On the Problem of Participation in Strategy: A Critical Discursive Perspective

Abstract

We still know little of why strategy processes often involve participation problems. In this paper, we argue that this crucial issue is linked to fundamental assumptions about the nature of strategy work. Hence, we need to examine how strategy processes are typically made sense of and what roles are assigned to specific organizational members. For this purpose, we adopt a critical discursive perspective that allows us to discover how specific conceptions of strategy work are reproduced and legitimized in organizational strategizing. Our empirical analysis is based on an extensive research project on strategy work in 12 organizations. As a result of our analysis, we identify three central discourses that seem to be systematically associated with nonparticipatory approaches to strategy work: “mystification,” “disciplining,” and “technologization.” However, we also distinguish three strategy discourses that promote participation: “self-actualization,” “dialogization,” and “concretization.” Our analysis shows that strategy as practice involves alternative and even competing discourses that have fundamentally different kinds of implications for participation in strategy work. We argue from a critical perspective that it is important to be aware of the inherent problems associated with dominant discourses as well as to actively advance the use of alternative ones.

Navigating Sustainability Embeddedness in Management Decision-Making

“…We argue that the realization of sustainability in practice and subsequent improved decision-making for enhanced sustainability can only be achieved when the current situation of sustainability embeddedness in decision-making has been conceptualized [33,[55][56][57]. This requires in-depth involvement from practitioners and the necessary inclusion of subjective decision-making factors into interpretation such as ideology, values, norms, and context, due to their influence on an improved understanding of decision-making and strategy execution [6,37,44,50].…”

Estratégia como Prática Social: um Estudo de Práticas Discursivas no Fazer Estratégia

“…Acredita-se haver coerência teórica nessa articulação, uma vez que se direcionou a pesquisa para as relações de poder, que se materializam por intermédio das práticas discursivas nos diversos níveis hierárquicos da Instituição, pelos envolvidos no fazer estratégia. Também a fim de justificar a contribuição de Foucault no trabalho, ressalta-se que outros autores já realizaram estudos com a abordagem da EPS orientada pela proposta foucaultiana, a saber: Vaara et al (2004), Ezzamel e Willmott (2008), Mantere e Vaara (2008), A. R. L. Silva, Carrieri e Souza (2012) e Allard-Poesi (2015. Seidl e Whittington (2014) afirmaram já haver um esforço importante articulando teorias sociais com a EPS -incluindo a análise de discurso foucaultiana, no entanto o desafio de aplicá-las em pesquisas empíricas ainda permanece para os pesquisadores.…”

“…Mantere e Vaara (2008) Vaara (2010) utilizou três níveis de análise da estratégia: no metanível, examina-se a complexidade da estratégia como um corpo de conhecimento; no mesoeconômico ou organizacional, compreendem-se as narrativas de organização estratégica, para melhor entender a polifonia e a dialogicidade; no plano micro, reflete-se sobre as habilidades retóricas e táticas que são usadas em conversas -formais e informais -sobre estratégia. Balogun, Jacobs, Jarzabkowski, Mantere e Vaara (2014) corroboraram que estratégia envolve todas as formas de comunicação concebidas pela organização, como conversas informais, reuniões formais de estratégias, declarações coorporativas, enfim, palavras faladas e materializadas em textos.…”

Rethinking the concept of performance in strategy research: towards a performativity perspective

“…This line of argument has been transposed to the field of strategy, sometimes without explicitly referring to performativity. For example, studies have examined how the subject position of "strategist" is taken up and how strategy discourse may have power effects -generally privileging senior management (Knights & Morgan, 1991;Mantere & Vaara, 2008). Knights and Rethinking the concept of performance in strategy research: towards a performativity perspective M@n@gement vol.…”

“…Different strategy discourses produce different subject positions and different opportunities for participating in the strategy (Mantere & Vaara, 2008).…”