Popular in Professional

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Education

The Role of Education in Reducing Racial Inequality

University of Southern California Pedro A. Noguera

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Pharmacy

Cytotoxic Activity and Anti-Migratory Effect of Berberine-Phytantriol Liquid Crystalline on Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

University of Technology Sydney Kamal Dua

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Education

Dual strategy process in open strategizing

View more insights in Professional - Business - Corporate Strategy

View more figures from University of Aberdeen

View the page of Ignacio Canales

View the page of Jing Cai

Read the Study

Jing Cai and Ignacio Canales unravel the dual process of open strategy by delving into the relationships between transparency and inclusion from a longitudinal case study.

Image courtesy of interviewee. March 7, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video discusses the concept of "open strategy," which builds on the idea of open innovation and highlights its evolution since the 1960s. Originally, strategic planning was viewed as a top-down process where executives devised strategies that were implemented by subordinates. However, research reveals that involving middle managers and other stakeholders in strategy development yields better outcomes and adaptability to changing environments.

The notion of open strategy was notably popularized in 2005 by Richard Whittington, who proposed broadening stakeholder involvement in strategic planning to include not just top and middle management but also frontline employees and customers. This video video participatory approach is driven by the need for transparency and inclusion.

This video video emphasizes that while broader participation can enhance strategy creation, it is essential to balance it with considerations of transparency—how much information should be shared internally and externally—and inclusion—determining the level of say stakeholders have in the decision-making process.

Moreover, recent studies since the millennium indicate that open strategy is particularly effective in platform-based organizations where various external stakeholders are involved, necessitating guided openness. The research also aims to explore the nuances of transparency and inclusion, proposing subdimensions to better understand these interactions within a platform setting.

In conclusion, the text highlights that open strategy is not a one-size-fits-all solution, but rather a flexible tool that can adapt to the distinctive dynamics of different organizations. The findings suggest that the interplay of transparency and inclusion can significantly enhance these strategic processes.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.115 --> 00:02.845
Open strategy draws from this notion of open innovation.

00:03.065 --> 00:05.845
But I, I, I need to tell you a little bit of background of h

00:06.065 --> 00:09.525
how and why did open strategy come to be in,

00:09.725 --> 00:10.885
I don't know, the 1960s.

00:11.245 --> 00:13.365
I, I'm pretty sure none of us were born then.

00:13.905 --> 00:17.405
Uh, there was this, wave called strategic planning,

00:17.625 --> 00:20.125
and that's where kind of strategy become to be used

00:20.145 --> 00:23.885
as a term in business and in strategic planning.

00:24.305 --> 00:26.805
The assumption was that there was a boss

00:27.505 --> 00:28.925
and they designed the strategy

00:29.065 --> 00:32.365
and there were followers that implemented

00:32.385 --> 00:33.525
or did the strategy.

00:34.145 --> 00:39.045
And if, actually, if you dig a bit, in many organizations,

00:39.265 --> 00:43.165
that's is still the assumption, but that is not the reality.

00:43.865 --> 00:47.845
And on one, on the one hand, the,

00:48.545 --> 00:51.805
the development of academic academia,

00:51.805 --> 00:55.925
regarding strategy has included other people

00:56.625 --> 00:57.765
in making strategy.

00:58.185 --> 00:59.525
Let, let me give you an idea.

01:00.145 --> 01:03.205
In, in, there was this big shake,

01:03.425 --> 01:06.485
mostly in America on the, on this, in the eighties,

01:06.975 --> 01:10.725
where the middle managers were fired, really?

01:11.345 --> 01:13.685
And that affected many big corporations

01:13.685 --> 01:15.205
because a big part

01:15.285 --> 01:17.765
of the knowledge was kept by middle managers.

01:17.785 --> 01:22.485
So there were a, a couple of, academics

01:22.485 --> 01:23.565
who started researching

01:23.585 --> 01:25.725
how important middle managers were in

01:25.725 --> 01:26.885
the developmental strategy.

01:27.385 --> 01:29.205
And their main finding was that

01:29.885 --> 01:33.965
although, well, you would tend to think that if you,

01:34.425 --> 01:36.965
spread decision making across the organization,

01:37.345 --> 01:38.605
you get more commitment.

01:39.545 --> 01:44.045
Uh, however, their, results were counterintuitive

01:44.045 --> 01:46.365
because what they actually found is that the quality

01:46.625 --> 01:48.885
of the strategy being produced was better.

01:49.465 --> 01:52.685
It was more attuned to the environment,

01:52.895 --> 01:54.085
which is counterintuitive

01:54.085 --> 01:55.805
because you would think that you, you just

01:56.395 --> 02:00.125
because we have this mind frame that there's a boss

02:00.185 --> 02:03.445
and the boss says, kind of military mind frame.

02:04.265 --> 02:08.325
Uh, and from then on in academia spec especially,

02:08.325 --> 02:10.965
there's been a lot of development of the effects

02:11.305 --> 02:13.005
and the power that middle management

02:13.585 --> 02:15.125
can have in developing strategy.

02:16.105 --> 02:17.485
And another finding has been

02:17.485 --> 02:19.245
that it depends on the industry.

02:19.345 --> 02:21.485
So in, in, in some industries, for example,

02:22.015 --> 02:24.125
where there's much more research

02:24.125 --> 02:27.045
and development, you need much more involvement

02:27.385 --> 02:30.565
of middle managers in developing the strategy

02:30.565 --> 02:33.765
because you need to be closer to the customer in, in, in,

02:33.785 --> 02:36.845
in, in, in how the environment changes

02:37.025 --> 02:39.525
as the company changes in,

02:39.525 --> 02:41.205
environments, which is more stable.

02:41.485 --> 02:42.805
There're not that many of those,

02:42.865 --> 02:46.245
but, for example, the car industry there is,

02:46.955 --> 02:50.325
there's less, well, they would hate me to say this,

02:50.345 --> 02:51.605
but it's a bit more steep.

02:52.225 --> 02:55.405
It, it seems like a, a more top down approach works better.

02:56.075 --> 02:57.445
However, in the

02:57.495 --> 03:01.805
after the millennium, it has been, kind of studied

03:02.435 --> 03:04.885
that actually it goes beyond that.

