Strategising and the routines of governance An empirical analysis of practices in an international engineering consultancy firm

Strategising and the routines of governance An empirical analysis of practices in an... Purpose – This paper uses the strategy‐as‐practice perspective to explore the relationship between practices and organisational routines of governance in pluralistic contexts. The purpose of this paper is to explore empirically how strategising activities and organisational actions interact. It discusses and illustrates the relationship between strategising and organising through routines of governance, and in particular the use of board papers. Design/methodology/approach – This research is based on a single longitudinal “soft” case study. The researchers collected both primary and secondary data. Primary data collection took place from the end of 2004 until early in 2008. Primary data collection occurred through three main methods: interviews, meeting observations, and “shadowing” of participants; six participants were each shadowed for a working week (five days), and another participant was shadowed for three days. Interviews were held with 20 participants and typically lasted for between one and two hours. The interviews and meetings resulted in over 150 hours of audio recordings. In addition, notes of shadowing covered 420 hours. Findings – The first section of this paper presents the theoretical foundation before describing the research method. A discussion then explores the relationships between one of the specific strategising practices – the creation of board papers – and formal organisational routines of governance. The conclusion suggests that in professional service firms, informal practices that provide feedback are important in ensuring the stability and continuity of formal organisational routines. Originality/value – The links between micro, meso, and macro levels – that is to say, between actors, organisational actions, and institutional field practices – have already been broadly investigated. However, much of the research remains theoretical rather than empirical in nature. Furthermore, although researchers have been increasingly interested in strategising within organisations featuring multiple goals, diffuse networks of power, and knowledge‐based work processes, a deep understanding of practices in these organisations is still underdeveloped. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Asia‐Pacific Journal of Business Administration Emerald Publishing

Strategising and the routines of governance An empirical analysis of practices in an international engineering consultancy firm

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/strategising-and-the-routines-of-governance-an-empirical-analysis-of-dxFQ75Ymvc
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1757-4323
DOI
10.1108/17574321111169830
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – This paper uses the strategy‐as‐practice perspective to explore the relationship between practices and organisational routines of governance in pluralistic contexts. The purpose of this paper is to explore empirically how strategising activities and organisational actions interact. It discusses and illustrates the relationship between strategising and organising through routines of governance, and in particular the use of board papers. Design/methodology/approach – This research is based on a single longitudinal “soft” case study. The researchers collected both primary and secondary data. Primary data collection took place from the end of 2004 until early in 2008. Primary data collection occurred through three main methods: interviews, meeting observations, and “shadowing” of participants; six participants were each shadowed for a working week (five days), and another participant was shadowed for three days. Interviews were held with 20 participants and typically lasted for between one and two hours. The interviews and meetings resulted in over 150 hours of audio recordings. In addition, notes of shadowing covered 420 hours. Findings – The first section of this paper presents the theoretical foundation before describing the research method. A discussion then explores the relationships between one of the specific strategising practices – the creation of board papers – and formal organisational routines of governance. The conclusion suggests that in professional service firms, informal practices that provide feedback are important in ensuring the stability and continuity of formal organisational routines. Originality/value – The links between micro, meso, and macro levels – that is to say, between actors, organisational actions, and institutional field practices – have already been broadly investigated. However, much of the research remains theoretical rather than empirical in nature. Furthermore, although researchers have been increasingly interested in strategising within organisations featuring multiple goals, diffuse networks of power, and knowledge‐based work processes, a deep understanding of practices in these organisations is still underdeveloped.

Journal

Asia‐Pacific Journal of Business AdministrationEmerald Publishing

Published: Sep 27, 2011

Keywords: Corporate governance; Corporate strategy; Organizational culture; Strategy‐as‐practice; Strategizing; Organizational routines; Sense making; Sense giving; Sense testing; Boards of Directors

References

  • Organizational routines: a review of the literature
    Becker, M.C.
  • Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation
    Gioia, D.A.; Chittipeddi, K.
  • Strategic practices: an activity theory perspective on continuity and change
    Jarzabkowski, P.
  • Organizational routines as a unit of analysis
    Pentland, B.T.; Feldman, M.S.
  • Micro‐practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: how middle managers interpret and sell change every day
    Rouleau, L.
  • Practice then and now
    Turner, S.P.
  • Strategy after modernism: recovering practice
    Whittington, R.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off