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-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T12:10:42.799Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 5 - Practices of Inclusion in Open Strategy

from Part II - Practices of Open Strategy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2019

By
Julia Hautz ,
Kurt Matzler ,
Jonas Sutter ,
Katja Hutter  and
Johan Füller
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

In responding to changing competitive conditions, organizations are adopting increased levels of openness in the form of greater transparency and the inclusion of a larger number and variety of internal and external actors (Whittington et al., 2011; Hautz et al., 2017). Recent societal changes toward more participation in various domains of society (Dobusch et al., 2015) and technological advances in the form of social technologies (Haefliger et al., 2011), in particular, promote increased inclusiveness in strategizing. In this chapter, we pay specific attention to this dimension of inclusiveness in Open Strategy, which involves external and internal consultation to exchange “information, views and proposals intended to shape the continued evolution of an organization’s strategy” (Whittington et al., 2011: 536; Hautz et al., 2017).

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Open Strategy , pp. 87 - 105
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

Abfalter, D., Zaglia, M. E., & Mueller, J. (2012). Sense of virtual community: A follow up on its measurement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 400–404.Google Scholar
Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. L. (2012). Crowdsourcing as a Solution to Distant Search. Academy of Management Review, 37, 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aten, K., & Thomas, G. F. (2016). Crowdsourcing strategizing: Communication technology affordances and the communicative constitution of organizational strategy. International Journal of Business Communication, 53(2), 148–180.Google Scholar
Bafoutsou, G., & Mentzas, G. (2002). Review and functional classification of collaborative systems. International Journal of Information Management, 22, 281–305.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, 322–336.Google Scholar
Berger-Baader-Hermes. (2012). Hypovereinsbank – Wenn ich mein Kunde wär [Online]. Available: www.bergerbaaderhermes.de/Cases [Accessed 19.12.2012.]Google Scholar
Bertotti, M., Adams-Eaton, F., Sheridan, K., & Renton, A. (2012). Key barriers to community cohesion: Views from residents of 20 London deprived neighbourhoods. GeoJournal, 77, 223–234.Google Scholar
Bjelland, O., & Wood, R. C. (2008). An inside view of IBM’s “Innovation Jam.” MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(1), 33-40.Google Scholar
Bonabeau, E. (2009). Decisions 2.0: The power of collective intelligence. Sloan Management Review, January 9, 2009, 45–52.Google Scholar
Borison, A., & Hamm, G. (2010). Prediction markets: A new tool for strategic decision making. California Management Review, 52, 125–141.Google Scholar
Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 61–69.Google Scholar
Bungartz, T. (2011). Interview Dr. Thomas Bungartz, Deutsche Telekom. www.crowdworx.com/de/news/interview-dr-thomas-bungartz-deutsche-telekom/.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 349–399.Google Scholar
Camillus, J. C. (2008). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review, 86, 98.Google Scholar
Candido, C. J. F., & Santos, S. P. (2015). Strategy implementation: What is the failure rate? Journal of Management & Organization, 21, 237–262.Google Scholar
Chang, W.-L., & Chen, S.-T. (2015). The impact of World Café on entrepreneurial strategic planning capability. Journal of Business Research, 68, 1283–1290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CrowdWorx (2007–2013a). CrowdWorx helps Syngenta focus on the right products. CrowdWorx ® Case Study Series, Berlin | Munich | Boston | Poznan. www.crowdworx.com/resources/case-studies/.Google Scholar
CrowdWorx (2007–2013b). Deutsche Telekom delivers New Products just at the right price with the help of CrowdWorx. CrowdWorx ® Case Study Series, Berlin | Munich | Boston | Poznan. www.crowdworx.com/resources/case-studies/.Google Scholar
CrowdWorx (2007–2013c). Henkel – Right on the money: Unit sales forecasts for new products. CrowdWorx ® Case Study Series, Berlin | Munich | Boston | Poznan. www.crowdworx.com/resources/case-studies/.Google Scholar
CrowdWorx (2007–2013d). Zeppelin Rental zapft das lokale Marktwissen aus über 100 Standorten an. CrowdWorx® Case Study Series, Berlin | Munich | Boston | Poznan. www.crowdworx.com/resources/case-studies/.Google Scholar
Culleton, E. (2013). We’re crowdsourcing ideas for our Strategic Plan! [Online]. Available: http://emergency20wiki.org/20131125/were-crowdsourcing-ideas-for-ourstrategic-plan.Google Scholar
Da Cunha, J. V., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2008). Performing catharsis: The use of online discussion forums in organizational change. Information and Organization, 18, 132–156.Google Scholar
Dachler, H. P., & Wilper, B. (1978). Conceptual dimensions and boundaries of participation in organizations: A critical evaluation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 1–39.Google Scholar
Denyer, D., Parry, E., & Flowers, P. (2011). “Social,” “open” and “participative”? Exploring personal experiences and organisational effects of enterprise 2.0 use. Long Range Planning, 44, 375–396.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L., Dobusch, L., & Muller-Seitz, G. (2018). Closing for the benefit of openness? The case of Wikimedia’s open strategy process. Organization Studies.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L., & Kapeller, J. (2018). Open strategy-making with crowds and communities: Comparing Wikimedia and Creative Commons. Long Range Planning, 51, 561–579.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L., von Krogh, G., & Whittington, R. (2015). Open organizations for an open society? Practicing openness in innovation, strategy and beyond. Call for Papers Sub-theme 46 EGOS – European Group for Organizational Studies. Athens.Google Scholar
Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. (2008). The dynamics of strategic agility: Nokia’s rollercoaster experience. California Management Review, 50, 95–118.Google Scholar
Felin, T., & Zenger, T. R. (2014). Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice. Research Policy, 43, 914–925.Google Scholar
Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of Management Review, 25, 154–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, S. W., & Wooldridge, B. (1999). Knowledge creation and social networks in corporate entrepreneurship: The renewal of organizational capability. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 23, 123–143.Google Scholar
Fullarton, C., & Palermo, J. (2008). Evaluation of a large group method in an educational institution: The world café versus large group facilitation. Journal of Institutional Research, 14, 109–117.Google Scholar
Gast, A., & Zanini, M. (2012). The social side of strategy. McKinsey Quarterly, May, 1–15.Google Scholar
Gegenhuber, T., & Dobusch, L. (2017). Making an impression through openness: How open strategy-making practices change in the evolution of new ventures. Long Range Planning, 50, 337–354.Google Scholar
Giles, W. D. (1991). Making strategy work. Long Range Planning, 24, 75–91.Google Scholar
Gratton, L., & Casse, J. (2010). Boosting strategy with an online community. Business Strategy Review, Spring 2010, 41–45.Google Scholar
Haefliger, S., Monteiro, E., Foray, D., & von Krogh, G. (2011). Social software and strategy. Long Range Planning, 44, 297–316.Google Scholar
Hamel, G. (1996). Strategy as revolution. Harvard Business Review, July–August, 69–82.Google Scholar
Hardy, C., Lawrence, T. B., & Phillips, N. (2006). Swimming with sharks: Creating strategic change through multi-sector collaboration. International Journal of Strategic Change Management 1, 96–112.Google Scholar
Hauptmann, S., & Steger, T. (2013). “A brave new (digital) world”? Effects of in-house social media on HRM. Zeitschrift für Personalsforschung, 27, 26–46.Google Scholar
Hautz, J. (2017). Opening up the strategy process – a network perspective. Management Decision, 55, 1956–1983.Google Scholar
Hautz, J., Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2017). Open strategy: Dimensions, dilemmas, dynamics. Long Range Planning, 50, 298–309.Google Scholar
Healey, M. P., Hodgkinson, G. P., Whittington, R., & Johnson, G. (2015). Off to plan or out to lunch? Relationships between design characteristics and outcomes of strategy workshops. British Journal of Management, 26, 507–528.Google Scholar
Hodgkinson, G. P., Whittington, R., Johnson, G., & Schwarz, M. (2006). The role of strategy workshops in strategy development processes: Formality, communication, co-ordination and inclusion. Long Range Planning, 39, 479–496.Google Scholar
