Closing for the Benefit of Openness? The case of Wikimedia’s open strategy process

Abstract

A growing number of organizations subscribe to ideals of openness in areas such as innovation or strategymaking, supported by digital technologies and fuelled by promises of better outcomes and increased legitimacy. However, by applying a relational lens of inclusion and exclusion, we argue that, paradoxically, certain forms of closure may be necessary to achieve desired open qualities in strategy-making. Analysing the case of Wikimedia, which called for participation in a globally open strategy-making process, we show that openness regarding participation in crafting strategy content depends on certain forms of closure regarding procedures of the strategy-making process. Against this background, we propose a two-dimensional framework of openness, in which content-related and procedural openness are characterized by a combination of open and closed elements.

Strategic renewal: Beyond the functional resource role of occupational members

“…By examining occupational members as key actors and extending the context to strategic renewal, our research contributes to the nascent but growing body of work highlighting the importance of nonmanagerial actors in doing strategy (e.g., Ambrosini, Bowman, & Burton‐Taylor, ; Balogun et al, ). Similarly, our study supports research on open strategy by demonstrating that inclusion and participation by nonmanagerial actors (Hautz, Seidl, & Whittington, ; Whittington, Cailluet, & Yakis‐Douglas, ) extends beyond deliberate strategic planning and strategy oriented discussions (Dobusch, Dobusch, & Müller‐Seitz, ; Mantere & Vaara, ; Whittington et al, ) to the everyday activities of actors critical in achieving strategic objectives. Investigating the dual role occupational members have—as key organizational actors doing strategy and concurrently as occupational members engaging in work directed at nonorganizational outcomes—provides evidence to support Phillips and Lawrence () who argue organizational actors engage in work with a “range of important consequences” outside the domain of strategy.…”

Organizing the Unexpected: How Civil Society Organizations Dealt with the Refugee Crisis

“…Hence, organizations' capacity to respond to the unexpected relies on an appropriate interplay between flexibility and stability (Dobusch et al 2017). While common sense would expect that organizations with flexible structures would be better prepared to react to jolts, we found that it was not flexibility alone that counts, but the type of flexibility.…”

“…In this vein, organizations will hesitate to relax redundant elements as long as they can respond in more flexible domains. To be open for change in one domain requires redundancy in others (see for the interplay between openness and closeness Dobusch et al 2017).…”

Participation Research and Open Strategy

“…Furthermore, there have been some studies that have examined the role of external actors such as consultants, who are known to influence outcomes when they participate in for example strategy workshops (Hodgkinson et al, 2006) or strategic reorganization initiatives (Molloy and Whittington, 2005). However, such studies have been relatively few and there is opportunity to broaden research into participation of non-organizational or other internal actors (Dobusch et al, 2017;Jarzabkowski and Spee, 2009).…”

“…That is, rather than limiting participation to specific parts of the strategy process, strategy-making can be based on widespread participation in the co-creation of strategies. Although not often used in strategy-making, the idea is exemplified in co-creating organizational strategies as wiki pages (Dobusch et al, 2017).…”