Projects
The Emergence of Routines
SNF number: 100014_135403
Period: 2011-2014
Researchers: David Seidl, Stephane Guerard, Katharina Dittrich
Since the publication of “An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change” by Nelson & Winter (1982) routines have been recognized to hold the potential for understanding not only organizations, but also their development. While we know that routines bring both stability and change (Feldman, M. 2000; Feldman, M. S. & Pentland, B. T. 2003), and are constitutive of organizational life, there is surprisingly little work on the question of their emergence. To address this gap, this research project seeks to understand how organizational routines emerge.
CEO Post-Succession Period
Period: 2010-2013
Researchers: David Seidl, Shenghui Ma, Stephane Guerard
Despite a large number of studies on CEO succession, we know little about the post-succession process since most research “failed to examine what new leaders do” (Miller, 1993: 656). Adopting a Strategy-as-Practice perspective, we are interested in exploring how CEOs shape strategy and the organization in the post-succession context. We argue that it is necessary to take leader integration and strategic change as dual but interrelated processes to better understand this dynamic period. Through in-depth case studies we intend to uncover what new CEOs do, to find out how these two processes interact and to better capture the dynamic and complexity of the post-succession process.
Inter-Organizational Strategizing: Process Patterns in the Relation between Inter- and Intra-Organizational Strategizing
Period: 2010-2012
Researchers: David Seidl, Felix Werle
Strategy research has increasingly recognized that strategizing is a phenomenon that is not exclusively happening within but also beyond organizational boundaries. Empirically, one can observe inter-organizational strategizing processes, where organizations get involved in multi-sector strategizing initiatives not in order to achieve a common aim or collective way forward for the group but rather to develop a shared understanding on the importance and different dimensions of a set of issues to inform the strategizing process within individual participating organizations. These cases are particularly interesting as they resemble two parallel processes, both on the inter-organizational as well as the intra-organizational level.
Organizational Memory – The Linkage between Past, Present and Future within the Organization
Period: 2010-2013
Researcher: Felix Langenmayer
The usage of anthropomorphic metaphors for a better understanding of organizations and their attributed phenomena has a long-standing tradition in management studies. In particular the metaphor of organizational memory is frequently used in the discourse of organizational learning, studies on innovation, organizational change and development as well as organizational identity. According to Rowlinson et al. (2010) most of the actual concepts within organizational memory studies (OMS) refer to memory in the sense of a “database” or “passive warehouse” and disregard the process-related characteristics of memory. Against this background this project tries to develop a communication based and therewith process-related perspective on organizational memory. With the help of a fieldstudy we try to display how organizations are embedded within past, present and future.
The Role of Meetings in Strategy Process
SNF number: 100014_130338
Period: 2010-2013
Researchers: David Seidl, Stephane Guerard, Karen Ariane Schweg, Katharina Dittrich
In the strategic management literature, meetings have not explicitly been considered part of the strategy process except in providing a “neutral” frame within which decision-making processes take place (Schwartzman, 1989). Contemporary work, however, suggests that meetings do not just provide empty shells for decision-processes which could as easily have taken place elsewhere, but that they actively influence organizations (Boden, 1994; Schwartzman, 1989). This influence is reflected through different functions, such as sense-making (Weick 1995), information gathering (Adams, 2004; Tepper, 2004) and agenda setting (Wodak 2001), that have been associated with meetings. More recently, studies have shown that meetings may directly affect the strategy process by stabilizing existing strategies or by shaping strategic change (Hodgkinson, Whittington, Johnson, & Schwarz, 2006; Jarzabkowski & Seidl, 2008). While the literature indicates that meetings do affect strategy formation, there are no coherent theories or measurable constructs that thoroughly examine how series of meetings affect strategy-making processes. This research intends to fill this gap by asking how series of meetings influence different phases of the strategy process.