The problematic of strategy: a way of seeing is also a way of not seeing

The paper aims to question the post-rational observations and traditional constructions of strategy in terms of what they achieve and what they fail to achieve, and seeks to reconstruct strategy as a multi-dimensional, dynamic concept. For this purpose, the study uses and interrelates the dualities between continuity principle and discontinuity principle, knowledge and imagination, opportunity exploitation and opportunity exploration, and conformist innovation and deviant innovation. The paper makes explicit, through the notion of performance paradox, the context for the framework that results from the mutual relation of these four dualities. The paper finds that failure to understand these dualities and their interrelatedness will ensure that strategy will remain largely an illusive, unexplained and rhetorical concept. It demonstrates that the greatest benefit of understanding these dualities and their interrelatedness is that it can show how organisations should be by illuminating who they might be. The paper identifies opportunities for innovation, research and reflection by establishing the need for balancing the seemingly conflicting opposites of these interrelated dualities and ways in which they can be located on their strengths. The paper suggests that the understanding that emerges from the treatment of strategy as a multi-dimensional, dynamic construct, allows organisations to align the corporate, business and functional dimensions more effectively in making progress and receiving more in terms of the results they want to achieve. The paper introduces a radical shift in thinking, arguing for a move away from simplified, unbalanced, static constructions of strategy that focus on one-dimensionality, asymmetry and post-rationalisation

Collective creativity: wisdom or oxymoron?

The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate ways in which collective creativity and individual creativity exist in an “and/both” rather than in an “either/or” relationship. This study uses and interrelates a number of dualities using “metalectics”, the principal task of which is to balance seemingly conflicting opposites by revealing them and locating them on their strengths. Collective creativity, as a bridging metaphor, renders itself as an oxymoron, both literally and as an outcome: where individual and collective creativity are dichotomised, diversity is treated as a constraint, and collaboration is confused with coordination. An essential of creativity is deviancy, and that this has to be valued to bring about change. Heterogeneous communities of practice should not be confused with homogenous communities of practice because this causes artificial dialogues that destroy the very creativity they claim to ignite. The paper offers an alternative way of thinking, arguing for a move away from simplified, unbalanced perspectives of creativity that focus on one-dimensionality and asymmetry

Intellectual capital: direction, not blind faith

This study questions the coupling of “intellectual” with “capital” and the assumption that such a coupling legitimises measurement. It suggests this coupling presents intellectual capital as an uncontested construction that attracts a broad audience. However, this study lays bare intellectual capital by revealing its contestability and multiple meanings using rational and non-rational management perspectives as examples. Such contestability can be seen both as a strength and weakness in making intellectual capital a meaningful or meaningless construction. Using a metalectic framework, a process is presented that exposes a variety of attitudes of mind so that the integration of rational and non-rational management perspectives becomes a possibility. Using this framework, intellectual labour is captured operating within an eco-work system, which relies on the human attributes of independency and interdependency working simultaneously. It suggests that intellectual capital can only indicate a direction when imagination, creativity and learning are at work. The intention is not to provide yet another management model that will control or change people’s behaviours. This paper simply presents an alternative thinking process that accommodates a variety of attitudes of mind and argues that such a process is more appropriate than what is currently on offer if intellectual capital is to become more meaningful

Organisations, transformability and the dynamics of strategy

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the relationship between three concepts: organisations, transformability and the dynamics of strategy. These three concepts together with their interrelationships are central in explaining the life cycle of organisations, their survival and renewal. Design/methodology/approach: The development of this explanation has been based on bringing together a diversity of perspectives. Each perspective provides a horizon of understanding by directing attention in a particular way. The benefits of this approach are that it avoids the pitfalls of one-dimensionalism. This approach more accurately reflects the multi-faceted reality within which organisations operate. Findings: Discusses, compares and contextualises the findings and approaches of the papers in this special issue. Originality/value: The perspectives considered represent a small sample of the diversity that exists. However, this sample as serves a starting-point in developing a wider, more holistic debate that aims to bring theory and practice together

The audit dilemma in public services

Whilst in some way, audits can be seen as positive in terms of bringing about external accountability and regulation of high standards, the involvement of an approach in maintaining such standards by attaching a heavy weight to 'quality' control considerations is questionable. This is because such an approach shifts the focus from performance, which is about results, to conformance which emphasises norm-following behaviour. In other words, it shifts focus from what professionals can do in delivering public services to what they cannot do. This can be demonstrated using the arguments put forward in a recent public debate on the audit culture which enjoyed the participation of a significant number of academic professionals who have experienced it and question its legitimacy and those in the position of authority who promote and reinforce it. The evidence from this debate suggests that whilst audits have their origin in the Utopian craving for imagined ideal public services, when they crystallise into a culture, involving sets of largely unconscious assumptions, they can be distorted to such an extent that they conceal more than they reveal with the result that the actual policy pursued is the exact opposite of the professed ideal.public policy; accountability; audit culture; new public management; public services; auditing; unconscious assumptions.