Research suggests that, if removed, managerial hierarchy needs to be replaced with "something else". This paper applies a sensemaking perspective to explore how managerial hierarchy can be replaced. Based on a longitudinal case study of an organization designed to avoid managerial hierarchy, we demonstrate how the lack of hierarchy opened up a sensemaking gap around the autonomy-alignment tension which was addressed in different ways over time. Our case shows how the organization gradually reverted to the hierarchical structures it initially intended to oppose. We argue that a sensemaking perspective can explain the rationale to this development and propose that less-hierarchical organizations need a broad range of context-specific, alternative sensemaking devices connecting to local experience to effectively guide action.

In the face of today’s world of uncertainty, many organizations aim for more flexible and less hierarchical forms of organizing. Relatedly, management scholars and consultants have increasingly taken stock of the agile concept, advocating a scaling of agile teams and their maverick practices to the organizational level. Considering four common challenges with organization-level agile in practice, we outline an alternative trajectory for agile in the context of organization design. This alternative trajectory builds on the notion of growing (rather than scaling) agile and is rooted in the Manifesto for Agile Software Development as the philosophical anchor of the agile movement. In this paper, we describe the journey of a Swedish software company along which we highlight the discrepancies in assumptions about uncertainty and people between manifesto agile and large-scale agile. Based on our case analysis, we propose a Manifesto for Agile Organization Development with four associated values, bringing the original Agile Manifesto and its mindset of trusting people to solve problems together locally to the organizational level. We further articulate five principles for agile organization development and illustrate through our case how bringing them to life can help address the common challenges of organization-level agile. Rather than a blueprint, our manifesto, and its associated values and principles are intended as an alternative basis for developing and discussing what manifesto agile means at an organizational level and how it can be turned into practice(s) in local contexts.

This article examines Donald Schön's positioning of reflective practice in relation to design. In particular, the focus is directed toward his presentation of the acting–thinking relationship. Questioning this presentation we turn to the work of philosopher John Dewey, who acted as one of Schön's key inspirational sources. Here, we consider Dewey's presentation of thought-in-action, artistry, and importantly, habit. We argue that a wider referencing of this material—most especially the art–habits relationship—holds the potential to expand the Schönian presentation of design, providing the field with a more nuanced modeling of what it means both to design and to become a designer.

This article introduces the special issue on Design Pragmatism and Design Inquiry by drawing attention to the key design-orientated principles found in pragmatism, detailing the content of the articles and, from this, mapping the direction for future research.

Design thinking is based on designers' creative ways of working and is defined as a formal method for creative problem solving aimed at fostering innovation by harnessing "the designer's sensibility and methods." The basic premise is that design "thinking" can be extracted and separated from the situated practice of designing in the studio. This approach has given rise to a widely accepted nomenclature for describing design which has improved communication between designers and managers, leading to massive interest in adoption of design thinking in management settings. However, due to a widespread implicit cognitivism in the literature, scholars find it difficult to explain the cultural and experiential qualities of design thinking and it tends to be presented as a fundamentally cognitive, problem-solving activity. We argue that these cognitivist tendencies preclude proper attention to and theorization of designers' creative practice. We contend that the absence of a theory of practice prevents a deeper understanding of the contribution of design thinking to innovation, loses sight of the sensibility on which it relies, and hampers realization of the promise of design thinking. We develop an alternative theoretical perspective, grounded in a pragmatist theory of practice and the studio culture from which designers' creative practice developed. This theoretical perspective allows design thinking to be understood as sensemaking, foregrounds imagination and improvisation as its core activities, and explains how sensibility is developed and nurtured. We review the design thinking literature through this pragmatist lens and discuss the implications for theory and practice of conceptualizing design thinking as sensemaking.

Abstract In this chapter we explore how mind-body techniques derived from arts-based pedagogy can inform process research. Following William James and John Dewey, our inquiry starts from direct experience as we aspire to ‘learn to see’ the forest for the trees both literally and figuratively. We develop a set-up to help guide intention, attention, and connection, and experiment with and reflect on body-mind techniques. As we respond to our sensory and imaginative encounter with a forest, we find out how our integrated awareness in the present moment helps us learn to notice differently. We enact a shift in perspective from an entitative view that focuses on the trees, to a processual view, which focuses on the forest as a living organism. This shift enables a different relationship to the forest, helping us notice the continuity, relationality, and temporality of the forest. These insights open up new possibilities for us as processual researchers.

Project success is an issue of intense interest to both scholars and project management practitioners, and yet its theoretical elaboration continues to be somewhat under-developed. Responding to this gap between theory and practice, we tease out the dynamics of the design(ing) duality in relation to project management. Our argument is informed by the contrasting management theories of Taylor (design) and Follett (designing), and it is illustrated by drawing on two different experiences of a large Initial Training Network project funded by the European Commission. We suggest that a comprehensive appreciation of project success requires an interweaving of the substantive and processual understandings reflected in the design(ing) duality.

