IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v31y2013i6p613-625.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A matter of foresight: How practices enable (or impede) organizational foresightfulness

Author

Listed:
  • Sarpong, David
  • Maclean, Mairi
  • Davies, Clayton

Abstract

Emphasizing practice as the site of the emergence of strategic foresight, this paper draws on the contemporary turn to ‘practice’ to examine how the organizing practices of members positioned further down the organization may facilitate (or constrain) their ability to enact foresightful actions. Adopting a case-based approach, three software companies engaged in four new product development projects served as our empirical research sites. With emphasis placed on their innovation teams’ everyday practices, data for the empirical inquiry were collected using the qualitative methods of semistructured interviews, ethnographical observation and project archival documents. Explicating the observed foresightful practices and their underlying activities under the general rubrics of organizing architecture and social co-ordination, we identified over-compartmentalization, over-determinism and (in)congruence-of-values as quintessentially embedded organizing practices, that constitutively enable (or impede) organizational foresightfulness. We conclude the paper with a discussion of the managerial implications and some limitations of our research.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarpong, David & Maclean, Mairi & Davies, Clayton, 2013. "A matter of foresight: How practices enable (or impede) organizational foresightfulness," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 613-625.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:31:y:2013:i:6:p:613-625
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2013.03.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026323731300042X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2013.03.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    2. Haridimos Tsoukas & Robert Chia, 2002. "On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 567-582, October.
    3. Davies, Martin F., 1987. "Reduction of hindsight bias by restoration of foresight perspective: Effectiveness of foresight-encoding and hindsight-retrieval strategies," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 50-68, August.
    4. Dery, David, 1983. "Decision-making, problem-solving and organizational learning," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 321-328.
    5. Morecroft, John DW, 1983. "System dynamics: Portraying bounded rationality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 131-142.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sarpong, David & Eyres, Eve & Batsakis, Georgios, 2019. "Narrating the future: A distentive capability approach to strategic foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 105-114.
    2. Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Zhang, Hongxu, 2014. "What can we learn from failed international companies?," MPRA Paper 63591, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2014.
    3. Bezjian, James & Stoyanova, Veselina & McKiernan, Peter & MacKay, R. Bradley, 2020. "Synthesizing scenario planning and industry recipes through an analysis of the Hollywood film industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    4. Marinković, Milan & Al-Tabbaa, Omar & Khan, Zaheer & Wu, Jie, 2022. "Corporate foresight: A systematic literature review and future research trajectories," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 289-311.
    5. Shima Lashgari & Jurgita Antuchevičienė & Alireza Delavari & Omid Kheirkhah, 2014. "Using QSPM and WASPAS methods for determining outsourcing strategies," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 729-743, September.
    6. Tapinos, E. & Pyper, N., 2018. "Forward looking analysis: Investigating how individuals ‘do’ foresight and make sense of the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 292-302.
    7. Sarpong, David & AbdRazak, Azley & Alexander, Elizabeth & Meissner, Dirk, 2017. "Organizing practices of university, industry and government that facilitate (or impede) the transition to a hybrid triple helix model of innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 142-152.
    8. Hussain, M. & Tapinos, E. & Knight, L., 2017. "Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 160-177.
    9. Marek Jemala & Ľubomír Jemala, 2014. "Key Sub-Disciplines and Methods of Technology Planning in Dynamic Environments," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2014(2), pages 71-84.
    10. Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Zhang, Hongxu, 2015. "Business failure research," MPRA Paper 67848, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Sarpong, David & Maclean, Mairi, 2016. "Cultivating strategic foresight in practise: A relational perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2812-2820.
    12. Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph, 2015. "A unified framework for incorporating decision-.making into explanations of business failure," MPRA Paper 65896, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Burt, George & Mackay, David J. & van der Heijden, Kees & Verheijdt, Charlotte, 2017. "Openness disposition: Readiness characteristics that influence participant benefits from scenario planning as strategic conversation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 16-25.
    2. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Robert A. Burgelman, 2018. "An Ecosystem‐Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1278-1316, November.
    3. Shahzad Khurram & Sandra Charreire Petit, 2017. "Investigating the Dynamics of Stakeholder Salience: What Happens When the Institutional Change Process Unfolds?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 485-515, July.
    4. Gary T. Burke & Carola Wolf, 2021. "The Process Affordances of Strategy Toolmaking when Addressing Wicked Problems," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 359-388, March.
    5. Hagedoorn, John & Carayannis, Elias & Alexander, Jeffrey, 2001. "Strange bedfellows in the personal computer industry: technology alliances between IBM and Apple," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 837-849, May.
    6. Guiette, Alain & Vandenbempt, Koen, 2017. "Change managerialism and micro-processes of sensemaking during change implementation," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 65-81.
    7. Marina Fiedler & Isabell Welpe & Arnold Picot, 2010. "Understanding Radical Change: An Examination of Management Departments in German-speaking Universities," management revue. Socio-economic Studies, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 21(2), pages 111-134.
    8. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    9. Benjamin Cole & Preeta Banerjee, 2013. "Morally Contentious Technology-Field Intersections: The Case of Biotechnology in the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 555-574, July.
    10. Risien, Julie, 2019. "Curators and sojourners in learning networks: Practices for transformation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 71-79.
    11. Michelacci, Claudio & Schivardi, Fabiano, 2020. "Are they all like Bill, Mark, and Steve? The education premium for entrepreneurs," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    12. Lise Arena & Anthony Hussenot, 2021. "From Innovations at Work to Innovative Ways of Conceptualizing Organization: A Brief History of Organization Studies," Post-Print hal-03290300, HAL.
    13. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    14. Andersson, Martin & Noseleit, Florian, 2008. "Start-Ups and Employment Growth - Evidence from Sweden," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 155, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    15. Dragos Vieru & Pierre-Emmanuel Arduin, 2016. "Sharing Knowledge in a Shared Services Center Context: An Explanatory Case Study of the Dialectics of Formal and Informal Practices," Post-Print hal-01458031, HAL.
    16. Lorino, Philippe & Mourey, Damien & Schmidt, Géraldine, 2017. "Goffman's theory of frames and situated meaning-making in performance reviews. The case of a category management approach in the French retail sector," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 32-49.
    17. Domagoj Hru?ka, 0000. "Leading with Purpose: Framework for Recontextualizing Organizations Through Metaphors," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 11313240, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    18. Rui Baptista & Vítor Escária & Paulo Madruga, 2008. "Entrepreneurship, regional development and job creation: the case of Portugal," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 49-58, January.
    19. Francesco Virili & Cristiano Ghiringhelli, 2021. "Uncertainty and Emerging Tensions in Organizational Change: A Grounded Theory Study on the Orchestrating Role of the Change Leader," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, April.
    20. Pistorius, C. W. I. & Utterback, J. M., 1997. "Multi-mode interaction among technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 67-84, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:31:y:2013:i:6:p:613-625. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.