Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:17:05.765Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 13 - Practice-Theoretical Perspectives on Open Strategy: Implications of a Strong Programme

from Part IV - Theoretical Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2019

By
Violetta Splitter ,
David Seidl  and
Richard Whittington
Edited by
David Seidl ,
Georg von Krogh  and
Richard Whittington
David Seidl
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Georg von Krogh
Affiliation:
Swiss Federal University (ETH), Zürich
Richard Whittington
Affiliation:
Saïd Business School, University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

Practice theories have an obvious appeal for Open Strategy research. The major trend towards more openness in strategy making gives rise to new strategy practices that afford internal and external actors greater strategic transparency and/or inclusion (Whittington et al., 2011). Committing to the primacy of practice in social life (Reckwitz, 2002; Schatzki et al., 2001), practice theories offer a particularly suitable perspective for studying both the emergence of these new Open Strategy practices and the complex dynamics of their application in real-life settings. Accordingly, many studies on Open Strategy already refer to practice theories to identify the new practices associated with Open Strategy, such as strategy jamming, strategy blogging, or interorganizational strategy making.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Open Strategy , pp. 221 - 240
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2011). Decolonializing discourse: Critical reflections on organizational discourse analysis. Human Relations, 64(9), 1121–1146.Google Scholar
Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baptista, J., Wilson, A. D., Galliers, R. D., & Bynghall, S. (2017). Social media and the emergence of reflexiveness as a new capability for open strategy. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 322–336.Google Scholar
Bloor, D. (1999). Anti-latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 30(1), 81–112.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In Richardson, J. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1996). The rules of art: Genesis and structure of the literary field. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian meditations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40–57.Google Scholar
Chapman, C., Chua, W., & Mahama, H. (2015). Actor-network theory and strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 265–282). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clegg, S. (1998). Foucault, power and organizations. In McKinlay, A. & Starkey, K. (Eds.), Foucault, management and organization theory (pp. 29–48). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D., & Phillips, N. (2006). Power and organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Pine Forge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, H. M., & Yearley, S. (1992). Epistemological chicken. In Pickering, A. (Ed.), Science as practice and culture (pp. 301–326). Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. (1989). The visibility of social systems. In Jackson, M.C., Keys, P., & Cropper, S.A. (Eds.), Operational research and the social sciences (pp. 51–57). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L., & Mueller-Seitz, G. (2012). Strategy as a practice of thousands: The case of Wikimedia. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2012 (1), 155–172.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. Gordon (Ed.)., C. New York: Pantheon: 90.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the self. In Technologies of the self: A seminar with Michel Foucault, 16–49.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (2012). The archaeology of knowledge. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1982). The way we think now: Toward an ethnography of modern thought. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 35(5), 14–34.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. (Eds.). (2010). Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gomez, M. (2015). Bourdieu and strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 180–200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hautz, J., Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2016). Open strategy: Dimensions, dilemmas, dynamics. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 298–309.Google Scholar
Hutter, K., Nketia, B. A., & Füller, J. (2017). Falling short with participation – Different effects of ideation, commenting, and evaluating behavior on open strategizing. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 355–370.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529–560.Google Scholar
Knights, D., & Morgan, G. (1991). Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: A critique. Organization Studies, 12(2), 251–273.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale Welt, 47(4), 369–381.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory, 3, 141–158.Google Scholar
Luedicke, M. K., Husemann, K. C., Furnari, S., & Ladstaetter, F. (2017). Radically open strategizing: How the premium cola collective takes open strategy to the extreme. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 371–384.Google Scholar
Mack, D. Z., & Szulanski, G. (2017). Opening up: How centralization affects participation and inclusion in strategy making. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 385–396.Google Scholar
Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., & Niemiec, R. M. (2017). Using public crowds for open strategy formulation: Mitigating the risks of knowledge gaps. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 397–410.Google Scholar
Matzler, K., Füller, J., Koch, B., Hautz, J., & Hutter, K. (2014). Open strategy – A new strategy paradigm? In Matzler, K., Pechlaner, H., & Renzl, B. (Eds.), Strategie und Leadership (pp. 37–55). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.Google Scholar
Miettinen, R., Samra-Fredericks, D., & Yanow, D. (2009). Return to practice: An introductory essay. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1309–1327.Google Scholar
Mutch, A. (2007). Reflexivity and the institutional entrepreneur: A historical exploration. Organization Studies, 28(7), 1123–1140.Google Scholar
Neeley, T. B., & Leonardi, P. M. (2018). Enacting knowledge strategy through social media: Passable trust and the paradox of nonwork interactions. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 922–946.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice theory, work, and organization: An introduction Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Oakes, L. S., Townley, B., & Cooper, D. J. (1998). Business planning as pedagogy: Language and control in a changing institutional field. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(2), 257–292.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2009). The sociomateriality of organisational life: Considering technology in management research. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1), 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, J. (2000). Structuration. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Rasche, A., & Chia, R. (2009). Researching strategy practices: A genealogical social theory perspective. Organization Studies, 30(7), 713–734.Google Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2004). Die Reproduktion und die Subversion sozialer Praktiken. Zugleich ein Kommentar zu Pierre Bourdieu und Judith Butler: na.Google Scholar
Restivo, S. (2010). Bruno Latour: The once and future philosopher. In Ritzer, George & Stepinsky, Jeffrey (Eds.), The New Blackwell companion to major social theorists (pp. 1–39). Boston: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rouse, J. (2007). Practice theory. In Gabbay, Dov M., Thagard, Paul, & Woods, (Handbook Eds.) John Handbook of the philosophy of science, Turner &, Stephen Risjord, (Eds.) Mark Philosophy of anthropology and sociology (Vol. 15) (pp. 499–539). Amsterdam: North-Holland/Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2011). Grasping the logic of practice: Theorizing through practical rationality. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 338–360.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical exploration of the constitution of social life and change. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (1996). Social practices: A Wittgensteinian approach to human activity and the social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2005). Peripheral vision: The sites of organizations. Organization Studies, 26(3), 465–484.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2011). Where the action is (on large social phenomena such as sociotechnical regimes). Sustainable Practices Research Group, Working Paper, 1.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K., & von Savigny, E. (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 1407–1421.Google Scholar
Sibony, O. (2012). Collaborative strategic planning: Three observations. McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 12–15.Google Scholar
Stieger, D., Matzler, K., Chatterjee, S., & Ladstaetter-Fussenegger, F. (2012). Democratizing strategy: How crowdsourcing can be used for strategy dialogues. California Management Review, 54, 44–68.Google Scholar
Tavakoli, A., Schlagwein, D., & Schoder, D. (2017). Open strategy: Literature review, re-analysis of cases and conceptualisation as a practice. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 26(3), 163–184.Google Scholar
Wacquant, L. (2004). Following Pierre Bourdieu into the field. Ethnography, 5(4), 387–414.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731–735.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613–634.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2010). Giddens, structuration theory and strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 109–126). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2014). Corporate strategies in recession and recovery (Routledge Revivals): Social structure and strategic choice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2015). The massification of strategy. British Journal of Management, 26,13–16.Google Scholar
Whittington, R (2019). Opening Strategy: Professional Strategists and Practice Change, 1960 to today, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Cailluet, L., & Yakis‐Douglas, B. (2011). Opening strategy: Evolution of a precarious profession. British Journal of Management, 22(3), 531–544.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2012). Organizational ethnography between toolbox and world-making. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 1(1), 31–42.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×