Hutter, K., Nketia, B. A., & Fuller, J. (2017). Falling short with participation – Different effects of ideation, commenting, and evaluating behavior on open strategizing. Long Range Planning, 50, 355–370.Google Scholar
Jeppesen, L. B., & Lakhani, K. R. (2010). Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organization Science, 21, 1016–1033.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Scholes, K., Angwin, D., & Regner, P. (2014). Exploring strategy: Text and cases. London: Pearson.Google Scholar
Ketokivi, M., & Castener, X. (2004). Strategic planning as an integrative device. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49, 337–365.Google Scholar
Kim, C. W., & Mauborgne, R. (1998). Procedural justice, strategic decision making, and the knowledge economy. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 323–338.Google Scholar
Koch, B. (2013). Open strategy and its implementation – An exploratory study. Innsbruck: University of Innsbruck.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, M. A., Schweiger, D. M., & Sapienza, H. J. (1995). Building commitment, attachment, and trust in strategic decision-making teams: The role of procedural justice. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 60–84.Google Scholar
Latham, J. R. (2008). Building bridges between researchers and practitioners: A collaborative approach to research in performance excellence. Quality Management Journal, 15 (1), 20.Google Scholar
Lombardi, G. (2016). Unilever Leaders Chat Strategy with Employees [Online]. Available: https://simply-communicate.com/unilever-leaders-chat-strategy-employees/ [Accessed 03.04.2016.]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, 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, 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, 397–410.Google Scholar
Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. (2008). On the problem of participation in strategy: A critical discursive perspective. Organization Science, 19, 341–358.Google Scholar
Matzler, K., Fuller, 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. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.Google Scholar
Matzler, K., Fuller, J., Hutter, K., Hautz, J., & Stieger, D. (2016a). Crowdsourcing strategy: How openness changes strategy work. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 14, 450–460.Google Scholar
Matzler, K., Strobl, A., & Bailom, F. (2016b). Leadership and the wisdom of crowds: How to tap into the collective intelligence of an organization. Strategy & Leadership, 44, 30–35.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (2009). Rebuilding companies as communities. Harvard Business Review, 87, 140–143.Google Scholar
Mortensen, M., & Hinds, P. J. (2001). Conflict and shared identity in geographically distributed teams. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 212–238.Google Scholar
Morton, J., Wilson, A., & Cooke, L. (2015). Collaboration and knowledge sharing in open strategy initiatives. In Proceedings of iFutures 2015, Sheffield, UK, 7 July 2015, 7pp.Google Scholar
Morton, J., Wilson, A. D., Galliers, R. D., & Marabelli, M. (2017). Open strategy and IT: A review and research agenda. 33rd EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen, Denmark, 6th-8th July 2017.Google Scholar
Neeley, T. B., & Leonardi, P. (2018). Enacting knowledge strategy through social media: Passable trust and the paradox of non-work interactions. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 922–946.Google Scholar
Newstead, B., & Lanzerotti, L. (2010). Can you open-source your strategy? Harvard Business Review, October Issue, 32.Google Scholar
Oobstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the tertius Iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 100–130.Google Scholar
Page, S. E. (2008). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pappas, J. M., & Wooldridge, B. (2007). Middle managers’ divergent strategic activity: An investigation of multiple measures of network centrality. Journal of Management Studies, 44, 323–341.Google Scholar
Perry-Smith, J. E. (2006). Social yet creative: The role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 85–101.Google Scholar
Perry-Smith, J. E., & Shalley, C. E. (2003). The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 28, 89–106.Google Scholar
Prpic, J., Shukla, P. P., Kietzmann, J. H., & McCarthy, I. P. (2015). How to work a crowd: Developing crowd capital through crowdsourcing. Business Horizons, 58, 77–85.Google Scholar
