![]() In the remainder of this section, we revisit these three facets, expounding on our understanding of them (see Table 1). Given this backdrop, one of the distinctive features of our original article was an effort to conceptualize and define what we called the “analytic facets of grand challenges.” Specifically, we introduced three facets: complexity, uncertainty, and evaluativity. 1880) and, following Grand Challenges Canada, as “specific critical barrier(s) that, if removed, would help solve an important societal problem with a high likelihood of global impact through widespread implementation” (p. (2016) described grand challenges both as “formulations of global problems that can be plausibly addressed through coordinated and collaborative effort” (p. Both then and now, discussions of grand challenges invoked primarily phenomena-driven definitions. What are grand challenges? When we were developing our ideas, grand challenges had yet to attract significant interest from organization and management scholars. Finally, stepping back from the particular elements of our framework, we revisit the core premise of our original paper – robust action – and reflect on some challenges and opportunities that scholars may wish to take up next, namely in the areas of scaffolding, future imaginaries, and distributed actorhood. Second, we take stock of how scholars have subsequently explored and extended these strategies. First, we revisit our original robust action framework with an eye to clarifying selected elements, particularly areas where further elaboration seems warranted, or where our concepts have been interpreted in ways we had not anticipated. Specifically, the editors invited us to take stock of progress relative to our robust action approach to tackling grand challenges.Īlthough we have read many of our interlocutors closely, this article does not aim to provide either a systematic or comprehensive review of this work. In this article, we embrace this spirit to further advance our ideas. In some instances, this involved work to translate and unpack ideas from the margins of the management field in others it involved reimagining (and blurring) the boundaries between literatures in ways that enabled us to expand the conversation. ![]() Rather than providing an entirely de novo set of ideas, our robust action framework brought together several extant (and sometimes eclectic) ideas in an integrated fashion. ![]() When we were developing our ideas, we certainly had no inkling of the popularity the paper would achieve. Looking back, part of what our work enabled and catalyzed – together with other early contributions – was the creation and legitimation of an intellectual space for research on grand challenges, especially for early-career researchers ( Friesike, Dobusch, & Heimstädt, 2022). We were fortunate to have published our own contributions ( Etzion, Gehman, Ferraro, & Avidan, 2017 Ferraro, Etzion, & Gehman, 2015) somewhat early in this cycle. Although this particular label is relatively novel, the topic resonates with longstanding interest in addressing societal issues within organization studies ( Hinings & Greenwood, 2002 Selznick, 1996 Stern & Barley, 1996). Over the past several years, management scholars have produced a growing body of research on grand challenges. The full terms of this licence may be seen at Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. This chapter is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Ĭopyright © 2022 Joel Gehman, Dror Etzion and Fabrizio Ferraro License 79), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. (Ed.) Organizing for Societal Grand Challenges ( Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. (2022), "Robust Action: Advancing a Distinctive Approach to Grand Challenges", Gümüsay, A.A., Marti, E., Trittin-Ulbrich, H. Ultimately, our core message is remarkably simple: robust action strategies – participatory architecture, multivocal inscription and distributed experimentation – jointly provide a means for tackling grand challenges that is well matched to their complexities, uncertainties, and evaluativities. We then identify three promising directions for future research: scaffolding, future imaginaries, and distributed actorhood. ![]() In this invited article, we revisit our 2015 model, clarifying and elaborating its key elements and taking stock of subsequent developments. By comparison, our approach – robust action – provides a novel theoretical framework for tackling grand challenges. Although management scholars have embraced grand challenges research, in many cases, grand challenges have been treated as merely a context for exploring extant theoretical perspectives. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |