warwick.ac.uk/lib-publicationswrap.warwick.ac.uk/79733/7/WRAP_LRP social media and open... · 2016. 9. 8. · Social media features Examples: strategic use Effects on strategic activity

warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications

Original citation: Baptista, João, Wilson, Alexander David, Galliers, Robert D. and Bynghall, Steve. (2016) Social media and the emergence of reflexiveness as a new capability for open strategy. Long Range Planning. Permanent WRAP URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/79733 Copyright and reuse: The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher’s statement: © 2016, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

A note on versions: The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the ‘permanent WRAP URL’ above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected]

http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications

http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications

http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/79733

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

mailto:[email protected]

Pleasedonotshare.Manuscriptinreviewforjournal.Askcorrespondingauthorfornewversion.([email protected])

1

SocialmediaandtheemergenceofreflexivenessasanewcapabilityforopenstrategyAbstractSocial media increases transparency and inclusiveness in organizational strategizing bywidening engagementwith strategy content and participants. However, our study showsthat just relying on the feedback features of social media is not sufficient for an openstrategy approach. Instead, emergent feedback from social media use leads to tensionsinitially between the participatory nature of the technology and extant managementpractices. Ultimately, these tensions encourage the development of new internalcapabilitiestoappropriatefeedbackstructurallyintotheorganization.Weconceptualizetheemergenceofthisneworganizationalcapabilityasreflexiveness.Further,wesuggestthatitisthedevelopmentofthiscapabilitythat,alongwithtransparencyandinclusiveness,explaintheshifttowardsmoreopenformsofstrategizingandthepotentialtomoveorganizationstowards stewardship, as a governance model more consistent with open strategizingpracticesinorganizations.IntroductionStrategy is both a statement of intent and a process bywhich that intent is formed andperformedbymembersoforganizations. Theownershipof these twoaspectsof strategyhas traditionally been with elite groups within organizations (Hambrick, 2007, Pettigrew,1992).However,theriseofsocialmediaasaplatformforopencommunicationandwiderengagement in organizational discourse has shifted attention tomore collective views ofstrategy(SeidlandWhittington,2014,Whittington,2006).Formalized strategymay still bemanaged from the top inmany organizations but socialmediaisaddingpressuretomakethisprocessmoreporousandopentoinformalactivityatthe grassroots level and throughout (and even beyond) individual organizations. This isparticularly relevant as the younger generation of “digital natives” (Helsper and Eynon,2009) become more dominant given their aptitude to use social media to engage andinteract with others (Vodanovich et al., 2010; Tams et al., 2014) and share knowledge(Mortonetal.,2015).Theparticipativenatureofsocialmediachangesthedistributionofrhetoricalresourcesandreshapes patterns of communication from univocal into multivocal organizationalenvironments (Huang et al., 2014, 2015). Social media is intrinsic to knowledgemanagement (von Krogh, 2012), knowledge reuse (Majchrzak et al., 2013), distributedleadership (Sutanto et al., 2011), and in facilitating interaction and internal collaboration(Razmeritaetal.,2014).However,itistheincreasedvisibilityofwhatothersknowthroughsocial media that creates conditions to leverage knowledge in new ways and promoteslearningasaprocessthatoperatesvicariouslyratherthanthroughinterpersonalexperience(Leonardi,2014).Thisissignificanttostrategybecauseofhowsocialmediaaccentuatestheroleandvoiceofeverymemberoftheorganizationbyprovidingaplatformforengagementandparticipation,aswellasamorevisible lineofsight tostrategy (Haefligeretal.2011).Socialmediacanhavethereforetheabilitytoextendreachandrichnessinthemakingand‘doing’ of strategy. In particular, social media has the potential to modify ‘how much’


2

strategy is visible, and when and how individuals are able to participate in creating andshaping practices and content of strategic significance. It adds reach and volume offeedback ex-ante, but often also replaces traditional forms of communication of extantstrategy.Itisthereforeappropriatetobroadenourviewofstrategytoincludeawidersetofactivitieswith strategic impact within organizations, some of which have not been recognized asbeing sufficiently close to the practice of strategy (Bechky 2011). This broader view ofstrategy reflects the growing number of modern work environments where strategypractice is shifting frombeing “exclusive and secretive” to becomingmore “inclusive andtransparent”(Whittingtonetal.,2011p.538).Theissueisthenhowincreasinginclusiveness(broader involvement of stakeholders) and transparency (wider access to content andinformation) interferes with established conventions around who should be involved instrategyandhow,andtheextentofwhatshouldbeshared.Forexample,becomingmoreinclusivecanchallengeestablishedhierarchicalstructureswithinorganizations(Collieretal.,2004)andbreakwithestablishedconventionsonstrategybeingthedomainofarestrictedgroup of top managers (Pettigrew, 1992, Hambrick, 2007) by opening-up the potentialinvolvement to other echelons in the organization, notably middle managers (Floyd andWooldridge, 1994, Wooldridge and Floyd, 1990). Adding transparency can also beproblematicbecauseitcreatesconditionsforequalvoiceandaccesstorhetoricalresourcesbyallmembersoftheorganization(Huangetal.,2013),challengingforexamplethestatusof middle management because they no longer moderate and intermediate knowledgeexchanges. This echoes Bruhn and Ahlers (2013)who note the importance of integratingand embedding new communication channels in existing organizational and strategizingpracticesandprocesses.Thisiscausingsignificantchangestostrategyasconventionallydescribed;changesthatgodeepintothepraxisofstrategy,itsnormsandartefacts,aswellaswhoisinvolvedinformalandinformalstrategicactivityinorganizations(Whittington,2006,Whittingtonetal.,2006,2011).With further ramificationson thedemocratisationof strategybyestablishingagile,responsiveandcapableorganizations(DozandKosonen,2008a,b),crowdsourcingstrategydialogues (Stieger et al., 2012) and more democratized forms of strategy (Dobusch andMueller-Seitz,2012,Stiegeretal.,2012,Matzleretal.,2014).Thispaperfocusesonsocialmediaasaplatformforparticipation(Cottonetal.,1988)andconsidersitsroleinshapingandformingstrategywithinorganizations(MantereandVaara,2008).Weposethefollowingguidingresearchquestiontodeepenourunderstandingofthisresearchpuzzle:Howistheadoptionofsocialmediachangingthenatureoforganizationalstrategizing?Thepaperisstructuredasfollows.Inthissectionwemotivatedthestudybyhighlightingtheroleofsocialmediainshapingstrategicactivityinorganizations.Nextweshowhowsocialmediaischangingthenatureanddynamicsofprocessesofstrategizinginorganizationsandidentifytheresearchgapinourcurrentunderstandingthatweaimtoaddress.Thesectionthatfollowsoutlinesourmethodologicalapproachtotheempiricalworkbyexplainingthetwostagesundertakentogatherandanalysesecondaryandprimarydata.Thistwo-prongedapproach allowed us to intertwine a wide range of data frommultiple sources with the


3

conceptsofopenparticipation inorganizational strategizing.Wethen reportonourmainfindings, providing evidence of tensions and capability development in the organizationsstudied. In our analysis sectionwe then review and conceptualize the dynamic nature ofcapabilitydevelopmentbyaddingreflexivenessasathirddimensiontoWhittingtonetal.’s(2011)modelofopenstrategy.DrawingonGorlietal.(2015),wesuggestthatthiscapabilityembodies the process of integrating open and emergent feedback into the structuralarrangementsoforganizations.Ourconceptualizationofthereflexivenesscapabilityisakeycontributionofourstudy.Lastly,wereflectonthepotential forthiscapabilitytoshiftthegovernance of the organization towards stewardship as an overall organizationalarrangementthatisconsistentwithopen-strategizingpracticesinorganizations.SocialMediaExpansionintoProcessesofStrategizingWe commenced with a systematic and comprehensive review of case material publiclyavailable such as blog posts, onlinemagazines, news, industry reports, company reports,white papers, etc. This gave us a broad basis to understand the emerging use of socialmediainorganizations.Moreparticularly,theaimwastocapturesalient,currentexamplesof the expansion of social media into processes of strategizing. This was achieved byanalysingthesocialmediafeaturesused(column1)andtheirspecificstrategicuse(column2)and tocapture theeffecton strategicactivity (column3).Table1 showsa selectionofrepresentativeexamplesofourinitialanalysis:Socialmediafeatures Examples:strategicuse EffectsonstrategicactivityInteractionwithmanagementBlogs,commenting,videocasting,discussionforums,onlinecommunities,realtimeonlineQ&As,socialnetworkupdates,internaltwitter

DowChemical,LloydsBank,ING,Nokia,Lloyd’sBank,LindenLabs,Alcatel-LucentCEOatDowChemicalwasanearlyadopterofinternalblogsince2007called“AccessAndrew”.Received24,000visitsperblogpostandupto50comments.Employeesareencouragedtoleavecomments,whicharemoderatedbuttheCEOpersonallyauthorsthebloganddealswithhottopicshimself.AtDeutscheBanksomemanagershost“AskMeAnything”sessionsonlinewherequestionsonanytopiccanbefreelyaskedbyanyemployeeinthecompany.

