CORE
🇺🇦
make metadata, not war
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Community governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
research
Beyond belief: Strategic taboos and organizational identity in strategic agenda setting
Authors
Albert S.
Corley K. G.
+19 more
Dutton J.
Dutton J.
Gates B.
Glaser B.
Hamel G.
Hamilton A. L.
Markides C.
Miles M. B.
Minkoff D. C.
Patton M. Q.
Plambeck N.
Slok C.
Stake R. E.
Steiner F.
Strauss A.
Tushman M.
Webster H.
Whetten D. A.
Yin R. K.
Publication date
1 January 2014
Publisher
London : SAGE Publications Ltd.
Doi
Cite
Abstract
A comprehensive strategic agenda matters for fundamental strategic change. Our study seeks to explore and theorize how organizational identity beliefs influence the judgment of strategic actors when setting an organization’s strategic agenda. We offer the notion of “strategic taboo” as those strategic options initially disqualified and deemed inconsistent with the organizational identity beliefs of strategic actors. Our study is concerned with how strategic actors confront strategic taboos in the process of setting an organization’s strategic agenda. Based on a revelatory inductive case study, we find that strategic actors engage in assessing the concordance of the strategic taboos with organizational identity beliefs and, more specifically, that they focus on key identity elements (philosophy; priorities; practices) when doing so. We develop a typology of three reinterpretation practices that are each concerned with a key identity element. While contextualizing assesses the potential concordance of a strategic taboo with an organization’s overall philosophy and purpose, instrumentalizing assesses such concordance with respect to what actors deem an organization’s priorities to be. Finally, normalizing explores concordance with respect to compatibility and fit with the organization’s practices. We suggest that assessing concordance of a strategic taboo with identity elements consists in reinterpreting collective identity beliefs in ways that make them consistent with what organizational actors deem the right course of action. This article discusses the implications for theory and research on strategic agenda setting, strategic change, a practice-based perspective on strategy, and on organizational identity. © The Author(s) 2014
Similar works
Full text
Open in the Core reader
Download PDF
Available Versions
Berner Fachhochschule: ARBOR
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:arbor.bfh.ch:5660
Last time updated on 17/10/2019
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
info:doi/10.1177%2F14761270145...
Last time updated on 05/06/2019
Institutionelles Repositorium der Leibniz Universität Hannover
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:www.repo.uni-hannover.de:1...
Last time updated on 02/12/2017
Bern Open Repository and Information System (BORIS)
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:boris.unibe.ch:76116
Last time updated on 06/05/2016