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-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-04T13:24:18.753Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - The communicative constitution of strategy-making: exploring fleeting moments of strategy

from Part III - Theoretical Resources: Organization and Management Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2015

By
François Cooren ,
Nicolas Bencherki ,
Mathieu Chaput  and
Consuelo Vásquez
Edited by
Damon Golsorkhi ,
Linda Rouleau ,
David Seidl  and
Eero Vaara
François Cooren
Affiliation:
Université de Montréal
Nicolas Bencherki
Affiliation:
State University of New York
Mathieu Chaput
Affiliation:
Université de Montréal
Consuelo Vásquez
Affiliation:
Université du Québec à Montréal
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

Practice-based approaches in management scholarship and organizational communication studies have in the past mainly evolved along parallel trajectories. Nonetheless, their epistemological and ontological stances – mostly influenced by a pragmatic positioning – and their shared concern for ordinary day-to-day (organizational) practices make them complementary trends of literature that would benefit from a more systematic and engaged dialogue (for similar arguments, see Fenton and Langley 2011; Spee and Jarzabkowski 2011; Vásquez, Sergi and Cordelier 2013). Accordingly, this chapter is a first attempt to put together two bodies of literature, the strategy-as-practice and the communicative constitution of organization approaches – stemming, respectively, from practice-based studies and organizational communication – in order to explore the role of talk and text in strategy-making.

Let us first note that we engage in this dialogue as communication scholars interested in understanding processes of organizing by acknowledging the constitutive force of communication (Putnam and Nicotera 2009). We therefore take a particular point of view for studying organization, more broadly, and here, strategy-making, which is deeply informed by the three following premises: (1) to always start from (rather than arriving at) communication as the motto of every inquiry; (2) to take a broad definition of communication that acknowledges the material and social world in which it takes place; and (3) to account for the many kinds of languages, not only spoken and written, that participate in constituting organization and organizing (Cooren, Taylor and Van Every 2006; see also Cooren et al. 2011).

Applied to the study of strategy and strategy-making, this implies that we should not begin by looking at strategy as originating in the individual and his/her situation and then, subsequently, asking how it gets transmitted in communication. From a communicational approach, we focus on strategy – what it is, what it does – and we question the constitutive role of communication in this being and acting. We also extend this questioning to other forms of communication that do not pertain solely to human activity; texts, objects, architectural elements, as we will argue, also ‘communicate’, and thus take part in the making of strategy. Finally, while accounting for the key role of language as talk and text, we do not exclude other modes of communication, such as paralinguistic or non-human modalities, that can also allow us to fully explore how communication constitutes strategy.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice , pp. 365 - 388
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