Activeuseofsocialmediatomakethevisionofseniormanagementmoretransparentandgathersupportandfeedbackfromemployees.Insomecases,thisisusedtodefinenewstrategicinitiativesandsupportdecisionmaking.Italsoprovidesaviewonemployeesentimentforseniormanagement.

ExtensionofclosedmanagementmeetingsReal-timeandpostcommentingontopicsfrommanagementmeetings,liveupdatesonsocialnetworks,eventblogs

Philips,Unilever,PwC,DollarFinancial,GrantThorntonDollarFinancial,theUKoperationsofUS-basedDFCGlobalCorp,adiversifiedfinancialservicescompany,regularlyfilmboardmeetingsandpostthevideosontheintranetforemployeestoview.AtGrantThorntonthereislivebloggingofseniormanagementmeetings.

Strategymeetingswhichwerepreviouslyclosedbecomemoreopen,allowingmoreemployeestoengageanddiscussstrategicissues.

EmployeelisteningprogrammeCommunitygroups,onlineportalforsharingfeedback,

HSBC,VirginMediaHSBChaveastructuredEmployeeListeningprogrammeforemployeestotalkaboutanything,thesesessionsarefacilitatedbymanagers.Managersthenuseacustom

Employees’concernsandissuesarelistenedtoandrecorded,actingasadatainputintostrategicdecision-making


4

custom-builtformsforinputofdata,votingsystems

portaltorecordissuesraisedwhichisthenanalysedtoprovideinformationtoadvisemanagementondecisionmaking.

Ideationprogrammes,managedinputandconsultationonspecificinitiativesInnovationJam,ideationplatforms,Wikis,votingsystems,communitygroups,discussionforum,socialnetworkupdates,microbloggingandinstantmessaging

AveryDennison,HCTTechnologies,IBM,GrantThornton,RedHat,LuxotticaSanofiAventis,ATOS,BNPParibas,VirginMediaWithinSanofiPasteur,Yammerwasusedasacommunitysiteforits“WomeninSanofiPasteur”(WiSP)network.Thenetworkhelpstopromotegenderbalanceinacompanywherewomenwereoriginallyonly20%oftheworkforce.PressurefromthegrouphelpedtochangecompanypolicyandalsomeantthecompanywontheApec(Frenchexecutiveemploymentassociation)GenderParityprize.

Specificinitiativeswhichaskforinputintoastrategiclevelcampaignorobjectivesuchasavaluesprogramme.Gradualformationofincentivesandmeasurementtorecognizecontributionsfromemployeeandmanagement.Structuredapproachestofacilitateinnovation.Recognitionofissue-ledcommunitiesleadingtochangeswithincompany.

OpenHR-relatedprocessesincludingpeerrecognitionBadgesandrecognition,ratings,peerrecognitionsystems,gamification

HCLTechnologies,XchangingAtHCLTechnologiestheappraisalsystemisopensothatmanagementappraisalfeedbackisvisibletoall.Employeesgivefeedbackonmanagers.Thishelpstoestablishanopenculture,whichhasresultedinfurtherstructuredapproachestocrowdsourcingstrategyamongemployees.

Peertopeerrecognitiononemployeesandmanagerscanidentifyissues,influencebehavioursandalsoguidestrategyasfeedbackcascadesupwards

AnalysisofemployeesentimentandsocialdynamicsPollsandsurveys;Analysisofcommunitygroups;Discussiongroups;Socialnetworks

HSBC,NationwideInsurance,PhilipsNationwideInsurance(USA)experimentedwithanapptoidentifyemployeesentimentonitsYammersocialnetwork,whichwasthenusedtohelpmanagementmakedecisions.AtPhilipsKPIsshowstrategiccontributionofESNtointeractionbetweendifferentgroups.

Analysisofemployeesentimentandrelativeidentificationoftrendstoinformandfeedintostrategy

Table1:Examplesshowingsocialmediainfluenceoverstrategicactivityintheirorganizations(fullsourcesandcodingavailablefromtheauthors)

Ouranalysisrevealedvariouswaysinwhichparticularsocialmediafeaturesarebeingusedinstrategizing.Italsorevealedthatsocialmediawereusedincombinationorattimeswerereplacing traditional approaches to strategy development that had often been basedpreviouslyonpapercommunicationandface-to-facemeetings.Thisanalysisshowedawiderangeofsocialmediafeaturesbeingusedwithinorganizationssuchasbloggingplatforms,commenting, activity streaming, social networking, internal twitter, videocasting, onlineforums and chats, wiki editing, voting systems, ideation and collaborative platforms. Itshowed that these online services were increasingly used to engage employees inorganizationalactivityanddecisionmaking(Razmeritaetal.,2014). Incertaincases,socialmedia were more deeply embedded, and effectively replaced traditional forms oforganizationalparticipation, and in thisway socialmediabecamea significant influencingfactoroverthestrategicoutlookoftheseorganizations(Haefligeretal.,2011).In theseorganizations, strategic activitywas shifting from“analogue”processesbasedontraditional tools, such as work-shopping, stakeholder meetings, corporate events and


5

sharing documents (Whittington, 2006; Whittington et al., 2006), towards new “digital”formsofstrategicengagementandparticipationbasedonsocialmedia(Stiegeretal.,2012).Figure 1 captures this finding by showing the increasing influence of social media overtraditional approaches tomanaging strategy (Whittington 2006,Whittington et al. 2011,JarzabkowskiandKaplan2014,Haefligeretal.2011).Theconcentriccirclesrepresentthisgradual integration and often replacing in the use of social media in strategic activity inorganizations.AspertheexamplesshownininTable1,thefigurealsohighlightsthewayinwhichsocialmediashiftsattentionfromanapproachtostrategizing focusedontoolsandoutcomes,towardsanapproachmorebasedonstrategyconversations,connectednessandengagement.

Figure1:Digitalandanaloguestrategyprocesses:socialmediaexpansionintoprocessesofstrategizing

Thesefindingsmotivatedustoanalysetheeffectsofparticipationthroughsocialmediaonorganizational strategizing. In other words, to explore further this shift towards moreparticipativeformsofengagementanditspotentialtoopen-upstrategycontentandmodifystrategy practices in organizations. This led us to explore how socialmedia created newdynamics of interaction and placed pressure on organizations to manage emergentfeedbackfromamuchgreaternumberstakeholdersandmedia(Hienerthetal.,2011,Araletal.,2013)withregardtostrategicissues.Inourstudy,wefounddifferentapproachestomanaging feedback. The emergence of new capabilities to manage new forms ofparticipationandopennessseemedtobeadominantthemeacrossthecasematerial.SocialmediaandtheemergenceofreflexivenessTo understand this phenomenon it is essential to define and interpret the inherentcharacteristicsofsocialmedia.Socialmediaisnotasingulartechnology.Rather,itisabroadcategorythatincludesvarioustypesofonlineservicesthataddtheabilityforinteractiveandparticipative communication within social settings that form organizations. They areinherently contextual and become embedded in the practices and norms of these socialgroups.Socialmediaare thereforebetterdescribedasanemergentensembleof featuresthatformscontextforsocialinteractions(Spagniolettietal.,2015),theshapeofwhichistheresultoftheuniqueinterplaywiththecontextofuseofeachorganization(Baptista2009).OthertypesofICTssuchasemailareinherentlymoreclosed,transactional,andcentredon


