Strategy-making increasingly depends on integrating knowledge across functional and hierarchical boundaries, often through processes mediated by material artifacts. While research shows that the material properties of individual artifacts partly shape what can be known, discussed, and decided, less is known about knowledge integration during moments when a structured strategy tool moves it through materially distinct artifacts. Drawing on an in-depth study of two strategic roadmapping projects in a large organization, we examine how transitions between artifact forms shape knowledge integration. We identify four artifact types, ephemeral, interim, stabilized, and analytical, and the transitions between materially distinct forms during which knowledge is reconstituted rather than simply carried forward. Across both projects, we identify three dynamics during these transitions: selection, surfacing, and reconfiguration. We contribute by identifying reconstitution as a knowledge-integration mechanism and by offering a tools-in-process account of how structured strategy tools work through transitions between artifact forms over time.

Based on a study of a postgraduate course, we show how-through the processes associated with applying a strategic tool-students developed the understandings that allowed them to span disciplinary and organizational boundaries. We reveal how the students, working in groups and acting as consultants to industry clients, developed specific boundary-spanning skills learned through observation and practice (mimesis), and reflection. Namely, (1) working with others with different disciplines to establish roles and processes to operate successfully as a group, (2) establishing productive communication with other groups of diverse disciplines as part of project processes, (3) eliciting information from other groups of diverse specialists, and (4) managing an inclusive discussion process among other groups of diverse specialists for agreement. We discuss how these insights about mimesis and reflection add to pedagogic debates about instruction for interdisciplinary and inter-organizational learning and the implications for management education and development practice.

Purpose This study aims to test the propositions of socialization resources theory, specifically focusing on social capital resources and their prediction of proximal (relational learning) and distal (job satisfaction and intent to quit) outcomes. The authors include the job design characteristic of job autonomy as a moderator of these associations. Design/methodology/approach Cheung et al.'s (2021) four-step SEM procedure was used to test our mediation, moderation and moderated mediation hypotheses. The sample consisted of newcomers (N = 175) measured at two time points. Findings The results support the proposed model. Relational learning mediates the associations between social capital resources and outcomes; the utility of these social capital resources is stronger when job autonomy is lower. Practical implications Organizations can use social capital resources to reduce newcomers' uncertainty during socialization, facilitating learning and positive outcomes. Organizations should also carefully consider the amount of job autonomy they grant to newcomers, as too much can be detrimental. Originality/value Despite the acknowledged importance of workplace resources and relationships, few studies have focused on social resources provided during socialization. Moreover, job design is rarely included in socialization research, despite its influence on workplace processes. Thus, this study provides information about two novel areas of investigation: socially-oriented socialization resources and the impact of job autonomy.

Roadmapping is a workshop-based tool that draws on diverse sets of knowledge from individuals to create shared knowledge in the form of a roadmap for navigating a strategic landscape. Theoretical explanations of knowledge sharing in roadmapping are underdeveloped, with only limited insights into the relationship between individuals’ knowledge (at the micro level) and organizational-level outcomes. This article uses a multilevel lens to examine knowledge sharing in two roadmapping projects empirically. The analysis identifies five mechanisms that enable or constrain knowledge sharing in roadmapping: 1) a neutral space for face-to-face interactions between individuals that fosters; 2) a positive disposition of individuals to share knowledge, together with (3) imperatives to trigger knowledge contributions. Individually shared knowledge is transformed into collective outcomes via 4) shared meanings and 5) shared commitment to act. The analysis also highlights the important role of the facilitator in relation to knowledge sharing. This article extends the theoretical understanding of individuals and their behavior in the roadmapping process. In doing so, it demonstrates how microlevel actions relate to macrolevel outcomes. Practitioners, including facilitators, can use these insights as they design and deliver roadmapping interventions to improve knowledge sharing and, therefore, better strategic outcomes.

The socialization of an employee into a new role provides an opportunity for both the newcomer and the organization to maintain or improve current practices. In this paper, integrating ideas from a practice-based perspective with the concept of sensemaking, we draw on the multiple perspectives provided by the newcomer and relevant colleagues to examine the socialization process. Using an inductive, qualitative approach analyzing 21 semi-structured interviews in six organizations with four types of participant-newcomers, and their respective coworkers, managers, and human resource (HR) representatives-our findings shed light on how interactions between newcomers and these three types of insiders influence newcomers' enactment of organizational practices. Specifically, newcomers who received greater sensegiving from insiders had, in turn, more opportunity to sensetest their nascent understandings, and to sensemake using these inputs, leading to the replication of organizational practices. Conversely, newcomers with limited access to sensegiving were less able to sensetest, and instead relied more on previous experiences to make sense of their new environment, leading to the determination of practices. Newcomers with substantial prior work experience used this as a valuable input to sensemaking, allowing quasi-replication and determination of organizational practices that were more likely to be accepted, although not always. Our findings highlight social aspects of socialization as integral to sensemaking processes and performance of practice. In order to optimize socialization, all stakeholders-newcomers, their colleagues, and HR-should consider how the fundamentally social nature of socialization might require each party to adapt their approach.

