Open Strategy: Dimensions, Dilemmas, Dynamics

Abstract

Responding to increasing practitioner and academic interest in Open Strategy, this article builds on recent theoretical and empirical studies in order to advance research in the following ways. We begin by developing a definition of Open Strategy that emphasizes variation along the two dimensions of transparency and inclusion, as well as the dilemmas and dynamics inherent in its practices. We identify five dilemmas in particular: those of process, commitment, disclosure, empowerment and escalation. We continue by exploring key dynamics in Open Strategy, including both movements along the dimensions of transparency and inclusion, and movements between the two dimensions. Respecting the acute dilemmas of Open Strategy, we allow in each case for movement away from greater openness. The article concludes by proposing an agenda for future research on Open Strategy.

Inter‐organizational sensemaking in the face of strategic meta‐problems: Requisite variety and dynamics of participation

“…In response to the challenges of such meta-problems, organizations often open up their strategizing process (Hautz et al, 2017;Whittington et al, 2011) and collaborate with other organizations to complement their own variety and thereby ensure that they attain the overall requisite variety that is need. There is a large stream of literature that examines inter-organizational collaborations as forms of dealing with (mostly social) meta-problems (Selsky & Parker, 2005), which is a subset of the broader literature on inter-organizational relations (Cropper, Ebers, Huxham, & Ring, 2008).…”

A communication perspective on open strategy and open innovation

“…As described by Dobusch and Müller-Seitz (2012), this openness created substantial difficulties to bring the open strategymaking process to a close, ending in a tiny group of consultants finalizing the strategic proposals eventually (see also Heracleous et al 2017). On a much more general level, this is also discussed by Hautz et al (2017), who speak about dilemmas of open strategy. Dilemmas of process, commitment, empowerment, disclosure, and escalation, all refer to the pressures on the fact and/or the time dimension that come from opening up the social dimension and which are likely to only unfold over time.…”

“…This points us to an insight that has just recently come to the attention of open strategy scholars (see Hautz et al 2017). Openness is not something that is unconditionally desirable and productive: Openness constitutes a continuous challenge to the formation and continuation of strategy and innovation processes because there exists a "risk of dysfunctional escalation of openness, for example the excessive promotion of individual interests of problems of information overload" (Hautz et al 2017, p. 4).…”

“…Tying the notion of open strategy to that of open innovation, Chesbrough and Appleyard argued that open strategy "balances the tenets of traditional business strategy with the promise of open innovation" (Chesbrough and Appleyard 2007, p. 58). Similarly, in their assessment of the concept of open strategy, Whittington et al (2011) suggested that open strategy challenges traditionally exclusive approaches (see also Hautz et al 2017). In their definition of open strategy, Whittington et al (2011, p. 534) went so far as to argue that "open innovation is a subset of open strategy: innovation is just one of many kinds of strategy process increasingly subject to openness".…”

“…Such changes in openness over time can be seen as ways of managing the communicative complexity resulting from openness. As studies have shown (Hautz et al 2017;Baptista et al 2017), reducing degrees of openness tends to lead to tensions that need to be managed skillfully. Future research could track systematically how openness and closure of strategy and innovation processes change over time trying to identify characteristic patterns -particularly also across the three different dimensions of openness.…”