6

individuals,whereas the essence of socialmedia is based on providing high visibility andopenparticipation.Atthepracticallevel,socialmediaaddfeaturesthatenableforexamplethe seamless sharing, commenting, responding, syndicating and interacting with content(text, voice and video) and connectingwith others, and follow and interactingwith theiractivity streams (Kaplan andHaenlein 2010, Kietzmannet al., 2011) – see Table 1. Socialmediathereforeprovideamalleableplatform,whichisinherentlyorganic,free-flowingandbuilt to support dynamic and emergent feedback loops of communicationwithin a socialgroup.Within organizations social media afford new types and patterns of communication andinteractions,andhavethepotential to impacton itsstructure,governanceandorganizingprinciples (Leonardietal.,2013,VaastandKaganer2013,TreemandLeonardi2012).Thedynamic feedback loops that emerge through wider participation in strategic activity viasocial media can initially be in tension with extant formal structures and norms withinorganizations. However, organizations learn tomanage and harness feedback as a usefulresource.Insodoingtheybecomeinherentlymorereflexiveandabletomovetowardsanorganizational environment where there is wider participation and engagement in theshapeofanddirectionofthestrategy.Gorlietal.(2015,p.3)suggestthattheenvironmentwithinanorganization is reflexivewhen it gives “managersandpractitionersoccasions toreflectontheirsystemsofaction,sothattheirimagination,inventivenessandenterprisecantakewing.”Socialmediastimulatesthisreflexivityasanewcapabilityinorganizations.Theembedding of social media in the functioning of organizationsmeans that feedback andparticipationisstructurallypartoftheorganization.Denyeretal. (2011,p.393)reflectonthelongtermeffectsofsocialmediaadoptionwithinorganizations,theysuggestthatsocialmediahavethepotentialfor“reconfigurationandredesignofthewholesocio-technicalandmanagerial system”withthepotential tocontribute forstrategypractice tobe inherentlymorereflexive(WilsonandJarzabkowski2004,p.15).Reflexiveness– theability tobe reflexive– isa social concept that refers to theability tointegrateanalysisofourselves in thinkingandaction.At the individual level itmeansself-introspectionandself-awarenessbut,insocialsettings,itinvolvesinteractionwithothersinthe context of established norms within a social group. Thus, within organizations thiscapability requires feedback systems and refers to the ability of employees to applypractical reflexivity (Cunliffe,A.,2002) togive themstructuralconditions tobeauthorsoftheir own workplace and play an active role in the daily “production, reproduction andtransformationoftheirworkprocesses” (Gorlietal.,2015,p.3).Accordingly,organizationswith low reflexivity only allow for low levels of agency in changing established socialstructure.Incontrast,organizationswithhighreflexivityallowforhighlevelsofagencyandgive individuals better ability to shape norms and structures of their own environment -which is what Gorli et al. (2015) say develops the ability for individual and collectiveauthorshiporinotherwords“makesenseof,andshapetheirorganizationalpractices”.Thisthen gives individuals an opportunity “to perceive and pursue specific opportunities forinfluencingorganizationsandtheircontexts”whichisashiftfromconventionalapproachesto strategy and organizing. It is this thread and link between social media use and thestructuralconditionsforparticipationinorganizationalstrategizingthatisthefocusofthisstudy.Wenowreviewtheresearchmethodsusedtosupportthisaim.


7

ResearchApproachandMethodologyTo find evidence of social media use in organizational activity with strategic reach westartedwith awide review of industry reports by systematically collecting any source ofcasematerialreportedinthepressasnotedabove.Oureffortswerestrengthenedbyoneof the co-authors who is immersed in the social media field and is well informed of itspractices. Our aim was to gain a rich insight into the possible practices across as manyorganizationsaspossibleofsocialmediausedinstrategicactivity.Therefore,toaddressthisrecentandemergingphenomenon,ourresearchadoptedanexploratorydesign(Stebbins,2001)combining tworesearchmethods tohelpgainbreadthanddepth.Thestudybeganwithanextensivesearchandanalysisofsecondarydatatobuildabroadunderstandingofhoworganizationsusesocialmedia inopenstrategy initiatives.Thesecondroundofdatacollection gathered primary data and used semi-structured interviews. Informants wereselectedastheywereresponsiblefor,andembedded-in,therunningofsocialmediadrivenopen initiatives. Informants were drawn from seven organizations spanning differentsectors.Inthefirstphase,thecollectionandanalysisofsecondarydatafocusedonconsultancyandmanagementreports,companypressreleases,thebusinesspressandcorporateblogs–allofwhichweredeemed tobe a rich sourceof data (Easterby-Smithet al., 2012) and givegoodcoverageoforganization’ssocialmedia-ledinitiatives.Ourinitialsearchrevealeddataon50casesoforganizationsusingsocialmediainsupportofstrategicinitiatives.Followinginitial codingof thesedata,we identified35casesacross29organizationswhichmet thetwofoldcriteriaof socialmediause inourcontext:1)being in-use (caseswere rejected iftheywereusing‘primitive’technologies(Whittingtonetal.,2011)),and2)wereservingasthe driver for open strategy (i.e. social media were aimed at increasing inclusion andtransparency). These 35 cases were coded further to identify the socialmedia tools andfeaturesemployed,theintendedeffectonstrategizing,thenatureofemergentcapabilitiesandthetensionsencountered.Thisphaseofthestudyprovidedthebasisforouranalysisoffeaturesofsocialmediausedtodriveopenstrategyandenabledthesynthesisoftensionsbetweenestablishedwaysofworkinguserexpectationsandtheconfigurationofopennessachieved. These were written-up as vignettes to provide “systematically elaborateddescriptions of concrete situations” (Schoenberg and Ravdal, 2000) which enabled us tocollateandcontrastdifferentapproachestoopenstrategy.Theaimwastocaptureexistingpractices across the industry from secondary data using short vignettes (Friesl andSilberzahn,2012)andthenusethistoconductextendedinterviewswithasmallergroupoforganizationsforricheranddeeperunderstandingofsocialmediauseinthiscontextThe second phase of data collection drew on interviews as a method to access rich,experientialaccountsofsocialmediatechnologiesin-useandopenstrategyinitiatives.Ouraim was to gain first-hand, experiential accounts of how social media are deployed insupportofopenstrategizing.Weconductedextended,semi-structured interviewswith10respondents from 7 different organizations (around 30 hours of audio recording weretranscribedverbatim).The7organizationswereselectedfromthepoolofcasesgatheredinthefirstphaseoftheempiricalwork.Thetranscriptswereanalysedfirstindependentlyandthen jointly by the authors to capture the themes and experiences shared by ourrespondents.Thethemeswereusedasfirstordercodes,whichweresubsequentlyusedtorecode interviewdata inordertocapturequotationsandevidenceofhowsocialmedia is


8

beingusedinopenstrategycontexts.Table2summarizesthesevenorganizationsstudiedandexplainstheselectioncriteriaforeach.Someoftheseorganizationsarealsolistedandfeature in our preliminary findings in Table 1. However, in table 2,we analyse new fieldworkbasedon interviews,goingbeyondthepublicmaterialcoveredearlier that ledustoconsidertheseorganizationsingreaterdepth.Organization Characteristics Salientinsightsofsocialmedia

influenceonstrategicactivityInterviewee

Xchanging 9,000 employees in 12global locations,Technologyservices

Known to have recentlyimplemented social media withsignificant impact on the practicesandcultureoftheorganization.

Global Head of InternalCommunications

VirginMedia 14,000 employees, UK-basedTelecommunications

Reportedasacasestudyforhavingan advanced online community-basedcustomerservice.

Director of TechnicalServices, Head ofeCustomerCare

HSBC 265,000 employees, Globalwith UK HQ, Financialservices

Widely reported listening inprogramme encouragingemployees to voice concerns andopenuptoseniormanagement

Global Head of Insight,Culture and Group CEOcommunications

GrantThornton

5,000 employees, UK-basedAccountancy. Partnershipmovingtosharedownership

KnowncaseofanewCEOactiveonsocial media internally, with anopen style of communication.Movingfrompartnershiptosharedownership.

Senior Manager forNationalCommunications

IBMStudio Several hubs in large cities,operates as subsidiary ofIBM, Global IT andconsulting servicescompany.

Notoriousforbeingthe“agile”armoflargerIBMtoallowemployeestoexecuteprojectsdifferently.

CIO Lead, ProjectManager, SeniorManager

Atos 93,000 employees, Globalwith headquarters inFrance,ITservices

Verypresent inthepressasacaseof banning email internally. Veryambitiousinsocialmedia.

Group Chief ChangeOfficer

Philips 105,000, Global withheadquarters inNetherlands,Electronics

Knowntohaveadvancedmetricstocapture social media collaborationandexchangesglobally

Digital CommunicationsManager

Table2:Detailsofsemi-structuredinterviews,firmcharacteristics,andselectioncriteria

The interviewsrevealedhowsocialmediaareused,andhowgradually theycontribute tosubstantively opening approaches to strategic activity in each case. The experience oforganizationalactorstellsushowparticulartensionswereplayed-out,whatcapabilitieshaddeveloped,andwhethertheorganizationconcernedhadadapteditsgovernancestanceinresponseto,orinconcertwith,openstrategyinitiatives.ThisdualmethodapproachenabledustogaininsightintothevarietyofwayssocialmediaareusedinopenstrategyaswellasprovidingawindowintothewayssuchICT isshapingandchallengingmanagementpractices.Ouraimwastospanmeso-levelpatternsofICTusein firms (cases drawn from secondary data) as well as granular examples anchored instrategic praxis (interviews). This approach enabled us to give situated accounts oforganizational practices positioned in a broader context of social media usage. Weinvestigatedmultiple cases, using complementarymethods of data collection, seeking toidentifycommonfeaturesofstrategizingandstrategicpraxissupportedbysocialmedia.Theapproach leads to the identification of common understandings, teleologies and rules


9

drivingtheadoptionofsocialmedia,eachofwhichcontributestoconstellationsofpracticesandmaterialarrangementsofopenstrategy(Schatzki,2002,SeidlandWhittington,2014).FINDINGSANDANALYSIS:BECOMINGSTRUCTURALLYOPENWenowpresent anddiscussour findings.We first reviewkey initiatives related to socialmediausewithimpactonstrategicpractice.Weanalysehowthisstimulatedtheemergenceoffeedbackloops,andtheirgradualembeddinginsignificantaspectsoforganizations.Wepayparticularattentiontotheemergenceofnewwaysofengagingemployees inshapingthe functioningof theenvironment that theybelong to,which leads to tensionsbetweennew formsofparticipationandestablished structuresandnorms in theorganization.Ourfindingssuggestthatorganizationsdevelopnewcapabilitiesinresponsetothesetensions.Weconceptualizethesetensionsandrelatedcapabilitiesandreflectonhowtheyultimatelymove strategic processes and thinking to become more distributed: seen as somethingshared,jointlyachievedandenactedwithinorganizations–acharacteristicoforganizationsthathavedevelopedreflexivenessasanewcapability.EmergentfeedbackloopsThe growing adoption of social media within the organizations studied created new andoften unexpected forms of interaction and feedback. These new forms of managed andunmoderatedcommunicationunderpinnedchangesacrossallorganizations.Forexample,theCEOandCFOorXchangingheldregularonlinechatswiththeemployees.Thequestionsposedbyemployeeswereunmoderatedandrespondedto“onthespot”bythem. This feedback feature was associated with a new culture of interaction betweensenior leadersandemployees,andboth thecontentand interactionweregraduallymoredeeply embedded in the culture andprocesses of Xchanging asmentionedby theGlobalHeadofInternalCommunications

"Wehadsomelivechatswhichwe’dneverbeenabletodobefore,soitwasreallyinteresting.We’dgettheCEOandtheCFOdoingalivechat,sopeoplecouldliterallypile in and ask them questions. They were very open questions that they wereexpected to respond to on the spot, so a completely different culture, and reallyshowingpeoplethattheCsuiteareaccessible."

Feedback was also becoming part of the way of working among employees through theadoptionof socialnetworking, instantmessagingandactivity streaming.Forexample, theDigital Communications Manager at Philips highlighted how social media stimulatedfeedbackandconnectedemployees

"It’stotallysynchronizedsoeveryfollowerofmewillseemyintranetarticle.Allmyfollowers will be notified that I’ve been interactive with this article. This is reallyinteresting because normally I would never go to the IT intranet but now I followpeople from IT and they interact with IT intranet articles and then I go to the ITintranetaswelltoreadthosearticlesbecausetheyareofinteresttome"


10

Socialmediachannelsdeliveredwideranddeeperuseoffeedbackwithintheorganizationsstudiedandwasacentralthemeinouranalysis.Insomeorganizationsfeedbackfromsocialmediachannelsdevelopedmorenaturallywithinthecultureoftheorganizations,suchasinthecaseofPhilipswheretheculturewasperceivedtobeopenandrelaxed.Whileinotherorganizations we noticed the need to follow a more formal approach to managing newfeedback from social media. For example, HSBC created a structured programme, calledExchangetostimulatefeedbackandengagementwithemployeesandmorespecificallyto“put employees in a position where they have the freedom and the trust to talk aboutanything they want to talk about.” Feedback from employees under this program wasinitiallypushed through the formal structuresof thebank toensure itwas listened-tobyseniormanagers.However,expectationsaboutusingfeedbackbecamequicklyaccepted,ascapturedbytheGlobalHeadofInsight,CultureandGroupCEOcommunicationsatHSBC:

"In the early days I had to be really prescriptive and very, very strict actuallywithleaders.BecauseIthinktheyhadforgottentheartoflisteningandthey’dforgottentheartoflisteningwithintent.”

Amore complex formof feedbackwas anonymous posting. Philips’ socialmedia channelcalled “Office World” allowed totally anonymous feedback. This feedback featurecomplementedotherformsofsocialmediafeedback,butallowedemployeestoraiseissuesthey otherwise would not without the safety of anonymous posting. The DigitalCommunicationManageratPhilipsdescribedtheuseofthisservice:

"… everybody with a Philips’ email address can sign up for employee feedbackanonymously,whereyour identity isprotected…people share their feedbackaboutcertainthings…you’refreetosaywhatyoureallythink."

Theabovehighlightstheemergenceofnewformsofsocialmediafeedbackandnovelformsof interaction, which were associated with new forms of participation increasinglystructurallyembeddedinformalstructuresoforganizations.Nextweexploreemergenceofinherenttensionsarisingalongthenewemergentfeedbackloops.TensionsfromintegratingopenfeedbackinextantstructuresandnormsAs identified previously, the adoption of social media can bring unprecedented levels offeedbackanddialoguetoorganizational life. Italsosetsnewexpectationsofparticipationand engagement in increasingly important and strategic aspects of the organization.Tensions emerge when the structures of organizations are then in opposition to theseexpectations of participation. We conceptualize four types of tensions experienced byorganizations as they become more transparent and inclusive in their approach tostrategizing(Whittingtonetal.,2011)usingsocialmedia.Tension1ischaracterizedbyfrustrationwhenorganizationsadoptsocialmediabutlimititsreach(inclusiveness)andvisibilityofcontent(transparency).Userfrustrationensueswhenthey start to engage with social media and feedback features but realize that theircontributions are moderated and/or restricted in terms of visibility. Imbalance anddissatisfactionemergewiththeexclusionofcertaingroupsorwheretheprocessandabilityforemployeestocontributeistoorigidlycontrolled.Thisleadstoinconsistenciesbetween


11

established norms and new expectations of open participation is captured by the GlobalHeadofInternalCommunicationsatXchanging:

"Youknow,youcan’tgivepeopleavoiceandthentellthem‘well,actually,youcanhavea voicebutonly if you saywhatwewant you to say’. If you’regoing togivethemavoice, thenyouhave to listen. I thinkwe’vegiven themthevoiceandnowwe’relearningtolisten,butactivelylisten,andthat’sthedifference…”

She further reflectedon themorestructural implicationsof this tension.Employeeswerehappy to engage with organizational discourse but expected in return their voice andcontribution to be acknowledged and purposefully considered. This is illustrated in thefollowingquote

“Aspeoplegetbraverandstart toaskquestionsof thesenior leadersaroundtheirstrategy, and they’re being held accountable to it now, so people are saying, youknow,‘Yousaidyou’ddeliverthere.Whereareweandwhathaveyoudeliveredandwhyhaven’twedeliveredthat?’Thequestionsarereallyupfront.”

Typically,organizationsreacttothisbytakingstridestowardsincreasingeitherinclusivenessand/or transparency. However, although this signifies that the effects of tension 1 arealleviated,itcanproducedifferenttensions.Tension2ischaracterizedbygreaterinclusivenessbutstilllowtransparencyofstrategyonsocial media. Typically, this means that greater inclusiveness provides conditions for allemployees to contribute and participate in organizational discourse through socialmediatools.However,frustrationemergesfromthissituationwhenmanagementfailstoallowtheexpression of conflicting views or are seen to not be engaging with employee views.Dissatisfaction emerges from limited ability to engage with strategy content and havemeaningfulconversationsdespitethewideraccess.WenoticedthistensioninVirginMediaforexamplewithasignificantemphasisonbuildingalargeandinclusiveonlinecommunitybutwherethefocuswasonspecifictopicsandoperationaldiscussions.Alternatively,organizationsmayfocusonaddingtransparencyviasocialmediatools,ratherthanonwideningreach.ThisischaracterizedasTension3wherecontentandinformationisopenandvisiblebut restricted to someclosedgroups. This inevitably causesdivisionandinstability.Forexample,knowledgeworkersmayhavemoreaccesstodigitalchannelsthantheircolleagues infactoryorretailoutlets.ThistypeoftensionwasvisibleforexampleatIBMbetweentheagilesubunitbasedattheIBMStudioandtherestofIBM,thefollowingquotebytheCIOLeadillustrateshowthesetensionswerefeltbytheIBMStudioteam.

"They’re trying tocreate this fastmovingenvironment…butbasedstillaroundthisvery slow moving, large organization. So there’s this little hub that’s working toproduce quickly, but still... this huge process-orientated, monolithic organizationbehindit,thatkindoffightswiththatidealIthink."

Organizationsnaturallyrespondtothesetensionsbyrebalancingtheirinternalstructurestoaccommodateemployeefeedback.Theymaythenreachastatewheretheyhaveenabled


12

widereach(inclusiveness)andrichnessofcontent(transparency)sothatallemployeescanopenlyinteractwitheachotherandcontent.However,ouranalysissuggeststhatthisstateis perhaps the most precarious of all because the expectations of participation are thehighest but the organization has not yet developed appropriate structural conditions toincorporatethefeedbackcreatedanduseitmeaningfullyandstrategically.Wecharacterizethisstageastension4.Tension 4 therefore is also associated with tensions between the open nature of socialmedia and established more closed and hierarchical structures. For example, whereemployees contribute openly to strategic discourse, but senior executives still retaindiscretionandcontrolofwhatandhowemployeescontributetodiscoursearoundstrategycontent.Thusadisconnectmayarisebetweenopenfeedbackandthestructuressupportingthe strategic development of the organization. Tension 4 is fostered by the existence ofopen communication, but without the associated redistribution of power and rewardstructures.Whittingtonetal.(2011,p.535)alludetothiswhentheysaythat

“Inclusion and transparency do not extend to the transfer of decision rights withregard to strategy: openness refers to the sharing of views, information andknowledge,notademocracyofactualdecisionmaking.”

Tension4 isacorollaryofthiswhenorganizationsadoptsocialmediatoopenstrategizingbutdonotbecomemoreparticipativestructurallyintheirstrategyprocesses.TheDirectorof Technical Services at Virgin Media reflected on how far they had gone to be bothinclusiveandtransparentbutwerestillunderserioustensionstoadjustmorestructurallytothenewenvironment

“We'restillonthatjourney,thatshifttoreallytrulytransform.It'salmostaleapoffaithtoreallymovefrom[being]reactive,tobeproactive…it'saboutrelationships.It'squitealongleadtimetogetintothattrulytransformedspace"

Figure 2 illustrates these tensions using a two dimensional diagram where each axisrepresentsexpansionofeither inclusivenessortransparency.Thefourresultingquadrantscapturethetypesoftensionsdescribedabove.


13

Figure2:Tensionsarisingfromincreasinginclusivenessandtransparencythroughsocialmedia

Theeffectof these tensions in the long-runwas thatorganizationsadjusted their internalstructures to accommodate the new forms of interaction and feedback. Variousadjustments were visible at various levels in the organizations studied but they had incommon increased appreciation of the participative nature of social media. We nowconceptualizetheseadjustmentsasthedevelopmentofanewcapabilityofreflexiveness.ReflexivenessasaneworganizationalcapabilityReflexivenessemergedasanewcapabilityformanagingthetensionsdescribedabove.Wesuggest that the development of reflexiveness enabled organizations to successfullyintegrate emergent feedback from social media and harness advantages arising fromengagement in open strategy initiatives.We characterize three stages in the progressiontowards gaining this new capability: 1) feedback accepted as valuable resource; 2)developingformalizedstructurestosustainopenbehavioursand;3)strategicintegration.The first stage arises fromstructural adjustments in response to tension1, specifically tothe initialemergenceof feedback features inorganizations thatsocialmediaprovide.Themaincharacteristicofthisstageistheinternalrecognitionthatfeedbackfromsocialmediaas a new resource that has value, needs attention and requires management. Thisrecognition of feedback as useful for organizations was seen to develop gradually, forexampletheGlobalHeadofInternalCommunicationsatXchangingsaidthatthey

“…hadtheplatformforprobablyayearandahalf,and I thinkwe’vegrownmoreconfidentandtrustingintheplatform.”

Another characteristic of increased reflexiveness is the stronger signals to encourage andstimulateopenandunmoderatedfeedbackfromvariousareasoforganizations.Thistypeoffeedback through social media is inherently emergent and unprompted, so outside thecontrol of senior management. This often marks a departure from managed feedback


14

through employee surveys for example, and so it requires new approaches. At HSBC theExchange programmewas created to signal and create anenvironment for employees toprovideunrestrictedfeedback.As social media provide organizations with greater understanding and new methods formanagingthistypeoffeedback,newformalizedstructuresemergetomonitor,measureandreportfeedbacktoexecutives,ascapturedinthisquotefromHSBC:

“Everybusinessandeveryfunctionhead, includingtheheadofcommunicationsforthatarea,getsareporteveryquarter,andthenthereisaglobalHSBConeandthatistheonethatgetspresentedattheBoard.”asreportedbytheGlobalHeadofInsight,CultureandGroupCEOcommunications.

Stageoneencompassesthe initialphasesof theorganizationbecomingawareof thenewresource it has in termsof information and feedback, followedby structural adjustmentswhereorganizationalmembersaremadeawareofthevalueofsocialmediaandtheneedtomanagethenewlevelsoffeedbackitprovides.Stagetwoindevelopingreflexivenessisaresponsetotensions2and3andischaracterizedbythegreaterlevelofformalityinmanagingandusingfeedbackinternally.Oftenthiswasaccompanied by formalized techniques to monitor the use of social media for sharing,collaborating and social networking for example. Some organizations then used thisinformation as part of the reward structures for employees, so that they were directlyincentivized to engage with feedback features with strategic significance in theirorganizations.Oneexample fromPhilipswas in identifying influentialparticipants throughadvancedsocialnetworkanalysisasdescribedbytheDigitalCommunicationsManagerwhosaidthatthey

"Lookattheinfluence,sohowmanygroupmembersandwhoarereallyinfluential,who have the highest response rate, the most active members. This is a reallypopulartoolforthegroupadmins."

Other organizations had also developed advanced systems tomeasure engagement withfeedbackfeatures.AtAtosforexampletheGroupChiefChangeOfficereferredtoanewandsophisticated system of stars that helped management to manage content andcontributions.

“Wehavearobustautomatedtoolthatcapturesthenumberofreaders,thenumberof reactions, the number of posts, the number of peoplewho subscribe anda fewother parameters… this gives you the number of stars.We believe that the valuebroughtbythiscommunityisreflectedbythesestars.”

However,someorganizationsmovedfurthertoestablishalinkbetweenthesemetricsandtheinternalrewardstructuresforemployees.Forexample,atPhilipstheyissuedaregularreport that assessed progress towards volume and quality of employee feedback andinteraction,whichwasassociatedwithinternalbonusstructures,thefollowingquote.


15

“A lotof those functionshave in theirobjectives to increaseadoptionof the socialplatform...iftheymeettheirobjectivestheyreceiveabonus…."

Theserewardstructuresalsoworkedtorewardemployeecontributionsthroughasystemofbadgeswhichwere seen as currency for influence. The Digital CommunicationsManagerdescribedthesignificanceofthebadgesinprofiledevelopmentatPhilips.

"Everybodycangiveitaway.Forexample,ifIgotomyprofileyouwillseemythings.YouseehowmanyIreceived.Ireceivedonebrandbadge,threeeagertowin.Ialsoreceived fifty-one great contributions and two verymeaningful innovations. I havefour inspire and one operational excellence. One I deliver results and twelve takeownershipandthirty-oneteamuptoexcel.Thissayssomethingaboutmypersonalityofcourse"

However, there were organizations that demonstrated more advanced characteristics ofreflexivenesswherefeedbackwasfullyincorporatedintothenormsandwaysofworkinginthe organization, but also began to shape deeper aspects of the organization such astrustingattitudesandbehaviour,leadershipstylesandculture.Thesearethecharacteristicsofstagethreeinthedevelopmentofreflexivenesswhichemergeinresponsetotension4.In these organizations feedback was not just integral to the normal functioning but wasstartingtoshapeandinfluencemanagementstyles,governancestructuresandstrategy.Linking feedback from social media with organizational strategy is a sign of a reflexiveorganization where strategy is more than a statement from senior management, to beinstead seen tobe a sharedeffort and co-created. This aspiration for theorganization todeveloptheabilitytousefeedbackfromsocialmediaiscapturedbythefollowingquotebytheGlobalHeadofInternalCommunicationsatXchanging.

“…hopefullyslowly,bitbybit,we’llgettoapointwhere,youknow,we’llgetpeopleinfluencing the strategy to come. Right now they [employees] are just reacting towhatthey’rebeingtold,butastheirconfidencebuildsandastheir leadersseethatactuallyouremployeesaren’tchildrenandtheydohavesomevaluetoadd,thenitcouldinfluencethingsgoingforward.…they[leadershipteam]wouldsayokay,thesepeople [employees]areaskingquestions foragood reason,and theyhave things Ineed to start thinking about a little bitmorewhen I’m setting strategies. How I’llanswerthose,andifIcan’tanswerthem,thenlet’sthinkaboutitandconsideralltheotheroptionsandmaybeaskpeople’sopinions."

Anintegralpartofthisprocesstowardsbecomingmorereflexiveatstrategiclevelisashiftin leadership style andmanagement approaches. Leaders that operatemore consistentlywiththeparticipativenatureoftheenvironmentdevelopedrecognitionandnotorietyandbecome more influential, and ultimately rise in the organization. This shift to formmanagement approaches more consistent with the participative nature of a reflexiveorganization iscapturedbythefollowingquotefromHSBCstatinghowsomeleaders“gotIt”whileothersstruggledwiththisnewapproach:


16

“Therewasanothercohortofleaderswhojustfoundthiseffortless.Itwasalmostlikeadifferentbreedofleaderthathadbeenquietupuntilthispoint.Whowouldhavethoughtyouarenowsomebodywhohasfollowersratherthanworkersbecauseyoulistenedtothem?”

Further, we noted that this shift in leadership was reinforced as part of the Exchangeprogrammediscussedpreviously,andotherstructuralchangesatHSBC.Thefollowingquotecaptures this link between leadership and a wider movement towards a more reflexiveenvironmentinthebank.

“Antonio [CEO of HSBC] runs a blog called Connected. People have no problemspeaking up on his blog. That’s got nothing to dowith socialmedia though and Ithink this iswherepeopleget thingsconfused.That is todowithAntonio.Theonethingthathe’smadecrystalclearaspartofhisleadershipisthatnooneisevergoingto be told to shut up. I think there has been something that has subliminallyhappened throughExchange. Like Ihaveheardpeople say, ‘I’mpartofa speakupculture, I’m going to voice this, and I’m not going to wait for Exchange’. That’sexactly what should be happening, people should feel that they can knock onpeople’sdoorsandsaythings.”

SimilarevidenceofprogressionwasevidentatGrantThorntonwheretheriseofanewCEO,SachaRomanovitch,was linkedtohergrowingprofileandability toengageand influencethroughsocialmedia.TheSeniorManagerforNationalCommunicationsatGrantThorntoncharacterizedher as“the verydefinitionof a social CEO”. It is significant that asCEO shestated “I don’t want closed leadership conversations happening via email. I want themhappeningoutinthebigwideworld”.Thiswasconsistentwithherviewofthemanagementoftheorganizationwhichshesaidwouldlike“thevastmajorityofthemanagementofthefirmtobedoneinanopenforum”.Allthismarksatrajectorytowardsgainingcapabilitiestoappropriateandengagewithfeedbackatastrategiclevel.Insomeorganizationsadeeperimplicationofthiswastheeffectongovernance.AtAtostheadoptionofsocialmediaandfeedbackwasfar-reachingandtheorganizationwasthereforeconsidering strategic implications of this. For them this had deep implications andrepresentedatransformationasreflectedbytheGroupChiefChangeOfficer.

“Wearenowatastepwhereweclearlyseewhatthebenefitswillbewhenwemoveinto a new model of organization. Not new tools, not a new hierarchy functionsupporting thisway ofwork.Whenwe really create amore agile organization, inwhich co-exists structurally a social organization and a classical hierarchicalorganization,andwemakeallthesefloweffortlessly,seamlessly.Andofcoursenow,wearespeakingofatransformation,whichstartswiththeseniormanagersandintoalltheorganization.”

Other organizations, recognizing the complexity of this transformation, took a differentapproachinreconcilingthedistinctnatureofthetwomodesofworkingandorganizing.Forexample,IBMcreatedaseparateunitcalled“IBMStudio”tooperateaccordingtothemore


17

“agile” and employee centred approach. By separating the Studio from the rest of theorganizationIBMexpectedtocreateanenvironmentthatgives

“…individualsmorefreereignandautonomyonwhattheychoosetoworkon,andhowthey’regoingtodoit.Thewaythattheteamworks,thetoolsthattheyusetooperateon,andtheneventhingsthattheydoisverymuchopentothem.”

Thevisionwas“thattherestofIBMcatchesupwithusandoperatesinamodelclosertothewaywe’reworking”asstatedbytheCIOLeadofIBMStudio.Atthecoreofthisnewwayofworking was a view of individuals as active participants of the environment where theyoperate.ItissignificantthatIBMcreatedthisasaseparateentitybecauseasstated“Ifyoutry to change thewaysofworkingand the culture toagilebutat the same timekeeponmeasuring people, rewarding people, and using exactly the same metrics you havepreviously,thatwillfail.”Thecross-organizationanalysisabovehighlightshowtheprocessofintroducingsocialtoolsstimulatesemployeeparticipationand feedback,but also leads to tensionsand capabilitydevelopment, ultimately shifting deeper structures of organizations towards moreparticipative environments where in some cases gives employees greater degree ofinfluenceoverorganizationalstrategy.ConceptualisingreflexivenessAcross the cases analyzed we saw that the use of social media created conditions forindividuals to contribute and engage in meaningful and significant aspects of theirorganizations’ strategies. Social media provided a platform for appropriating strategiccontent, but also to shape that content by commenting and contributing to ongoingdiscourse in their organization. The feedback systems embedded in socialmedia createdstructural conditions for individuals to become active participants of their ownorganizational settings. This is consistent with the view that strategic action involvesindividuals thinking and acting reflexively and is enabled by structural conditions in theorganizational environment. A reflexive environment creates equal opportunities to allconstituents for participation and engaging in feedback. Our analysis shows that theadoption of social media contributes to the creation of an environment and contextualconditions for reflexive behavior, which over time evolves to become a property of theorganizationassuggestedbyGorlietal.(2015,p.4):

“Reflection thus becomes a collective ability to question the assumptions thatunderpintheorganizingprocess.Althoughindividualreflectionisnoteliminated,theattention paid to the organizational level stresses the impossibility of isolatingreflection from the social and organizational micro-contexts in which courses ofactionareproducedandreproduced.”

AlthoughGorlietal.(2015,p.3)donotmentionsocialmediatheyindicatethatthesesameproperties or affordances of becomingmore reflexive and open ultimately contribute to“staffinanorganizationtobecomeauthorsoftheirownworksettings.”Asstrategypracticeshiftsfromtherealmsofaprivilegedgrouptobecomerecognizedasasharedresource,it


18

builds a capability that “consists of a constant process of interrogation whereby wereconstruct shared meanings with others” (Gorli et al., 2015, p. 5). Reflexiveness givesagency to employees to become actively included and derive meaning from moretransparentinformation.Thus, reflexiveness contributes a third dimension to Whittington et al.’s model of openstrategizingasrepresentedinFigure3,therebyextendingtheopen-strategyliterature.Thisaddeddimensioncapturesthedynamicnatureoftheprocessofopeningupstrategicworkwithinorganizations.

Figure3:Tensionsbetweenopensocialmediaparticipationandextantstructuresasdriversfor“reflexiveness”capabilities

This third dimension, as represented in Figure 3, injects the need for organizationalcapabilities to an otherwise static typology. In practical terms it represents the capabilitycreatedbyorganizationstobettermanagefeedbackfromindividuals(asaresultofamoretransparent and inclusive environment) and use it positively to collectively shape thestrategicdirectionoftheorganization.Thisisconsistentwiththeviewofstrategyasaformof reflexive behaviour that draws on learned “institutionalised patterns and recipes foraction”but“requiresreflexivity inordertoselecttheappropriatemoveattheappropriatetime”(WilsonandJarzabkowski,2004,p.15).Thissituatedandcontextualviewofstrategysuggeststhatsocialmediaanditsfeedbackfeaturesgivesindividualstheabilityto“assumeresponsibility for, and constructively contribute to thegoals of the organizations towhichthey belong” (Gorli et al., 2015, p.1), they call this “practical reflexivity”. As seen in theanalysisofthecasematerialtheembeddingofsocialmedia inthewaysofworkingoftheorganization created conditions for the emergence of feedback, and in some cases theactive participation in significant aspects of the organizations. In this respect their usecreatesthe“reflexive”environmentthatGorlietal.(2015)referstointheirstudy.We find that,while socialmedia creates inclusiveness (by involvingmore individuals) andtransparency (wider availability of information) through the embedding of social media


19

features in organizations, reflexiveness is the ability to manage and appropriate thisfeedbackstructurallytoshapethedirectionoftheorganization.Wethereforesuggestthatincreasing inclusiveness and transparency in strategy (Whittington et al., 2011) throughsocialmedia in organizations stimulates the corresponding development of reflexiveness.Theserelationshipsare illustrated in figure3,whereopenstrategy isaprogressionacrossthethreedimensionalaxis.Next,wetakeamoredynamicviewofthisprocess,toconceptualizetheprogressionfromtensionstowardsthedevelopmentofneworganizationalcapabilities,ultimatelyresultinginnewbutmoreconsistentstructuralarrangementsintheorganizations.DynamicviewoftensionsandcapabilitiesdevelopmentWecharacterizedthedevelopmentofreflexivenessinthreestages,asagradualprocessofcapability development as organizations adjust structurally to better manage emergentfeedback from social media platforms. We noted how the normative structures shiftedtowardsopencommunicationandemergentfeedback,graduallyalsoshiftingpracticesandbehaviours. Figure 4 captures this process. It provides a dynamic and longitudinalrepresentationoftheprocessbywhichsocialmediacreatesconditionstotriggertensionsthat encourage the development of new capabilities to better manage and integrateemergentfeedback inthefunctioningoforganizations.Atthecoreofthisprocessarethetensionscharacterizedearlier inFigure2.Asdiscussed,thesetensionstriggeradjustmentsto the organization, rendering it more capable of managing and integrating emergentfeedbackwithinitsworkenvironment.Figure4showstwojuxtaposinglayers.Thefirstlayershows the progressionwith the tensions identified. The second layer represents the newcapabilitiesdevelopedinresponsetothetensions.