03:05.105 --> 03:06.845
And you can actually think of

03:07.685 --> 03:10.125
companies in which the strategy is being made not only

03:10.185 --> 03:13.565
by top managers, middle managers, frontline managers,

03:13.785 --> 03:16.685
but stakeholders in general, even customers.

03:17.305 --> 03:19.685
And that, I mean, when, when you think about it,

03:19.685 --> 03:20.725
it really rings a bell

03:20.725 --> 03:24.445
because how many clever input can

03:25.085 --> 03:26.765
customers give you a lot,

03:27.135 --> 03:29.565
especially in a rapid changing environment.

03:30.225 --> 03:32.045
So you, you are asking there who,

03:32.045 --> 03:33.165
which are the main authors?

03:33.165 --> 03:35.965
So in, in about 2005,

03:37.565 --> 03:38.765
a colleague

03:38.765 --> 03:41.445
and friend called Richard Whittington came up with this idea

03:41.445 --> 03:46.365
of open strategy, trying to broaden how strategy is created,

03:47.225 --> 03:51.125
which is so, which was a super clever story,

03:51.145 --> 03:54.005
but obviously there's no paradise here.

03:54.065 --> 03:56.285
So it's not, the more you open it,

03:56.345 --> 03:58.285
the better strategy will be.

03:59.005 --> 04:00.865
And there are caveats to that.

04:01.245 --> 04:04.305
And those two caveats are transparency and inclusion.

04:04.485 --> 04:07.625
That's why those are so important as I dimensions,

04:07.695 --> 04:11.065
because the more you open strategy, the more

04:11.605 --> 04:13.145
you inclusion you have.

04:13.605 --> 04:16.025
But how much transparency do you need?

04:16.285 --> 04:18.585
How much transparency should you have?

04:19.005 --> 04:22.625
Are you gonna show your, I don't know, pilot projects

04:22.965 --> 04:24.105
to the competition?

04:24.645 --> 04:28.865
Is it gonna go that far so that it becomes then,

04:29.005 --> 04:30.105
a trade off?

04:30.365 --> 04:32.185
How much open strategy do you want?

04:32.185 --> 04:33.305
And how much inclusion

04:33.365 --> 04:35.945
and how much transparency do you want?

04:36.325 --> 04:38.825
And that's why it has become so important

04:38.825 --> 04:40.665
because many companies that want to grow

04:41.125 --> 04:44.585
or want to develop new ways to compete it,

04:44.695 --> 04:46.705
explore new procedures

04:46.925 --> 04:50.905
or new processes to compete, and lay

04:51.115 --> 04:53.905
after Richard, there have been people like Julia, hows,

04:53.905 --> 04:55.665
for example, or David Seidel

04:56.165 --> 04:58.705
or Christian Staler, who is Christian is,

04:58.705 --> 05:01.185
is selling his open strategy book all over the world

05:01.645 --> 05:04.865
and hopefully, effectively, who have kind

05:04.865 --> 05:06.745
of consulted an open strategy

05:06.845 --> 05:09.385
and helped companies develop open strategy.

05:09.925 --> 05:13.065
And it's become kind of a, a, a bit of a fashionable thing.

05:13.485 --> 05:16.985
Now, is it a solution for every problem companies have?

05:17.045 --> 05:20.625
Of course not. But it is, it is a cool tool.

05:20.855 --> 05:25.025
Yeah. Just to add to my, Tono comments, you know,

05:25.025 --> 05:29.145
for this research, we really, the starting point is

05:29.685 --> 05:31.425
we build on Wittington

05:31.605 --> 05:33.785
and his colleagues the two dimensions.

05:34.645 --> 05:36.985
But, nowadays more

05:36.985 --> 05:38.945
and more researcher trying to see,

05:39.405 --> 05:41.585
is this just the two broadly dimensions?

05:41.805 --> 05:45.425
Are there sub dimensions? I think we take a step further.

05:46.165 --> 05:50.705
We want to see what are the, you know, like,

05:50.835 --> 05:55.745
additional sub dimensions can be used to indicate the depths

05:56.045 --> 05:57.765
and the level of transparency.

05:57.955 --> 06:00.885
Like you just gave example, what kind of information,

06:01.275 --> 06:02.805
some information like r

06:02.805 --> 06:06.845
and d are very ins, secrecy to the companies.

06:07.395 --> 06:11.445
Well, and, and, and, and most of the companies were open.

06:11.595 --> 06:13.565
They open in terms of a procedure.

06:14.105 --> 06:17.885
We could have a roadmap X, y, z one after another.

06:17.955 --> 06:19.005
What is the process?

06:19.625 --> 06:22.565
We make a decision, but it's kind of the information

06:23.195 --> 06:27.005
that is very difficult to, justify which kind

06:27.005 --> 06:30.205
of information might be strategically important

06:30.305 --> 06:32.605
to company will have to keep it in house.

06:33.465 --> 06:35.125
And also inclusion as well.

06:35.665 --> 06:37.885
You include a wide range of people,

06:38.545 --> 06:41.005
but what kind of responsibility

06:41.665 --> 06:43.405
and entitlement you,

06:43.405 --> 06:45.965
you decision making rights you will give to

06:46.645 --> 06:48.205
internal employees or more

06:48.725 --> 06:51.285
dramatically external, stakeholders.

06:51.705 --> 06:54.925
And also what would be their commitment.

06:55.075 --> 06:57.325
Some of them might be very active,

06:57.635 --> 06:59.165
some might be very passive.

06:59.865 --> 07:02.325
So I think we build on that.

07:02.555 --> 07:05.765
This paper is really trying to find those nitty gritty,

07:06.225 --> 07:08.565
taking a granular approach.

07:09.305 --> 07:13.045
And in addition to that, we're trying to take a very,

07:13.645 --> 07:14.645
a unique example.

07:15.115 --> 07:19.405
It's not in traditional companies, we apply those dimension,

07:19.545 --> 07:23.325
expand those dimension to understand, you know,

07:23.465 --> 07:25.765
sub dimensions in the platform setting.

07:26.305 --> 07:30.205
So that is something is quite,

07:30.225 --> 07:31.485
move very fast.

