Strategy process in practice : practices and logics of action of middle managers in strategy implementation

The study focuses on strategy process in practice from the viewpoint of middle managers and practices in strategy implementation. The strategy process of an organization creates and implements strategy. Although this process influences the activities of many members of the organization, strategy research has only recently started to become interested in the activities of practitioners and practices in strategizing. In addition to organizational actions, micro-level activities have thus become a relevant focus of research. Middle managers, acting both as subordinates and superiors, represent a group of actors whose role in the strategy process is still not understood to a significant extent. Although the literature has to some extent noticed their significance, their activities related to practices remain unexplored. Current literature is not informative about the routines, tools and ways of working of middle managers in putting the intended strategy into action. The purpose of this study is to explore the experiences of middle managers in strategy implementation and describe the practices and strategy process in practice. In this constructivist study, the strategy process is treated as a social system, in which knowledgeable purposive agents create the structures, while, at the same time, these same structures constrain and enable their choices. The activities of middle managers are studied through their logics of action, relating to a cognitive framework in a social exchange relationship binding the actors’ means and ends. In the qualitative design of this study, semi-structured interviews with fifty-four middle managers in eight service-sector organizations constitute the primary data. Additional data consists of documentation of the official strategy processes of the organizations. It is acknowledged that structural properties appear differently in practices and make them different from each other. For describing practices-in-use, a framework is created. The framework differentiates four types of practices: Institutionalized and loosely-coupled; Established and recurrent; Individualized and stochastic; and Individualized and systemic practices. However, it is the practitioners who, by the actual use of practices, define the meaning of the practices. An inductive analysis of the experiences of the middle managers identifies four logics of action for practices, Executing, Facilitating, Empowering and Reflecting, the characteristics of which are described. It is noticed that the logics of action strive not only for strategy implementation, but also strategic renewal. The relations of the logics of action and different types of practices are described in general and also across the eight organizations. Based on analyses of the experienced and intended strategy processes, four types of strategy processes in practice (Sustainable, Self-directed, Unbalanced and Weak strategy process) are described. By showing how middle managers use practices, the study adds to our understanding of their activities in strategy implementation and their influence on strategic renewal. The study suggests that, for strategic renewal to emerge, both the extent to which the practices-in-use are coherent and the degree to which middle managers have enabling experiences of practices are significant. The study provides strategy research with a new understanding of what strategy process is in practice. Instead of a homogenous entity, strategy process is seen as a repertoire of practices. Describing practices, and exploring the experiences that middle managers have of practices-in-use, shows the relevance of various practices, including those that are not part of the official strategy