Quick, K. S., & Feldman, M. S. (2011). Distinguishing participation and inclusion. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31, 272–290.Google Scholar
Razmerita, L., Kirchner, K., & Nabeth, T. (2014). Social media in organizations: Leveraging personal and collective knowledge processes. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 24, 74–93.Google Scholar
Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 240–267.Google Scholar
Reitzig, M., & Sorenson, O. (2013). Biases in the selection stage of bottom-up strategy formulation. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 782–799.Google Scholar
Schieffer, A., Isaacs, D., & Gyllenpalm, B. (2004). The world café: Part one. World, 18, 1–9.Google Scholar
Seidl, D., & Werle, F. (2018). Inter-organizational sensemaking in the face of strategic meta-problems: Requisite variety and dynamics of participation. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 830–858.Google Scholar
Sijbrandij, S. (2016). GitLab’s Open Strategy [Online]. Available: https://about.gitlab.com/2016/02/09/gitlab-open-strategy/ [Accessed 10.04.2016.]Google Scholar
Smith, A. D. (1999). Problems of conflict management in virtual communities. In Smith, M. A. & Kollock, P. (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sterling, J. (2003). Translating strategy into effective implementation: Dispelling the myths and highlighting what works. Strategy & Leadership, 31, 27–34.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
Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations. New York: Doubleday & Co.Google Scholar
Teck-Hua, H., & Kay-Yut, C. (2007). New product blockbusters: The magic and science of prediction markets. California Management Review, 50, 144–158.Google Scholar
Teulier, R., & Rouleau, L. (2013). Middle managers’ sensemaking and interorganizational change initiation: Translation spaces and editing practices. Journal of Change Management, 13, 308–337.Google Scholar
Tortoriello, M., Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2012). Bridging the knowledge gap: The influence of strong ties, network cohesion, and network range on the transfer of knowledge between organizational units. Organization Science, 23, 1024–1039.Google Scholar
Vana, P. (2011). Working in the café: Lessons in group dialogue. The Learning Organization, 18, 189–202.Google Scholar
von Hippel, E., & von Krogh, G. V. (2003). Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science. Organization Science, 14, 209–223.Google Scholar
von Krogh, G. (2012). How does social software change knowledge management? Toward a strategic research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 21, 154–164.Google Scholar
von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K. R. (2003). Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: A case study. Research Policy, 32(7), 1217–1241.Google Scholar
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (1988). The new leadership: Managing participation in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
Werle, F., & Seidl, D. (2015). The layered materiality of strategizing: Epistemic objects and the interplay between material artefacts in the exploration of strategic topics. British Journal of Management, 26, S67-S89.Google Scholar
Whitehurst, J. (2015). The open organization: Igniting passion and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2014). Commentary: Information systems strategy and strategy-as-practice: A joint agenda. Journal of Strategy Information Systems, 23, 87–91.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Cailluet, L., & Yakis-Douglas, B. (2011). Opening strategy: Evolution of a precarious profession. British Journal of Management, 22, 531–544.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, B., Schmid, T., & Floyd, S. W. (2008). The middle management perspective on strategy process: Contributions, synthesis, and future research. Journal of Management, 34, 1190–1221.Google Scholar
Yakis-Douglas, B., Angwin, D., Ahn, K., & Meadows, M. (2017). Opening M&A strategy to investors: Predictors and outcomes of transparency during organisational transition. Long Range Planning, 50, 411–422.Google Scholar
Yeaney, J. (2011). Democratizing the Corporate Strategy Process at Red Hat [Online]. Available: http://www.managementexchange.com/story/democratizing-corporate-strategy-process-red-hat.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
×