Publication Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

6-2017

Abstract

Despite the benefits of opening the strategy process, greater inclusiveness and transparency stand in sharp contrast to the conventional emphasis on elitism and opacity in strategy making, especially in centralized organizations where decision making is driven by top management. We suggest that centralized organizations can manage this tension by combining participatory and inclusive practices. Whereas participation is about increasing stakeholders’ input for decisions, inclusion is about creating and sustaining a community of interacting stakeholders engaged in an ongoing stream of issues in the strategy process. We show that the distinction between partic- ipatory and inclusive practices helps to explain why and how centralized and decentralized organizations engage with stakeholders differently over the two phases of alternatives generation and idea selection in the strategy process. We illustrate our arguments using vignettes of the strategizing process at two public companies.

Keywords

Alternatives generations, Public company, Sharp contrast, Strategy process, Top management, decision making

Discipline

Organizational Behavior and Theory | Strategic Management Policy

Research Areas

Strategy and Organisation

Publication

Long Range Planning

Volume

50

Issue

3

First Page

385

Last Page

396

ISSN

0024-6301

Identifier

10.1016/j.lrp.2016.08.004

Publisher

Elsevier

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2016.08.004

Share

COinS