Most power relationships between organizations and stakeholders are episodic circuits of power whereby resource dependence is exacerbated by prohibitive rules. Such relationships are usually constraining rather than empowering and generate resistance and reluctant compliance rather than co-operation and creativity. Clegg's (1989) concept of facilitative circuits of power, however, suggests that some power relationships, particular where high amounts of discretion are delegated, can result in innovation by stakeholders. Public sector agencies have multiple and diverse external stakeholder groups that they need to influence in order to implement their strategies. In this paper, we explore a facilitative circuit of power using a case study of a public sector research funding organization that employed strategic ambiguity to delegate considerable authority to stakeholders, stimulating a variety of creative responses during a period of major system restructuring. Risks associated with such a practice include the generation of active and passive resistance as well as a propensity for the system to revert to an episodic power circuit over time. Despite these risks, we propose that the deployment of strategic ambiguity is a previously unrecognized mode of high discretionary strategic agency in authority delegation that can generate creative responses on the part of stakeholders within a facilitative circuit of power.

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in organization studies would be strengthened by an increased focus on a central CDA tenet that texts should be analysed in context. Context has, for the most part, been afforded a taken‐for‐granted status that is misplaced because of the diverse ways in which it may be defined and applied. These generally unacknowledged differences relate to whether context is treated as space, time, practice, change, or frame. The result is a confusing array of studies claiming some degree of CDA status without core agreement – or acknowledgement of disagreements – about what is meant by context or how it should be linked to texts. To remedy this situation we identify in this Point article nine methodological protocols related to conceptual definitions, data selection, and data analysis which we argue benefit the consistency and rigour with which CDA in organization studies is applied. Use of these protocols may also serve as criteria against which the rigour of CDA research papers may be assessed.

This article offers the “brand web” model as a conceptual framework for the creation and ongoing analysis of corporate brands and brand relationships. The framework is particularly relevant for new economy ventures that result from alliances. In deploying the brand web model, marketers are asked to consider: the power relationship between the corporate brands; their corporate identities and brand values; the goals of each brand; and the relative strategies pursued to achieve these goals. These questions are posed within the context of the semiotic model of corporate identity.

In this article we examined the ways in which strategic ambiguity (Eisenberg, 1984) in the use of keywords (Williams, 1976(Williams, /1983) served an enabling function within a discourse marked by conflict and ideological divisions. Our analysis focused on the intertextual relationships between five documents intended by the Government to guide the development of biotechnology in New Zealand. Through our analysis we identified 'sustainability' as a keyword and three major roles for the deployment of the discourse strategy of strategic ambiguity in the use of this keyword. First, strategic ambiguity lent an internal and intertextual coherence to the texts (albeit superficial). Second, it allowed multiple perspectives and objectives to co-exist. Third, strategic ambiguity facilitated the participation of discourse actors who subscribed to ideologies that were more or less incommensurable. Disciplines Business | Social and Behavioral Sciences | Strategic Management Policy Publication DetailsThis article was originally published as Leitch, SR and Davenport, S, Strategic ambiguity as a discourse practice: the role of keywords in the discourse on 'sustainable' biotechnology. Discourse Studies, 9 (1) Over the past six years she has collaborated with Dr Davenport on two major projects, the first on the discourses of national science systems and the second on discourses of biotechnology.Dr Sally Davenport is an Associate Professor in the Victoria University of Wellington Management School in New Zealand. Her research interests centre on organizational and stakeholder strategy surrounding the management of science and technology, with a particular focus on the interaction between public sector researchers and private sector companies. Her articles have mainly appeared in research & technology management journals.3 AbstractIn this article we examined the ways in which strategic ambiguity (Eisenberg, 1984) in the use of keywords (Williams, 1976(Williams, /1983) served an enabling function within a discourse marked by conflict and ideological divisions. Our analysis focused on the intertextual relationships between five documents intended by the Government to guide the development of biotechnology in New Zealand. Through our analysis we identified 'sustainability' as a keyword and three major roles for the deployment of the discourse strategy of strategic ambiguity in the use of this keyword. First, strategic ambiguity lent an internal and intertextual coherence to the texts (albeit superficial). Second, it allowed multiple perspectives and objectives to co-exist. Third, strategic ambiguity facilitated the participation of discourse actors who subscribed to ideologies that were more or less incommensurable.4

This paper applies Eisenberg's 1 theory of strategic ambiguity to stakeholder relationship management during a period of significant change within a public sector organisation. Public sector organisations generally have a wider range of stakeholders than private sector organisations and must discharge their statutory responsibilities within the highly charged environment of the political arena. 2 This paper will contend that communication professionals may deploy strategic ambiguity to manage the competing demands of public sector stakeholders and also to stimulate a diversity of actions and creative responses in the stakeholder community. The paper draws upon an extensive case study of the major science-funding agency in New Zealand -the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology (FRST) -to illustrate the potential value of and identify some limits to the use of strategic ambiguity.