Governing the gap: Forging safe science through relational regulation

Designed to close the ubiquitous gap between law on the books and law in action, management systems locate the standard setting and implementation of regulation within the regulated organization itself. Despite efforts to more closely couple aspirations and performance, the gap re-emerges because th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Huising, Ruthanne (Author), Silbey, Susan S. (Contributor)
Other Authors: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Anthropology Program (Contributor)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley Blackwell (Blackwell Publishing), 2012-04-27T21:41:05Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Get fulltext
LEADER 02014 am a22002173u 4500
001 70472
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Huising, Ruthanne  |e author 
100 1 0 |a Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Anthropology Program  |e contributor 
100 1 0 |a Silbey, Susan S.  |e contributor 
100 1 0 |a Silbey, Susan S.  |e contributor 
700 1 0 |a Silbey, Susan S.  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Governing the gap: Forging safe science through relational regulation 
260 |b Wiley Blackwell (Blackwell Publishing),   |c 2012-04-27T21:41:05Z. 
856 |z Get fulltext  |u http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70472 
520 |a Designed to close the ubiquitous gap between law on the books and law in action, management systems locate the standard setting and implementation of regulation within the regulated organization itself. Despite efforts to more closely couple aspirations and performance, the gap re-emerges because the exigencies of practical action exceed the capacity of system prescriptions to anticipate and contain them. Drawing on data from a six-year ethnographic study of the creation and implementation of an environment, health, and safety management system, this article identifies relational regulation as the approach used by front-line managers to govern the gap: keeping organizational activities within an acceptable range of variation close to regulatory specifications. We identify four practices - narrating the gap, inquiring without constraint, integrating pluralistic accounts, and crafting pragmatic accommodations - and three conditions under which actors may develop a sociological orientation to enact relational regulation. Overall, the article concludes that the mechanism for assuring compliance resides in the apprehension of relational interdependencies rather than the management system per se. 
520 |a National Science Foundation (U.S.) (Grant No. 0216815) 
520 |a National Science Foundation (U.S.) (Grant No. 0518118) 
546 |a en_US 
655 7 |a Article 
773 |t Regulation and Governance