Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-20T19:55:39.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 35 - Strategy as Practice and Routine Dynamics

from Part IV - Related Communities of Thought

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2021

By
David Seidl ,
Benjamin Grossmann-Hensel  and
Paula Jarzabkowski
Edited by
Martha S. Feldman ,
Brian T. Pentland ,
Luciana D'Adderio ,
Katharina Dittrich ,
Claus Rerup  and
David Seidl
Martha S. Feldman
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine
Brian T. Pentland
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Luciana D'Adderio
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Katharina Dittrich
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
Claus Rerup
Affiliation:
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management
David Seidl
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
Get access

Summary

In this chapter, we compare Routine Dynamics and Strategy as Practice based on an extended literature review. Routine Dynamics and Strategy as Practice are distinctive communities of thought in organization studies that exhibit a number of striking parallels: both subscribe to the overall “practice turn” in the social sciences, seek to bring the human being back in, and focus predominantly on the level of action involved in organizational routines and strategy, respectively. In our comparison of similarities and differences of Routine Dynamics and Strategy as Practice, we focus on their empirical domains, underlying theoretical perspectives, research frameworks, levels of analysis, and empirical methods employed. Based on that, we discuss what Routine Dynamics can learn from Strategy as Practice and vice versa. We conclude with some general reflections on the future relation between the two research communities and develop an agenda for future research that facilitates cross-fertilizations between the two research communities.

