Explore the vast range of titles available.

Research summary: When faced with complex strategic problems that exceed their individual sensemaking capacities, organizations often engage in inter-organizational collaboration. This enables them to pool the participants' different perspectives and to grasp the problem at hand more comprehensively. Drawing on data collected from two longitudinal case studies, we examine how those who participate in inter-organizational sensemaking processes are selected and how the particular selection of participants affects the dynamics of the sensemaking process in turn. In our analysis, we show how the selection of specific problem issues influences who joins or withdraws from the collaboration and we identify a mechanism that accounts for changes in the particular dynamics of the sensemaking process over time. Our findings help explain how the process of inter-organizational sensemaking can yield different outcomes. Managerial summary: The ability to make sense of the business environment is central to strategic management. As the complexity of the environment increases and interpreting it becomes more difficult, organizations increasingly turn to inter-organizational collaboration, which allows them to pool their expertise in order to explore strategic issues. We examine how the participants in projects of joint exploration are selected and how the selection of participants affects the process of exploration in turn. More specifically, we describe how the aspects on which collaborating organizations choose to focus influence who joins and who withdraws from a collaboration. We also identify a mechanism that accounts for differences and changes in the dynamics of the sensemaking process over time. These changes affect how the collaborators come to understand their organization's business environment.

The experience of simultaneously positive and negative orientations toward a person, goal, task, idea, and such appears to be quite common in organizations, but it is poorly understood. We develop a multilevel perspective on ambivalence in organizations that demonstrates how this phenomenon is integral to certain cognitive and emotional processes and important outcomes. Specifically, we discuss the organizational triggers of ambivalence and the cognitive and emotional mechanisms through which ambivalence diffuses between the individual and collective levels of analysis. We offer an integrative framework of major responses to highly intense ambivalence (avoidance, domination, compromise, and holism) that is applicable to actors at the individual and collective levels. The positive and negative outcomes associated with each response, and the conditions under which each is most effective, are explored. Although ambivalence is uncomfortable for actors, it has the potential to foster growth in the actor as well as highly adaptive and effective behavior.

Through a wide-ranging critical review of relevant publications, we explore and articulate what constitutes the sensemaking perspective in organization studies, as well as its range of applications and limitations. More specifically, we argue that sensemaking in organizations has been seen as consisting of specific episodes, is triggered by ambiguous events, occurs through specific processes, generates specific outcomes, and is influenced by several situational factors. Furthermore, we clarify the application range of the sensemaking perspective and identify, as well as account for, the types and aspects of organizational sensemaking that have been under-researched. We critically discuss the criticism that the sensemaking perspective has received so far and selectively expand on it. Finally, we identify the main limitations of the sensemaking perspective, which, if tackled, will advance it: the neglect of prospective sensemaking, the exclusive focus on disruptive episodes at the expense of more mundane forms of sensemaking implicated in routine activities, the ambiguous status of enactment, the conflation of first-order and second-order sensemaking, and the lack of proper attention to embodied sensemaking.

Changes in the way customers shop, accompanied by an explosion of customer touchpoints and fast-changing competitive and technological dynamics, have led to an increased emphasis on agile marketing. The objective of this article is to conceptualize and investigate the emerging concept of marketing agility. The authors synthesize the literature from marketing and allied disciplines and insights from in-depth interviews with 22 senior managers. Marketing agility is defined as the extent to which an entity rapidly iterates between making sense of the market and executing marketing decisions to adapt to the market. It is conceptualized as occurring across different organizational levels and shown to be distinct from related concepts in marketing and allied fields. The authors highlight the firm challenges in executing marketing agility, including ensuring brand consistency, scaling agility across the marketing ecosystem, managing data privacy concerns, pursuing marketing agility as a fad, and hiring marketing leaders. The authors identify the antecedents of marketing agility at the organizational, team, marketing leadership, and employee levels and provide a roadmap for future research. The authors caution that marketing agility may not be well-suited for all firms and all marketing activities.

Building on the sensemaking perspective, we theorize and test conditions under which perceived innovation job requirement increases employee innovative behavior. Using data consisting of 311 employee–supervisor pairs from two companies in China, we found that perceived innovation job requirement had a more positive relation with innovative behavior for employees with low intrinsic interest in innovation than for those with high intrinsic interest. In addition, this positive effect for low-intrinsic-interest employees was achieved only when these employees interpreted the job requirement as important either because performance-reward expectancy was high or because perceived value for the organization was high. We discuss the implications of these results for research and practice.

