Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T12:53:49.885Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Constructivist paradigms: implications for strategy-as-practice research

from Part I - Ontological and Epistemological Questions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2015

Simon Grand
Affiliation:
University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
Widar von Arx
Affiliation:
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts
Johannes Rüegg-Stürm
Affiliation:
University St. Gallen, Switzerland
Damon Golsorkhi
Affiliation:
Grenoble School of Management
Linda Rouleau
Affiliation:
HEC Montréal
David Seidl
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Eero Vaara
Affiliation:
Svenska Handelshögskolan, Helsinki
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The practice turn in strategy research (Johnson, Melin and Whittington 2003; Johnson et al. 2007; Golsorkhi et al. 2010; Vaara and Whittington 2012) implies an explicit reconsideration of paradigmatic premises (Tsoukas and Knudsen 2002; Feldman and Orlikowski 2011; Vaara and Whittington 2012). The strategy-as-practice research programme challenges concepts of strategy that have long been taken for granted, uncovering the complexities of the ‘social fabric’ of strategy-making (Latour 1996). Furthermore, it undermines the apparently self-evident premises of strategy research and its relation to strategy-making by referring to various constructivist perspectives, theories and methodologies.

Looking at the main contributions to strategy-as-practice research of the last few years, a handful of patterns seem dominant. One can distinguish between three dimensions (Johnson et al. 2007; Orlikowski in this volume). On an empirical level (‘phenomenon’), strategy-making is seen as involving multiple construction processes and activities and multiple actors inside and outside the organization, distributed across multiple organizational layers (Johnson, Melin and Whittington 2003; Jarzabkowski and Spee 2009). While strategies and strategy processes are traditionally treated as defined entities, the strategy-as-practice research programme emphasizes their constructedness, and thus their heterogeneity, processuality and fragility. On a theoretical level (‘perspectives’), the study of strategy-making requires approaches that provide conceptual cover for this heterogeneous mesh of processes, activities and actors, as well as the fact of their situatedness and embeddedness. It is argued that a focus on the practice of strategy-making therefore implies a discussion of the underlying action theories (Grand and MacLean 2007; Jarzabkowski 2004; Tsoukas and Knudsen 2002) and, specifically, theories of practice (Schatzki, Knorr Cetina and von Savigny 2001). On a philosophical level (‘philosophies’), this emphasis on strategy-making as social practice requires a consideration of scientific research itself from the vantage point of practice (Knorr Cetina 2002; Tsoukas 2005). How do scientific research itself and particular research practices contribute to the construction of the field of strategy, both scientifically and organizationally (Knights and Morgan 1991)?

