INTRODUCTION

Research in the field of Administration has long focused on studies of cities taken as social and space organizations (CZARNIAWSKA-JOERGES, 1997; FISCHER, 1996a, 1996b, 1997; MAC-ALLISTER, 2004; SARAIVA; CARRIERI, 2012) and, as such, socially constituted by its members through their collective actions and routines (WEBER, DACIN, 2011; FINE, HALLETT, 2014). In the midst of this context, the national scientific production had as a theoretical framework, specifically in the field of Organizational Studies, the study by Mônica Mac-Allister, published in 2004, proposing the concept of Organization-City, with varied implications in several other research on urban spaces and organizational practices in cities.

Such studies, by using approaches not limited to functional or traditional forms, analyzed organizational complexity from different lenses, whose conceptual frameworks included notions of symbolism and culture (MORGAN, FROST PONDY, 1983; HASSARD, COX, 2013). Thus, they reveal processes constituted in urban practices linked to the organization of cities and the symbolic relations established by specific practitioners (MENDES, CAVEDON, 2012).

These approaches present spatial understandings and peculiar cultural practices that allow an organizational look at urban dynamics, that is, the relational and situational character inherent in human interactions with urban facilities, which also opens up possibilities for the observation of an organized social life (SARAIVA; CARRIERI, 2012; FIGUEIREDO, CAVEDON, 2012), allowing us to take a new look at what the practiced city is, how it happens based on urban spaces.

To understand the city in its urban dynamics, many of these studies (FRANCO, OLIVEIRA, 2016; MENDES, CAVEDON, 2012) resort to common notions of urban spaces as a practiced place (CERTEAU, 1994), considered both as a geographical location of the action, but also as the possibility of engaging in the action on a daily basis (GOTTDIENER, 1997), therefore, continuously constituted and dissolved through interactions (SIMMEL, 2006). In this sense, the space is “not only organized and instituted, it is modeled, appropriate by X or Y social group according to their demands, ethics and aesthetics, their ideology” (LEFEBVRE, 2008, p.82) and, therefore, considered a producer of the transformation of social organization due to the uses that city practitioners make of it (CERTEAU, 1994). Seen in this way, being in constant construction, the city is a web formed by social spaces produced by the “walk” of social subjects, it is only possible to understand cities through daily practices, by the uses, by the appropriations that the subjects make of it (CERTEAU, 1994).

If, on the one hand, some studies adopt the concept of city as something related to an urban plan, with strategically defined functions and norms in order to organize collective life in a more general and utopian conception^[4] about urban space. On the other hand, in this study, we started from the understanding of the city by Certeau (1994), which proposes the displacement of this concept of city to urban practices, arguing that in addition to a substantive concept, the city is a “verb” practiced daily. Based on this perspective, several surveys represent the city in Organizational Studies (OSS) through practices and thus highlight how “the ways of doing” that organizations produce also produce cities (FRANCO, OLIVEIRA, 2016; MENDES, CAVEDON, 2012; SARAIVA, CARRIERI, 2014, IPIRANGA, 2010; CAVALCANTI; BISPO; SOARES, 2015; SARAIVA, IPIRANGA, 2020). Therefore, we start from the common foundation for studies with approaches based on organizational and social practices that seek understandings according to daily actions and their symbolic aspects. (RECKWITZ, 2002), that are embodied, materially mediated and organized around common practical understandings (SCHATZKI, 2002).

Nevertheless, the revelation of the different ways of appropriating urban spaces allows us to see ordinary practices, tensions and power relations that (re) produce the different spaces / times in which we live and the importance of the spatial dimension in material and social relations. We realize that scientific productions are restricted to recognizing only threads, distinct fragments of an urban social fabric, without offering combined understandings from possible intertwining of urban practices that, together, (re) produce the city. This aspect fragments the understanding about the organizational web inherent to the ways of making cities, resulting in the problematization of this study: How does scientific production on urban spaces (re) produce cities in OSS? What Brazilian city is this? Due to the proposed problem, the objective of this paper is to discuss the (re) production of cities in national OSS based on scientific production on the uses of Brazilian urban spaces. Understanding the city from its uses allows us to assign new meanings to the idea of the city.

We conducted a systematic literature review, through research based on scientific production in the area of administration for the last 16 years, period between 2004 and 2020, on the bases: Scielo, Spell, Scopus and Web of Science, the period selected was based on the theoretical framework that occurred in 2004 based on the theoretical proposition of city-organization by Mônica Mac-Allister. The search was performed based on the words, City (ies), Urban Space (s), Urban Practice (es) sought in the topics: key words, summary and title. The analysis of the articles was concerned with understandings about cities, specifically, based on three matters: Urban Spaces, Ordinary Practitioners and Organizational Practices.

To build the landscape of this research, we first resort to organizational and spatial studies, whose interwoven notions enable a view of the theoretical elements about cities in organizational studies. Then, we register our methodological trajectory and, later, debates about the scientific production of cities and their possible implications.

ORGANIZATIONAL STUDIES, URBAN PRACTICES AND CITIES

There are several researches that deal with cultural practices and organizational life in an interwoven way and build specific understandings about organizational phenomena as social constructions (WEBER, DACIN, 2011; WASSERMAN, FRENKEL, 2011). Such studies position practices as a broad theoretical and methodological lens, linked to local understandings, daily interactions and ongoing social relations (FINE, HALLET, 2014) inside or outside organizations. Thus, adopting approaches not limited to conventional forms, studies recognize that everyday life in organizations is not peripheral (FINE, HALLET, 2014), but it can be fundamental for the understanding of symbolic elements, possible processes that organize larger structures and new ways of thinking about management (FANTINEL, CAVEDON, FISCHER, 2012).

Considering organizations based on their daily processes and actions implies the use of a procedural and reflective perspective (DUARTE, ALCADIPANI, 2016; CZARNIAWSKA, 2004, 2010, 2013) as the basis for organizational analysis. The organizing perspective, already addressed in OSS, reveals the procedural nature of organizations, arguing that they can be better understood if they are denaturalized and studied not as fixed, homogeneous and stable entities, but from its daily processes and interactions in its context of social formation (CZARNIAWSKA, 2004; 2010, 2013; DUARTE, ALCADIPANI, 2016). Such an approach allows the expansion of the limits of investigations that start to consider different organizational processes and not only conventional and formal organizations.

In addition to conventional organizations, there are studies involving cities taken as social and spatial organizations (FISCHER, 1996a, 1996b, 1997; CZARNIAWSKA-JOERGES, 1997). Both cities and organizations have traces of complexity, diversity, uniqueness, plurality and contradiction, where a multidimensional system of actors articulated by the everyday lives sharing common spaces forming complex organizational sets (FISCHER, 1997). However, the major milestone in national scientific production took place in 2004, when urban researcher Mônica Mac-Allister published an article resulting from her doctoral thesis completed a few years earlier and proposes the city organization as a:

social organization regarding a set of social organizations and unorganized individuals located in time and space, it has large dimensions and high complexity, it processes collectively, and although incorporating individual processes and, continuously, a culture, it has, as a result of this process, a cultural identity both relative to the whole city and to the management of this totality. (MACALLISTER, 2004, p.175).