Keywords

Routinesroutine dynamicsStrategy as Practicetheoretical perspectivesresearch domainsresearch communitymethodologylevel of analysis
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics , pp. 481 - 500
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aggerholm, H. K. and Asmuß, B. (2016). When ‘good’ is not good enough: Power Dynamics and Performative Aspects of Organizational Routines. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 140–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C. S. (2006). Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: Positioning data to contribute to theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(8), 819–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aroles, J. and McLean, C. (2015). Becoming, assemblages and intensities: Re-exploring rules and routines. In de Vaujany, F.-X., Mitev, N., Lanzara, G. F. and Mukherjee, A., eds., Materiality, Rules and Regulation: New Trends in Management and Organization Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 177–194.Google Scholar
Balogun, J., Best, K. and Lê, J. (2015). Selling the object of strategy: How frontline workers realize strategy through their daily work. Organization Studies, 36(10), 1285–1313.Google Scholar
Balogun, J., Huff, A. S. and Johnson, P. (2003). Three responses to the methodological challenges of studying strategizing. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 197–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balogun, J. and Johnson, G. (2004). Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 523–549.Google Scholar
Balogun, J. and Johnson, G. (2005) From intended strategies to unintended outcomes: The impact of change recipient sensemaking. Organization Studies, 26(11), 1573–1601.Google Scholar
Bapuji, H., Hora, M. and Saeed, A. M. (2012). Intentions, intermediaries, and interaction: Examining the emergence of routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1586–1607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bapuji, H., Hora, M., Saeed, A. and Turner, S. (2019). How understanding-based redesign influences the pattern of actions and effectiveness of routines. Journal of Management, 45(5), 2132–2162.Google Scholar
Becker, M. C. (2005). The concept of routines: Some clarifications. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29(2), 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertels, S., Howard-Grenville, J. and Pek, S. (2016). Cultural molding, shielding, and shoring at Oilco: The role of culture in the integration of routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 573–593.Google Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D. and Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: On the regeneration of Camp Poplar Grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315–332.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice (Original printing). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. D. and Thompson, E. R. (2013). A narrative approach to strategy-as-practice. Business History, 55(7), 1143–1167.Google Scholar
Bucher, S. and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell-Hunt, C. (2007). Complexity in practice. Human Relations, 60(5), 793–823.Google Scholar
Champenois, C., Lefebvre, V. and Ronteau, S. (2020). Entrepreneurship as practice: Systematic literature review of a nascent field. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 32(3–4), 281–312.Google Scholar
Chia, R. and Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 27(5), 635–655.Google Scholar
Chia, R. and MacKay, B. (2007). Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: Discovering strategy in the logic of practice. Human Relations, 60(1), 217–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christianson, M. K., Farkas, M. T., Sutcliffe, K. M. and Weick, K. E. (2009). Learning through rare events: Significant interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum. Organization Science, 20(5), 846–860.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D. (2007). Reading Dewey: Reflections on the study of routine. Organization Studies, 28(5), 773–786.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L. (2015). Using ethnography in strategy-as-practice research. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 431–446.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2008). The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5), 769–789.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(2), 197–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 1325–1350.Google Scholar
Dameron, S., Lê, J. K. and LeBaron, C. (2015). Materializing strategy and strategizing materials: Why matter matters. British Journal of Management, 26, S1–S12.Google Scholar
Danner-Schröder, A. and Geiger, D. (2016). Unravelling the motor of patterning work: Toward an understanding of the microlevel dynamics of standardization and flexibility. Organization Science, 27(3), 633–658.Google Scholar
Denis, J.-L., Langley, A. and Rouleau, L. (2007). Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames. Human Relations, 60(1), 179–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dionysiou, D. and Tsoukas, H. (2013). Understanding the (re) creation of routines from within: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 181–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016). Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change. Organization Science, 27(3), 678–697.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018). Emerging Intentionality in Routine Dynamics: A Pragmatist View. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111–138.Google Scholar
Ericson, M., Melin, L. and Popp, A. (2015). Studying strategy as practice through historical methods. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 506–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ezzamel, M. and Willmott, H. (2010). Strategy and strategizing: A poststructuralist perspective. In Baum, J. a. C. and Lampel, J., eds., Globalization of Strategy Research, vol. 27. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, pp. 75–109.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2003). A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(4), 727–752.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2015). Theory of routine dynamics and connections to strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 317–330.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present, and future. In Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Orlikowski, W. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on Routine Dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505–513.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Rafaeli, A. (2002). Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3), 309–331.Google Scholar
Fenton, C. and Langley, A. (2011). Strategy as practice and the narrative turn. Organization Studies, 32(9), 1171–1196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, D., Deng, X. and Bai, B. (2014). The emergence of organizational routines from habitual behaviours of multiple actors: An agent-based simulation study. Journal of Simulation, 8(3), 215–230.Google Scholar
Gao, D., Squazzoni, F. and Deng, X. (2018). The role of cognitive artifacts in organizational routine dynamics: An agent-based model. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 24(4), 473–499.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A. and Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880–1895.Google Scholar