07:31.985 --> 07:35.645
So, so that the, the main drive behind is to see,

07:35.865 --> 07:39.205
in which way we understand it can be applied

07:39.305 --> 07:41.205
to a platform setting. The

07:41.405 --> 07:43.445
Literature basically covers transparency

07:43.545 --> 07:45.405
and inclusion to a certain degrees.

07:46.265 --> 07:51.045
And, the, the literature is very, well, not very,

07:51.105 --> 07:54.045
but a little bit normative in, in that they're

07:54.685 --> 07:57.405
encouraging companies to follow open strategy.

07:58.385 --> 08:01.485
Uh, of course there, there are not, not all of them,

08:01.505 --> 08:06.005
but there's this a kind of push to towards using,

08:06.465 --> 08:08.045
open strategy.

08:08.945 --> 08:11.445
Uh, and we also want to explore

08:12.345 --> 08:13.805
how these two dimensions work

08:13.805 --> 08:16.925
because it's, it's very easy to say, well, no, you,

08:17.065 --> 08:20.825
you give one dimension, you give one dimension,

08:20.825 --> 08:22.225
and you don't give another dimension.

08:22.725 --> 08:26.025
But what we go is in depth into each dimension,

08:26.025 --> 08:28.945
and the literature doesn't go in that much depth

08:29.495 --> 08:30.665
into each dimension.

08:31.845 --> 08:34.905
And the other thing is that they, the literature tends

08:34.925 --> 08:38.585
to apply the, the concept of open strategy

08:38.725 --> 08:39.905
to any organization.

08:40.045 --> 08:43.385
And that's one of the reasons why we pick up a platform,

08:43.915 --> 08:45.345
which is what Jing mentioned.

08:45.885 --> 08:49.625
And the platform model is really, prevalent today.

08:49.765 --> 08:52.385
If you think the, the organization that you work

08:52.385 --> 08:53.505
for is a platform,

08:53.935 --> 08:57.125
because you bring together different players,

08:57.985 --> 09:00.565
so you don't control the players, you don't actually, even,

09:00.595 --> 09:04.125
even, there's no contractual obligation

09:04.585 --> 09:07.485
and everything you get is from this collaboration.

09:08.385 --> 09:11.605
Uh, so well, I'm gonna give up what we found in the end,

09:12.025 --> 09:14.765
it turns out that for platforms,

09:15.115 --> 09:17.125
open strategy is a match made in heaven

09:17.675 --> 09:22.285
because it's the way, platforms better operate.

09:23.185 --> 09:27.205
Uh, so we contribute in many ways, well, hopefully in

09:27.205 --> 09:31.045
that way, but, by talking about a specific type

09:31.045 --> 09:33.125
of organization, which is a platform,

09:33.125 --> 09:36.925
and how open strategy is a valid tool for a platform.

09:37.265 --> 09:40.205
And well, gene will carry on, we'll develop that further.

09:40.305 --> 09:41.765
But how does transparency

09:41.865 --> 09:46.565
and inclusion nuances affect our platforms? Operate

09:46.875 --> 09:48.605
It's ambitious project.

09:49.625 --> 09:54.335
Uh, we collect the data from 2009, actually up

09:54.335 --> 09:58.135
until 2022, because for this, its ongoing project.

09:58.755 --> 10:01.215
But for this, research, this paper,

10:01.915 --> 10:04.335
we used the data from 20, 2000,

10:05.035 --> 10:08.855
the interview data from 2009 to 2017.

10:09.595 --> 10:13.335
But we also collect the, you know, meeting reports.

10:13.875 --> 10:17.855
And also, there, a number of

10:18.535 --> 10:20.855
statistics of the company growth, like a number

10:20.855 --> 10:24.215
of participants, what kind of knowledge they gather,

10:24.595 --> 10:26.975
in which way, the use of their knowledge.

10:27.195 --> 10:32.135
So, so basically it's a, we could track 10 years growth

10:32.355 --> 10:35.495
of this platform from 27 the year.

10:35.635 --> 10:37.535
It, the company

10:38.315 --> 10:41.855
was incept in inception stage is is established

10:42.115 --> 10:43.295
up until 2017.

10:43.955 --> 10:48.575
So the reason we want to, we, we did five rounds of,

10:48.575 --> 10:50.815
inter we used the five rounds of the interview.

10:51.275 --> 10:53.295
So the, I said it, it, it,

10:53.355 --> 10:56.175
it was a very ambitious project in several ways.

10:56.395 --> 11:01.135
The first, we believe that, open strategy one company,

11:02.035 --> 11:05.335
it itself, it's a venture business

11:05.555 --> 11:10.095
and trying to incorporate external, all the,

11:10.265 --> 11:14.975
individual players, actors trying to involve them.

11:15.355 --> 11:18.615
It, it's, it's a evolution, which means it evolves.

11:19.075 --> 11:22.375
And they, they make mistakes of a strategy at the beginning,

11:22.635 --> 11:25.935
for example, a completely open, they want to say, okay,

11:25.935 --> 11:29.575
let's do it like a, a similar idea of open source,

11:29.875 --> 11:31.255
and we encourage everybody,

11:31.545 --> 11:35.095
let's co-design this like a community, but it didn't work

11:35.095 --> 11:37.415
because they give too much power to individual.

11:37.835 --> 11:40.775
And the individual, like academics, I do, I cycle,

11:41.005 --> 11:45.175
because they don't understand how important to,

11:45.995 --> 11:49.695
to, they don't understand how to pitch the commercial value

11:49.755 --> 11:52.135
of their academic outputs.

11:52.205 --> 11:55.245
They, they're thinking, okay, I want to,

11:55.315 --> 11:58.205
sell my product or my, patent.

11:58.925 --> 12:01.765
I just upload a few, like, the files

12:02.065 --> 12:06.805
and I could have like my academic paper for stuff, but,

12:06.865 --> 12:09.245
and customer, they're not interested business,

12:09.515 --> 12:10.605
they're not interested.

12:11.145 --> 12:14.165
So at the beginning, they completely lose the control.

12:14.185 --> 12:17.325
And in the middle stage, they have to,

12:17.355 --> 12:21.685
enforce much more regulation control standard at the end,

12:22.315 --> 12:26.765
then they become open more, but with this guided openness.

