Strategy consensus and social practice: A perspective from public sector managers

Date

2021-06-23

Advisors

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

ISSN

1755-425X

Volume Title

Publisher

Emerald

Type

Article

Peer reviewed

Yes

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate consensus formation among top and middle managers during the strategy process. Specifically, the paper seeks to gain insight into to the role of strategic consensus during transition between strategy formulation and implementation. Design/methodology/approach: Adopting a social practice perspective and a single case study approach, we undertook semi-structured interviews of twenty-seven managers working in a Kuwaiti Ministry. Data collected was analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: We found that social interaction among individuals with similar characteristics and shared understanding fosters consensus. Factors such as alignment of strategic priorities, managerial flux, and centralised control, contribute to the extent to which strategic consensus is achievable. Additionally, managerial turnover and lack of empowerment hampers development of shared understanding. Finally, that consensus on strategy content is insufficient for effective inter-group communications. Originality: The research contributes to the strategic consensus literature from a social practice perspective as it provides new insights into the dynamics between top managers and middle managers. Significantly, it highlights the importance and need for common understanding, as well as communications prioritisation among managers for consensus development and successful implementation of organisation strategy.

Description

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version.

Keywords

strategic consensus, strategy implementation, social practice, top and middle managers, public sector

Citation

Almansour, J. and Obembe, D. (2021) Strategy consensus and social practice: A perspective from public sector managers. Journal of Strategy and Management, 14 (4), pp.461-476

Rights

Research Institute