Gherardi, S. (2009). Introduction: The critical power of the ‘practice lens’. Management Learning, 40(2), 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Goh, K. T. and Pentland, B. T. (2019). From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 1901–1929.Google Scholar
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E. (2015). Introduction: What is strategy as practice? In Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
Grand, S. (2016). Routines, Strategies And Management: Engaging For Recurrent Creation ‘At The Edge’. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Grand, S. and Bartl, D. (2019). Making new strategic moves possible: How executive management enacts strategizing routines to strengthen entrepreneurial agility. Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation, 61, 123–151.Google Scholar
Healey, M. P., Hodgkinson, G. P., Whittington, R. and Johnson, G. (2015). Off to plan or out to lunch? Relationships between design characteristics and outcomes of strategy workshops. British Journal of Management, 26(3), 507–528.Google Scholar
Hendry, J. (2000). Strategic decision making, discourse, and strategy as social practice. Journal of Management Studies, 37(7), 955–978.Google Scholar
Hendry, J. and Seidl, D. (2003). The structure and significance of strategic episodes: Social systems theory and the routine practices of strategic change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 175–196.Google Scholar
Herepath, A. (2014). In the loop: A realist approach to structure and agency in the practice of strategy. Organization Studies, 35(6), 857–879.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. and Rerup, C. (2017). A process perspective on organizational routines. In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Process Organizational Studies. London: SAGE, pp. 323–339.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategic practices: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 23–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2005). Strategy as Practice: An Activity-Based Approach. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J. and Seidl, D. (2007). Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1), 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Bednarek, R. (2018). Toward a social practice theory of relational competing. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 794–829.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Kaplan, S. (2015). Strategy tools-in-use: A Framework For Understanding ‘Technologies Of Rationality’ In Practice. Strategic Management Journal, 36(4), 537–558.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Kaplan, S., Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2016). On the risk of studying practices in isolation: Linking what, who, and how in strategy research. Strategic Organization, 14(3), 248–259.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Le, J. and Balogun, J. (2019). The social practice of coevolving strategy and structure to realize mandated radical change. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 850–882.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. A., Lê, J. K. and Feldman, M. S. (2012). Toward a theory of coordinating: Creating coordinating mechanisms in practice. Organization Science, 23(4), 907–927.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Seidl, D. (2008). The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy. Organization Studies, 29(11), 1391–1426.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Spee, A. P. (2009). Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(1), 69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Whittington, R. (2008). A strategy-as-practice approach to strategy research and education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 282–286.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L. and Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as Practice: Research Directions and Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Melin, L. and Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity-based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 3–22.Google Scholar
Johnson, G., Prashantham, S., Floyd, S. W. and Bourque, N. (2010). The ritualization of strategy workshops. Organization Studies, 31(12), 1589–1618.Google Scholar
Knights, D. and Morgan, G. (1991). Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: A critique. Organization Studies, 12(2), 251–273.Google Scholar
Korkman, O., Storbacka, K. and Harald, B. (2010). Practices as markets: Value co-creation in e-invoicing. Australasian Marketing Journal, 18(4), 236–247.Google Scholar
Kornberger, M. and Clegg, S. (2011). Strategy as performative practice: The case of Sydney 2030. Strategic Organization, 9(2), 136–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozica, A., Kaiser, S. and Friesl, M. (2014). Organizational routines: Conventions as a source of change and stability. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66(3), 334–356.Google Scholar
Kremser, W. and Schreyögg, G. (2016). The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27(3), 698–721.Google Scholar
Laamanen, T., Reuter, E., Schimmer, M., Ueberbacher, F. and Guerra, X. W. (2015). Quantitative methods in strategy-as-practice research. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 520–544.Google Scholar
Langley, A. (2015). The ongoing challenge of developing cumulative knowledge about strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D. and Rouleau, L., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor- Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lê, J. and Spee, P. (2015). The role of materiality in the practice of strategy. In Golsorkhi, D., Seidl, D., Vaara, E. and Rouleau, L., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 582–597.Google Scholar
LeBaron, C., Christianson, M. K., Garrett, L. and Ilan, R. (2016). Coordinating flexible performance during everyday work: An ethnomethodological study of handoff routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 514–534.Google Scholar
Luedicke, M. K., Husemann, K. C., Furnari, S. and Ladstaetter, F. (2017). Radically open strategizing: How the premium cola collective takes open strategy to the extreme. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 371–384.Google Scholar
Luoma, J., Laamanen, T. and Lamberg, J. A. (forthcoming). Toward a routine-based view of interfirm rivalry. Strategic Organization.Google Scholar
Mantere, S. (2013). What is organizational strategy? A language-based view. Journal of Management Studies, 50(8), 1408–1426.Google Scholar
Mantere, S. and Vaara, E. (2008). On the problem of participation in strategy: A critical discursive perspective. Organization Science, 19(2), 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miettinen, R., Samra-Fredericks, D. and Yanow, D. (2009). Re-turn to practice: An introductory essay. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1309–1327.Google Scholar