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

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

Ahrens, T., and Chapman, C. S. (2007), ‘Management accounting as practice’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32/1: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balogun, J., and Johnson, G. (2004), ‘Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking’, Academy of Management Journal, 47/4: 523–49.Google Scholar
Bateson, G. (1972), Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berger, P. L., and Luckmann, T. (1967), The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Boltanski, L., and Thévenot, L. (1991), De la justification: Les économies de la grandeur. Paris: Éditions Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1977), Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1982), Ce que parler veut dire. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P., and Wacquant, L. (1992), An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bower, J. L. (1970), Managing the Resource Allocation Process: A Study of Corporate Planning and Investment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Bower, J. L., and Gilbert, C. G. (2005), From Resource Allocation to Strategy. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bower, J. L., and Gilbert, C. G. (2007), ‘How managers’ everyday decisions create or destroy your company's strategy’, Harvard Business Review, 85/2: 72–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. S., and Duguid, P. (2001), ‘Knowledge and organization: a social-practice perspective’, Organization Science, 12/2: 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. L., and Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997), ‘The art of continuous change: linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42/1: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgelman, R. A. (1994), ‘Fading memories: a process theory of strategic business exit in dynamic environments’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39/1: 24–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (1986), ‘Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay’, in Law, J. (ed.), Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?: 196–223. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1990), Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chia, R., and Holt, R. (2009), Strategy without Design: The Silent Efficacy of Indirect Action. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia, R., and MacKay, B. (2007), ‘Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: discovering strategy in the logic of practice’, Human Relations, 60/1: 217–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, C. M., and Bower, J. L. (1996), ‘Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms’, Strategic Management Journal, 17/3: 197–218.3.0.CO;2-U>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahrendorf, R. (2005), Engagierte Beobachter: Die Intellektuellen und die Versuchungen der Zeit. Vienna: Passagen Verlag.Google Scholar
Denis, J.-L., Lamothe, L., and Langley, A. (2001), ‘The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organizations’, Academy of Management Journal, 44/4: 809–37.Google Scholar
Dyer, J. H., and Singh, H. (1998), ‘The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage’, Academy of Management Review, 23/4: 660–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberle, T. (1992), ‘A new paradigm for the sociology of knowledge: “the social construction of reality” after 25 years’, Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 18/2: 493–502.Google Scholar
Elkana, Y. (1986), Anthropologie der Erkenntnis. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Endrissat, N., and von Arx, W. (2013), ‘Leadership practices and context: two sides of the same coin’, Leadership, 9/2: 278–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engström, V., and Blackler, F. (2005), ‘On the life of the object’, Organization, 12/3: 307–30.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2003), ‘A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 12/4:727–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., and Orlikowski, W. J. (2011), ‘Theorizing practice and practicing theory’, Organization Science, 22/5: 1240–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., and Pentland, B. T. (2003), ‘Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48/1: 94–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleck, L. (1980), Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Floyd, S. W., and Lane, P. J. (2000), ‘Strategizing throughout the organization: managing role conflict in strategic renewal’, Academy of Management Review, 25/1: 145–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M. (1971), Die Ordnung der Dinge: Eine Archäologie der Humanwissenschaften. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1978), The History of Sexuality, vol. I, An Introduction. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973), The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1987), Social Theory and Modern Sociology. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Glasersfeld, V. (1995), Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning. London: Falmer Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds.) (2010), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez, P.-Y., and Jones, B. C. (2000), ‘Conventions: an interpretation of deep structure in organizations’, Organization Science, 11/6: 696–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, N. (1987), Ways of Worldmaking. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Grand, S. (2003), ‘Praxisrelevanz versus Praxisbezug der Forschung in der Managementforschung’, Die Betriebswirtschaft, 63/5: 599–604.Google Scholar
Grand, S. (2012), ‘Routines, strategies and management: engaging for recurrent creation “at the edge”’, Habilitation manuscript. University of St Gallen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Grand, S., and Ackeret, A. (2012), ‘Managing knowledge: a process view’, in Schultz, M., Maguire, S., Langley, A., and Tsoukas, H. (eds.), Constructing Identity in and around Organizations: 261–305. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grand, S., and MacLean, D. (2007), ‘Researching the practice of strategy as creative action: toward an action theoretics foundation of the research program’, paper presented at the twenty-third European Group for Organizational Studies colloquium, Vienna, 7 July.
Grant, R. M. (2003), ‘Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: evidence from the oil majors’, Strategic Management Journal, 24/6: 491–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guba, E., and Lincoln, Y. (1994), ‘Competing paradigms in qualitative research’, in Denzin, N., and Lincoln, Y. (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research: 105–17. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (1999), The Social Construction of What?Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. (1931), Cartesianische Meditationen: Eine Einleitung in die Phänomenologie. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004), ‘Strategy as practice: recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use’, Organization Studies, 25/1: 529–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., and Seidl, D. (2007), ‘Strategizing: the challenges of a practice perspective’, Human Relations, 60/1: 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., and Spee, P. (2009), ‘Strategy-as-practice: a review and future directions for the field’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 11/1: 69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joas, H. (1992), Die Kreativität des Handelns. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. (1987), Strategic Change and the Management Process. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., and Whittington, R. (2007), The Practice of Strategy: Research Directions and Resources. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G., Melin, L., and Whittington, R. (2003), ‘Guest editors’ introduction: micro strategy and strategizing: towards an activity-based view’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpik, L. (2010), ‘Valuing the Unique: The Economics of Singularities’. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Knights, D., and Morgan, G. (1991), ‘Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: a critique’, Organization Studies, 12/2: 251–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoblauch, H. (2005), Wissenssoziologie. Konstanz: UVK Verlag.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (1981), The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (1989), ‘Spielarten des Konstruktivismus: einige Notizen und Anmerkungen’, Soziale Welt, 40/1–2: 86–96.