Mac-Allister bases her thesis on the traditional conceptual assumption of cities as “home and meeting place” (Fischer et al, 1997, p.74), justifying by arguing that, “space seems to continue to be systematically ignored by the field of organizational studies”(Mac-Allister, 2004, p.178) and concludes her proposal by highlighting the need to value space in organizational studies with the theme cities and invites the academic community to “expand the approach to the city object as an object of study” (Mac-Allister, p.178).

Based on the study by Mac-Allister (2004), these approaches to cities as social organizations, present specific spatial and cultural understandings, allowing an organizational look at urban dynamics, pointing out possible paths for the observation of organized social life (SARAIVA; CARRIERI, 2012; IPIRANGA, 2009). In addition, they show processes and symbolic links constituted in urban practices that associate factors linked to the organization of cities and the relationships established by their practitioners (MENDES; CAVEDON, 2012).

To understand the city and its urban dynamics, it is common for studies to use the notions of urban spaces as a practiced place (CERTEAU, 1994; FRANCO; OLIVEIRA, 2016; MENDES; CAVEDON, 2012), considered both as a geographical location of the action, but also as the possibility of engaging in the action on a daily basis (GOTTDIENER, 1997) via everyday practices (PALHARES; CARRIERI; OLETO, 2019). Thus, a lot of research understands that the (re) production of cities happens and can only be understood in \ from the practiced spaces, these being the aspects that affect the daily relations between the different members of this organization-city and serve as a basis for the analysis and debate of the national scientific production that aims this research, as described in the next section.

CITIES AND URBAN SPACES

The organization of urban spaces is usually studied from conventional approaches that privilege urban techniques of socio-cultural production; of master plans for cities that postulate urban spaces as something purely physical, a built environment, a fixed, neutral and immobile place that simultaneously approaches and distances (GOTTDIENER, 1997). These approaches are considered insufficient to explain contemporary spatial organization because they are restricted to the study of morphology without considering social organization. Studies that are frequently concerned with the role of the State in the construction and maintenance of cities, highlight political, real estate or economic issues. Such approaches are criticized for mystifying the social structure, proposing a false irreversibility of reality, fundamentally based on cause and effect relationships, which aim only to institutionalize what can be done and by whom (GOTTDIENER, 1997), because they seek to determine what forms of social relationship are legitimized in these spaces (FRANCO, OLIVEIRA, 2016; SARAIVA; CARRIERI, 2012).

This review seeks to gather and debate scientific production inserted in another perspective, under which the city and the urban space are understood not as an object, “something that can be successfully designed” (HARVEY, 2014, p. 61), nor as something given by nature (VILLAÇA, 2011), but in a procedural perspective as a social event that occurs from everyday practices and the lived space (LEFEBVRE, 2008) and so in an integrated manner. Therefore, we select studies that start from a plunge into the daily life of social life, in order to interpret in the invisibility of practices what is found in the non-passive consumption of the subjects to the established orders, erected from its own place (CERTEAU, 1994).

Magnani (1998) emphasizes that the city can be observed and studied from the point of view of those who live in it and those who own it. Thus, the appropriation of space is related to the way the space is occupied by artifacts (streets, buildings, cafes, bars and restaurants etc.), activities (land use, transportation, communication, territorial organization, etc.), individuals, groups and communities (HARVEY, -2004). These forms of appropriation are neither random nor the result of individual choices (MAGNANI, 1998), but constituted in the everyday inventions that make up the city map. These aspects are consistent with Certeau (1994), when he says that “walking with your feet in the city” cuts out urban spaces and shapes new spaces. This daily “walk” results in a production that overlaps the official design of the city; “sometimes it breaks with it, other times it follows it, others still have no alternative but to adapt” (MAGNANI, 1998. p.13).

When inserting the city in their studies, Certeau (1994) presents two opposite forms for the understanding of the city, from the “heights” and the “ground”. The position from above, of those who climb, being at the top to look at the city, has the body outside the urban fabric, outside the streets it becomes a point that observes the superficial relief and holds the fiction of knowledge referring, for example, to urban planners. Thus, the view from the heights is placed at a distance or, still, it provides a naive overall view. This is the vision conceived by the city administration, with its economic and political strategies, of the media. However, it is from this strategy that decisions regarding urban space are made (CERTEAU, 1994).

The opposite position is the view of walkers, whose body obeys the fullness and emptiness of an urban “text” that they write without being able to read it. Thus, the view from the ground accesses the eyes of the common, ordinary man, with his invented practices, errant trajectories and anonymous stories. It is from the practices and appropriations of the ordinary citizen that the invisible in the city can be seen. Thus, Certeau (1994, p. 172) takes a critical position on the concept city, “established by the utopian and urban discourse is defined by a triple operation”. Namely: for a purely rational organization that allows highlighting any involvement by physical, mental or political pollution.

By not adopting a concept-city-based approach, which is similar to the understanding of a city-thing or city object, we shift our gaze to urban practices just as Mendes and Cavedon (2012) did, observing the activities of street vendors in Mato Grosso do Sul. In this study, we intend to capture in the appropriation processes different spaces constituted in urban practices, which city is (re) produced in the field of organizational studies, from the methodological aspects described below.

METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS

A systematic review is developed based on a process consisting of seven phases that culminate in a rigorous synthesis of all research related to a specific issue (GALVÃO, SAWADA, TREVIZAN, 2004), seen as an important resource to guide practical understandings and identify future needs (BANNIGAN, K.; DROOGAN, J.; ENTWISTLE, 1997) and that is already being used in Organizational Studies (IGARASHI; IGARASHI; BORGES, 2015). “What city is this? ”, was the question that guided this review and served as the starting point of the protocol (GALVÃO, SAWADA, TREVIZAN, 2004) adopted as a way of understanding how the city is (re) produced in Brazilian Organizational Studies.

Data collection was divided into three stages. First, we conducted the research in the academic repositories Scielo, Spell, Scopus and Web of Science with the keywords: City (ies), Urban Space (s) and Urban Practice (es), searched for in the topics: keywords, abstract and title. The search for studies in the literature made it possible to find 51 articles from different areas. The second stage consisted of selecting among these studies, those that are in the field of Organizational Studies, restricting data collection to the scope of this article. The third stage sought to increase and expand the analyzes, thus, we verified in the curriculum lattes of the authors of Organizational Studies found if there were other publications that did not appear in the database and that could contribute to the guiding question of the article, “What city is this?”. Thus, 31 scientific, we selected theoretical and empirical articles. Among them, we identified three theoretical articles that were published in journals ranked A2 and B4. The majority of empirical articles, totaling 28 articles published between 2004 and 2020, with publications from qualis A2 to B4. We also observed that from the empirical studies, 12 use Certeau (1994) as a theoretical contribution to the analysis and understanding of cities, based on the city practiced through the view of the other.