This full day workshop intends to explore design experiments to create a deeper understanding of the underpinning mindsets, epistemological assumptions and their implications as well as possibilities within the context of academic research. The participants will contribute with their experiences of conducting design experiments in a variety of settings and contexts. During the workshop the participants will give and get feedback on the experiments presented and explored, and participate in the discussion and development of (new) principles for design experiments in academic research. One aim of the workshop is to develop a conceptual map that categorizes the various design experiments based on their epistemological assumptions and practical implications for design practice as well as academic research.

Design Management JournalVolume 4, Issue 1 p. 7-19 Design Thinking as Knowledge Work: Epistemological Foundations and Practical Implications Anna Rylander, Anna RylanderSearch for more papers by this author Anna Rylander, Anna RylanderSearch for more papers by this author First published: 29 December 2009 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1942-5074.2009.00003.xCitations: 53Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume4, Issue1October 2009Pages 7-19 RelatedInformation

The current interest in organizational culture, identity, image and reputation and in organizational discourse points towards the pressure on contemporary organizations to focus attention on the symbolic dimensions of their activities. The phenomenon of branding, while originally portrayed as a marketing tool, can also be understood as an exercise in management of meaning. Branding does not only inform external stakeholders, such as customers and investors, about the values of the organization. It also potentially instructs and directs organizational members. In this sense, branding can be viewed as a management and leadership practice. Drawing on a longitudinal case study, this paper illustrates how these practices are played out in the particular context of a management consulting firm and explores the relationship between branding and organizational identity and identification. The study highlights the shortcomings of the strategic marketing perspective on brands and the need for further empirical studies that examine the role of branding from different perspectives and in different empirical contexts.

In the physical world, products and services are traditionally distinguished from each other on the basis of tangibility and intangibility; indeed, services are often described as intangible products. In the virtual world of the fixed and mobile Internet, however, this distinction is no longer appropriate: both products and services become intangible. This is essentially because the Internet is not merely a technology but represents an entirely new medium for conducting business, a fact that was overlooked by many of the early entrants into this space. This medium is defined by information and fundamentally different from the physical space where business has traditionally been transacted. Consequently, the concept of products and services requires study. In this paper we focus on business-to-consumer (B2C) markets and explore consumer products and services in cyberspace, distinguishing them along a number of dimensions.

The concept of a knowledge intensive firm (KIF) is seemingly an important category of organizations that is being increasingly studied. The underlying inference from the literature is that the KIF ...

In the physical world, products and services are traditionally distinguished from each other on the basis of tangibility and intangibility; indeed, services are often described as intangible products. This distinction has governed the design and management of both. In the virtual world of the fixed and mobile Internet, however, this distinction is no longer appropriate: both products and services become intangible. This is essentially due to the fact that the Internet is not merely a technology but represents an entirely new medium for conducting business, a fact that has been overlooked by many of the early entrants into this space. This medium is defined by information and fundamentally different from the physical space where business has traditionally been conducted. Consequently, products and services require a different conceptualisation. In this paper we focus on business-to-consumer (B2C) markets and explore consumer products and services in cyberspace.

For most knowledge‐intensive companies at present, the business environment where they compete is complex, characterized by rapid change and uncertainty. Employees and other intangible resources (i.e. intellectual capital) generally represent the most critical resources in the value creation process. Crafting strategy in such contexts is not helped by conventional models and tools of strategy. The assumptions which underpin many of them do not hold in the present competitive environment, making them at best irrelevant, but at worst leading to the development of strategies that can put the success of a company in jeopardy. New metaphors for describing these companies and their competitive realities, as well as tools for navigating in them, are required, if the strategy discipline is to remain relevant for practitioners. In this paper, it is suggested that the intellectual capital perspective can provide a bridge to the practical application of a vision‐ and values‐based strategy through the notion of embodying strategy in organizational resources. A conceptualization of strategy, that links strategy, identity and intellectual capital, more suitable to knowledge‐intensive companies competing in uncertain environments, is introduced and described.

Abstract Over the past decade, there has been a rapidly growing realization of the importance of intangible assets and intellectual capital as a whole in the operation of organizations. With this realization has come the need to manage companies in a new way and to measure their performance in a new way. A sharp illustration of the differences in the managerial attitudes of the industrial and postindustrial ages (Sveiby 1997) has been in the appreciation that people can no longer be considered to be costs on the profit and loss statement but are, in fact, assets to be invested in, developed, and deployed carefully. The effect of changes in business on national life has not gone unnoticed either, with governments taking a keen interest in economic development in the “new economy” (UKDTI 1998a, 1998b). In the markets, the effects of the new economy have also been startling. In early 2000 in the United States, 5% (i.e., about $1 trillion) of company capitalization is accounted for by the dotcom companies, and this valuation is not built upon profit-yielding sales or physical capital but on “stories” (Lightman 2000). In the United Kingdom the trend is similar and is expected to continue over the next decade. It is estimated that over 25 % of companies that can be expected to be listed in the FTSE 100 in 2010 do not exist at present, and these will be dominated by the dotcoms and hi-techs (DTI 2000). Elsewhere it is estimated that over half of the market capitalization of all companies is due to intangible assets.