In researching and writing my most recent book, Free-Range Learning in the Digital Age: The Emerging Revolution in College, Career, and Education (SelectBooks 2018), I immersed myself in the stories people told about their personal and experiential learning; why they did it, how they did it, how they knew when they had learned enough, when colleges had been helpful and when they had not, and so on. Almost everyone undertakes at least one or two major learning projects a year. Some people undertake as many as 15 or 20. The median is eight projects a year lasting a total of 800 hours. (approximately 15 hours per week.) If you are like most people, you haven't seriously considered the possibility that you have achieved significant learning, let alone tried to put a value on it. But it is there throughout your life, an iceberg of knowledge, but only revealing tips of ability and knowledge while leaving the larger body of knowledge and capacity hidden beneath the surface. Losing track of your learning and its value means losing track of who you are becoming and why. That's a big problem for each of us. I have come to believe that terms like “mid-life crisis” were coined to describe the collision of unexamined life learning with current day realities. As I discussed Free-Range Learning with dozens of audiences and in a wide variety of settings, I came to a powerful new understanding. Before, I had been focused primarily on assessing prior learning for its academic value. And, more recently, I had begun to focus on translating it for value in the workplace. As I listened to more and more people, however, I realized that recognizing the value of all learning, regardless of where it was done, was a triple winner that benefitted not only the learner, but also employers, colleges, and the wider society. It was at that point that I saw, for the first time, how competency-based education could be far more than a philosophy or course and program design concept. Indeed, I saw that CBE contained the key to bringing quality and clarity to all dimensions of learning, uniting the universe of learning regardless of where, when, or how it happened. In this view, competency-based evaluations bring consistency and clarity, as well as validity, to the universe of learning. With this approach, the assessment of learning becomes more valuable and powerful because it is employed as a pedagogical tool and not simply a judgment. It documents how well you know something and also how appropriately you can employ that knowledge, skill, ability, or behavior. So, when a learner is asked to demonstrate what knowledge they have gained from a particular experience, they should be asked to also apply that learning, reflect on the experience and tickle out the value of that experience for them as part of the demonstration. With that type of application, the utility of that learning, as well as the knowledge gained, can be fully understood. As examples of this approach, a learner could be asked to utilize the knowledge they have gained to solve a problem by working on a team; and/or thinking critically and writing out the solution; and/or applying it in an environment that includes the complexity of a diverse population. Through this approach, the learner's grasp of the subject matter as well as her ability to employ it appropriately can both be assessed, with the latter requirement being tailored to the needs of the user, be that a college, an employer, or the individual herself. We can structure assessments to generate evidence of multiple capacities. I have come to see a formal educational experience, like college, as the skeletal structure of a person's knowledge base. But the flesh and blood, the heart and soul of who we are continually becoming comes from the learning we do beyond school. Although I cannot put a precise number on it, I believe that over 80% of what we know is gained through personal learning, whether in school or not. Let me share a personal story as an example. When I was a sophomore in college, I was not taking things as seriously as I should have, to put it mildly. One day, I was in a history precept, a small class where, because there were only 7–8 other people in the room, you had to know your stuff. Gradually, it became clear that I was not prepared. The professor, Dr. Flaherty, threw me out of the class and told me to wait and speak with him afterwards. After the class had ended, he beckoned me back into the room, put his hands on my shoulders, and said, “Don't you ever waste my time like that again! You have potential and you are smart. So, act that way!” This man took me seriously and was asking me to do the same. That was not a history lesson. It was a life experience lesson. And the experience contained deep personal learning and it became a turning point in my college career. Thirty months later, I graduated Magna Cum Laude in History. But the personal learning that came from that encounter after history class was the fuel that got me there. Although I didn't recognize it immediately, I learned that, if you don't take yourself seriously, why should anyone else? When you think about it, a person's “personal transcript,” the record of all the learning they have done up to that point in their life, is a single elaborated set of information. And as lifelong learning portfolios and related services become available, more and more people are going to have that “personal transcript.” And competency-based statements of evidence, whether delineating academic standards, employment requirements, or personal learning, even if their requirements are different, can all draw from the same body of evidence. None of this is intended to suggest that evidence of a credential will not be a significant part of a “personal transcript.” Indeed, I see more ways to establish a valid and verifiable credential as a key value in this trend. Importantly, I see Competency-Based Evaluations as an early step in creating a common language so that all learning can be understood in more complex ways and can be applied in all three settings. We shall not cease from exploration. And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And know the place for the first time.

This paper shows how strategic initiatives in the context of wellestablished open strategy processes at two producer co-operatives reveal four tensions related to inclusion and transparency at the level of both the firm and the individual actor. We derive a "zones of participation" model that shows how tensions created by the interplay of the content, process and context of strategy cause actors to participate (or not participate) in open strategy formulation and implementation. We address theoretical and practical implications regarding the open strategy content, process, and context interplay, including a range of management tactics required in different participation zones.

This paper draws on a detailed case study of an innovation awards-giving scheme in a professional service firm to consider the role of discretionary awards in encouraging and displaying innovation capabilities. Because of their association with competition, it might seem that awards are likely tools in pluralistic contexts such as professional service firms where risk-taking and collaboration require deep relationships with clients and with professionals from different specialisations. We intend to show how managers and professionals mobilised around the scheme using the rewarding, recognising, and ritualising of innovation through awards, as a platform to initiate and promote other organisational processes that foster innovation capabilities.

This article offers insight into how middle managers formulate strategy while working with external strategy consultants. We claim two significant contributions. First, we challenge the view that middle managers cannot be strategists because their involvement is essentially part-time. Our empirical study details how in a twenty-two month strategy formulation process a small team of middle managers were the dominant actors and deserved to be regarded as strategists, albeit temporary ones. Second, we theorize how middle managers work with external strategy consultants through focusing on liminality and their liminal actions. The construct of liminality allows us to theorize middle managers’ strategizing as tentative, identity-related actions that unfold in places where norms of work are suspended and new conventions emerge.

We test the relationship between alliance scope and firm performance in the context of the biotechnology industry by means of a meta-analysis. Meta-analysis is a statistical technique that allows a systematic review of the existing research that is more rigorously systematic compared to conventional narrative reviews as it uses statistics to capture the strength of relationships. The analysis confirms that a relationship between alliance scope and firm performance does exist. Furthermore, results suggest that there is a statistically significant difference in firm performance between exploitation alliances and exploration alliances, confirming recent studies in the innovation and R&D management literature. Managerial implications and future research suggestions are provided.

Innovation is of continuing interest to professional service firms (PSFs) and the scholars who study them. Nevertheless, innovation in PSFs remains underresearched within the wider canon of literature on service innovation, and existing studies typically take a firm-centric perspective on innovation, even though such approaches have been challenged extensively. Our study addresses the shortcomings related to service innovation research, particularly in the context of PSFs, by utilizing the service-dominant logic (SDL)—a framework considered particularly appropriate for understanding innovation in service from a customer-centric standpoint. We apply the SDL to a case of innovation in an engineering consulting firm, and we find that innovation in PSFs is, to a certain degree, unique. Specifically, this work contributes to the literature by identifying multiple beneficiary roles, termed “customer as payer” and “customer as end user,” with often competing and changing values in use. The notion of operant resources is extended to include social capital, and we show how social capital can enable innovation in PSFs. A preliminary model and five propositions that can guide future empirical research on innovation in PSFs, together with managerial implications, are delineated.

This research investigates the internationalization of engineering consulting firms. The study draws on the elements of the strategy tripod (industry factors, resources and capabilities, and institutional factors). The internationalization process is examined using a longitudinal single case study of a New Zealand-based engineering consulting firm with 40 years of international experience. The research identifies five phases through which the case firm passed during that period, and highlights the different strategies that were apparent. It is shown that individual actors lead to an adjustment of the modes of operation and overall play a significant role for the internationalization of engineering consulting firms.

We describe a multidisciplinary course introducing Software Engineering, Computer Science and Business students to strategic business planning in IT organizations using technology roadmapping as the focus of instruction. The course has a strong practicum element, where multidisciplinary teams facilitate development of a technology roadmap in fast growth IT organizations guided by experienced mentors. It provides opportunities for a rich set of learnings, of the core content, technology roadmapping, but also: team skills in a multidisciplinary context; consultancy and communication skills; understanding other professionals vocabularies; and practical observation of hi-tech senior managers.