After a complete reading of the 31 articles, we started with a critical evaluation of the studies, and selected 15 articles that articulate urban spaces and their practitioners, from a reflective perspective, focusing on analysis of daily practices as processes of social organization. We group the analyzes into six “cities” found in the city: the capitalist: power, diversity and inequality; the hybrid: between public and private; the elitist: segregation and social exclusion; the anti-democratic: social segregation of differences; the friendly: sociability and resistance; the artificial: racism and prejudice. After selecting the production according to the criteria mentioned above, we performed a qualitative analysis of the content of the publications, selecting articles that discussed the three interconnected aspects: Urban Spaces, Ordinary Practitioners and Organizational Practices. In the analyzes, we first seek to understand how the appropriation of urban spaces took place in each of the researched places, its theoretical foundations and then we focus on building syntheses of the data with approximations of underlying elements in such appropriation processes, in order to promote the debate on the (re) production of urban spaces in the area.

WHAT CITY IS THIS? HOW THE CITY IS (RE) PRODUCED IN PUBLICATIONS IN BRAZILIAN ORGANIZATIONAL STUDIES

Using the definition by Santos (2002) as a basis, in which space is understood as the way in which individuals systematize their relationship with the world, we specifically analyze how the appropriation of urban spaces took place in OSS. We understand these appropriations as the "ways of doing" in the Certeaunian perspective by the uses of the subjects in their relations with the world. We understand that this spatial conception that goes beyond physical limits, defying geographical boundaries in a material and symbolic overlap, allows an integrative vision with the different spatial dimensions that jointly articulate a complex mosaic where we seek to find appropriations that produce different concepts in an attempt to explain the concept “city”. Below are the results of our selection and analysis. We started by separating the studies into spatial categories, as we will present below.

The Capitalist City: Power, Diversity and Inequality

We unified the analysis of texts on shopping centers and street vendors based on their common aspect, the commercial function. The dynamics of the city of Porto Alegre was the object of study by Figueiredo and Cavedon (2012) who, from a shopping center, investigated interactions of urban people and equipment. The investigated shopping center incorporates a wide variety of social groups, the so-called cults, mature homosexuals, young people, punks, emo, and the group of elderly people who interact and use the space in different ways and who often, extrapolate the initial conception of the organization, going against its functional logic. The authors propose that organizations are equipment of the city that can be appropriate as a space for leisure and coexistence of different groups, emphasizing how different the ways of making use of organizational spaces can be for each group, denoting the coexistence of different lifestyles and behaviors that organize urban facilities.

The street vendors were the focus of analysis for Mendes and Cavedon (2012) who sought, in the appropriation of urban spaces, to reveal the dynamics of spatial practices of street vendors. When carrying out a review of articles with this theme, the authors note that these appropriations occurred due to practices such as the strong identity attribute of these subjects who, when called street vendors, deal with the pejorative symbol of the word – nomenclature linked to subjects who carry their goods, as well as camels in the desert (GOULARTE, 2008). To deal with this unfavorable aspect, strategies of reframing the profession for traders are used, seeking to regularize bureaucratic activities such as signing the employment record book, registration of micro-companies, payment of taxes, among others. Another form of appropriation of spaces takes place through street vendor's circuits, via an articulated relationship of work between street vendors and other professionals with activities related to the movement of goods, from its suppliers in Paraguay to the point of sale, in the specific case Presidente Prudente and Marília, SP (RODRIGUES, 2008). The authors show that the symbolic aspects of the practices and the peculiarities of the region (re) produce different roles for street vendors, in asymmetric power relations existing in daily practices.

The study by Saraiva, Carrieri and Soares (2014) is initially differentiated by the methodology used, when carrying out French discourse analysis to understand the relationships between territoriality and identity in the organizational environment. The authors use the notion of space linked to landscape, and associate the notion of territory with the concept of place by Augé (2004), relational and historical, so that it is in the territory that power disputes and modes of resistance take place. The authors, not only being attached to concrete elements, but also in its symbolic representativeness, also use the symbolic aspect. Thus, they take the central market of Belo Horizonte as the object of study, a place of multiple practices (and professionals). The daily dynamics extrapolates the initial functions of the territory, creating a distinction between dominant and dominated – habitual aspect that creates territories in constant dispute between unequal groups. The search for one's own interests changes the conception of the territory in the market, causing conflicts and resistance from certain groups. Three territories are explored in the discourses: lasting element (parish territory), distinctive element (trade territory) and central element (office territory). The relationship between the three elements generates a conflictive daily life, but which resists in search of a “greater good”: the functioning and survival of the central market in Belo Horizonte / MG.

We consider that the three articles present the city as a field of dispute, through the diversity of uses and meanings analyzed through organizational spaces of intensive sociability, “which are those whose raison d'être basically rests on the interaction practices that occur in them” (FANTINEL, 2016, p. 146), even when they do not explicitly highlight this aspect. While the shopping center (FIGUEIREDO; CAVEDON, 2012) is seen as a fixed space that has its function modified by different social groups over time, the street vendor (MENDES, CAVEDON, 2012) it is seen as an urban, dynamic and unstable practice, in this case, strongly related to practitioners’ identity aspects. As illustrated as desert “camels” (reference to street vendors) for carrying their goods on their back, differentiating them symbolically from those seen as traders. As for the central market (SARAIVA; CARRIERI; SOARES, 2014) reveals the existence of diversity and dispute over territories related to identity and symbolic issues.

Another aspect common to the articles is the mention of neoliberal capitalism as a producer of different cities inserted in the cities, either as a manifestation of the social and spatial organization, which produces inequalities (FIGUEIREDO; CAVEDON, 2012); or by the dual city, which makes it possible to manifest the categories at the same time marginalized and articulated (MENDES; CAVEDON, 2012); or even in the silenced discourse of practitioners that hides the existence of “Power, conflict, money, profit and other aspects of capitalist territoriality” (SARAIVA; CARRIERI, SOARES; 2014, p. 114), in which political segregation is a product expected by the capitalist system.

Therefore, by mobilizing the protagonism of different politically minorized groups (street vendors, punks, emos, homosexuals) more than making visible the diversity and inequality in the appropriations of urban spaces, such studies reveal different organizational logics that contradict the hegemonic functionalist logic present in commercial spaces. Together, these studies lead us to (re) think the concept of a capitalistic city. They are movements that reveal powerful spatial and identity experiences that insert identity and strategic negotiations of these same populations considered to be marginalized by capitalism, at the same time they form different policies of production of capitalist spaces of commerce in their own terms.

In this way, with ordinary workers, these researchers and their studies, more than materialize in organizational studies extrapolations in the urban dynamics experienced reveal daily practices that form policies of production and occupation of urban spaces. Indeed, they indicate relevant paths, by which organizational research productions can be more inclusive with different individuals, offering important clues to rethink the dominant capitalist logics and offering paths to new thoughts with more democratic organizational processes.

The Hybrid City: Between Public and Private

Based on studies on / from urban “intermediate spaces”, located between the private (home) and the public (street) - such as bars, cafes, bohemian spaces and restaurants reveal relationships between modes of sociability and meanings that indicate how they produce and give meanings to cities (IPIRANGA, 2010). In addition, from the development of sociability there is the establishment of links between different subjects and the city that are constantly changing the city itself. Such forms of appropriation of and in cities reveal what happens in “street experiences” (MAGNANI; TORRES, 1996). These are studies that also translate ways to occupy and recreate the city based on daily activities and movements in the “invention of everyday life” (CERTEAU, 1994), thus highlight the city as a complex system that brings social formations together, in which practices and assessments of time and space are incorporated. A tangle of practices is interwoven with the city's memory, making it a puzzle in permanent reconstruction.

Ipiranga (2010) carried out an ethnography involving intermediate spaces in three neighborhoods in Fortaleza (Meireles, Varjota and Aldeota), among the most coveted for housing and business, located in spaces considered “noble” by a significant part of city dwellers. The study reveals how the appropriation of intermediate spaces is directed so that their uses are for the purposes of productive sociability and leisure. It also points to new identities, based on cultural hybridities, preserving remnants of native populations and new flows. These flows characterize and shape innovative spaces of the “modern” transience of the city of Fortaleza, attracting old and new residents. Ipiranga brings to scientific production, the city of Fortaleza reproduced as a space of interaction and hybridism, describing the cultural meanings attributed to the intermediate spaces, which allowed us to reflect on the range of sensations and possible social practices in the city.

Fantinel and Cavedon (2010) investigate symbolic aspects in social representations on / from urban food spaces in the city of Porto Alegre, unraveling identity meanings and characteristics of transience in the heart of the historic center of the city. Use the TSR - Theory of Social Representations (MOSCOVICI, 2009; JODELET,-2001) – to unveil social representations of space and time present in the daily life of the Chalé da Praça XV restaurant. When developing an ethnographic study, they present the restaurant space as a vector of social interactions (FISCHER, 1997) and a constitutive place of identity, relational and historical aspects (AUGÉ, 2004). Fantinel and Cavedon (2010) empirically verify that the appropriation of space occurs due to links with the history of the Chalet, that mixes with the history of the city of Porto Alegre. Such links are often established from old customers who have lived in these spaces for decades, and this also constitutes a space for memory. The article highlights the importance of time and space as categories in organizational analysis and symbolic aspects associated with the identification, relationship and history inherent in the intermediate space of the historic restaurant, unveiling everyday reproductions of the rest of the city of Porto Alegre.

Based on participant observations on the organizational and urban meanings of coffee organizations located in Brazil, Argentina and France, Fantinel and Fischer (2012) show characteristic modes of urban sociability, situated in their times and adaptable to the urban contexts to which they belong. The authors resort to contemporary spaces of intensive sociability, as they understand that these show different types of interactions and representative sociability in urban contexts. Thus, they revealed sociability as practices that produce different spaces characterized by hybridity and complexity woven between different times, cultural contexts, identity and symbolic aspects.

In these studies, the highlight is due to the appropriations that permeate the construction and maintenance of social bonds between customers, regulars, city dwellers and employees who, through memories, historical ties produce different concepts in an attempt to explain the concept “city”, whether in the bohemian intermediate spaces of Fortaleza, in the food spaces of Porto Alegre or in the coffee organizations located in Brazil, Argentina or France where the understanding of the time and space category in these cities was only possible through the sociability and social bonds practiced in an intersection between public and private, configuring the hybrid city concept.

The Elitist City: Segregation and Social Exclusion

Interested in the relations between excluded and socially inserted in urban spaces, the study by Medeiros, Valadão and Ferreira (2011) verifies how the production of elite spaces, such as closed condominiums, has been used as a source of segregation, differentiation and exclusion in Brazilian cities. To implement these spaces, the upper classes appropriated the logic of the ghetto, quilombos and communities that are the stage of resistance and social inclusion to create yet another of the countless urban spaces in which power relations materialize as users only the wealthiest. In this way, the authors denominate as “elite ghettos”, the symbolic universe and outside the Brazilian reality that luxury condominiums create in the city, a space of exclusive and segregating practices that seeks the sociability between equals and reject the social heterogeneity existing in Brazilian cities.

The luxury condominiums are constituted by cultural and symbolic systems and, thus, create a cultural identity of the organizational space, which transforms the city distancing even more distinct groups and causing an increase in social inequality, outside and inside the condominium. Such polarization happens due to its own rules, for example, by valuing older residents and consequently devaluing younger residents, in addition to making bodies that organize this space invisible, such as gatekeepers, maids, nannies, gardeners, and other professionals who live and produce luxury condominiums with their residents.

The Anti-Democratic City: Social Segregation of Difference

The explicit and implicit rules of society cause us to have similar behaviors in public spaces, in which, hierarchical and social differences are temporarily suspended (ANDRADE, JAYME, DE CASTRO ALMEIDA, 2009), for this reason we chose to analyze the articles that deal with public space together. Andrade, Jayme and Almeida (2009) address the changes in forms of sociability that happen in some public squares in Belo Horizonte, in which subjects constantly seek coexistence between equals. As much as there is a discourse referring to the eviction of public environments due to private spaces (SENNETT, 1988; DAVIS, 1993; AUGÉ, 1994; SERPA, 2003, 2007), with insecurity as the main justification, the research emphasized the existence of a relevant sociability in the public squares of the city. However, socio-spatial segregation is evident when they describe that there is a search for sociability, as long as they occur among those considered socially “equal”, avoiding the encounter with the different, the other.

Santos and Soares (2017) identify physical and symbolic control practices in the streets of downtown Belo Horizonte, observing an “anti-beggar” architecture such as: railings inhibiting certain uses of public spaces, signposts forcing pedestrians to flow, police guardhouses acting as surveillance and discipline technology in peripheral regions, cameras on street corners and squares like “eye aliverailings inhibiting certain uses of public spaces, signposts forcing pedestrians to flow, political guardhouses acting as surveillance and discipline technology in peripheral regions, cameras on street corners and squares with a “keen eye”. Such control measures remove and exclude homeless people in certain territories in order to “transform the city into an opaque place, with no life, not aimed at encounters or coexistence” (SANTOS, SOARES, 2017, p.1596). These practices are carried out not only by the public authorities, but also by various social actors that are guided by power games to delimit and restrict spaces, whether through physical, symbolic or moral control.

Both articles open space for us to think about urban segregation practices that produce difference on a daily basis. If sociability produces meaning for the city (IPIRANGA, 2010) and reveals space-producing practices (FANTINEL, FISCHER, 2012), one must reflect on what aspects the absence of sociability manifests in the city. Non-sociability reveals another meaning to the city for the bodies that are excluded from it or that have greater obstacles to relate to other city dwellers and to inhabit the city with its producing or transgressive practices. This relationship occurs in public (squares, streets, avenues) and private spaces (condominiums, shopping malls, restaurants), because, when looking for coexistence between equals, they hinder coexistence between different. We then consider that non-sociability is one of the segregating and excluding practices that transform the city into an organizational space of disagreements and distance, an anti-democratic place that is far from being shared by all.

The Friendly City: Sociability and Resistance

The dynamics of sociability, power, occupation and institutionalization of the city are present in studies on open markets and hippies (CARRIERI; SARAIVA; PIMENTEL, 2008; DOMINGUES; FANTINEL, 2016; CALÍOPE et. al, 2016). Among them, the study of the hippie fair in Belo Horizonte stands out, which had its institutionalization process analyzed longitudinally and organized in five distinct temporal moments (CARRIERI; SARAIVA; PIMENTEL, 2008). In its first moment, it revealed the fair as a space of identity bond between artists, which had its first period based on the integration between art critics, visual artists, artisans with characteristics related to elements of hippie culture. This production of urban space with attributes of a more popular character presented as forms of symbolic occupation as a territorial behavior that supported ties of friendship between the marketers whose common element was the fact that they were artists, with the implicit assumption that it was necessary to create something that had no commercial value. The development of the research culminated in the fifth period, in which the government’s economic demands and interference transformed the fair into a space produced by the government, reducing social and identity ties. Throughout the fair's institutionalization periods, the urban space was continuously transformed and altered by changes in the forms of local sociability. In the same direction, Coimbra and Saraiva (2013) also highlighted the sociability and the bonds between friends materialized by the desire to get together (in this case, by the pleasure of listening and dancing to soul music) as an organizational principle in the territorialization process of the urban space known as Quarteirão Soul in the city of Belo Horizonte. When indicating these practices of appropriation and territorialization in a city-organization, brought readers’ attention provocatively when questioning in their final considerations how it is possible to plan and develop policies for urban spatial production in a restricted way to geographical limits without taking into account the territorial behaviors and the different uses that individuals make of the city.

While Carrieri, Saraiva and Pimentel (2008) analyzed the process of institutionalizing the fair, Coimbra and Saraiva (2013) argued about the behavior of individuals as a way to collectively produce urban spaces, Domingues, Fantinel and Figueiredo (2016) sought to understand how the organizational space at the Arts and Crafts Fair at Praça dos Namorados, in Vitória, Espírito Santo happens at the intersection of spaces conceived and lived – concept by Lefebvre (2006) – by different subjects who make use of this urban space. They understand the organization of the fair as composed of provisional, temporary practices, with constant manifestation of asymmetric power relations, which end up generating resistance and confrontation in the daily life of this organizational space. They also perceive the coexistence of forces of harmony and affinity, which show the intertwining between the conceived and lived space of the fair, a kind of rotation of conceptions of space, generating a constant movement that sometimes privileges some subjects, sometimes others. In order to bring the understanding of the spaces of the two fairs closer, Belo Horizonte’s Hippie Fair (CARRIERI; SARAIVA; PIMENTEL, 2008) and Arts and Crafts Fair at Praça dos Namorados, em Vitória (DOMINGUES; FANTINEL, 2016) we identified that these organizational spaces have constant dynamics of appropriation, relations of power and resistance. Moreover, despite being considered spaces of intensive sociability, in which the organizational objective is permeated by capitalism, with a focus on trade in products, sociability among subjects (government, clients, marketers, passers-by, etc.) is a central and common aspect in these spaces, enabling bonds of collegiality and friendship.

In addition to these spatial dynamics, territoriality is evident when different groups of individuals impose meanings (bonds of friendship, relations with something extra commercial value, harmony) to the occupied spaces, which at first would be public. In this way, it is possible to view these spaces as social constructions, instead of perceiving them in an objective and predetermined way, and thus, it makes sense to include in these analyzes the interventions of individuals in the construction of these places, as spaces do not exist without subjects (LACERDA; MELLO, 2020) that, through the ways of doing, gestures, expressions, interactions constitute and give movement to spaces (CERTEAU, 1994).

Finally, such studies indicated possible relationships between the space category and the mobilization of social and affective bonds between these different individuals, revealing an affective dimension of the urban spaces practiced. The understanding of this lived world involves exploring in some sense the subversion of these commercial practices (fairs) by inserting the affective dimension as a force that harmonizes and organizes identity affinities at the same time that asymmetric power relationships are manifested. In effect, instead of excluding, segregating or denying territorial behavior permeated by social ties as the anti-democratic city organizes, it ends up enabling bonds of friendship and camaraderie with unequal social subjects revealing, even if temporarily, the concept of friendly city emerges and resists with such appropriations.

The Artificial City: Racism and Prejudice

We separate these two texts for analysis because both speak specifically of shopping centers, strategic urban spaces and not coincidentally, both articulate racism and prejudice, by establishing violent relationships with black and peripheral youths in these spaces that are intended only for specific social groups. In this way, they demonstrated how the body, specifically through skin color, affects the access and spatial experience of certain social groups. Nascimento et. al. (2015) analyze the speeches of social network users referring to an image that circulated on networks about the profile of the regulars of shopping malls in Belo Horizonte. This analysis demonstrates two main aspects: race relations and socio-spatial segregation in organizations in relation to the racialized black body. Organizational space and places are seen as a social construction that reflects extensive social dynamics, reproducing the same segregation characteristics seen in society in the organizational context. In the case of shopping centers, segregation exists because it is implicit which portion of society is interested in attending this place of intense consumption.

In another study, Nascimento et. al. (2016) seek to apprehend in media discourses about the so-called “hang-outs” of young people (in general, socially marked individuals, with black and peripheral bodies) in shopping centers also in the city of Belo Horizonte that also naturalize the use of certain bodies as vectors of reproduction practices of social segregation. The authors reinforce the understanding that urban space is socially constructed, but add that cities are practical and discursive stages, constituting dynamics of social segregation. For practitioners, the “hang outs” are reactive resistance practices of peripheral young people that resignify these organizational spaces.

Both articles are written by the same authors and use French discourse analysis in their analysis. However, we noticed some differences in the analysis, because while Nascimento et. al. (2015) focuses on analyzing the discourses of shopping mall users, the other analyzes the media’s discourses about the “hang outs” phenomenon. Both the resistance practices and the reproduction of social segregation collaborate in the production of questions about the limits of these urban organizational spaces and their public-private characteristics (re) producing structural aspects of society, such as prejudice and racism perceived in shopping malls (FANTINEL; FISCHER, 2012). Studies reveal that the body is a producer of urban organizational spaces. By assuming this theoretically, we contribute to the debate by Dale (2001) who considers the body an absent presence in organizational studies. Although several studies that make up this systematic review imply that spaces are practiced by bodies, which have, color, sex, gender, and several material aspects that characterize them (with this being the present side), studies do not place bodies as a relevant organizing vector for urban spaces, relegating them to the background of the debate (this being the missing side). And they make us think about the concept of artificial city through the dynamics of racism and prejudice that strategically seek to organize artificial spaces, in a hygienist logic, only with the presence of hegemonic bodies, and for that purpose they exclude, precarize and hierarchize different bodies with the spatial experiences lived in shopping malls.

DEBATE AND CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE (RE) PRODUCTION OF SPACES OF AND IN CITIES

We try to focus our analysis of the articles from a procedural perspective starting from the world lived of \ in cities (differentiating our approach to that of cities), we do this, specifically, from three interconnected aspects: Urban Spaces, Ordinary Professionals and Organizational Practices. Thus, in addition to dialoguing with studies on the theme cities, we seek to dialog with studies that recognize the centrality of the analytical category space for organizational understandings.

Among these studies, Weinfurtner and Seidl (2018) offer a systemic view of international production on organizational space that updates the seminal text by Taylor and Spicer (2007). In this review, the authors group the works into three conceptualizations of space: space as a limit; space as distance and space as movement and conclude the review revealing that the field of organizational spaces is concentrated in one or two of these elements, with rare studies addressing the three dimensions simultaneously. At the same time, there are arguments with the empirical phenomenon, which encompasses the three dimensions in the research. When we bring these reflections to national production we realize that the analyzed works use the empirical phenomenon cities, and, by using the existential dimension of space by Certeau, they show an important avenue by which new space studies can articulate understandings in an integrative way where the spatial experience is experienced under the three mediating categories of practices, practitioners and spaces as we expose in this article. In this way, our discussion of national (re) production on cities can contribute more broadly to the spatial debate with practices that break with the classifications by Weinfurtner and Seidl (2018).

In addition to contributing to the debate on the analytical category of space, the Certeaunian thinking makes it possible to reveal spatial experiences through the approach of practices, providing us with important clues about how the existential dimension of urban spaces, with the experiences of ordinary practitioners, are materialized in organizational studies. Reflecting with this mosaic of lived spatial experiences makes us question the traditional conceptual assumption of the city as “home and meeting place” (Fischer et al, 1997, p.74), this being a fundamental concept appropriated by Mac-Allister (2004) in her study considered a milestone in organizational studies with cities that works as a kind of metaphor, even if implicitly, present in many studies with the theme cities. The different works present in this review showed us that the city is not a space for meetings and living for everyone. With the existential dimension of living space as the spatial experiences show us, many urban areas are organized to deny and avoid certain encounters. Different than this assumption around the metaphor of cities as “home and meeting place” it uncritically suggests that the presence in urban spaces is materially organized for specific encounters between certain individuals and disorganized for others, a process situated in the dynamics of interactions, a situation in a physical, symbolic context, but which does not happen without bodies. On the contrary, bodies organize spatial experiences, whether for those who will have naturalized bodies present or not. Spatial practices often locate an important conceptual vector of spatial production in the body.

In conceptual terms, the results show with different appropriations, that the attempt to explain the city concept implies, to some extent, situating the organization of the city as material practice, therefore embodied (BEYES; STEYAERT, 2011) and provide clues to problematize about the invisibility of bodies in studies, which we consider an absent presence. Thus, with the materiality of spatial practices, as a vital and necessary lens, we propose, with Certeaunian fundamentals about existential space, a future research agenda with spatial experiences in the field of cities without neglecting the presence of bodies. Bodies that express gender, sexuality, class and are racialized and spatially produced in the relationships practiced in urban spaces, which interact materially and symbolically.

In an attempt to explain the urban context and generate understandings about the concept “city”, we analyze the uses of different urban spaces present in scientific production, from a reflective perspective, we find appropriations that produce different understandings about the city. For this purpose, we resort to the most relevant theoretical frameworks (discourse, power relations, confrontations, resistance, social conceptions, language, materiality, intentionality of action, incorporation of meanings, among others) which allowed us to make understandings about the social context, as a producer, reproducer and transformer of cultural meanings from the analytical category “space”, and in this way reconciling the proposal for studies of daily practices as a new look at the social process of organization, in fact, we hope that such analyzes of this work can contribute to OSS supported by a cultural perspective.

The impossibility of determining a single concept that encompasses the most varied cities present in the studies denotes the complexity of urban spaces. We try to demonstrate “what city is this?” based on studies from the perspective of workers. What we find is the existence of many cities that cohabit in cities. The “landscape” formed by the research analyzed here sets up different frameworks that show asymmetric power relations, cultural transformations, institutional crises and social tensions, revealed in the subjects’ daily strategies and tactics as a way of existing and resisting in city territories. In other words, the studies confirm the interests of these productions for anonymous, perishable and non-capitalized creations, but which are made possible by seeing, in practitioners' operations, resistance mechanisms forged by the uses they make of what is imposed on them.

This study, by concentrating its investigations on “ways of doing” with \ in cities, seeks an appropriation that produces a difference in functionalist understandings about the urban in the area of Administration. We unveiled aspects of how they tacitly insinuate themselves as a style of technical inventions and moral resistance, through which it is possible to confront limits imposed by quantitative research, as opposed to attempts to standardize the territory that only offer a model for the management of citizens. When considering studies that use non-dominant and procedural approaches to understand cities, we follow the propositions by Certeau (1994), we shift our understanding of the concept city to urban practices. When we start from social practices, we overcome unproductive attempts at homogenization, expanding the concept of the city to “a thousand ways to play / undo the game of the other” (VIDAL, 2005, p.275) in varied and creative reappropriations of urban spaces by different social groups.

Nevertheless, some of these studies make it clear that, in the urban sphere, we continue to seek to legitimize, through, for example, urban planning to justify gentrification actions^[5][i] and cleaning public areas (e.g. squares), creating elite or exclusion spaces (e.g. shopping malls and closed condominiums) the production and reproduction of the mechanisms necessary to maintain the exclusive right to use spaces only by certain economic groups. Finally, matters related to the connection between the appropriations of urban spaces and the manifested forms of sociability indicate the close relationship between contemporary cities and the capitalist economy. In this sense, the production of spaces in the city does not occur in a homogeneous way, but rather in terms of responses to movements of social fragmentation of the population. A process that results in the deepening of identity differences, but also provides a certain multiplicity of territories due to the consumption of economic and cultural goods related to the social practices of groups, whether they are practicing in bars, restaurants, cafes or street markets, hippies.

This research seeks to contribute to the rescue of works that shift the gaze from urban development to a vision centered on how inhabitants / practitioners recreate spaces in their uses and daily practices, in living in / with cities, and in / with multiple urban networks with visible effects in the forms of sociability described in national scientific publications. We can also say that the city (re) produced in OSS is not only made up of urban spaces in the sense of Simmel (2006), rather, something that exists from the reciprocal action of the interaction between the practices of the subjects and the practices of organization of / in cities in different territories in constant tension. We suggest future studies that expand theoretical analyzes outside the scope of Organizational Studies, such as, for example, in areas such as Tourism, Anthropology, Architecture and Urbanism, Social Sciences, Psychology, among other areas, that can reveal new and different understandings about the city practiced, lived and its corporeality, in the most varied everyday inventions of the subjects in the (re) production of the city.

REFERENCES

ANDRADE, L. T.; JAYME, J. G.; DE CASTRO ALMEIDA, R. Espaços públicos: novas sociabilidades, novos controles. Cadernos metrópole, n. 21, p. 131-153, 2009.

AUGÉ, M. Não-lugares. Papirus Editora, 1994.

BANNIGAN, K.; DROOGAN, J.; ENTWISTLE, V. Systematic reviews: what do they involve?. Nursing Times, v. 93, n. 18, p. 52-53, 1997.

BEYES, Timon; STEYAERT, Chris. Spacing organization: Non-representational theory and performing organizational space. Organization, v. 19, n. 1, p. 45-61, 2011.

CARRIERI, A. P.; SARAIVA, L. A. S.; PIMENTEL, T. D. A institucionalização da feira hippie de Belo Horizonte. Organizações & Sociedade, v. 15, n. 44, p. 63-79, 2008.

CERTEAU, M. de. A invenção do cotidiano 1: artes de fazer. Petrópolis, Vozes, 1994.

CALÍOPE, Thalita Silva et al. A institucionalização da Feira de Artesanato da Beira Mar em Fortaleza, Ceará. Gestão & Regionalidade, v. 32, n. 94, 2016.

CAVALCANTI, E. D. C.; BISPO, M. S.; SOARES, L. C. Praia, Sol e Mar: Um mergulho na compreensão da Orla Marítima de João Pessoa (PB) como Organização. Gestão & Regionalidade, v.31, n. 92, 2015.

COIMBRA, K. E. R.; SARAIVA, L. A. S. Territorialidade em uma organização-cidade: o movimento quarteirão do soul. Gestão & Regionalidade, v. 29, n. 86, 2013.

CZARNIAWSKA, B. Narratives in social science research. Sage, 2004.

CZARNIAWSKA, B. Translation impossible? Accounting for a city project. Accounting, auditing & accountability journal, v. 23, n. 3, p. 420-437, 2010.

CZARNIAWSKA, B. Organizations as obstacles to organizing. In: Organization and Organizing. Routledge, p. 27-46, 2013.

CZARNIAWSKA-JOERGES, B. Learning organizing in a changing institution order: examples from a city management in Warsaw. Management Learning, London, v. 28, n. 4, p. 475-495, 1997.

DALE, Karen. The Body and Organisation Studies. In: Anatomising Embodiment and Organisation Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p. 8-31, 2001.

DAVIS, M. Cidade de quartzo: escavando o futuro em Los Angeles, Scritta. São Paulo,1993.

DOMINGUES, F. F.; FANTINEL, L. D.; FIGUEIREDO, M. D. A feira como entrecruzamento de espaços: entre o concebido e o vidido, o praticado. In: Anais do Congresso Brasileiro de Estudos Organizacionais. Porto Alegre: 2016.

DUARTE, M. F.; ALCADIPANI, R. Contribuições do organizar (organizing) para os Estudos Organizacionais. Organizações & Sociedade, v. 23, n. 76, p. 57-72, 2016.

FIGUEIREDO, M. D.; CAVEDON, N. R. O espaço organizacional e o espaço da cidade: as diversas formas de apropriação física e simbólica de um centro comercial em Porto Alegre. Gestão e Sociedade, v. 6, n. 15, p. 227-253, 2012.

FANTINEL, L. D.; CAVEDON, N. R. A cultura organizacional do restaurante Chalé da Praça XV em Porto Alegre: espaços e tempos sendo revelados. RAM, Revista de Administração Mackenzie, v. 11, n. 1, p. 6-37, 2010.

FANTINEL, L. D.; CAVEDON, N. R.; FISCHER, T. Produção de Significações do Espaço e Sociabilidade em um Café Artesanal de Salvador. RIGS - Revista Interdisciplinar de Gestão Social, v. 1, p. 51-74, 2012.

FIGUEIREDO, M. D.; CAVEDON, N. R. O espaço organizacional e o espaço da cidade: as diversas formas de apropriação física e simbólica de um centro comercial em Porto Alegre. Gestão e Sociedade, v. 6, n. 15, p. 227-253, 2012.

FANTINEL, L. D.; FISCHER, T. M. D. Organizações e Contextos Urbanos: Os cafés e as Sociabilidades. Gestão e Sociedade, v. 6, n. 15, p. 280-307, 2012.

FINE, G. A.; HALLETT, T. Group Cultures and the Everyday Life of Organizations: Interaction Orders and Meso-Analysis. Organization Studies. v. 35, n. 12, p. 1773- 1792, 2014.

FISCHER, T. A cidade como teia organizacional: inovações, continuidades e ressonâncias culturais — Salvador da Bahia, cidade puzzle. Revista de Administração Pública, Rio de Janeiro, v. 31, n. 3, p. 74-88, maio/jun. 1997.

FISCHER, T. Gestão contemporânea, cidades estratégicas: aprendendo com fragmentos e configurações do local. In: FISCHER, T. Gestão contemporânea: cidades estratégicas e organizações locais. Rio de Janeiro: FGV, 1996.

FISCHER, T. et al. Teias urbanas, puzzles organizativos: inovações, continuidade e ressonâncias culturais. In: XX ENCONTRO ANUAL DA ASSOCIAÇÃO NACIONAL DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO E PESQUISA EM ADMINISTRAÇÃO. Anais[...]. Rio das Pedras: Anpad, 1996.

FRANCO, B. L.; OLIVEIRA, J. As Práticas de Constituição dos Espaços Organizacionais e dos Espaços das Cidades: Contribuições de Michel de Certeau aos Estudos Organizacionais. In: Congresso Brasileiro de Estudos Organizacionais. Anais...Porto Alegre: 2016.

GALVÃO, Cristina Maria; SAWADA, Namie Okino; TREVIZAN, Maria Auxiliadora. Revisão sistemática. Rev Latino-am enfermagem, v. 12, n. 3, p. 549-56, 2004.

GOTTDIENER, M. Planned Sprawl: Private Public Interest Suburb. SAGE Publications, Incorporated, 1977.

