Social factors of organisational changes in enterprises in war conditions: methodological issues of researching
The article analyses the methodological challenges involved in studying the social factors of organisational change at enterprises under wartime conditions. The authors argue that the reality of war not only transforms patterns of organisational behaviour but also reshapes the very logic of power relations, creating a need to rethink classical theoretical and methodological approaches. Based on a critical analysis of neo-institutionalism, structuration theory, field theory, and concepts of organisational learning, the article demonstrates that these paradigms are grounded on assumptions of social stability, the reproducibility of practices, and the predictability of institutional rules. The study examines how the state of radical instability generated by war undermines organisational structures and reshapes decision-making processes in conditions of uncertainty and threat. The findings highlight improvisation, informal coordination, solidarity, and moral mobilisation as the principal mechanisms of organisational survival. Particular attention is paid to the empirical dilemmas arising in these circumstances, including the instability of the research field, difficulties in data verification, the affective nature of narratives, the moral ‘inflation’ of experience, and the blurring of boundaries between researcher and respondent. The article demonstrates that war intensifies ethical concerns, particularly regarding the researcher’s responsibility, the limits of permissible knowledge, the care for participants, and the handling of traumatic testimonies. The study substantiates the need to transition to adaptive, hybrid, and context-sensitive research strategies, including case-oriented methods, the combination of quantitative and qualitative techniques, the use of digital and visual data, and practices of methodological reflexivity.
Weick, K. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (4), 628-652.
Aldrich, D. (2012). Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery. University of Chicago Press.
Moorman, C., Miner, A. (1998). Organizational improvisation and organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 23 (4), 698-723.
DiMaggio, P., Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48 (2), 147-160.
Scott, W. (2013). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. SAGE.
Wood, E. (2006). The ethical challenges of field research in conflict zones. Qualitative Sociology, 29 (3), 373-386.
Powell, W., DiMaggio, P. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (2004). Science of science and reflexivity. University of Chicago Press.
Aldrich, D., Meyer, M. (2015). Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist, 59 (2), 254-269.
Fujii, L. (2010). Shades of truth and lies: Interpreting testimonies of war and violence. Journal of Peace Research, 47 (2), 231-241.
Kostovicova, D., Knott, E. (2020). Harm, change and unpredictability: the ethics of interviews in conflict research. Qualitative Research, 22 (1), 56-73.
Ukraine: Firms through the war. (2023). KSE & World Bank. URL: https://kse.ua/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Ukraine.-Firms-through-the-War-Paper-Nov-2023.pdf
Stavytskyy, A., Dligach, A. (2024). Resilience factors of Ukrainian micro, small, and medium-sized business. Economies, 12 (12), 319.
Olishevska, A., Kredysov, V., Mykolaichuk, V. (2025). Crisis and War as Factors of Strategic Management Transformation: Ukraine in a Global Context. Economic Synergy, 4, 154-169 [in Ukrainian]
Beckert, J. (2010). Institutional isomorphism revisited: Convergence and divergence in institutional change. Sociological Theory, 28 (2), 150-166.
Thompson, E. (1971). The moral economy of the English crowd in the eighteenth century. Past & Present, 50, 76-136.
Boltanski, L. (2011). On critique: A sociology of emancipation. Polity Press.
Argyris, C., Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.
March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2 (1), 71-87.
Barakat, S., Zyck, S. (2009). The evolution of post-conflict recovery. Third World Quarterly, 30 (6), 1069-1086.
Hier, S. (2023). Suppressing the crisis: Moral panics, emerging infectious disease, and the normalization of risk. Canadian Journal of Communication, 48 (2), 203-223.
Kellogg, V., Valentine, M., Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14 (1), 366-410.
Scheper-Hughes, N. (1995). The primacy of the ethical: Propositions for a militant anthropology. Current Anthropology, 36 (3), 409-440.
Emerson, R., Fretz, R., Shaw, L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. University of Chicago Press.
Bourke, B. (2014). Positionality: Reflecting on the Research Process. The Qualitative Report, 19 (33), 1-9.
Kvale, S., Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage.