Affiliations: [a] School of Applied Social and Human Sciences, University of Western Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] | [b] Tulane University, A.B. Freeman School of Business, USA. E-mail: [email protected] | [c] St. Louis University, School for Professional Studies, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author.
Abstract: This paper proceeds from the widespread assumption – apparently, a truism – that the longevity of corporations is very much beholden to the success in their processes of strategic planning and the manner in which they learn from, and adapt to, those processes. The predominant strategic paradigm used in corporations, that of the rational planning school, assumes that language is transparent and time is linear. Such assumptions don't hold up in a complex world. Emergent strategy [8,50,63] has the potential to address the current challenges of organizations by shifting the language and talk about strategizing. Rather than talk about the challenges faced by top managers [14,25], emergent strategizing, for example, talks of “communicative interaction” and “focusing attention on what [is] going on now” [64, p. 158]. Mintzberg's disdain for the divination techniques of the Delphi Oracle [51, p. 238] notwithstanding, we suggest that characteristics of the Delphic Oracle [52] mirror many of those of both emergence and strategy and, therefore, may offer insight into the effective development of emergent strategies at lower and middle levels of the organization. Our method for understanding emergence is abduction, as developed by Charles Franklin Peirce and the pragmatists. A playful reinterpretation of the Delphic Oracle can provide a way to imagine the roles of organizational actors in strategic emergence.