GOULARTE, C. C. Cotidiano, identidade e memória: narrativas de camelôs em Pelotas-RS. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Sociais) – Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, 2008.

HARVEY, D. Espaços de esperança. São Paulo, Loyola, 2004.

HARVEY, D. Cidades rebeldes – do direito à cidade à revolução urbana. São Paulo, Martins Fontes, Selo Martins, 2014.

HASSARD, J.; COX, J. W. Can Sociological Paradigms Still Inform Organizational Analysis? A Paradigm Model for Post-Paradigm Times. Organization Studies, v.34, p. 1701-1728, 2013.

IGARASHI, W., IGARASHI, D. C. C., BORGES, B. J. Revisão sistemática e sua potencial contribuição em “negócios, gerenciamento e contabilidade”. Gestão & Regionalidade, v. 31, n. 91, 2015.

IPIRANGA, A. S. R. A cultura da cidade e os seus espaços intermediários: os bares e os restaurantes. RAM, Revista de Administração Mackenzie, v. 11, n. 1, p. 65-91, 2010.

JODELET, D. Representações sociais: um domínio em expansão. In: Jodelet, D. As representações sociais. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. UERJ, 2001. p. 17-44.

LACERDA, Carlos César de Oliveira; MELLO, Sérgio Carvalho Benício de. Se essa rua fosse minha eu mandava ladrilhar: conflitos sociais no organizar do espaço urbano e a luta pela significação entre discursos e [r] existência. Organizações & Sociedade, v. 27, n. 95, p. 787-819, 2020.

LEFEBVRE, H. A produção do espaço. Trad. Doralice Barros Pereira e Sérgio Martins (do original: La production de l’espace. 4e éd.Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 2000), 2006.

LEFEBVRE, H. O direito à cidade. Rio de Janeiro: Centauro, 2008.

MAC-ALLISTER, M. A cidade no campo dos estudos organizacionais. Organizações & Sociedade, Salvador, v. 11, edição especial, p. 171-181, 2004.

MAGNANI, J. G. C. Festa no pedaço: cultura popular e lazer na cidade. Unesp, 1998.

MAGNANI, J. G. C. Na metrópole. In: MAGNANI, J. G. C.; TORRES, L. L. (Org.). Textos de Antropologia Urbana. São Paulo: Editora da Universidade de São Paulo; Fapesp, 1996.

MEDEIROS, C. R. O.; VALADÃO, V. M. JR; PEREIRA, A. P. Condomínios Horizontais Fechados: segregação do espaço social. REA-Revista Eletrônica de Administração, v. 7, n. 1, 2011.

MENDES, L.; CAVEDON, N. R. A atividade de camelô como prática urbana no contexto das cidades. Urbe - Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana, v. 4, n. 1, p. 123-140, 2012.

MOSCOVICI, S. Representações sociais: investigação em psicologia social. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2009.

MORGAN, G., FROST, P.; PONDY, L. Organizational symbolism. In: PONDY, L. et al. (eds.). Organizational symbolism. Connecticut: Jay Press, p. 3-35, 1983.

NASCIMENTO, M. C. R. et al. Com que cor eu vou pro shopping que você me convidou?. RAC-Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 19, n. 3, p. 245-268, 2015.

NASCIMENTO, M. C. R. et al. Práticas de segregação e resistência nas organizações: uma análise discursiva sobre os “rolezinhos” na cidade de Belo Horizonte (MG). RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, v. 17, n. 1, p. 55-81, 2016.

PALHARES, L. V.; CARRIERI, A. POLETO, A. F. As práticas cotidianas de negócio dos catireiros da região do triângulo mineiro e alto paranaíba. Gestão & Regionalidade, v. 35, n. 103, 2019.

RECKWITZ, A. Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, v. 5, n. 2, p. 243–263, 2002.

RODRIGUES, I. D. A dinâmica geográfica da camelotagem: a territorialidade do trabalho precarizado. Dissertação (Mestrado em Geografia). Universidade Estadual Paulista, Presidente Prudente, 2008.

SANTOS, D. A reinvenção do espaço: diálogos em torno da construção do significado de uma categoria. São Paulo: UNESP, 2002.

SANTOS, L. T.; SOARES, F. M. A. Entre o físico e o simbólico: práticas organizativas de controle no centro de Belo Horizonte. Farol – Revista de Estudos Organizacionais e Sociedade, v.4, n.11, 2017.

SARAIVA, L. A. S.; CARRIERI, A. P. Organização-cidade: proposta de avanço conceitual a partir da análise de um caso. Revista de Administração Pública, v. 46, n. 2, p. 547-576, 2012.

SARAIVA, L. A. S.; CARRIERI, A. P.; SOARES, A. S. Territorialidade e identidade nas organizações: o caso do Mercado Central de Belo Horizonte. RAM, Revista de Administração Mackenzie, v. 15, n. 2, p. 97-126, 2014.

SARAIVA, L. A. S.; IPIRANGA, A. S. R. História, práticas sociais e gestão das/nas cidades. Ituiutaba: Barlavento, 2020.

SCHATZKI, T. R. What Is a Social Practice? In: SCHATZKI, T. R. The site of the social: a philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. Pennsylvania: State University, 2002. P.70-88.

SENNET, R. O Declínio do Homem Público. São Paulo: Cia das Letras, 1988.

SERPA, A. S. P. Apropriação social versus requalificação dos parques e praças na capital baiana. In: ESTEVES JR., M.; URIARTE, U. M. (orgs.). Panoramas urbanos: reflexões sobre a cidade. EDUFBA. Salvador, 2003.

SERPA, A. S. P. O espaço público na cidade contemporânea. Contexto. Salvador, 2007.

SIMMEL, G. Questões fundamentais da sociologia: indivíduo e sociedade. Zahar, 2006.

Taylor, S.; Spicer, A. Time for space: A narrative review of research on organizational spaces. International Journal of Management Reviews, v. 9, n. 4, p. 325–346, 2007.

VIDAL, D. “Michel de certeau e a difícil arte de fazer história das praticar”. In: FARIA FILHO, L. M. Pensadores sociais e história da educação. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2005.

VILLAÇA, F. São Paulo: segregação urbana e desigualdade. Estudos avançados, v. 25, n. 71, p. 37-58, 2011.

WASSERMAN, V.; FRENKEL, M., Organizational Aesthetics: Caught Between Identity Regulation and Culture Jamming. Organization Science, v. 22, n. 2, p. 503- 521, 2011.

WEBER, K.; DACIN, M. T. The Cultural Construction of Organizational Life: Introduction to the Special Issue. Organization Science, v. 22, n. 2, p. 287-298, 2011.

Weinfurtner T.; Seidl D. Towards a spatial perspective: An integrative review of research on organisational space. Scandinavian Journal of Management, v.35, n. 2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2018.02.003.

Notas de autor

fabianafd@gmail.com