12:26.985 --> 12:31.925
So, so that's why we have this, a five round interview,

12:32.135 --> 12:35.925
allow us to see how the strategy evolves over time.

12:36.025 --> 12:40.485
But also when we design this sub dimensions,

12:40.705 --> 12:44.525
we want to see whether there is a consistency across

12:45.265 --> 12:48.325
10 years development, this kind of validated.

12:48.865 --> 12:53.325
So having said it's a mixed method, we wanna identify

12:53.745 --> 12:55.725
to see whether there is any relationships

12:55.835 --> 12:57.885
between transparency and inclusion.

12:58.545 --> 13:02.325
And also when we design the sub, dimensions, we want

13:02.325 --> 13:06.645
to see in which way is there any particular sub dimension

13:07.115 --> 13:10.165
influence, particular sub dimension of inclusion.

13:10.385 --> 13:14.445
So we wanna map out the kind of relationships.

13:15.265 --> 13:19.885
So the, the, the interviews, the qualitative parts of this

13:20.525 --> 13:22.845
research give us a little bit direction.

13:23.395 --> 13:27.325
Then we, at the end, we also use a little bit simple

13:27.845 --> 13:31.405
statistics regression to find whether we could convince

13:31.715 --> 13:35.325
what, the relationships that we,

13:35.945 --> 13:37.285
anticipated.

13:38.105 --> 13:42.845
So, so, so, so that is, so, so the database,

13:43.865 --> 13:46.885
you know, we have these interviews.

13:47.105 --> 13:51.925
We also have this, you know, the sta statistics, statistics,

13:52.505 --> 13:56.405
you know, as well as, you know, the company report.

13:56.985 --> 13:59.685
So it's, it's, it's quite, unique set

14:00.145 --> 14:01.205
for the transparency

14:01.355 --> 14:04.765
because we, having said we applied it to a,

14:05.125 --> 14:07.245
platform setting, and,

14:07.245 --> 14:09.205
we borrowed the idea from Waitington

14:09.345 --> 14:12.685
and, his two colleagues, 2011 publication.

14:12.825 --> 14:15.405
So, so we borrowed the procedure transparency,

14:15.575 --> 14:18.925
we're thinking, okay, about the decision, whether the steps,

14:19.145 --> 14:21.525
the information, whether you, you,

14:21.665 --> 14:25.485
you put on your website clearly, who will be part

14:25.505 --> 14:26.885
of this decision making,

14:27.545 --> 14:32.045
and then, to what extent we're going to disclose the

14:32.605 --> 14:33.685
decision we've made.

14:34.425 --> 14:36.645
And, in addition to that, we found that

14:36.645 --> 14:40.885
because the platform, it's, it's kind of,

14:41.545 --> 14:44.965
include quite a lot of external stakeholders,

14:45.115 --> 14:48.645
that individual, in this case, for example, those individual

14:49.485 --> 14:52.565
businesses who want to buy technology, patent

14:52.905 --> 14:56.205
or academic, output from academics.

14:56.385 --> 14:58.125
So, so those academics

14:58.125 --> 15:01.925
and the businesses, those are two very important group of

15:01.945 --> 15:03.405
for external stakeholders.

15:04.145 --> 15:08.125
So therefore, we found that for platform to work, you must

15:08.925 --> 15:12.645
disclose what would be the personal information.

15:12.645 --> 15:16.365
Because it's interesting is if I, I,

15:16.735 --> 15:18.605
let's just say I'm academic, I have a patent,

15:19.005 --> 15:22.405
I have the ownership, whether I use which platform,

15:22.405 --> 15:24.925
the platform doesn't have ownership of my knowledge.

15:25.265 --> 15:28.965
So it's up to me what, how much information I want

15:28.965 --> 15:32.645
to disclose and whether it will,

15:32.835 --> 15:36.285
have some ramification impact on my

15:36.465 --> 15:38.085
follow up patent.

15:38.785 --> 15:39.805
So I have to be careful.

15:39.905 --> 15:41.765
So, so that is kind of, so

15:41.765 --> 15:44.645
therefore, in terms of transparency in the platform setting,

15:44.705 --> 15:47.165
we think, yes, procedure is important,

15:47.785 --> 15:51.405
but also whether to what extent the individual, they want

15:51.405 --> 15:53.805
to disclose their information, their assets.

15:54.265 --> 15:57.205
So that's also important in terms of inclusion.

15:57.905 --> 16:00.965
We also, still,

16:02.825 --> 16:07.125
retain waiting terms, the idea of range of a participant,

16:07.505 --> 16:08.685
we found that that's important.

16:08.785 --> 16:13.165
But most important, we think to what extent the platform

16:13.835 --> 16:18.765
will entitle the individual players the kind

16:18.765 --> 16:22.445
of the rights to be part of decision, do they allow them

16:22.465 --> 16:25.845
to decide who do I want to work with, how,

16:26.145 --> 16:30.085
and what kind of collaboration format I want to work with,

16:30.145 --> 16:32.845
in which way I want to sell my technology,

16:33.185 --> 16:37.925
and how much control in, in that, negotiation I have.

16:38.345 --> 16:41.565
So, so, so that we add another dimension, inclusion

16:41.715 --> 16:44.605
that is participant, entitlement.

16:45.105 --> 16:49.845
The third one we wanna, include is to, to, enhance

16:50.785 --> 16:52.085
on, ton's

16:52.345 --> 16:55.005
and original, research is

16:55.025 --> 16:57.885
to include participants commitment,

16:58.315 --> 17:02.765
because some academics there, they're more active, they want

17:02.765 --> 17:05.645
to give time, effort to help

17:06.305 --> 17:09.125
to improve the platform development.

17:09.235 --> 17:13.845
Some are less, some just saying, okay, I do my bit as long

17:13.845 --> 17:16.605
as I can sell my, my technology,

17:17.345 --> 17:20.725
and whether to certain extent whether I want to help

17:21.275 --> 17:22.325
with the functions

17:23.025 --> 17:26.125
and the features of platform, I don't care that much.

17:26.625 --> 17:28.325
So we, we want to differentiate that.

17:28.585 --> 17:31.085
So therefore, we kind of included,

17:31.385 --> 17:35.085
having said in transparency, we included, you know,

17:35.275 --> 17:37.845
individuals, asset knowledge

17:38.545 --> 17:43.445
and, for the inclusion, we included that entitlement.

17:43.585 --> 17:46.605
And, the commitment

17:49.225 --> 17:51.005
for the, transparency

17:51.305 --> 17:53.645
of individual's assets and information.

17:54.025 --> 17:56.205
We also designed the three attributes

17:56.425 --> 17:59.285
to see whether their information, the diversity

17:59.465 --> 18:03.205
of their information, density of their information, as well

18:03.205 --> 18:05.245
as the quality of their information.

18:05.585 --> 18:08.805
We use it as the usability of their information.

18:09.185 --> 18:12.885
So those are the main constructs of this research.

18:13.145 --> 18:15.805
We found that both ways

18:16.555 --> 18:20.765
that the transparency influence the inclusion,

18:21.345 --> 18:22.605
and, to a certain extent,

18:22.825 --> 18:26.005
the inclusion also influence the transparency.

18:26.665 --> 18:29.925
So we don't found that, the procedure, both procedure

18:30.025 --> 18:32.125
and the individual's knowledge

18:32.345 --> 18:35.645
and asset will altogether

18:36.295 --> 18:40.125
equal influence simulate simultaneously all three

18:40.805 --> 18:42.885
a inclusion sub dimensions.

18:43.435 --> 18:47.965
What we found that is if you increase the procedure

18:48.385 --> 18:52.805
and the processes that will encourage more people to join in

18:52.805 --> 18:56.885
that range of participant as well as their entitlement,

18:56.885 --> 18:59.725
because you make your procedure very transparent.

19:00.185 --> 19:03.525
You allow people to post their interest,

19:03.635 --> 19:05.245
they wanna do X, Y, Z.

19:06.105 --> 19:10.765
Um, in comparison, we found that the individual,

19:11.025 --> 19:15.565
if you disclose individual, their, knowledge assets,

19:16.155 --> 19:19.085
that will increase the participant commitment.

19:19.705 --> 19:23.925
So we found those separate influence, like,

19:24.825 --> 19:27.485
going back, when we look at

19:27.625 --> 19:31.565
how inclusion influence transparency, we found,

19:31.565 --> 19:35.925
three attributes of the transparency, particular in terms

19:35.945 --> 19:37.805
of the individual's assets.

19:37.985 --> 19:41.365
We found that the, the, the wider

19:41.905 --> 19:45.205
the people participant, of course, they

19:45.795 --> 19:48.485
broaden the range of their knowledge, assets,

19:49.435 --> 19:51.525
deposit on the platform.

19:52.225 --> 19:56.685
And also when the participant give them more,

19:57.225 --> 19:59.805
entitlement responsibilities,

20:00.835 --> 20:03.445
they will increase the density.

20:04.115 --> 20:08.205
That means, accumulated numbers of knowledge

20:08.745 --> 20:09.965
in particular field.

20:10.545 --> 20:14.725
And we also found it's very important for the participant

20:14.785 --> 20:18.725
to increase their commitment to the platform,

20:19.145 --> 20:20.165
decision making.

20:20.385 --> 20:23.805
By doing that, it, vice versa, it

20:24.515 --> 20:26.645
will increase the quality.

20:27.075 --> 20:30.325
That means the usability of the participants,

20:30.335 --> 20:33.485
their knowledge, deposit on the platform.

20:33.785 --> 20:37.365
So that would be the main funding of this research. Before

20:37.365 --> 20:40.005
Going into the conclusions, I, I want to give kind

20:40.005 --> 20:44.645
of a dumb down version of what Jing very brilliantly said,

20:45.145 --> 20:47.725
because I, I can understand somebody

20:47.725 --> 20:49.525
who hasn't taken part in this project

20:50.175 --> 20:51.485
won't see what's the value of this.

20:51.485 --> 20:55.045
And, and this is the, I'm, I'm gonna really dumb it down,

20:55.105 --> 20:59.405
but when you go to a friend to consult on a decision

20:59.405 --> 21:03.725
that you need to make, you share with that person, well,

21:03.865 --> 21:05.885
I'm saying a friend, but a colleague could be anybody.

21:05.885 --> 21:07.765
You share with that person a lot of the information

21:07.765 --> 21:10.085
that you have to make the decision, because

21:10.085 --> 21:12.005
otherwise the person won't be able to help you.

21:12.425 --> 21:14.845
And then, well, you take on board the advice that the person

21:14.875 --> 21:16.205
that that friend could give you,

21:16.745 --> 21:17.965
and you're gonna make the decision,

21:18.265 --> 21:21.485
but then you are obliged to go back to the person

21:21.625 --> 21:23.365
and tell them, well, how did it go?

21:23.945 --> 21:25.645
Did, did it, was it the right decision?

21:25.705 --> 21:26.885
Was your advice useful?

21:27.585 --> 21:32.565
And this dynamic happens when you are creating value

21:32.995 --> 21:36.485
with a partner, eh, which doesn't

21:37.395 --> 21:38.445
have anything to gain.

21:38.445 --> 21:39.845
There's no contractual agreement.

21:39.845 --> 21:43.125
So you have to gain their conf, their, their trust

21:43.665 --> 21:47.045
and gain, their willingness to help you.

21:47.465 --> 21:49.805
And that's where all these, the, the interactions

21:49.805 --> 21:52.285
between transparency and inclusion occur

21:52.595 --> 21:55.085
because in, in, in the case it happens

21:55.115 --> 21:57.485
that the platform opens inclusion,

21:58.105 --> 22:00.125
and then nobody wants to participate,

22:00.125 --> 22:03.005
and they don't want, they, the ones who participate,

22:03.005 --> 22:04.045
don't do it in the right way.

22:04.425 --> 22:08.845
So the platform has to develop procedures for transparency

22:09.385 --> 22:12.325
to invite people to participate.

22:12.465 --> 22:15.285
And then it's where the, these, interactions

22:15.285 --> 22:17.965
between transparency and inclusion start to occur

22:18.305 --> 22:19.645
and start to be relevant

22:19.645 --> 22:23.325
because there is a creation

22:23.325 --> 22:26.085
of value from the interactions of this, of,

22:26.085 --> 22:27.485
of transparency and inclusion.

