Kaasamine on üks sedalaadi tähistajaid, mis kandideerib paljudel juhtudel tühjaks tähistajaks ehk tähistajaks ilma tähistatavata. Aga paljudel juhtudel võib olla kaasajatel siiras soov midagi positiivset esile kutsuda ning ei saa välistada, et mõnikord see võib õnnestudagi (kuigi ei ole teada, missugune roll kaasamisel täpselt võis olla :)). Organisatsioonide valdkonnas ei pea aga näiteid otsima sellest, kus kaasamisega soovitule mitmeid negatiivseid kõrvalmõjusid esile kutsuti (ka siin ei ole teada kaasamise täpne roll :)). Siinviidatu on vabalevis olev artikkel, mis võiks huvi pakkuda nendele, kel mõtlevad kaasamisele näiteks strateegia kujundamisel.

Kontekstist:

While the ‘traditional’ strategy process, which is ‘traditionally exclusive [and] normally regarded as secret’ (Whittington et al., 2011, p. 535), assigns clear strategic roles to top managers, the middle managers, defined as ‘managers located below top managers and above first-level supervision on the hierarchy’ (Wooldridge et al., 2008, p. 1192), tend to lack such clearly assigned strategic roles (Jarzabkowski and Balogun, 2009; Laine and Vaara, 2007; Mantere, 2008). […] as several studies have shown, middle managers are often faced with challenges in enacting such strategic activities resulting in a struggle to construct themselves as strategists (Laine and Vaara, 2007).

Kaasamistrendidest:

many organizations have started to open up their strategy-making processes to wider employee participation, which is likely to also shape the possibilities for middle managers to enact their strategic activities and thus to claim their subject position as strategists.

Uurimisküsimus:

How does widened participation in strategy making affect middle managers’ struggles over their subject positions as strategists?

Rollide teisenemine:

While this traditional strategy-making process assigns clear strategic roles to the top managers and operational roles to those at the bottom, middle managers tend to lack clearly-defined strategic roles

Lugemishuvi ergutamiseks:

our study advances understanding in two important ways. First, our findings elaborate on existing accounts of middle managers’ struggle over their subject position by revealing how and why widened participation intensifies this struggle. […] Second, our study extends understanding of the activities by which middle managers construct their subject position, elaborating on an alternative repertoire of activities through which they influence the strategy-making process when their traditional activities are restricted.

Splitter, V., Jarzabkowski, P., & Seidl, D. (2021). Middle managers’ struggle over their subject position in Open Strategy processes. Journal of Management Studies