The Consultant-Client Relationship: A Systems-Theoretical Perspective

The aim of this paper is to explain consulting failure from a systems-theoretical perspective and to provide a new framework for analysing consultant–client relationships. By drawing on Luhmann’s systems theory, clients and consultants are conceptualised as two autopoietic communication systems that operate according to idiosyncratic logics. They are structurally coupled through a third system, the so-called “contact system”, which constitutes a separate discourse. Due to their different logics no transfer of meaning between the three discourses is possible. This contradicts the traditional notion of consulting as a means of providing solutions to the client’s problems: neither is the consultant able to understand the client’s problems nor is it possible to transfer any solutions into the client system. Instead, consulting interventions only cause perturbations in the client system. Consequently, the traditional functions of consulting are called into question. The paper discusses the implications of this analysis with relation to the traditional approach to consulting, and presents a tentative framework for a systemic concept of consulting

The Consultant-Client Relationship: A Systems-Theoretical Perspective

The aim of this paper is to explain consulting failure from a systems-theoretical perspective and to provide a new framework for analysing consultant–client relationships. By drawing on Luhmann’s systems theory, clients and consultants are conceptualised as two autopoietic communication systems that operate according to idiosyncratic logics. They are structurally coupled through a third system, the so-called “contact system”, which constitutes a separate discourse. Due to their different logics no transfer of meaning between the three discourses is possible. This contradicts the traditional notion of consulting as a means of providing solutions to the client’s problems: neither is the consultant able to understand the client’s problems nor is it possible to transfer any solutions into the client system. Instead, consulting interventions only cause perturbations in the client system. Consequently, the traditional functions of consulting are called into question. The paper discusses the implications of this analysis with relation to the traditional approach to consulting, and presents a tentative framework for a systemic concept of consulting.Consulting; Consultant-Client Relation; Consulting Failure; Systems Theory

Strategy Workshops and Strategic Change

Despite the attention that strategic change as a topic of research has received, there remain considerable difficulties in conceptualizing the actual sources of strategic change. Strategy workshops represent one obvious and explicit research site since organizations often use such events as a means of effecting or initiating strategic change. This paper examines empirical data from ninety-nine strategy workshops in ten separate organizations to address the research question: Do strategy workshops produce strategic change? The paper concludes that workshops can produce change but that one-off workshops are much less effective than a series of workshops. The data presented indicates that the elapsed duration of the entire series of workshops, the frequency of workshops, the scope and autonomy of the unit concerned, and the seniority of participants have an impact on the success or failure of the venture

Strategy Workshops and Strategic Change

Despite the attention that strategic change as a topic of research has received, there remain considerable difficulties in conceptualizing the actual sources of strategic change. Strategy workshops represent one obvious and explicit research site since organizations often use such events as a means of effecting or initiating strategic change. This paper examines empirical data from ninety-nine strategy workshops in ten separate organizations to address the research question: Do strategy workshops produce strategic change? The paper concludes that workshops can produce change but that one-off workshops are much less effective than a series of workshops. The data presented indicates that the elapsed duration of the entire series of workshops, the frequency of workshops, the scope and autonomy of the unit concerned, and the seniority of participants have an impact on the success or failure of the venture.Co-production of Knowledge; Engaged Scholarship; Strategic Change; Strategy as Practice; Strategy Workshops

Regulating organizations through codes of corporate governance

Although codes of corporate governance have come to be widely used as a mode of regulating corporations, our understanding of how they function is still rather limited. In this paper we describe the design of such code regimes and propose a theoretical framework for studying their effects. On the basis of an observation-theoretical approach, codes are conceptualized as schemas of observation that determine the way we evaluate corporations. On the one hand, the effect of a code depends on the extent to which it becomes integrated into recursive cycles of mutual observation between the corporation and the various actors in the field. On the other hand, it also depends on how the code relates to other observational schemas in the field. The paper concludes with some guidelines for empirical research on code regimes.Codes, Corporate Governance, Ecology, Field, Observation, Rules

Theorizing the client-consultant relationship from the perspective of social-systems theory

Over the last few years research on management consulting has established itself as an important area in management studies. While, traditionally, consulting research has been predominantly a-theoretical, lately researchers have been calling for an exploration of different theoretical approaches. This article has been written in response to these calls. It explores a new perspective for theorizing the client–consultant relationship based on the theory of social systems by Niklas Luhmann. According to this approach, clients and consultants can be conceptualized as two autopoietic communication systems that operate according to idiosyncratic logics. They are structurally coupled through a third system, the so-called ‘contact system’. Due to the different logics of these systems, the transfer of meaning between them is not possible. This theoretical position has interesting implications for the way we conceptualize consulting, challenging many traditional assumptions. Instead of supporting the client in finding solutions to their problems, this perspective emphasizes that consulting firms can only cause ‘perturbations’ in the client’s communication processes, inducing the client system to construct its own meaning from it

Conservation Provisions of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008: Evolutionary Changes and Challenges

Farm Bill, Conservation, Agricultural land retirement, Agricultural land preservation, Working lands, Agricultural and Food Policy, H59, Q58, Policy,

Praxistheorie vs. Systemtheorie

In der theoriegeleiteten Beratungsforschung fi nden sich zwei zentrale Theorieansätze. Auf der einen Seite sind dies Studien, die im weitesten Sinne der Praxistheorie zuzurechnen sind. Auf der anderen Seite existieren recht umfangreiche Forschungsarbeiten, die sich explizit auf die neuere Systemtheorie beziehen. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden die beiden Ansätze gegenübergestellt und im Hinblick auf ihre Leistungsfähigkeit untersucht. Dazu werden die jeweiligen Grundannahmen der Theorien herausgearbeitet und bezüglich ihrer Konsequenzen für die Konzeptualisierung der Beratung analysiert.In the literature on consulting one can find two prominent theoretical approaches. On one hand there are studies that draw on the theory of social practices. On the other hand there is a vast literature taking a systems perspective. In this paper the two approaches are contrasted and discussed with regard to their ability to account for empirical phenomena. For this purpose the basic assumptions of each approach are presented and their consequences for the conceptualisation of consulting will be analysed

Interdiscursive struggles: Managing the co-existence of the conventional and open strategy discourse

Research Summary “Open strategy” is a new macro discourse on strategy that differs fundamentally from the conventional strategy discourse. In this paper, we examine how actors deal with the co-existence of the two discourses, given their conflicting nature. For this purpose, we draw on a longitudinal, in-depth case study of an international finance firm that introduced open strategy alongside the conventional strategy discourse that had shaped their strategy work in the past. We find that strategy actors deal with interdiscursive tensions by enacting meta-discursive practices that regulate the mobilization of the two strategy discourses. Furthermore, we identify power as an important driver and necessary resource in enacting these practices. With these findings, we contribute to the open strategy literature and the literature on organization and strategy discourse. Managerial Summary There is a recent trend for opening up the strategy process to actors outside the upper echelons, which is referred to as “open strategy.” This new approach is based on a fundamentally different logic than the conventional approach to strategy making; while the latter highlights exclusivity and secrecy, the former stresses inclusivity and transparency. This empirical study examines how managers deal with tensions that arise from the co-existence of these approaches. We find that managers try to resolve these tensions by regulating where and when each approach can be applied. We also show that the switch from one way of regulating the application of approaches to another depends on the power and interests of the participants