Figure4:Dynamicandmulti-levelrepresentationofthedynamiceffectsoftensionsfromsocialmediause,andthe

emergenceofreflexivenessasaneworganizationalcapability

This longitudinalconceptualizationof thedynamics thatpushorganizations towardsmoreopenpracticesinstrategizing,andultimatelytheirorganizingwasforexampleseenatAtos,


20

aprocessthatwasreferredtoasa“thirdrevolution”.ButtherewerealsoinstancesofthesedeepereffectsattheIBMStudiowhichoperatedunderadistinctmandatefromtherestofIBMtocreateconditions foramorecollectiveandagilegovernancemodel.Thismandategaveemployeesahigherdegreeofindependenceandownershipoftheirwork,whichmadeitmuchcloser toa“startup thanamonolithicandsometimes facelessorganization”. Thismeantthatindividualsperformedtheirworkwithlimitedsupervisionbutstillaspartofanorganized structure of on-going peer evaluation, reinforcing collectively agreedcontributions,whileatthesameabandoningwhatisperceivedbythegrouptobeinferiororlowpriority.Also,atGrantThorntondeeperchangestorewardstructuresandworkingarrangementswere noticed, reflecting amove towards a governancemodel that ismorecentredon individuals asownersof theirwork, andbetter able to shape thedirectionoftheir organizations. Our study indicates that as organizations gain new capabilities tomanageand integrateemergent feedback in theirstructures theybecomemorereflexive,andconsequentlycreateconditionsfororganizationalauthorship,orinthewordsofGorlietal.(2015,p.5)they:

“… encourage social actors to see themselves as agents and as authors of theorganizationsandinstitutionsinwhichtheylive.Inotherwords,practicalreflexivityis closely linked to the pursuit, enhancement and development of organizationalauthorship.”

It is the subtlebutgradual shift inagency towards individualsas “stewards”of theirownpaths that cumulatively shift the structures of the organization towardswhat Hernandez(2012,p.175)describesas“stewardship”.Shearguesthatindividualscan“collectivelycreatefeedback loop processes to systematically shift organizational governance from agencytowardsstewardship”(p.172).While Hernandez does not empirically explore these feedback loop processes, our studyofferspracticalexamplesofhowparticipativesocialmediamayoffersuchdynamicsintheworkplace, ultimately leading to what Hernandez suggests is a culture and normativeenvironmentwhere“anaffectivesenseofconnectionwithotherspromptsindividualstofeelcompelled to positively influence the collective” (p. 175). Moving towards a stewardshipmodel reflects this progression towards giving individuals greater ability to participate inorganizational life so that they increasingly feel owners of “strategy”, as more broadlydefinedpreviously.Itisthisabilitytoshapetheenvironmentthatemployeesoperateinthatwerefertoasstewardship-basedorganizing,asconceptualizedbyHernandez(2012).ThesedeeperchangesrepresentwhatHernandez(2012,p.172)remarkas“feedbackloopprocessessystematicallyshiftorganizationalgovernancefromagencytowardsstewardship”and represents the aggregated effect of new capability development. This reflects theprogression from organizing strategic activity around processes that optimize employeeactivity around predetermined goals towards an approach that is more centred onindividualsasactiveparticipantsoftheirownworkenvironments.ConcludingremarksThisstudyhasexaminedtheroleofsocialmediaasorganizationsembraceopenstrategy.Wecontendthatsocialmediahavethepotentialtoincreaseinclusivenessandtransparency


21

astwoessentialpropertiesofopenstrategizing.However,thesecaninitiallycreatetensionsandinconsistenciesandsoarenotsufficientinthemselvesforopenness.Ourstudysuggeststhat organizations (including their leadership) respond to these tensions and learn tomanage and integrate feedback from social media in their internal structures. Wecharacterizethisasanewcapabilityofreflexiveness requiredfororganizationstobecomemoreopen.Thekeyengineforthedevelopmentofreflexivenessarisefromthetensionsfoundbetweenlatent ways of undertaking strategy and the new levels of inclusive, transparent andparticipativeworkenabledby socialmedia.Weargue that theuseof socialmediawithinorganizationsgeneratesemergentfeedbackloopsthatcreatenewandhigherexpectationsand norms of participation, ultimatelymoving organizations to becomemore centred onindividuals’ abilities to contribute to organizational life. We suggest that adoptingparticipative practices and becoming more reflexive create conditions for organizationalauthorship,andashifttowardsstewardshipgovernance(Hernandez,2012)wherestrategyisincreasinglyjointlyownedbyorganizationalactorswhofeelresponsibleforthecollective,rather than disengaged employees operating by following norms and procedures. Wesuggest that theadoptionof socialmediaand theembeddingofparticipativepractices inthe structure of organizations creates conditions for strategy to become shared andcollectively owned; one which positions many more organizational actors as strategypractitioners.The interlinked nature of these areas reemphasizes the importance of forging a jointInformation Systems – Strategy agenda for research and practice (Whittington, 2014). Asdiscussed,thereismuchpotentialforsocialmediatorevolutionizestrategizingasanopenactivitywhere stakeholders participate or take ownership of strategy content.Our study,thus, contributes to the literature on open strategy by advancing our understanding ofemergentnewarrangementsinwhoisinvolvedinstrategy(practitioners)usingwhattools(artefacts) and how it is performed (praxis) ultimately detecting the emergence of newprofessionalpracticesinthisfield(Whittington,2006,Whittingtonetal.,2011,Whittingtonetal.,2006).WealsocontributetotheInformationSystemsStrategyliteraturebyreflectingon the roleofand impactof ICTs suchas socialmedia inorganizational strategizing (e.g.,Chen et al., 2010, Galliers, 2011, Marabelli and Galliers, 2016), and their role in thedevelopment of new organizational capabilities (e.g., Peppard and Ward, 2004) but inparticular to thegrowing literaturethatconsiderssocialmediause in theworkplace (e.g.,Huangetal.,2013,Leonardietal.2013).Wealsocontendthatthisstudyinformspractice:the more we know of the tensions and capabilities arising from social media andparticipative platforms in theworkplace, the better placed seniormanagementwill be inleveragingthesenewphenomena.The study raises several important interrelatedchallenges for future research, includingareinvigorationoftheroleplayedbyemployeesindefiningstrategycontent.Further,andaswehaveargued, the featuresof socialmedia,coupledwith reflexiveagentsandmodifiedgovernance structures, render both the practice and content of strategy contested andnegotiable. A further strand of investigation could thus focus on the interrelationshipbetween social media and governance – an important, yet underexplored, themewithinopenstrategy.Itisclearfromourfindingsthatparticipationplayedanimportantroleinthe


22

emergenceoffeedbackloopsandengagingemployees.However,anunresolvedfeatureofour study concerns precisely how employees should participate in strategy using socialmedia; participation from rendering strategy inclusive and visible may be perfunctorydespiteorganizationalactorsappearingtotakeownershipofdecisionmaking.BibliographyAral, S.,C.DellarocasandD.Godes (2013). "SocialMediaandBusinessTransformation:A

FrameworkforResearch."InformationSystemsResearch24(1):3-13.

Baptista,J.(2009)."Institutionalisationasaprocessofinterplaybetweentechnologyanditsorganizationalcontextofuse."JournalofInformationTechnology24(4):305-319.

Bechky (2011). “Making Organizational Theory Work: Institutions, Occupations, andNegotiatedOrders.”OrganizationScience22(5):1157-1167

Bruhn,M.andG.M.Ahlers(2013).IntegratedCommunicationintheInnovationProcess:AnApproachtoIntegratedInnovationCommunication.StrategyandCommunicationforInnovation,Springer:139-160.

Chen,D.Q.,M.Mocker,D.S.PrestonandA.Teubner(2010)."Informationsystemsstrategy:reconceptualization,measurement,andimplications."MISQuarterly34(2):233-238.

Cunliffe,A.L.(2002)."ReflexiveDialogicalPracticeinManagementLearning."ManagementLearning33(1):35-61.

Collier,N.,F.FishwickandS.W.Floyd(2004)."Managerialinvolvementandperceptionsofstrategyprocess."LongRangePlanning37(1):67-83.

Cotton, J. L., D. A. Vollrath, K. L. Froggatt, M. L. Lengnickhall and K. R. Jennings (1988)."Employee participation - diverse forms and different outcomes." Academy ofManagementReview13(1):8-22.

