Is Actor Network Theory Critique?

TLDR

Critical theories of organization are characterized by denaturalizing ontology, reflexive epistemology, and anti‑performative politics, yet ANT is not entirely dismissed as a useful approach. The paper debates ANT’s contribution to critical organizational theory, arguing that it is based on a naturalizing ontology, an un‑reflexive epistemology, and performative politics. The study concludes that ANT’s contribution to developing a critical theory of organization is questionable.

Abstract

In this essai we debate the extent to which Actor Network Theory (ANT) provides a meaningful contribution to the body of critical theories of organization. Critical approaches are commonly associated with a denaturalizing ontology, a reflexive epistemology and an anti-performative politics. In contrast, we suggest that ANT relies on a naturalizing ontology, an un-reflexive epistemology and a performative politics. This does not completely dismiss ANT as a useful approach to studying organizations. It does however question the contribution of ANT to developing a critical theory of organization.