process. Tiivistelma (Abstract in Finnish) Tutkimus kasittelee strategiaprosessia kaytannossa lahestymalla sita kaytantojen ja keskijohdon strategian toimeenpanon kokemusten kautta. Organisaation strategiaprosessi luo ja toteuttaa strategiaa. Tama prosessi koskettaa laajasti organisaation eri toimijoita, joita ei kuitenkaan ole huomioitu strategiatutkimuksessa. Kiinnostus kaytantoihin edustaa strategiatutkimuksessa uutta nakokulmaa, jossa ollaan kiinnostuneita laajasti organisaation toimijoista ja heidan panoksestaan organisaation koherentille toiminnalle. Organisatoristen tekojen lisaksi ollaan kiinnostuneita myos mikrotason toiminnasta. Eras keskeinen toimijaryhma, jonka toimintaa ei viela riittavasti ymmarreta, on keskijohto eli ne henkilot, jotka organisaatiossa toimivat seka johtajina etta johdettavina. Aikaisempi strategiatutkimus on keskittynyt enimmakseen ylimman johdon tutkimiseen, jolloin keskijohto on jaanyt riittamattomalle huomiolle. Empiirisia tutkimuksia, joissa kasiteltaisiin keskijohdolle merkityksellisia kaytantoja, ei juuri ole. Olemassa oleva kirjallisuus ei kerro mita ovat ne rutiinit, valineet ja tyotavat, joita keskijohtajat kayttavat toteuttaessaan organisaation strategiaa. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena on tarkastella keskijohdon strategian toimeenpanon kokemuksia seka kuvailla kaytantoja ja strategiaprosessia kaytannossa. Konstruktivistisessa tutkimuksessa strategiaprosessia pidetaan sosiaalisena systeemina, jossa toiminnastaan ’tietavat’ (knowledgeable) tekijat (agentit) tuottavat rakenteen, joka seka rajoittaa etta mahdollistaa heidan toimintaansa. Keskijohdon toimintaa tutkitaan toiminnan logiikan kautta eli tarkastelemalla yksiloiden toimintaansa liittamia keinoja ja paamaaria. Laadullisen tutkimusasetelman aineisto on koottu kahdeksasta palveluorganisaatiosta. Paaasiallinen aineisto koostuu 54 keskijohdon edustajan haastattelusta. Haastattelujen lisaksi hyodynnetaan organisaatioiden virallisia strategiaprosesseja koskevia dokumentteja. Strategiaprosessilla on rakenteellisia ominaisuuksia, jotka nayttaytyvat eri tavoin kaytannoissa esimerkiksi velvoittamalla toimijoita toimimaan tietylla tavalla. Kaytantojen kuvaamiseksi tutkimus luo mallin, joka erottelee neljanlaisia kaytantoja: vakiintuneet ja loyhasidoksiset; tunnetut ja toistuvat; yksilolliset ja satunnaiset, seka yksilolliset ja systeemiset. Huolimatta kaytantojen rakenteellisista ominaisuuksista kaytannot saavat merkityksensa ennen kaikkea siita, mihin toimijat niita kayttavat. Aineistolahtoinen analyysi tunnistaa keskijohdon edustajien kokemuksista neljanlaisia toiminnan logiikoita (taytantoonpano, helpottaminen, valtuuttaminen ja reflektointi) jotka kuvaillaan. Tutkimus havaitsee, etta strategian toimeenpanon lisaksi keskijohdon toiminnalla on strategiaa uudistavia paamaaria. Eri toiminnan logiikoiden ja erilaisten kaytantojen yhteyksia kuvaillaan seka yleisesti etta organisaatiotasoisesti. Koettujen ja aiottujen strategiaprosessien perusteella kuvataan nelja strategiaprosessityyppia: kestava, itseohjautuva, epatasapainoinen ja heikko. Osoittamalla kuinka keskijohto kayttaa kaytantoja tutkimus lisaa ymmarrysta keskijohdon toiminnasta strategian toimeenpanossa ja strategian uudistamisessa. Tutkimus ehdottaa, etta strategian uudistumisen kannalta on merkityksellista, kuinka koherentteja kaytannot ovat ja missa maarin keskijohtajat kokevat kaytantojen mahdollistavan heidan strategista toimintaansa. Tutkimus tuottaa strategiatutkimukselle uutta ymmarrysta siita mita on strategiaprosessi kaytannossa. Homogeenisen kokonaisuuden sijasta strategiaprosessi nahdaan kaytantojen valikoimana. Lahestymalla kaytantoja keskijohdon kokemusten kautta tutkimus paljastaa tarkeiksi myos ne monet epaviralliset kaytannot, jotka eivat kuulu viralliseen strategiaprosessiin.