Denyer,D.,E.ParryandP.Flowers(2011)."“Social”,“Open”and“Participative”?ExploringPersonal ExperiencesandOrganizational Effectsof Enterprise2.0Use." LongRangePlanning44(5):375-396

Dobusch, L.andG.Mueller-Seitz (2012). StrategyasapracticeofThousands.AcademyofManagementBestPaperProceedings.

Doz,Y.L.andM.Kosonen(2008)."TheDynamicsofStrategicAgility:Nokia'sRollercoasterExperience."CaliforniaManagementReview50(3):95-118.

Doz, Y. L. andM. Kosonen (2008). Fast Strategy: How strategic agility will help you stayaheadofthegame,PearsonEducation.

Easterby-Smith,M.,R.ThorpeandP.R.Jackson(2012).ManagementResearch,Sage.

Floyd, S. W. and B. Wooldridge (1994). "Dinosaurs or dynamos? Recognizing middlemanagement'sstrategicrole."AcademyofManagementExecutive8(4):47-57.

Friesl, M. and R. Silberzahn (2012). "Challenges in Establishing Global Collaboration:Temporal,StrategicandOperationalDecoupling."LongRangePlanning45:160-181.


23

Galliers,R.D.(1995)."AManifestoforInformationManagementResearch."BritishJournalofManagement6:S45-S52.

Galliers,R.D.(2011).FurtherDevelopmentsinInformationSystemsStrategizing:Unpackingthe Concept. The Oxford handbook of management information systems: criticalperspectives and new directions. R. Galliers and W. Currie (eds.). Oxford, OxfordUniversityPress:329-345.

Galliers, R. D., S. L. Jarvenpaa, Y. E. Chan and K. Lyytinen (2012). "Strategic informationsystems:reflectionsandprospectives."TheJournalofStrategicInformationSystems21(2):85-90.

Gorli,M.,D.NicoliniandG.Scaratti(2015)."Reflexivityinpractice:Toolsandconditionsfordevelopingorganizationalauthorship."HumanRelations68(8):1347-1375.

Haefliger,S.,E.Monteiro,D.ForayandG.vonKrogh(2011)."SocialSoftwareandStrategy."LongRangePlanning44(5-6):297-316.

Hambrick, D. C. (2007). "Upper echelons theory: An update." Academy of ManagementReview32(2):334-343.

Helsper, E. J. and R. Eynon (2009). "Digital natives: where is the evidence?" BritishEducationalResearchJournal36(3):503-520.

Hernandez, M. (2012). "Toward an understanding of the psychology of stewardship."AcademyofManagementReview37(2):172-193.

Hienerth,C.,P.KeinzandC.Lettl(2011)."ExploringtheNatureandImplementationProcessofUser-CentricBusinessModels."LongRangePlanning44(5–6):344-374.

Huang, J., J. Baptista and R. D. Galliers (2013). "Reconceptualizing rhetorical practices inorganizations:Theimpactofsocialmediaoninternalcommunications."Information&Management50(2-3):112-124.

Huang, J., J. Baptista and S. Newell (2015). "Communicational ambidexterity as a newcapabilitytomanagesocialmediacommunicationwithinorganizations."TheJournalofStrategicInformationSystems24(2):49-64.

Jarzabkowski, P. and S. Kaplan (2014). "Strategy tools-in-use: A framework forunderstanding “technologies of rationality” in practice." Strategic ManagementJournal.

Kaplan, A. and M. Haenlein (2010). "Users of the world, unite! The challenges andopportunitiesofSocialMedia."BusinessHorizons53:59-68.

Kietzmann,J.H.,K.Hermkens,I.P.McCarthyandB.S.Silvestre(2011)."Socialmedia?Getserious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media." BusinessHorizons54(3):241-251.

Leonardi,P.M.(2014)."SocialMedia,KnowledgeSharing,andInnovation:TowardaTheoryofCommunicationVisibility."InformationSystemsResearch25(4):796-816.

Leonardi,P.M.,M.HuysmanandC.Steinfield(2013)."EnterpriseSocialMedia:Definition,History,andProspectsfortheStudyofSocialTechnologiesinOrganizations."JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication19(1):1-19.

Majchrzak, A., C.Wagner and D. Yates (2013). "The impact of shaping on knowledge for


24

organizationalimprovementwithwikis."MISQuarterly37(2):455-A412.

Mantere, S. and E. Vaara, 2008. On the problem of participation in strategy: A criticaldiscursiveperspective.OrganizationScience,19(2):341-358.

Marabelli,M.andR.Galliers(2016).“AReflectiononInformationSystemsStrategizing:TheRoleofPowerandEverydayPractices”, InformationSystemsJournal, (forthcoming)DOI:10.1111/isj.12110.

Matzler, K., J. Fuller, K. Hutter, J. Hautz and D. Stieger (2014). Open Strategy - A NewStrategy Paradigm? Strategie and Leadership. K. M. e. al., Springer FachmedienWisbaden.

Morton, J., A.Wilson and L. Cooke, 2015. Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing in OpenStrategyInitiatives.In:iFutures2015.SheffieldiSchoolConferences.

Peppard, J. and J. Ward (2004). "Beyond strategic information systems: towards an IScapability."TheJournalofStrategicInformationSystems13:167-194.

Pettigrew,A.M.(1987)."Contextandactioninthetransformationofthefirm."JournalofManagementStudies24(6):649-670.

Pettigrew, A. M. (1992). "On studying managerial elites." Strategic Management Journal13(S2):163-182.

Razmerita,L.,K.KirchnerandT.Nabeth(2014)."SocialMediainOrganizations:LeveragingPersonalandCollectiveKnowledgeProcesses."JournalofOrganizationalComputingandElectronicCommerce24(1):74-93.

Schatzki,T.R. (2002).Thesiteof thesocial:aphilosophicalaccountof theconstitutionofsociallifeandchange.UniversityPark,PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.

Schoenberg, N. E. and H. Ravdal (2000). "Using vignettes in awareness and attitudinalresearch."InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology3(1):63-74.

Seidl, D. and R.Whittington (2014). "Enlarging the Strategy-as-Practice Research Agenda:TowardsTallerandFlatterOntologies."OrganizationStudies.

Spagnoletti,P.,A.RescaandØ.Sæbø(2015)."Designforsocialmediaengagement:Insightsfrom elderly care assistance." The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 24(2):128-145.

Stebbins,R.A.(2001).Exploratoryresearchinthesocialsciences,Sage.

Stieger,D.,K.Matzler,S.ChatterjeeandF.Ladstaetter-Fussenegger(2012)."DemocratizingStrategy: How Crowdsourcing Can Be Used for Strategy Dialogues." CaliforniaManagementReview54(4):44-68.

Sutanto,J.,C.-H.Tan,B.BattistiniandC.W.Phang(2011)."Emergent leadership invirtualcollaboration settings: A social network analysis approach." Long Range Planning44(5):421-439.

Tams, S., V. Grover and J. Thatcher (2014). "Modern information technology in an oldworkforce: Toward a strategic research agenda." The Journal of StrategicInformationSystems23(4):284-304.

Treem, J. and P. Leonardi (2012). "Social Media Use in Organizations: Exploring the


25

Affordances of Visibility, Editability, Persistence, and Association." CommunicationYearbook36:143-189.

Vaast, E. and E. Kaganer (2013). "Social media affordances and governance in theworkplace: An examination of organizational policies." Journal of Computer-MediatedCommunication19(1):78-101.

Vodanovich,S.,D.SundaramandM.Myers(2010)."ResearchCommentary-DigitalNativesandUbiquitousInformationSystems."InformationSystemsResearch21(4):711-723.

VonKrogh,G.(2012)."Howdoessocialsoftwarechangeknowledgemanagement?Towarda strategic research agenda." The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 21(2):154-164.

Whittington, R. (2006). "Completing the practice turn in strategy research." OrganizationStudies27(5):613-634.

Whittington, R. (2014). "Information systems strategy and strategy-as-practice: A jointagenda."TheJournalofStrategicInformationSystems23(1):87-91.

Whittington,R., L. Cailluet andB. Yakis-Douglas (2011). "Opening Strategy: Evolutionof aPrecariousProfession."BritishJournalofManagement22(3):531-544.

Whittington, R., E. Molloy, M. Mayer and A. Smith (2006). "Practices ofstrategising/organising: broadening strategywork and skills." Long Range Planning39(6):615-629.

Wilson,D.C.andP.Jarzabkowski(2004)."Thinkingandactingstrategically:Newchallengesforinterrogatingstrategy."EuropeanManagementReview1(1):14-20.

Wooldridge, B. and S. W. Floyd (1990). "The strategy process, middle managementinvolvement,andorganizationalperformance."StrategicManagementJournal11(3):231-241.

Documents

warwick.ac.uk/lib-publicationswrap.warwick.ac.uk/79733/7/WRAP_LRP social media and open... · 2016. 9. 8. · Social media features Examples: strategic use Effects on strategic activity