Miller, K. D., Pentland, B. T. and Choi, S. (2012). Dynamics of performing and remembering organizational routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1536–1558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutch, A. (2016). Bringing history into the study of routines: Contextualizing performance. Organization Studies, 37(8), 1171–1188.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parmigiani, A. and Howard-Grenville, J. (2011). Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 413–453.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 793–815.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2007). Narrative networks: Patterns of technology and organization. Organization Science, 18(5), 781–795.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Feldman, M. S. (2008). Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Information and Organization, 18(4), 235–250.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Feldman, M. S., Becker, M. C. and Liu, P. (2012). Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1484–1508.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T. and Hillison, D. (2010). Comparing organizational routines as recurrent patterns of action. Organization Studies, 31(7), 917–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T. and Hillison, D. (2011). The (n) ever-changing world: Stability and change in organizational routines. Organization Science, 22(6), 1369–1383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pentland, B. T. and Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 484–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raff, D. M. and Scranton, P. (2017). The Emergence of Routines: Entrepreneurship, Organization, and Business History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rasche, A. and Chia, R. (2009). Researching strategy practices: A genealogical social theory perspective. Organization Studies, 30(7), 713–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.Google Scholar
Rerup, C. and Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 577–610.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. (2009). The contribution of event-sequence analysis to the study of organizational routines. In Becker, M. C. and Lazaric, N., eds., Organizational Routines: Advancing Empirical Research. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 68–102.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2017). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170–209.Google Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2003). Strategizing as lived experience and strategists’ everyday efforts to shape strategic direction. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 141–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W. and Smith, W. K. (2019). Quo vadis, paradox? Centripetal and centrifugal forces in theory development. Strategic Organization, 17(1), 107–119.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K. and Savigny, E. von, eds. (2001). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. (2007). General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: A systemic-discursive perspective. Organization Studies, 28(2), 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidl, D. and Werle, F. (2018). Inter‐organizational sensemaking in the face of strategic meta‐problems: Requisite variety and dynamics of participation. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 830–858.Google Scholar
Seidl, D. and Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 1407–1421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactions. Organization Science, 27(3), 722–738.Google Scholar
Smets, M., Greenwood, R. and Lounsbury, M. (2015). An institutional perspective on strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 283–300.Google Scholar
Smets, M., Morris, T. and Greenwood, R. (2012). From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 877–904.Google Scholar
Sonenshein, S. (2016). Routines and creativity: From dualism to duality. Organization Science, 27(3), 739–758.Google Scholar
Spee, P., Jarzabkowski, P. and Smets, M. (2016). The influence of routine interdependence and skillful accomplishment on the coordination of standardizing and customizing. Organization Science, 27(3), 759–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, J., Robertson, M. and Newell, S. (2016). Dynamic in-capabilities: The paradox of routines in the ecology of complex innovation. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (2015). Making strategy: Meta-theoretical insights from Heideggerian phenomenology. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 58–77.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. (2012). A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change. Organization Science, 23(1), 24–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. P. (2018). Watching the clock: Action timing, patterning, and routine performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1253–1280.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., Kleymann, B. and Seristö, H. (2004). Strategies as discursive constructions: The case of airline alliances. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 1–35.Google Scholar
Vaara, E. and Lamberg, J.-A. (2016). Taking historical embeddedness seriously: Three historical approaches to advance strategy process and practice research. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 633–657.Google Scholar
Vaara, E., Sorsa, V. and Pälli, P. (2010). On the force potential of strategy texts: A critical discourse analysis of a strategic plan and its power effects in a city organization. Organization, 17(6), 685–702.Google Scholar
Vaara, E. and Whittington, R. (2012). Strategy-as-practice: Taking social practices seriously. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 285–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Aaken, D., Kirsch, W. and Seidl, D. (2015). Gesetzmäßigkeiten in der Unternehmensführung?–Unternehmensführung als das Verfügen über Notwendigkeiten. Die Unternehmung, 69(1), 54–66.Google Scholar
Werle, F. and Seidl, D. (2015). The layered materiality of strategizing: Epistemic objects and the interplay between material artefacts in the exploration of strategic topics. British Journal of Management, 26, S67–S89.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731–735.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613–634.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy practice and strategy process: Family differences and the sociological eye. Organization Studies, 28(10), 1575–1586.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2011). The practice turn in organization research: Towards a disciplined transdisciplinarity. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(3), 183–186.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2015). Giddens, structuration theory and strategy as practice. In Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D. and Vaara, E., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 145–164.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (2019). Opening Strategy: Professional Strategists and Practice Change, 1960 to Today. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Jarzabkowski, P., Mayer, M., Mounoud, E., Nahapiet, J., et al. (2003). Taking strategy seriously: Responsibility and reform for an important social practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 396–409.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Yakis‐Douglas, B. and Ahn, K. (2016). Cheap talk? Strategy presentations as a form of chief executive officer impression management. Strategic Management Journal, 37(12), 2413–2424.Google Scholar
Whittington, R., Yakis-Douglas, B., Ahn, K. and Cailluet, L. (2017). Strategic planners in more turbulent times: The changing job characteristics of strategy professionals, 1960–2003. Long Range Planning, 50(1), 108–119.Google Scholar
Yamauchi, Y. and Hiramoto, T. (2016). Reflexivity of routines: An ethnomethodological investigation of initial service encounters at sushi bars in Tokyo. Organization Studies, 37(10), 1473–1499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J. and Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955–972.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×