[1]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Of strategies, deliberate and emergent , 1985, Strategic Management Journal.

[2]  M. Pozzebon,et al.  The Influence of a Structurationist View on Strategic Management Research , 2004 .

[3]  G. Yukl Managerial Leadership: A Review of Theory and Research , 1989 .

[4]  D. Teece,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[5]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[6]  D. Schendel,et al.  Introduction to the summer 1993 special issue on ‘corporate restructuring’ , 1993 .

[7]  Henry Mintzberg Patterns in Strategy Formation , 1978, International Studies of Management & Organization.

[8]  R. Whittington The Work of Strategizing and Organizing: For a Practice Perspective , 2003 .

[9]  Cynthia Stewart The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action : Donald A. Schon, Basic Books, New York, 1983 , 1984 .

[10]  Dennis A. Gioia,et al.  Influence Modes, Schema Change, and Organizational Transformation , 1989 .

[11]  David C. Wilson,et al.  Thinking and acting strategically: new challenges for interrogating strategy , 2004 .

[12]  J. Walsh Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane , 1995 .

[13]  Ramiro Montealegre,et al.  The interplay of information technology and the social milieu , 1997, Inf. Technol. People.

[14]  Thomas A. Schwandt Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms , 1997 .

[15]  Paul C. Nutt,et al.  Tactics of Implementation , 1986 .

[16]  I. Seidman Interviewing as qualitative research , 1991 .

[17]  Y. Sarason A model of organizational transformation: The incorporation of organizational identity into a struct , 1995 .

[18]  Michael Ivor Reed,et al.  The Agency/Structure Dilemma in Organization Theory: Open Doors and Brick Walls , 2005 .

[19]  Richard Whittington,et al.  What Is Strategy and Does It Matter , 1998 .

[20]  Paul C. Nutt,et al.  Identifying and appraising how managers install strategy , 1987 .

[21]  P. Parsons Defining Cable Television: Structuration and Public Policy , 1989 .

[22]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  The Fact of Fiction in Organizational Ethnography. , 1979 .

[23]  Henry Mintzberg Learning 1, planning 0 reply to Igor Ansoff , 1991 .

[24]  James B. Thomas,et al.  Interpreting Strategic Issues: Effects of Strategy and the Information-Processing Structure of Top Management Teams , 1990 .

[25]  L. Zachary The Role of Teacher as Mentor , 2002 .

[26]  W. Thorngate Possible Limits on a Science of Social Behavior , 1976 .

[27]  R. Mir,et al.  Strategic management and the philosophy of science: the case for a constructivist methodology , 2000 .

[28]  K. Weick FROM SENSEMAKING IN ORGANIZATIONS , 2021, The New Economic Sociology.

[29]  R. Scapens,et al.  Accounting systems and systems of accountability — understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts , 1985 .

[30]  J. Sydow,et al.  Organizing and Evaluating Interfirm Networks: a Structurationist Perspective on Network Processes and Effectiveness , 1998 .

[31]  Alain Noel,et al.  Strategic cores and magnificent obsessions: Discovering strategy formation through daily activities of ceos , 1989 .

[32]  Patricia Riley,et al.  A Structurationist Account of Political Culture , 1983 .

[33]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[34]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  Toward a theory of organizational socialization , 1977 .

[35]  Richard Whittington,et al.  Strategy after modernism: recovering practice , 2004 .

[36]  Renata Tesch,et al.  Qualitative research : analysis types and software tools , 1990 .

[37]  K. Weick The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[38]  Charles H. Noble,et al.  The Eclectic Roots of Strategy Implementation Research , 1999 .

[39]  A. Pettigrew The Character and Significance of Strategy Process Research , 1992 .

[40]  K. Weick Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination , 1989 .

[41]  G. Spreitzer,et al.  Empowering Middle Managers to be Transformational Leaders , 1996 .

[42]  Henry Mintzberg The rise and fall of strategic planning , 1993 .

[43]  David M. Reid,et al.  Operationalizing strategic planning , 1989 .

[44]  野中 郁次郎,et al.  The Knowledge-Creating Company: How , 1995 .

[45]  Thomas A. Schwandt Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. , 1994 .

[46]  Paul C. Nutt,et al.  An Experimental Comparison of the Effectiveness of Three Planning Methods , 1977 .

[47]  Dan Schendel Introduction to the winter 1992 special issue: ‘Fundamental themes in strategy process research’ , 1992 .

[48]  J. Spender,et al.  Organizational Renewal: Top Management's Role in a Loosely Coupled System , 1995 .