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (2002), Die Fabrikation von Erkenntnis: Zur Anthropologie der Naturwissenschaft: Erweiterte Neuaissenschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1974), ‘Second thoughts on paradigms’, in Suppe, F. (ed.), The Structure of Scientific Theories: 459–82. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1996), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langley, A. (1989), ‘In search of rationality: the purposes behind the use of formal analysis in organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 34/4: 598–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latour, B. (1996), ‘On actor–network theory: a few clarifications plus more than a few complications’, Soziale Welt, 47/4: 369–81.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1999), Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2005), Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor–Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B., and Woolgar, S. (1986), Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Law, J. (2004), After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Law, J. (2008), ‘Actor network theory and material semiotics’, in Turner, B. S. (ed.), The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory: 141–58. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Luckmann, T. (1992), ‘Social construction and after’, Perspectives, 15/2: 4–5.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (1986), ‘The autopoiesis of social systems’, in Geyer, F., and van der Zouwen, J. (eds.), Sociocybernetic Paradoxes: Observation, Control and Evolution of Self-Steering Systems: 176–92. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (1996), Social Systems. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (2002), Einführung in die Systemtheorie. Heidelberg: Carl-Auer-Systeme Verlag.Google Scholar
Lury, C., and Wakeford, N. (eds.) (2012), Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mantere, S., and Vaara, E. (2008), ‘On the problem of participation in strategy: a critical discursive perspective’, Organization Science, 19/2: 341–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maturana, H., and Varela, F. (1987), The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Boston: Shambhala.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1971), ‘Managerial work: analysis from observation’, Management Science, 18/2: 97 –110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1978), ‘Patterns in strategy formation’, Management Science, 24/9: 934–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (2009), Managing. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H., and McHugh, A. (1985), ‘Strategy formation in an adhocracy’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 30/2: 160–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mol, A. (1999), ‘Ontological politics: a word and some questions’, in Law, J., and Hassard, J. (eds.), Actor Network Theory and After: 74–89. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000), ‘Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations’, Organization Science, 11/4: 404–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002), ‘Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributive organizing’, Organization Science, 13/3: 249–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J., and Yates, J. (1994), ‘Genre repertoire: the structuring of communicative practices in organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39/4: 541–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettigrew, A. M. (1985), The Awakening Giant: Continuity and Change in Imperial Chemical Industries. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, A. M. (1987), ‘Context and action in the transformation of the firm’, Journal of Management Studies 24/6: 649–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rheinberger, H. J., and Hagner, M. (1997), ‘Plädoyer für eine Wissenschaftsgeschichte des Experiments’, Theory in Biosciences, 116/1: 11–32.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. (1989), Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouleau, L. (2005), ‘Micro-practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: how middle managers interpret and sell change every day’, Journal of Management Studies, 42/7: 1413–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rüegg-Stürm, J., and Grand, S. (2014), Das St Galler Management-Modell: 4. Generation: Einführung. Bern: Haupt.Google Scholar
Rumelt, R. (2011), Good Strategy Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters. New York: Crown Business.Google Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2003), ‘Strategizing as lived experience and strategists’ everyday efforts to shape strategic direction’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 141–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2005), ‘Peripheral vision: the sites of organizations’, Organization Studies, 26/3: 465–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K., and von Savigny, E. (eds.) (2001), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schendel, D., and Hitt, M. A. (2007), ‘Comments from the editors: introduction to volume 1’, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1/1: 1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütz, A. (1932), Der sinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütz, A. (1967 [1932]), The Phenomenology of the Social World. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. (2007), ‘General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: a systemic-discursive perspective’, Organization Studies, 28/2: 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spender, J. C. (1996), ‘Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 17/S2: 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Splitter, V., and Seidl, D. (2011), ‘Does practice-based research on strategy lead to practically relevant knowledge? Implications of a Bourdieusian perspective’, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47/1: 98–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Suchman, L. (1987), Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human–Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1985), Philosophical Papers, vol. I, Human Agency and Language. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thévenot, L. (2006), L'action au pluriel: Sociologie des régimes d'engagement. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (1996), ‘The firm as a distributed knowledge system: a constructionist approach’, Strategic Management Journal, 17/S2: 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (2005), Complex Knowledge: Studies in Organizational Epistemology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H., and Chia, R. (2002), ‘On organizational becoming: rethinking organizational change’, Organization Science, 13/5: 567–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsoukas, H., and Knudsen, C. (2002),‘The conduct of strategy research’, in Pettigrew, A. M., Thomas, H., and Whittington, R. (eds.), Handbook of Strategy and Management: 411–35. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., and Whittington, R. (2012), ‘Strategy-as-practice: taking social practices seriously’, Academy of Management Annals, 6/1: 285–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H. (1993),‘Managing the process of organizational innovation’, in Huber, G. P., and Glick, W. (eds.), Organizational Change and Redesign: Ideas and Insights for Improving Performance: 269–94. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Von Foerster, H. (1981), Observing Systems. Seaside, CA: Intersystems Publications.Google Scholar
Von Hippel, E., and von Krogh, G. (2003), ‘Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: issues for organization science’, Organization Science, 14/2: 209–23.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. (1988), The Company of Critics: Social Criticism and Political Commitment in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Watzlawick, P. (ed.) (1984), The Invented Reality: How Do We Know What We Believe We Know?New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organizing, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westley, F. (1990), ‘Middle managers and strategy: microdynamics of inclusion’, Strategic Management Journal, 11/5: 337–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (1996), ‘Strategy as practice’, Long Range Planning, 29/5: 731–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2007), ‘Strategy practice and strategy process: family differences and the sociological eye’, Organization Studies, 28/10: 1575–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (1967 [1951]), Philosophical Investigations, repr. edn. Oxford: Blackwell.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
×