Anderson, D. (2007), Identity's Strategy: Rhetorical Selves in Conversion. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, J. M., and Heritage, J. (eds.) (1984), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Balogun, J., and Johnson, G. (2005), ‘From intended strategies to unintended outcomes: the impact of change recipient sensemaking’, Organization Studies, 26/11: 1573–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boje, D. M. (2008). Storytelling Organizations. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Brummans, B., Cooren, F., and Chaput, M. (2009), ‘Discourse, communication, and organisational ontology’, in Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (ed.), The Handbook of Business Discourse: 53–65. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Burke, K. (1945), A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google 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
Chaput, M., Brummans, B., and Cooren, F. (2011), ‘The role of organizational identification in the communicative constitution of an organization: a study of consubstantialization in a young political party’, Management Communication Quarterly, 25/2: 252–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, I., Kwon, W., and Wodak, R. (2012), ‘A context-sensitive approach to analysing talk in strategy meetings’, British Journal of Management, 23/4: 455–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F. (2000), The Organizing Property of Communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F. (2006), ‘The organizational world as a plenum of agencies’, in Cooren, F., Taylor, J. R., and Van Every, E. J. (eds.), Communication as Organizing: Practical Approaches to Research into the Dynamic of Text and Conversation: 81–100. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cooren, F. (2010), Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation and Ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F. (2012), ‘Communication theory at the center: ventriloquism and the communicative constitution of reality’, Journal of Communication, 62/1: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F., Kuhn, T. R., Cornelissen, J., and Clark, T. (2011), ‘Communication organizing and organization: an overview and introduction to the special issue’, Organization Studies, 32/9: 1149–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F., Matte, F., Taylor, J. R., and Vásquez, C. (2007), ‘A humanitarian organization in action: organizational discourse as an immutable mobile’, Discourse and Communication, 1/2: 153–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F., Taylor, J. R., and Van Every, E. J. (eds.) (2006), Communication as Organizing: Practical Approaches to Research into the Dynamic of Text and Conversation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Crossley, N. (2010), Towards Relational Sociology. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Denis, J.-L., Dompierre, G., Langley, A., and Rouleau, L. (2011), ‘Escalating indecision: between reification and strategic ambiguity’, Organization Science, 22/1: 225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dépelteau, F. (2008), ‘Relational thinking: a critique of co-deterministic theories of structure and agency’, Sociological Theory, 26/1: 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dépelteau, F., and Powell, C. (eds.) (2013), Applying Relational Sociology: Relations, Networks, and Society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donati, P. (2011), Relational Sociology: A New Paradigm for the Social Sciences. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fenton, C., and Langley, A. (2011), ‘Strategy as practice and the narrative turn’, Organization Studies, 32/9: 1171–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds.) (2010), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardy, C., Palmer, I., and Phillips, N. (2000), ‘Discourse as a strategic resource’, Human Relations, 53/9: 1227–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, J., and Seidl, D. (2003), ‘The structure and significance of strategic episodes: social systems theory and the routine practices of strategic change’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 175–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoon, C. (2007), ‘Committees as strategic practice: the role of strategic conversation in a public administration’, Human Relations, 60/6: 921–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houser, N., and Kloesel, C. (eds.) (1992). The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, vol. 1, 1867–1893. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003), ‘Strategic practices: an activity theory perspective on continuity and change’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 23–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2005), Strategy as Practice: An Activity-Based Approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2008), ‘Strategy as practice’, in Barry, D., and Hansen, H. (eds.), The Sage Handbook of New Approaches in Management and Organization: 364–78. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., and Seidl, D. (2008), ‘The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy’, Organization Studies, 29/11: 1391–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Sillince, J., and Shaw, D. (2010), ‘Strategic ambiguity as a rhetorical resource for enabling multiple interests’, Human Relations, 63/2: 219–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1972), ‘Side sequences’, in Sudnow, D. (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction: 294–338. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., and Whittington, R. (2007), Strategy as Practice: Research Directions and Resources. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knights, D., and Morgan, G. (1991), ‘Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: a critique’, Organization Studies, 12/2: 251–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwon, W., Clarke, I., and Wodak, R. (2009), ‘Organizational decision-making, discourse, and power: integrating across contexts and scales’, Discourse and Communication, 3/3: 273–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1996), ‘On interobjectivity’, Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3/4: 228–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2004), ‘Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern’, Critical Inquiry, 30/2: 225–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2005), Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor–Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2008), What Is the Style of Matters of Concern?Assen, Netherlands: Royal Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Liu, F. (2013), ‘Emotion and strategizing: exploring emotional dynamics and senior team strategizing in meetings’, unpublished PhD dissertation. Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
Liu, F., and Maitlis, S. (2014), ‘Emotional dynamics and strategizing processes: a study of strategic conversations in top team meetings’, Journal of Management Studies, 51/2: 202–34.CrossRefGoogle 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