22:27.785 --> 22:31.285
The conclusions are, are, are, well firstly, the,

22:31.305 --> 22:35.285
the concept of the platform, the, the concept that in

22:36.125 --> 22:40.765
platforms this well open strategy is made for platforms.

22:41.265 --> 22:44.365
And in platforms, these interactions between transparency

22:44.465 --> 22:46.365
and inclusion are very important.

22:47.065 --> 22:51.245
Uh, and so we speak to procedural transparency and,

22:51.265 --> 22:52.845
and tell, tell the authors

22:53.185 --> 22:55.885
who have developed procedural transparency, which is mostly

22:55.955 --> 22:58.685
with internal and colleagues and side as well.

22:59.425 --> 23:00.845
Uh, we go back to them

23:00.845 --> 23:03.925
and tell them, well, trans procedural transparency is super

23:03.925 --> 23:06.765
important to allow for this interaction

23:07.235 --> 23:09.765
between inclusion and transparency.

23:10.965 --> 23:13.465
Eh, we also, eh,

23:15.165 --> 23:18.185
by adding these sub dimensions that don't exist,

23:18.925 --> 23:22.145
we open new avenues for, for research or,

23:22.145 --> 23:24.545
or new avenues for, discussion.

23:25.085 --> 23:28.545
Uh, maybe this doesn't work in, in, in, I don't know,

23:28.545 --> 23:29.625
in more closed companies.

23:29.835 --> 23:34.385
Maybe it works, in different ways in network companies.

23:34.805 --> 23:36.905
All that, would be interesting to study.

23:37.845 --> 23:42.635
Um, there's also the, this,

23:43.305 --> 23:46.405
evolution between transparency and inclusion,

23:46.785 --> 23:49.245
and we have kind of opened the box on that.

23:49.435 --> 23:52.725
Obviously there are tons of things that could be done,

23:53.265 --> 23:55.965
better or, or, or in, in different contexts.

23:56.545 --> 24:01.205
Um, and finally that we contribute by pointing out

24:02.065 --> 24:05.005
the three specific links between strategy, inclusion

24:05.785 --> 24:07.565
and the attributes of participation,

24:07.565 --> 24:09.725
which in calls the assets and resources.

24:10.545 --> 24:12.245
Uh, that's it.

24:12.425 --> 24:15.445
And we hope that, other scholars

24:15.445 --> 24:17.765
or maybe even ourselves will be able to build on that.

24:18.345 --> 24:21.765
Our research is just to give one

24:22.585 --> 24:24.885
as like illustrative example,

24:25.585 --> 24:28.725
the open strategy in particular implementation,

24:28.755 --> 24:30.565
open strategy is very complex.

24:31.595 --> 24:35.965
It's not like, you know, like openness as a closure.

24:36.475 --> 24:37.645
It's not a binary.

24:38.345 --> 24:42.845
You either go extremely open or you go extremely close.

24:43.075 --> 24:46.045
It's kind of continue, you know,

24:46.045 --> 24:48.805
many organization embrace a little bit open,

24:49.025 --> 24:50.405
but still have control.

24:51.185 --> 24:54.365
And, there are quite a lot of, you know,

24:54.365 --> 24:56.765
factors influence, you know,

24:56.945 --> 24:59.525
and which should be open

24:59.785 --> 25:03.885
and to what extent the degree of openness.

25:04.225 --> 25:08.165
So, so it, it's a com It, it's likely to have a combination

25:08.225 --> 25:10.605
of both open under control

25:11.185 --> 25:15.405
and it's, it's having said, it's quite, complex

25:15.915 --> 25:18.445
process, so we just shows

25:19.095 --> 25:21.485
there might be some relationships in there.

25:21.865 --> 25:24.125
But I think in reality particular

25:24.225 --> 25:28.285
for individual organizations, they, there, there are

25:28.915 --> 25:32.845
more story behind that, haven't been discovered

25:33.345 --> 25:34.165
by scholars.

00:00 - Open strategy draws from this notion of open innovation. But I, I, I need to tell you a little bit of background of h how and why did open strategy come to be in, I don't know, the 1960s. I, I'm pretty sure none of us were born then. there was this, wave called strategic planning,

00:17 - and that's where kind of strategy become to be used as a term in business and in strategic planning. The assumption was that there was a boss and they designed the strategy and there were followers that implemented or did the strategy. And if, actually, if you dig a bit, in many organizations, that's is still the assumption, but that is not the reality. And on one, on the one hand, the, the development of academic academia,

00:51 - regarding strategy has included other people in making strategy. Let, let me give you an idea. In, in, there was this big shake, mostly in America on the, on this, in the eighties, where the middle managers were fired, really? And that affected many big corporations because a big part of the knowledge was kept by middle managers. So there were a, a couple of, academics

01:22 - who started researching how important middle managers were in the developmental strategy. And their main finding was that although, well, you would tend to think that if you, spread decision making across the organization, you get more commitment. however, their, results were counterintuitive because what they actually found is that the quality of the strategy being produced was better.

01:49 - It was more attuned to the environment, which is counterintuitive because you would think that you, you just because we have this mind frame that there's a boss and the boss says, kind of military mind frame. and from then on in academia spec especially, there's been a lot of development of the effects and the power that middle management can have in developing strategy. And another finding has been

02:17 - that it depends on the industry. So in, in, in some industries, for example, where there's much more research and development, you need much more involvement of middle managers in developing the strategy because you need to be closer to the customer in, in, in, in, in, in how the environment changes as the company changes in, environments, which is more stable. There're not that many of those,

02:42 - but, for example, the car industry there is, there's less, well, they would hate me to say this, but it's a bit more steep. It, it seems like a, a more top down approach works better. However, in the after the millennium, it has been, kind of studied that actually it goes beyond that. And you can actually think of companies in which the strategy is being made not only by top managers, middle managers, frontline managers,

03:13 - but stakeholders in general, even customers. And that, I mean, when, when you think about it, it really rings a bell because how many clever input can customers give you a lot, especially in a rapid changing environment. So you, you are asking there who, which are the main authors? So in, in about 2005, a colleague

03:38 - and friend called Richard Whittington came up with this idea of open strategy, trying to broaden how strategy is created, which is so, which was a super clever story, but obviously there's no paradise here. So it's not, the more you open it, the better strategy will be. And there are caveats to that. And those two caveats are transparency and inclusion. That's why those are so important as I dimensions, because the more you open strategy, the more

04:11 - you inclusion you have. But how much transparency do you need? How much transparency should you have? Are you gonna show your, I don't know, pilot projects to the competition? Is it gonna go that far so that it becomes then, a trade off? How much open strategy do you want? And how much inclusion and how much transparency do you want?

