Suchergebnisse

In this article, a social theory framework is developed to explain the common themes of recursive and adaptive practice underpinning the existing strategic management literature. In practice, there is a coexistent tension between recursive and adaptive forms of strategic action that spans multiple levels from macro-institutional and competitive contexts to within-firm levels of analysis to individual cognition. This tension may be better understood by examining how management practices are used to put strategy into practice. Such practices span multiple levels of context and are adaptable to their circumstances of use, serving to highlight both general characteristics and localized idiosyncrasies of strategy as practice. The article develops the concept of management practices-in-use into a research agenda and nine broad research questions that may be used to investigate empirically strategy as practice.

Do elite strategists always project powerfulness in how they talk about their strategy work? Whilst the strategy discourse literature has often assumed that those occupying senior strategy positions project strength in how they negotiate power through discourse, our findings challenge and elaborate this assumption by revealing aspects of vulnerability and powerlessness in how they talk about themselves as elite strategists. Based on the strategy discourse of 48 elite strategists around the world, our findings extend the literature at the intersection of power and subjectivity, strategy discourse, and strategy work in three ways. First, we illuminate surprising vulnerability and powerlessness in some elite strategists' discourses about themselves, an element that goes beyond the assumption of exclusivity and influence embedded in current studies. Second, we contribute to the discursive opening up of the strategist role itself, showing how elite strategists position themselves in contrast to a variety of 'others' in strategy work beyond traditional hierarchies. Finally, we advance understandings on discursive competence in the strategy professional field, illuminating new ways in which its discursive competitiveness and continuity is manifest.

This paper addresses a fundamental conundrum at the heart of meaning making: How is agreement to change achieved amid multiple, coexisting meanings? This challenge is particularly salient when proposing a new strategic initiative as it introduces new meanings that must coexist with multiple prevailing meanings. Yet, prior literature on meaning-making processes places different emphases on the extent to which agreement to a new initiative requires shared meaning across diverse organizational members. We propose the concept of a joint account as the means through which an agreement to change may be achieved that accommodates multiple, coexisting meanings that satisfy diverse constituents' vested interests. Based on the findings from an ethnographic study of a university's strategic planning process, we develop a framework that demonstrates two different patterns in the microprocesses of meaning making. These patterns extend our understanding about the way vested interests enable or constrain the construction of a joint account. In doing so, we contribute to knowledge about resistance, ambiguity, and lack of agreement to a proposed change.

This article develops a relational model of institutional work and complexity. This model advances current institutional debates on institutional complexity and institutional work in three ways. First, it provides a relational and dynamic perspective on institutional complexity by explaining how constellations of logics − and their degree of internal contradiction − are constructed rather than given. Second, it refines our current understanding of agency, intentionality and effort in institutional work by demonstrating how different dimensions of agency interact dynamically in the institutional work of reconstructing institutional complexity. Third, it situates institutional work in the everyday practice of individuals coping with the institutional complexities of their work. In doing so, it reconnects the construction of institutionally complex settings to the actions and interactions of the individuals who inhabit them.

This paper examines the construction of a strategic plan as a communicative process. Drawing on Ricoeur's concepts of decontextualization and recontextualization, we conceptualize strategic planning activities as being constituted through the iterative and recursive relationship of talk and text. Based on an in-depth case study, our findings show how multiple actors engage in a formal strategic planning process which is manifested in a written strategy document. This document is thus central in the iterative talk to text cycles. As individuals express their interpretations of the current strategic plan in talk, they are able to make amendments to the text, which then shape future textual versions of the plan. This cycle is repeated in a recursive process, in which the meanings attributed to talk and text increasingly converge within a final agreed plan. We develop our findings into a process model of the communication process that explains how texts become more authoritative over time and, in doing so, how they inscribe power relationships and social order within organizations. These findings contribute to the literature on strategic planning and on organization as a communication process.

This article addresses the recent turn in strategy research to practice-based theorizing. Based on a data set of 51 meeting observations, the article examines how strategy meetings are involved in either stabilizing existing strategic orientations or proposing variations that cumulatively generate change in strategic orientations. Eleven significant structuring characteristics of strategy meetings are identified and examined with regard to their potential for stabilizing or destabilizing existing strategic orientations. Based on a taxonomy of meeting structures, we explain three typical evolutionary paths through which variations emerge, are maintained and developed, and are selected or de-selected. The findings make four main contributions. First, they contribute to the literature on strategy-as-practice by explaining how the practice of meetings is related to consequential strategic outcomes. Second, they contribute to the literature on organizational becoming by demonstrating the role of meetings in shaping stability and change. Third, they extend and elaborate the concept of meetings as strategic episodes. Fourth, they contribute to the literature on garbage can models of strategy-making.

There are still few explanations of the micro-level practices by which top managers influence employee commitment to multiple strategic goals. This paper argues that, through their language, top managers can construct a context for commitment to multiple strategic goals. We therefore propose a rhetoric-in-context approach to illuminate some of the micro practices through which top managers influence employee commitment. Based upon an empirical study of the rhetorical practices through which top managers influence academic commitment to multiple strategic goals in university contexts, we demonstrate relationships between rhetoric and context. Specifically, we show that rhetorical influences over commitment to multiple goals are associated with the historical context for multiple goals, the degree to which top managers' rhetoric instantiates a change in that context, and the internal consistency of the rhetorical practices used by top managers.

This paper adopts a practice approach to paradox, examining the role of micro-practices in shaping constructions of and responses to paradox. Our approach is inductively motivated. During an ethnographic study of an organization implementing paradoxical goals we noticed a strong incidence of humor, joking, and laughter. Examining this practice closely, we realized that humor was used to surface, bring attention to, and make communicable experience of paradox in the moment by drawing out some specific contradiction in their work. Humor thus allowed actors to socially construct paradox, as well as—in interaction with others—construct potential responses to the multiple small incidences of paradox in their everyday work. In doing so, humor cast the interactional dynamics that were integral in constructing two response paths: (i) entrenching a response, whereby an existing response was affirmed, thereby continuing on a particular response path, and (ii) shifting a response, whereby actors moved from one response to paradox to another, thereby altering how the team collectively responded to paradoxical issues. Drawing on these findings, we reconceptualize paradox as a characteristic of everyday life, which is constructed and responded to in the moment.

Reinsurance is a market that provides cover for the devastating consequences of unpredictable events such as Hurricane Katrina, or the Tohoku earthquake, underpinning society's capacity to rebuild after the unthinkable happens. This book fleshes out how this important and quirky financial market works

Over the last two decades, Strategy as Practice (SAP) has developed from an embryonic, fringe perspective on strategy to a consolidated field of strategy research. The 2007 special issue of Human Relations on 'Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective' played a pivotal role in bringing this field to fruition. Reflecting on the broad SAP aim to 'let a thousand flowers bloom', we employ a plant-based metaphor, to distinguish three phases in the development of SAP, each associated with different types of agenda work. In an initial Germination Phase, scholars did agenda-seeking work of establishing new concepts and differentiating SAP from other fields of strategy research. A Blossoming Phase of agenda-setting work followed, establishing a community of scholars and articles that identified as SAP, and establishing and defending the boundaries of the new field. As the field became established, it entered a Harvesting Phase, characterized by agenda-confirming work of using SAP lenses to explain core strategy and organization. Based on these reflections, and considering the many public critiques of SAP, we note that the field appears to be in transition to a new Propagating Phase that offers exciting potential to cross-pollinate within the SAP field and across other areas.