Mintzberg, H., and Waters, J. A. (1985), ‘Of strategies, deliberate and emergent’, Strategic Management Journal, 6/3: 257–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2009), ‘Zooming in and out: studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connections’, Organization Studies, 30/12: 1391–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1965 [1934]), Collected Papers, vol. V, Pragmatism and Pragmaticism. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1992 [1898]), Reasoning and the Logic of Things, ed. Ketner, K. L.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pink, S. (2001), Doing Visual Ethnography. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Pink, S. (2006), The Future of Visual Anthropology: Engaging the Senses. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Powell, C., and Dépelteau, F. (eds.) (2013), Conceptualizing Relational Sociology: Ontological and Theoretical Issues. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, L. L., and Nicotera, A. M. (2009), Building Theories of Organization: The Constitutive Role of Communication. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2002), ‘Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing’, European Journal of Social Theory, 5/2: 243–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regnér, P. (2003), ‘Strategy creation in the periphery: inductive versus deductive strategy making’, Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 57–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robichaud, R. (2006), ‘Steps toward a relational view of agency’, in Cooren, F., Taylor, J. R., and Van Every, E. J. (eds.), Communication as Organizing: Practical Approaches to Research into the Dynamic of Text and Conversation: 101–14. Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rouse, J. (2007), ‘Practice philosophy’, in Turner, S., and Risjord, M. (eds.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Science, vol. XV, Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology: 630–81. London: Elsevier.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
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2004), ‘Managerial elites making rhetorical and linguistic “moves” for a moving (emotional) display’, Human Relations, 57/9: 1103–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2005), ‘Strategic practice, “discourse” and the everyday interactional constitution of “power effects”’, Organization, 12/6: 803–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2010), Researching everyday practice: the ethnomethodological contribution’, in Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L.Seidl, D., and Vaara, E. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice: 230–42. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K., and von Savigny, E. (eds.) (2001), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schwartzman, H. B. (1989), The Meeting: Gatherings in Organizations and Communities. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillince, J., and Mueller, F. (2007), ‘Switching strategic perspective: the reframing of accounts of responsibility’, Organization Studies, 28/2: 155–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillince, J., Jarzabkowski, P., and Shaw, D. (2012), ‘Shaping strategic action through the rhetorical construction and exploitation of ambiguity’, Organization Science, 23/3: 630–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spee, P., and Jarzabkowski, P. (2011), ‘Strategic planning as communicative process’, Organization Studies, 32/9: 1217–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stensaker, I., and Falkenberg, J. (2007), ‘Making sense of different responses to corporate change’, Human Relations, 60/1: 137–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stronz, M. (2005), ‘Strategic learning in the context of strategy implementation: a case study of implementers in action’, unpublished PhD dissertation. New York: Columbia University.
Suominen, K., and Mantere, S. (2010), ‘Consuming strategy: the art and practice of managers’ everyday strategy usage’, in Baum, J. A. C., and Lampel, J. (eds.), Advances in Strategic Management, vol. XXVII, The Globalization of Strategy Research: 211–45. Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R., and Van Every, E. J. (2000), The Emergent Organization: Communication as Its Site and Surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R., and Van Every, E. J. (2011), The Situated Organization: Case Studies in the Pragmatics of Communication Research. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ten Have, P. (1999), Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Tracy, K., and Dimock, A. (2004), ‘Meetings: discursive sites for building and fragmenting community’, in Kalbfleisch, P. J. (ed.), Communication Yearbook 28: 127–65. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., Kleymann, B., and Seristö, H. (2004), ‘Strategies as discursive constructions: the case of airline alliances’, Journal of Management Studies, 41/1: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaara, E., Sorsa, V., and Pälli, P. (2010), ‘On the force potential of strategy texts: a critical discourse analysis of a strategic plan and its power effects in a city organization’, Organization, 17/6: 685–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaara, E., and Tienari, J. (2011), ‘On the narrative construction of multinational corporations: an antenarrative analysis of legitimation and resistance in a cross-border merger’, Organization Science, 22/2: 370–90.CrossRefGoogle 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 Dijk, T. A. (ed.) (1997), Discourse Studies: A Multidiscilpinary Introduction, vol. I, Discourse as Structure and Process. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vásquez, C. (2013), ‘Spacing organization (or how to be here and there at the same time)’, in Robichaud, D., and Cooren, F. (eds.), Organization and Organizing: Materiality, Agency and Discourse: 127–49. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vásquez, C., Sergi, V., and Cordelier, B. (2013), ‘From being branded to doing branding: studying representation practices from a communication-centered approach’, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29/2: 125–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2003), ‘The work of strategizing and organizing: for a practice perspective’, Strategic Organization, 1/1: 119–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006), ‘Completing the practice turn in strategy research’, Organization Studies, 27/5: 613–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittle, A., Housley, W., Gilchrist, A., Lenney, P., and Mueller, F. (2014), ‘Power, politics, and organizational communication: an ethnomethodological perspective’, in Cooren, F., Vaara, E., Langley, A., and Tsoukas, H. (eds.), Language and Communication at Work: Discourse, Narrativity, and Organizing: 71–94. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, R., Kwon, W., and Clarke, I. (2011), ‘“Getting people on board”: discursive leadership for consensus building in team meetings’, Discourse and Society, 22/5: 592–644.CrossRefGoogle 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
×