This paper explores how a world-wide operating software solutions provider implemented environmentally sustainable business practices in response to emerging environmental concerns. Through an interpretive case study, we develop a theoretical framework that identifies four important functional affordances originating in information systems, which are required in environmental sustainability transformations as they create an actionable context in which (1) organizations can engage in a sensemaking process related to understanding emerging environmental requirements, and (2) individuals can implement environmentally sustainable work practices. Through our work, we provide several contributions, including a better understanding of IS-enabled organizational change and the types of functional affordances of information systems that are required in sustainability transformations. We describe implications relating to (1) how information systems can contribute to the creation of environmentally sustainable organizations, (2) the design of information systems to create required functional affordances, (3) the management of sustainability transformations, and (4) the further development of the concept of functional affordances in IS research.

This study examines how updating—the process of revising provisional sensemaking to incorporate new cues—occurs within teams during unexpected events. I compare how 19 teams of emergency department staff managed the same unexpected event (a broken piece of equipment) in a medical simulation scenario. Using a microethnographic approach to analyze video recordings of these teams, I conduct a fine-grained examination of how updating takes place and find considerable variation in its effectiveness across teams. I show that the effectiveness of updating depends not only on how teams remake sense but also on how they engage in trajectory management, balancing the work of updating with their ongoing work (in this case, patient care). Trajectory management practices related to monitoring cues and managing engaging tasks facilitated effective updating and allowed teams to detect and identify the problem caused by the broken piece of equipment and correct it before it led to serious consequences. More-effective teams monitor and rapidly interpret cues, confirming them with others and evaluating changes over time; they then investigate cues, develop plausible explanations, and quickly test them, monitoring cues for feedback. Less-effective teams fail to monitor and confirm cues with others, overlook or misinterpret cues, and delay investigating cues and developing plausible explanations; they also delay testing explanations, often being sidetracked by patient care tasks.

Many models of (un)ethical decision making assume that people decide rationally and are in principle able to evaluate their decisions from a moral point of view. However, people might behave unethically without being aware of it. They are ethically blind. Adopting a sensemaking approach, we argue that ethical blindness results from a complex interplay between individual sensemaking activities and context factors.

This paper reports on a field study of strategy making in one organization facing an industry crisis. In a comparison of five strategy projects, we observed that organizational participants struggled with competing interpretations of what might emerge in the future, what was currently at stake, and even what had happened in the past. We develop a model of temporal work in strategy making that articulates how actors resolved differences and linked their interpretations of the past, present, and future so as to construct a strategic account that enabled concrete strategic choice and action. We found that settling on a particular account required it to be coherent, plausible, and acceptable; otherwise, breakdowns resulted. Such breakdowns could impede progress, but they could also be generative in provoking a search for new interpretations and possibilities for action. The more intensely actors engaged in temporal work, the more likely the strategies departed from the status quo. Our model suggests that strategy cannot be understood as the product of more or less accurate forecasting without considering the multiple interpretations of present concerns and historical trajectories that help to constitute those forecasts. Projections of the future are always entangled with views of the past and present, and temporal work is the means by which actors construct and reconstruct the connections among them. These insights into the mechanisms of strategy making help explain the practices and conditions that produce organizational inertia and change.

In this paper, I elaborate a theoretical model of how individuals come to make or create sense through their language while being accountable to others. Using accounts of corporate communication professionals who made sense of anomalous circumstances, I analyze how they used metaphorical words and expressions to organize their accounts and to negotiate between their own individual commitments and perceived social expectations. Based on the analysis, I induce that professionals (a) use individual metaphors to align themselves with the expectations of others and to mark particular roles for themselves that strictly meet those expectations (“strategic shifting”) when they perceive the social approval motive as strong; (b) engage in the extended use of a single metaphor to compress a situation into a frame that mediates between individual convictions and others' expectations (“framing”) when they know the views of others but are also strongly motivated to think through a circumstance as part of their professional role or previous commitments; and (c) systematically use a combination of metaphors that are blended and elaborated into a plausible narrative that attributes responsibility and prescribes a course of action (“narration”) when they are in a position (as part of their role) to define a circumstance, are unconstrained by past experiences, and do not directly know the views of others. This model integrates findings from prior research and combines the influence of role-related commitments and social accountability pressures on sensemaking.