Exploring the roles of external facilitators in IT-driven open strategizing

This paper examines the different roles external facilitators have in information technology driven open strategizing. Using a strategyas-practice lens and drawing on two empirical cases of open strategy in organizations, our paper highlights four emerging roles of external facilitators which we call; structuring, promoting, moderating and analyzing. In concluding the paper we call for further research relating to external facilitators and open strategy

Exploring the roles of external facilitators in IT-driven open strategizing

This paper examines the different roles external facilitators have in information technology driven open strategizing. Using a strategyas-practice lens and drawing on two empirical cases of open strategy in organizations, our paper highlights four emerging roles of external facilitators which we call; structuring, promoting, moderating and analyzing. In concluding the paper we call for further research relating to external facilitators and open strategy

Open Strategy and IT: A review and research agenda

No description supplie

User Participation in Infrastructuring: Exploring the Space for Action

This paper addresses the concept of participation in the context of design and transformation of a health information infrastructure. Recent work on transformation of health information infrastructures shows that bottom-up user-driven processes are preferred, however, the role of the user in infrastructuring remains under-researched. We investigate user representatives\u27 space for participation in design of an infrastructure, based on the Scandinavian tradition of Participatory Design. We take a user perspective to infrastructuring, investigating the work of user representatives (health workers) who engage in technology design, requiring engagement with local practices in shaping data practices. We have conducted a longitudinal case study on the design and development of a data platform for patient handover in a large Norwegian municipality. We contribute with an understanding of participation in the transformation of infrastructures as user representatives engage local organizations as both facilitators for their own design process, i.e. designers preparing and transforming their local services, as well as participants into design of the infrastructure, i.e. designers shaping technology. We contribute to literature on infrastructuring by showing how user representatives explore possbilities for action, shaping the infrastructuring process

Open strategy initiatives: open, IT-enabled episodes of strategic practice

The concept of openness has become widespread in organizations, driven by the advent of the internet and advances in information technology, with open approaches now a particular interest to information systems researchers. Open principles have more recently been adopted by organizations in a strategic context, through openness in strategy processes. Widely labelled ‘open strategy’, research into the phenomenon has primarily focused on increased transparency and participation in strategy-making, with less attention on the actual practice of open strategy. In particular, there has been limited focus on its episodic nature, with open strategy, in many cases, representing temporary instances of strategic ideation within the wider operational and strategic conduct of organizations. This paper intends to extend current open strategy definitions by conceptually expanding Hendry and Seidl's (2003) framework for studying ‘strategic episodes’, helping to explain the temporary complexion of the phenomenon. This analysis also explores how information systems are central to this form of open, ITenabled strategic practice. We introduce empirical data from two case studies to conceptualize the intermittent nature of what we define as ‘open strategy initiatives’, and conclude by outlining what this on-going research intends to contribute in the future

Scaling sustainability from the organizational periphery to the strategic core : towards a practice-based framework of what practitioners “do”

This paper explores what sustainability managers do when attempting to scale sustainability to a strategic level within their organization. Drawing on semistructured interview data with 44 sustainability managers in large, for‐profit companies, we identify three distinct scaling microstrategies that individuals use when scaling sustainability. We label these conforming, leveraging, and shaping. Our analysis also finds that sustainability managers deploy combinations of these microstrategies in three distinct approaches, which we call the assimilation approach, the mobilization approach, and the transition approach. Finally, we interrogate the degree to which employing these different approaches achieves a peripheral, intermediate, or strategic scale of sustainability within the organizations represented in the study. Our paper contributes to theory and practice at the interface of strategy and sustainability by developing a practice‐based Scaling Approach Framework, whereby an assimilation approach is associated with organizations with sustainability at a peripheral scale, a mobilization approach is associated with an intermediate scale of sustainability, and a transition approach is associated with scaling sustainability to a strategic level. From these results, we propose a Scaling Progression Model that reflects the phases that individuals progress through when scaling sustainability.PostprintPeer reviewe

Making Sense of Design Space: Design Perspectives on the Idea of Organization and Strategizing

