Strategic orientations in practice:Exploring the strategic belief structures of line-managers embedded in practice

Recently researchers have started to investigate the cognitive strategic orientations of individual top managers and have pointed out these may be key in determining the direction and success of their organizations in terms of performance, but they have been unable to effectively operationalize this notion in empirical research and this is holding up knowledge development. To make a contribution that helps overcome this limitation a theoretical framework is developed which specifies the different possible cognitive strategic orientations of top managers as well as those of managers at lower organizational levels involved in the strategy process. This theoretical framework is investigated in the empirical phase of the study into strategic orientations in practice. Additional contributions to knowledge of strategic orientation are made in three main domains. Firstly, current knowledge of strategic orientation is largely limited to analysis at the level of the firm whereas there is a lack of understanding of any relationships with practice at lower organizational levels. The exploratory research undertaken for this thesis contributes to new knowledge of different rational, developmental and interactive strategic orientations of front-line managers and this contributes to a cognitive explanation for emergent strategy linked to strategy processes embedded in practice. In theorising the presence of different strategic orientations in practice the discussion highlights the importance of network and spatial embeddedness within enacted environments. Secondly, a contribution to further knowledge of the links between strategy processes and the content of strategies within a retail context is made. The research highlights different strategy processes used in practice by retail front-line managers in a branch network of stores and these are linked to consequences such as different objectives, performance expectations and the fulfilment of personal goals. Thirdly, a contribution to research methodology is made by addressing problems associated with the comparison of cognitive maps.

Ethosuximide modifies network excitability in the rat entorhinal cortex via an increase in GABA release

Ethosuximide is the drug of choice for treating generalized absence seizures, but its mechanism of action is still a matter of debate. It has long been thought to act by disrupting a thalamic focus via blockade of T-type channels and, thus, generation of spike-wave activity in thalamocortical pathways. However, there is now good evidence that generalized absence seizures may be initiated at a cortical focus and that ethosuximide may target this focus. In the present study we have looked at the effect ethosuximide on glutamate and GABA release at synapses in the rat entorhinal cortex in vitro, using two experimental approaches. Whole-cell patch-clamp studies revealed an increase in spontaneous GABA release by ethosuximide concurrent with no change in glutamate release. This was reflected in studies that estimated global background inhibition and excitation from intracellularly recorded membrane potential fluctuations, where there was a substantial rise in the ratio of network inhibition to excitation, and a concurrent decrease in excitability of neurones embedded in this network. These studies suggest that, in addition to well-characterised effects on ion channels, ethosuximide may directly elevate synaptic inhibition in the cortex and that this could contribute to its anti-absence effects. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder'.

Learning and change in interorganizational networks:the case for network learning and network change

The ALBA 2002 Call for Papers asks the question ‘How do organizational learning and knowledge management contribute to organizational innovation and change?’. Intuitively, we would argue, the answer should be relatively straightforward as links between learning and change, and knowledge management and innovation, have long been commonly assumed to exist. On the basis of this assumption, theories of learning tend to focus ‘within organizations’, and assume a transfer of learning from individual to organization which in turn leads to change. However, empirically, we find these links are more difficult to articulate. Organizations exist in complex embedded economic, political, social and institutional systems, hence organizational change (or innovation) may be influenced by learning in this wider context. Based on our research in this wider interorganizational setting, we first make the case for the notion of network learning that we then explore to develop our appreciation of change in interorganizational networks, and how it may be facilitated. The paper begins with a brief review of lite rature on learning in the organizational and interorganizational context which locates our stance on organizational learning versus the learning organization, and social, distributed versus technical, centred views of organizational learning and knowledge. Developing from the view that organizational learning is “a normal, if problematic, process in every organization” (Easterby-Smith, 1997: 1109), we introduce the notion of network learning: learning by a group of organizations as a group. We argue this is also a normal, if problematic, process in organizational relationships (as distinct from interorganizational learning), which has particular implications for network change. Part two of the paper develops our analysis, drawing on empirical data from two studies of learning. The first study addresses the issue of learning to collaborate between industrial customers and suppliers, leading to the case for network learning. The second, larger scale study goes on to develop this theme, examining learning around several major change issues in a healthcare service provider network. The learning processes and outcomes around the introduction of a particularly controversial and expensive technology are described, providing a rich and contrasting case with the first study. In part three, we then discuss the implications of this work for change, and for facilitating change. Conclusions from the first study identify potential interventions designed to facilitate individual and organizational learning within the customer organization to develop individual and organizational ‘capacity to collaborate’. Translated to the network example, we observe that network change entails learning at all levels – network, organization, group and individual. However, presenting findings in terms of interventions is less meaningful in an interorganizational network setting given: the differences in authority structures; the less formalised nature of the network setting; and the importance of evaluating performance at the network rather than organizational level. Academics challenge both the idea of managing change and of managing networks. Nevertheless practitioners are faced with the issue of understanding and in fluencing change in the network setting. Thus we conclude that a network learning perspective is an important development in our understanding of organizational learning, capability and change, locating this in the wider context in which organizations are embedded. This in turn helps to develop our appreciation of facilitating change in interorganizational networks, both in terms of change issues (such as introducing a new technology), and change orientation and capability.