Structure as an element of practice

In Giddens' terms, structure consists of "rules and resources, organized as properties of social systems" (1984, 25) with characteristics of signification, authority and domination. The other critical aspect of structure in practice theory is that structures are both enabling and constraining simultaneously. Some examples of structure in using the public library organization as an example:

1. Formal policies, procedures, guidelines that direct service - go to any public library web page and under "About Us" or "About the Library" you will often find a list of policies that are immediately relevant to the public - e.g., collection policies, customer service policies, internet access policies, etc. These policies and procedures are both enabling and constraining - they allow, encourage and permit and they also contain or restrict at the same time.

2. Library buildings that make up the network of public library branches are also structures. This one is perhaps easier to see. But do you also see how library buildings contain as part of their essence, an organized set of rules and resources? And do you see how buildings constrain and enable agency also?

3. Committees, work groups, communities of practice, branch library staff teams, story time participants, can also be structures in the "practice" of library. These groups of agents engaged in a shared activity either formally or informally organized can also be understood as a structure in the "practice" of library.

For example a storytime group of parents, caregivers, children and library staff can participate in a series of weekly programs where "rules" and "resources" unique to that particular activity become visible. In this case, there may be rules - informal or formally articulated - about how parents and caregivers participate with their children, there may be rules about how the children are expected to participate, etc. And while we might understand that all storytimes for toddlers in many public libraries will have the same elements, we should also understand that each storytime in each time-space-agent interaction will have its own enabling and constraining structure that evolves as the activity occurs.

The elements might be similar but how structure interacts with the agents or participants may differ across each separate storytime. This point is extremely important to recognize: structure is an inherent property of "practice" - it is part of the process and part of the outcome. It is not "something else", not the organization, not management, not the policy, not the building, but it is all of these aspects only as we can see them IN ACTION.

What is a practice-based approach?

What is a practice-based approach (PBA) to organizing and why is it relevant for libraries? At some level, this question occupies most of my reflections and my thinking about how libraries and information organizations are already or perhaps should be changing or reorienting themselves. There are different definitions of PBA in the literature, mainly from sociological theory, but all definitions share the idea that "practice" is central and all share the idea that practice is emphatically "anti-dualistic" (Marshall, 2008). In practice, agency and structure come together in action, in "doing." And doing is often understood as "organizing" [for] and "learning." The togetherness aspect of practice is the dimension that makes practice a "social" theory and an activity that is fundamentally shared. Practice also occurs in time-space, it is always situated in this way. Which means that practice is often described in very "local" terms, making it difficult often to replicate "practices" across time and space and across differing socialities or activities. Making it also difficult sometimes to discuss practices in more theoretical or abstract ways.

Now, you can [and should] ask me, so what is "structure" and what is "agency" and what do they mean for libraries? And these are very important preliminary questions because everything we understand about practice and all of its significance as a theoretical approach to understanding and managing organizations today, comes originally from these two concepts.