This dissertation bridges areas of design research with organization and management studies with the aim of increasing interdisciplinary understanding of design. An increasing number of designers in industrial settings, besides designing physical objects, are involved in shaping services and experiences by utilizing evolving information technology. While design approaches have gained increased visibility in managerial realms the position of design managers participating in strategizing and organizational action calls for proliferation of paradigms and reflexivity on frames guiding such action. This research aims at enriching both design theories and areas of research in organization and management studies by bridging perspectives emerging from these fields. It does so by asking whether and how design theories and design managers might influence the idea of organization and its strategic direction. The positivist understanding of an organization is juxtaposed with philosophical perspectives from the traditions of social constructionism, hermeneutics and reflexivity. Qualitative research approaches are combined with sensemaking and design approaches. The research is positioned at the intersection of managerial traditions and frames and general values of design often concerned with human wellbeing. However, instead of embedding design into organizational traditions and structures, the research moves from this pre-understanding towards suggesting and making sense of an evolving design space as a social and linguistic, but also material and embodied phenomenon in which strategizing, sensemaking and design are in a continuous flow of becoming. Through the three sub-studies, the research evolves towards broader understanding of designing in organizational industrial settings. Design managers´ context is addressed by disclosing possible frames while combining micro and macro levels of organizational thinking from partly critical perspectives. The longitudinal research covers interviews among experienced designers in middle or senior management positions working in Silicon Valley between the years 2013 and 2016. Most participants represented large technology-driven multinationals and design consultancies. The first sub-study utilized theory elaboration by combining perspectives on sensemaking, strategizing and design into a preliminary theoretical model. The second sub-study focused on design managers´ language through identification of normalising and denormalising language use. The third sub-study addressed the information technology field as an example to discuss the need for ethics and attention to potential harmful consequences in the domain of design and strategizing for more awareness and responsible future outcomes. Reaching beyond the firm-centric and use-stage specific questions, designers might display more intense participation in strategic decision making concerning pre-use and post-use stage consequences for users, and additionally, for third-parties, locally, globally and digitally. Designers may act as supporters and challengers of evolving strategies while mediating between frame adoption and frame extension. At times, historically developed strategic frames may become reproduced. However, denormalising language used by design managers with material–linguistic strengths could trigger critical reflection on strategic assumptions. The dissertation proposed a way of understanding organizational strategizing differently through the suggestion to rather speak about design space in which strategic action and sensemaking are situated. The design space understood as a continuously evolving social construction in becoming is a site of sensemaking inviting actors from diverse fields into an interdisciplinary dialogue. By questioning the obvious, designers as managers may contribute to increased responsibility, transparency, sustainability and ethics in decision making concerning the rapidly evolving industrial and digitalizing contexts. Future designers as hybrid co-strategists may gain more power through their managerial roles making awareness and critical discussion on frames and taken-for-granted beliefs across occupational domains important. Finally, a suggestion to reframe the concept of meaning innovation was made. The research makes a design contribution to creative and critical streams of organization and management studies, as well as sensemaking studies and suggests some interdisciplinary issues for further research bridging these fields

Open strategy : a review and research agenda

In the whole, preceding literature reviews on the contemporary strategic management phenomena of open strategy include a number of limitations: they are deficient of a detailed concentration, deliver an excessive definitional focus or are absent of a distinct empirical analysis of research in the field. In order to address these shortcomings, this paper endeavours to systematically examine the existing literature on open strategy by classifying its main characteristics, connecting the different aspects together in a structured and comprehensive definition. This considered review of extant literature assesses numerous characteristics of open strategizing as they are presented in preceding research. Consequently, the systematic and methodical approach taken by this paper affords an alternative way of comprehending open strategy and contributes to the field by providing a consolidation of the literature and signifying potential streams for future research to explore

Corporate Foresight : A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research trajectories

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Consensus in strategy workshops: an exploratory study

Strategy workshops are a commonly used practice in modern organisations to support strategic decision making or to define implementation measures. However, despite their widespread use in practice, academic research on strategy workshops has been very limited. There have been calls among scholars to generate a deeper understanding of workshop processes. To date no research has focused on the interpersonal dimensions of strategy workshops, their relevance and the practices that shape them. This is specifically significant for strategic consensus and its role in strategy workshops, which has been overlooked by studies, despite acknowledgements of its significance for the strategy process. It is therefore the objective of this study to determine the relevance of consensus in a strategy workshop, to develop an understanding how and through which context factors consensus is established and to derive guidelines towards establishing and using consensus in these workshops. This qualitative study takes a Strategy-as-Practice perspective. Building upon the existing research gap, this study aims to identify and understand how consensus among participants develops in a strategy workshop and how this contributes to strategizing. The research focuses on the research questions: (a) how does consensus evolve in strategy workshops; (b) how is consensus experienced by participants; and (c) which factors influence consensus building in a strategy workshop. Through these research questions the study addresses the objectives of establishing the relevance of consensus for strategizing, how consensus building takes place in a strategy workshop context and which factors and practices can influence the formation of consensus and thus also of strategies. The data collection consisted of two phases. It has been conducted inductively in a single company case study approach in a German company. The related data was gathered through observations of two strategy workshops and in 16 interviews with professional experts from the researched organisation. From the findings it can be derived that consensus evolves non-linearly through iterative discussions by the workshop participants. Consensus building starts with a common agreement on the workshop goal and is then shaped by open interactions of the participants and guided by the facilitator. The study found that consensus is perceived as a critical pre-condition for the successful implementation of a strategy. Consensus creates commitment of stakeholders and establishes a momentum that is both used for decision making in a workshop as well as implementation in the aftermath. Further, consensus allows managers to use strategy workshops as sources of justification referenced during the implementation phase. As influencing context factors, consensus requires a clear problem and context scope before or at the start of a workshop. The structuring by the facilitator and the participants’ setup are critical for the process of consensus building. This study contributes to existing theory in the field of Strategy-as-Practice by expanding the definition of consensus in two dimensions. These are an extension of the definition towards a time-related dimension of consensus concerning its formation, as well as proposing a differentiation between true and false consensus, which adds a new dimension to the concept of consensus in strategizing Further, this research provides qualitative evidence of context factors that influence consensus building, as well as bridging the gap between theory and practice. This research contributes to practice by outlining the importance of workshop elements for consensus building in strategy workshops with a self-developed exploratory framework as guidance for practitioners. Further, it provides insights into the role of consensus for strategizing in strategy workshops