Reflecting on the past—a key to facilitating learning in strategy practice?

Abstract

PurposeThe literature on the past triggering learning in strategy practice is scant. To fill this gap, this study aims to examine the meaning of the past to learning in strategy practice and expands on the strategy-as-practice (SAP) literature. Understanding the relationship between the past and learning in strategy practice is important because learning is what keeps strategy practice in motion and remains in place, even if organizations and strategy practitioners change.Design/methodology/approachThe authors used a longitudinal case study design combined with historical methods to examine how the past is embedded in present strategy practice. To capture learning in strategy practice over time, the authors applied a four-stage methodology in our analysis of document and interview data.FindingsThe authors identified four dimensions of the past embedded in the present strategy practice. These dimensions emerged from the analysis of the interviews and document data. The study’s results showed that the past appears in structures and routines, materiality, positioning and reflecting over repeated rounds of strategic planning. According to the study’s results, reflecting on strategy practice draws on past structures and routines, positioning and materiality. The past facilitates reflecting and reflecting on the past enables learning in strategy practice.Originality/valueThe authors constructed a conceptual model and showed that in strategy practice, reflection triggers learning. The authors contributed to theory development by demonstrating how the past is embedded in present strategy practice and is available for use by strategy practitioners. The authors showed that strategy practice is a continuous learning process.

Stakeholders in strategy-making

“…We aimed to gain access to the thinking of managers as they are actually in the process of making strategy van de Ven (1992) – reflecting the SAP interest in “what strategy practitioners themselves regard as consequential for “doing” strategy (Rouleau and Cloutier, 2022), and where strategy is something that organisational members do rather than have done to them” (Jarzabkowski, 2004; Whittington, 2004). We are thus, seeking to contribute to strategy practice which “covers the whole arena of strategy work, including practitioners, different tools and techniques, actuals activities as well as the ways to consume the products of strategizing.” (Korin et al. , 2022, p. 283).…”

Genetic argument and new knowledge creation in strategic management

“…Indeed, what we have learned to date may be merely the tip of the iceberg, with significant embedded potential in existing knowledge to promote future learning and new knowledge (Kohtamaeki et al, 2022;Kolb and Kolb, 2005). Korin et al (2023) argued persuasively that such future learning can be theoretical as well as practical: "Learning occurs when past experience is captured from practice and transformed via reflection into new knowledge to be applied in practice . .…”

“…, 2022; Kolb and Kolb, 2005). Korin et al. (2023) argued persuasively that such future learning can be theoretical as well as practical: “Learning occurs when past experience is captured from practice and transformed via reflection into new knowledge to be applied in practice ….…”