[49]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Rethinking Strategic Planning Part II: New Roles for Planners , 1994 .

[50]  I. Nonaka Toward Middle-Up-Down Management: Accelerating Information Creation , 1988 .

[51]  Peter K. Mills,et al.  Clients as “Partial” Employees of Service Organizations: Role Development in Client Participation , 1986 .

[52]  Hugh Willmott,et al.  STUDYING MANAGERIAL WORK: A CRITIQUE AND A PROPOSAL[1] , 1987 .

[53]  K. Weick Making Sense of the Organization , 2000 .

[54]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[55]  W. Orlikowski,et al.  Genre Repertoire: The Structuring of Communicative Practices in Organizations , 1994 .

[56]  S. Sheather,et al.  The Effects of Strategy Type on Strategy Implementation Actions , 1996 .

[57]  R. Whittington PUTTING GIDDENS INTO ACTION: SOCIAL SYSTEMS AND MANAGERIAL AGENCY , 1992 .

[58]  Sumantra Ghoshal,et al.  The Strategy Process: Concepts, Contexts, Cases , 1991 .

[59]  P. Chisnall Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data , 1996 .

[60]  C. Prahalad,et al.  The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance , 1986 .

[61]  Karel Cool,et al.  Strategic management in a new framework , 1982 .

[62]  D. K. Sinha The contribution of formal planning to decisions , 1990 .

[63]  Cynthia M. Pavett,et al.  Managerial work: The influence of hierarchical level and functional specialty. , 1983 .

[64]  Dennis A. Gioia,et al.  Paradigms Lost: Incommensurability vs Structurationist Inquiry , 1994 .

[65]  K. Weick Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems , 1976, Gestión y Estrategia.

[66]  L. Smircich,et al.  The Case for Qualitative Research , 1980 .

[67]  K. K. Cetina,et al.  The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory , 2001 .

[68]  S. Ranson The Structuring of Organizational Structures. , 1980 .

[69]  S. Floyd,et al.  The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance , 1990 .

[70]  Paul Wheeler,et al.  Losing The Plot , 1998 .

[71]  J. Thompson,et al.  Strategies, Structures, and Processes of Organizational Decision , 1959 .

[72]  W. Orlikowski Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations , 2000 .

[73]  P. Jarzabkowski,et al.  Taking Strategy Seriously , 2003 .

[74]  K. Weick,et al.  Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization , 1990 .

[75]  Peter K. Mills,et al.  Toward a Core Typology of Service Organizations , 1980 .

[76]  Vijay Sathe,et al.  Institutional Versus Questionnaire Measures of Organizational Structure , 1978 .

[77]  M. Terziovski,et al.  Quality management practices and the link to potential learning outcomes within the Australian retail sector , 2001 .

[78]  G. Spreitzer,et al.  The road to empowerment: Seven questions every leader should consider , 1997 .

[79]  Rosemary Stewart,et al.  Studies of Managerial Jobs and Behaviour: The Ways Forward , 2019, Managerial Work.

[80]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Suggestions for studying strategy process: A research note , 1992 .

[81]  Richard Whittington,et al.  Strategy as Practice , 1996 .

[82]  Cecilia M. Falbe,et al.  Patterns of Influence Behavior for Managers , 1993 .

[83]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Rethinking strategic planning part I: Pitfalls and fallacies , 1994 .

[84]  David J. Cooper,et al.  Business Planning as Pedagogy: Language and Control in a Changing Institutional Field , 1998 .

[85]  Richard Whttington,et al.  PRACTICE PERSPECTIVES ON STRATEGY: UNIFYING AND DEVELOPING A FIELD. , 2002 .

[86]  F. Westley Middle managers and strategy: Microdynamics of inclusion , 1990 .

[87]  L. Smircich,et al.  Strategic Management in an Enacted World , 1985 .

[88]  Henry Mintzberg The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management , 1990 .