04:36 - And that's why it has become so important because many companies that want to grow or want to develop new ways to compete it, explore new procedures or new processes to compete, and lay after Richard, there have been people like Julia, hows, for example, or David Seidel or Christian Staler, who is Christian is, is selling his open strategy book all over the world and hopefully, effectively, who have kind

05:04 - of consulted an open strategy and helped companies develop open strategy. And it's become kind of a, a, a bit of a fashionable thing. Now, is it a solution for every problem companies have? Of course not. But it is, it is a cool tool. Yeah. Just to add to my, Tono comments, you know, for this research, we really, the starting point is we build on Wittington and his colleagues the two dimensions. But, nowadays more

05:36 - and more researcher trying to see, is this just the two broadly dimensions? Are there sub dimensions? I think we take a step further. We want to see what are the, you know, like, additional sub dimensions can be used to indicate the depths and the level of transparency. Like you just gave example, what kind of information, some information like r and d are very ins, secrecy to the companies. Well, and, and, and, and most of the companies were open.

06:11 - They open in terms of a procedure. We could have a roadmap X, y, z one after another. What is the process? We make a decision, but it's kind of the information that is very difficult to, justify which kind of information might be strategically important to company will have to keep it in house. And also inclusion as well. You include a wide range of people, but what kind of responsibility

06:41 - and entitlement you, you decision making rights you will give to internal employees or more dramatically external, stakeholders. And also what would be their commitment. Some of them might be very active, some might be very passive. So I think we build on that. This paper is really trying to find those nitty gritty, taking a granular approach.

07:09 - And in addition to that, we're trying to take a very, a unique example. It's not in traditional companies, we apply those dimension, expand those dimension to understand, you know, sub dimensions in the platform setting. So that is something is quite, move very fast. So, so that the, the main drive behind is to see, in which way we understand it can be applied to a platform setting. The

07:41 - Literature basically covers transparency and inclusion to a certain degrees. And, the, the literature is very, well, not very, but a little bit normative in, in that they're encouraging companies to follow open strategy. of course there, there are not, not all of them, but there's this a kind of push to towards using, open strategy. and we also want to explore how these two dimensions work

08:13 - because it's, it's very easy to say, well, no, you, you give one dimension, you give one dimension, and you don't give another dimension. But what we go is in depth into each dimension, and the literature doesn't go in that much depth into each dimension. And the other thing is that they, the literature tends to apply the, the concept of open strategy to any organization. And that's one of the reasons why we pick up a platform,

08:43 - which is what Jing mentioned. And the platform model is really, prevalent today. If you think the, the organization that you work for is a platform, because you bring together different players, so you don't control the players, you don't actually, even, even, there's no contractual obligation and everything you get is from this collaboration. so well, I'm gonna give up what we found in the end, it turns out that for platforms,

09:15 - open strategy is a match made in heaven because it's the way, platforms better operate. so we contribute in many ways, well, hopefully in that way, but, by talking about a specific type of organization, which is a platform, and how open strategy is a valid tool for a platform. And well, gene will carry on, we'll develop that further. But how does transparency and inclusion nuances affect our platforms? Operate It's ambitious project.

09:49 - we collect the data from 2009, actually up until 2022, because for this, its ongoing project. But for this, research, this paper, we used the data from 20, 2000, the interview data from 2009 to 2017. But we also collect the, you know, meeting reports. And also, there, a number of statistics of the company growth, like a number of participants, what kind of knowledge they gather, in which way, the use of their knowledge.

10:27 - So, so basically it's a, we could track 10 years growth of this platform from 27 the year. It, the company was incept in inception stage is is established up until 2017. So the reason we want to, we, we did five rounds of, inter we used the five rounds of the interview. So the, I said it, it, it, it was a very ambitious project in several ways. The first, we believe that, open strategy one company,

11:02 - it itself, it's a venture business and trying to incorporate external, all the, individual players, actors trying to involve them. It, it's, it's a evolution, which means it evolves. And they, they make mistakes of a strategy at the beginning, for example, a completely open, they want to say, okay, let's do it like a, a similar idea of open source, and we encourage everybody, let's co-design this like a community, but it didn't work because they give too much power to individual.

11:37 - And the individual, like academics, I do, I cycle, because they don't understand how important to, to, they don't understand how to pitch the commercial value of their academic outputs. They, they're thinking, okay, I want to, sell my product or my, patent. I just upload a few, like, the files and I could have like my academic paper for stuff, but, and customer, they're not interested business, they're not interested.

12:11 - So at the beginning, they completely lose the control. And in the middle stage, they have to, enforce much more regulation control standard at the end, then they become open more, but with this guided openness. So, so that's why we have this, a five round interview, allow us to see how the strategy evolves over time. But also when we design this sub dimensions, we want to see whether there is a consistency across 10 years development, this kind of validated. So having said it's a mixed method, we wanna identify

12:53 - to see whether there is any relationships between transparency and inclusion. And also when we design the sub, dimensions, we want to see in which way is there any particular sub dimension influence, particular sub dimension of inclusion. So we wanna map out the kind of relationships. So the, the, the interviews, the qualitative parts of this research give us a little bit direction. Then we, at the end, we also use a little bit simple statistics regression to find whether we could convince

13:31 - what, the relationships that we, anticipated. So, so, so, so that is, so, so the database, you know, we have these interviews. We also have this, you know, the sta statistics, statistics, you know, as well as, you know, the company report. So it's, it's, it's quite, unique set for the transparency because we, having said we applied it to a, platform setting, and,

14:07 - we borrowed the idea from Waitington and, his two colleagues, 2011 publication. So, so we borrowed the procedure transparency, we're thinking, okay, about the decision, whether the steps, the information, whether you, you, you put on your website clearly, who will be part of this decision making, and then, to what extent we're going to disclose the decision we've made. And, in addition to that, we found that

14:36 - because the platform, it's, it's kind of, include quite a lot of external stakeholders, that individual, in this case, for example, those individual businesses who want to buy technology, patent or academic, output from academics. So, so those academics and the businesses, those are two very important group of for external stakeholders. So therefore, we found that for platform to work, you must disclose what would be the personal information.

15:12 - Because it's interesting is if I, I, let's just say I'm academic, I have a patent, I have the ownership, whether I use which platform, the platform doesn't have ownership of my knowledge. So it's up to me what, how much information I want to disclose and whether it will, have some ramification impact on my follow up patent. So I have to be careful. So, so that is kind of, so

15:41 - therefore, in terms of transparency in the platform setting, we think, yes, procedure is important, but also whether to what extent the individual, they want to disclose their information, their assets. So that's also important in terms of inclusion. We also, still, retain waiting terms, the idea of range of a participant, we found that that's important. But most important, we think to what extent the platform will entitle the individual players the kind

16:18 - of the rights to be part of decision, do they allow them to decide who do I want to work with, how, and what kind of collaboration format I want to work with, in which way I want to sell my technology, and how much control in, in that, negotiation I have. So, so, so that we add another dimension, inclusion that is participant, entitlement. The third one we wanna, include is to, to, enhance on, ton's and original, research is

16:55 - to include participants commitment, because some academics there, they're more active, they want to give time, effort to help to improve the platform development. Some are less, some just saying, okay, I do my bit as long as I can sell my, my technology, and whether to certain extent whether I want to help with the functions and the features of platform, I don't care that much. So we, we want to differentiate that.

17:28 - So therefore, we kind of included, having said in transparency, we included, you know, individuals, asset knowledge and, for the inclusion, we included that entitlement. And, the commitment for the, transparency of individual's assets and information. We also designed the three attributes to see whether their information, the diversity of their information, density of their information, as well

18:03 - as the quality of their information. We use it as the usability of their information. So those are the main constructs of this research. We found that both ways that the transparency influence the inclusion, and, to a certain extent, the inclusion also influence the transparency. So we don't found that, the procedure, both procedure and the individual's knowledge and asset will altogether

18:36 - equal influence simulate simultaneously all three a inclusion sub dimensions. What we found that is if you increase the procedure and the processes that will encourage more people to join in that range of participant as well as their entitlement, because you make your procedure very transparent. You allow people to post their interest, they wanna do X, Y, Z. in comparison, we found that the individual, if you disclose individual, their, knowledge assets,

19:16 - that will increase the participant commitment. So we found those separate influence, like, going back, when we look at how inclusion influence transparency, we found, three attributes of the transparency, particular in terms of the individual's assets. We found that the, the, the wider the people participant, of course, they broaden the range of their knowledge, assets, deposit on the platform.

19:52 - And also when the participant give them more, entitlement responsibilities, they will increase the density. That means, accumulated numbers of knowledge in particular field. And we also found it's very important for the participant to increase their commitment to the platform, decision making. By doing that, it, vice versa, it will increase the quality.

20:27 - That means the usability of the participants, their knowledge, deposit on the platform. So that would be the main funding of this research. Before Going into the conclusions, I, I want to give kind of a dumb down version of what Jing very brilliantly said, because I, I can understand somebody who hasn't taken part in this project won't see what's the value of this. And, and this is the, I'm, I'm gonna really dumb it down, but when you go to a friend to consult on a decision

20:59 - that you need to make, you share with that person, well, I'm saying a friend, but a colleague could be anybody. You share with that person a lot of the information that you have to make the decision, because otherwise the person won't be able to help you. And then, well, you take on board the advice that the person that that friend could give you, and you're gonna make the decision, but then you are obliged to go back to the person and tell them, well, how did it go?

21:23 - Did, did it, was it the right decision? Was your advice useful? And this dynamic happens when you are creating value with a partner, eh, which doesn't have anything to gain. There's no contractual agreement. So you have to gain their conf, their, their trust and gain, their willingness to help you. And that's where all these, the, the interactions between transparency and inclusion occur

21:52 - because in, in, in the case it happens that the platform opens inclusion, and then nobody wants to participate, and they don't want, they, the ones who participate, don't do it in the right way. So the platform has to develop procedures for transparency to invite people to participate. And then it's where the, these, interactions between transparency and inclusion start to occur and start to be relevant

22:19 - because there is a creation of value from the interactions of this, of, of transparency and inclusion. The conclusions are, are, are, well firstly, the, the concept of the platform, the, the concept that in platforms this well open strategy is made for platforms. And in platforms, these interactions between transparency and inclusion are very important. and so we speak to procedural transparency and, and tell, tell the authors

22:53 - who have developed procedural transparency, which is mostly with internal and colleagues and side as well. we go back to them and tell them, well, trans procedural transparency is super important to allow for this interaction between inclusion and transparency. Eh, we also, eh, by adding these sub dimensions that don't exist, we open new avenues for, for research or, or new avenues for, discussion.

23:25 - maybe this doesn't work in, in, in, I don't know, in more closed companies. Maybe it works, in different ways in network companies. All that, would be interesting to study. there's also the, this, evolution between transparency and inclusion, and we have kind of opened the box on that. Obviously there are tons of things that could be done, better or, or, or in, in different contexts. and finally that we contribute by pointing out

24:02 - the three specific links between strategy, inclusion and the attributes of participation, which in calls the assets and resources. that's it. And we hope that, other scholars or maybe even ourselves will be able to build on that. Our research is just to give one as like illustrative example, the open strategy in particular implementation, open strategy is very complex.

24:31 - It's not like, you know, like openness as a closure. It's not a binary. You either go extremely open or you go extremely close. It's kind of continue, you know, many organization embrace a little bit open, but still have control. And, there are quite a lot of, you know, factors influence, you know, and which should be open and to what extent the degree of openness.

25:04 - So, so it, it's a com It, it's likely to have a combination of both open under control and it's, it's having said, it's quite, complex process, so we just shows there might be some relationships in there. But I think in reality particular for individual organizations, they, there, there are more story behind that, haven't been discovered by scholars.

Faculti AI can make mistakes