Role of Social Construction in the Making of Organisational Vision - Report Example

Role of Social Construction in the Making of Organisational Vision Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Date Introduction It is apparent that organizations do not operate within a vacuum, but rather, in the society. Consequently, the organization must relate with stakeholders both within and outside the organization. The concept of social construction therefore emerges in the operation of every organization. Social construction can be perceived as the practise of coordination of activity between individuals in a relationship. Social construction provides a platform for relations (Clegg and Stablein, 2006). It is also important for organizations to have a vision. The vision of the organization provides an insight into the future objectives/goals of the organization. This paper seeks discusses the role of social construction in the making of the organisational vision. Social Construction and Organisational Vision The constructionist view of the organisation equates it to a fluid field that reclines on generating meaning in a continuous process of development (Camargo-Borges & Rasera, 2013). The main concepts of social construction that include dialogue, generation of meaning, co-creation, and the development of a hybrid toolbox are fundamental aspects in setting the organisation’s vision. Under the constructionist perspective, dialogue entails the continuous interactive processes that take in a conversation. The outcome of a dialogue is the identification of shared realities that suit all the stakeholders of the organisation (McCown, 2014). In the organisational context, the shared realities are equivalent to the vision of the organisation. In essence, the interaction between managers, group leaders and consultants sets a milestone in the journey towards setting the vision of the organisation. The dialogue concept enables the different stakeholders to contribute a multiplicity of voices thereby yielding the co-creation of new realities that transform into the vision of the organisation. It is evident that setting the vision of the organisation does not focus entirely on the identification of the right path of the organisation. On the other hand, the vision entails the generative ways of achieving competitive advantage while ensuring the involvement and satisfaction of all stakeholders within the organisation (Janczak, 2005). As a result, attaining organisational transformation entails the inclusion of as many individuals as possible in defining the future of the organisation as well as providing suggestions to the preferred path of development. This heightens the significance of the dialogue concept of social construction in setting the organisation’s vision. Dialogue vocalises different understandings of individuals thus enabling the imagination and creation of different courses of action for the organisation. The other role played by social construction in setting the organisation’s vision revolves around the social construction concept of imagination. The inclusion of the social construction in making significant decisions necessitates a fluid, predicted, and less rigid perspective of possibilities (Camargo-Borges & Rasera, 2013). Introducing such a culture and view towards possibilities guarantees novelty, spontaneity, and ingenuity in the organisational decision making process. Unleashing imagination within the organisation guarantees freedom to different meanings proposed by the stakeholders of the decision-making process. Apparently, the freedom of meanings is a prerequisite for knowledge creation. As a matter of fact, the vision of the organisation centres on future possibilities. Defining future possibilities requires imagination, one of the definitive elements of social construction. Therefore, through imagination, it is proper to state that social construction plays an important role in setting the organisation’s vision. Social change within the organisation necessitates the use of imagination. Therefore, dialogue also entails imagination. Consequently, the organisation undergoes the transformation of the habitual approaches towards the thinking and talking of its staff (Bolden et al., 2003). Furthermore, this enables the construction of new meanings that lead in the path of creating new practices. On the far end of the process chain are new organisation realities that are inclusive and more engaging thus giving rise to sense of co-responsibility and belonging on all social actors in the process of setting the organisation’s vision. Setting the organisation’s vision also depends on the success of co-creation. The society has witnessed rapid changes and improvements in the forms of participation. As a result, the actors of the change process not only anticipate the change, but also expect the change to take place in an inclusive and more engaging manner for the benefit of all stakeholders (Ramaswamy, 2009). Continuous developments in communications technology has resulted in the development of better modes of participation. Co-creation plays a pivotal role in establishing trusting relationships between the organisation and its customers. This suffices to be an expected component of the vision statement of an organisation. It is important to understand that technology is a mere tool that connects people together using the interaction technology. This implies that such technologies do not change the relations that exist between these actors yet a positive shift in these relations is one of the building blocks for the anticipated change within the organisation. Dialogue yields an environment that enables co-creation (McCown, 2014). Dialogue enables the actors in the decision-making process to identify new forms of interaction and relation among stakeholders. Therefore, social construction enables participants under their coordinator to develop individual stories and stories about their environment, utilise their imaginations, create new ideas and express their commitment towards relational responsibility that is the key driver to the success of the change process. The chain of processes implies that social construction plays an influential role in setting the organisation’s vision. Therefore, co-creation is a creative process designed and facilitated by the participants of the social change process. It acts as an incentive to the ability of participants to explore new areas and ideas including the initially “taken-for-granted” ideas (Camargo-Borges & Rasera, 2013). It enables participants to “aim for the sky” in the race towards developing the organisation by embracing ambiguity and pursuing new solutions and ideas. The contribution of co-creation in setting the vision for the organisation is evident when participants ask imaginative and open questions to trigger the imagination of other actors in the process. A good question may be “If this organisation were a house, which type of a house would it be?” The use of such metaphorical questions invokes critical thinking among participants thereby subjecting them to constructive imagination about the effective ways of “putting the house in order and perfect condition” in readiness for future challenges. The use of co-creation in setting the vision of the organisation also requires the use of circular questions as opposed to fact-finding questions. For instance, regular customer complaints about a product may invoke several questions among participants. A fact-finding question may be “As the General Manager of this organisation, for how long have you received complaints from customers about defective products?” An analysis of the question reveals that it is a fact-finding question that attempts to associate defective products to the irresponsibility of the General Manager. Assuming that the vision is to enhance customer relations by developing quality products, the issue should invoke a dialogue by all actors. A good question may be “Suppose I asked the employees about the issue of defective products, for how long do you think they will say to have noted the issue?” Apparently, the second question does not focus on finding facts. Instead, the question intends to include ideas, actors, and contexts that should be put into action to resolve the issue with utmost urgency. Rather than anticipating feedback from one actor as would have been the case in the first question, the second question invokes a dialogue that requires all stakeholders to contribute their opinions regarding the descriptions of the issue and its possible solutions. The social construction of an organisation also plays a role in developing the organisational vision since social arrangements enhance the familiarisation of workers to the proposed and developed strategies (Parsic & Markic, 2013). Apparently, familiarisation is essential in fulfilling and achieving the vision and goals of the organisation. Therefore, including the social construction (particularly corporate social responsibility) into the vision and goals of the corporation is a guarantee of the successful performance of the firm. The social construct or environment includes the experiences of all stakeholders of the business that include employees, customers, and other stakeholders such as suppliers, marketers, distributors among others. The necessity of including the social environment of the business emanates from the fact that the fulfilment of the goals of the organisation motivates members of the social environment. A good example is establishing positive relationships among customers, marketers, distributors, suppliers, and employees of a company. The relationship enables the firm to attain competitive advantage since marketers and distributors relay customer feedbacks to the employees of the organisation. Following the reception of the feedback, employees integrate the information into the product development process thereby manufacturing products that reflect the needs of customers. Dealing with emerging problems at the workplace and the identification of solutions to such problems also depends on the social construction of the organisation. Such problems may include complaints from consumers and customers regarding poor services and poor-quality goods. Addressing such organisational concerns necessitates the transfer of cognitive tacit knowledge through informal discussions of the problems in question or social activity that involves the use of language (Willem & Buelens, 2006). As a result, it is evident that tacit knowledge resides within the social relationships in the firm and its individuals. This implies that it is a collective dimension. Developing organisational vision and strategies requires the proper use of the individuals and social relationships as a guarantee of the immediate and effective flow of information to all members of the social relationships. Conclusion New epistemologies and methodologies have revolutionised the process of setting the vision of the organisation. The social construction provides conceptual and practical resources that enable the firm to set a proper vision. The main social construction concepts that shape the making of organisational vision include dialogue, co-creation and imagination. Social construction actors include group leaders, managers, and consultants. Dialogue enables the identification of shared realities in the vision-setting process. It ensures that the process of setting the vision is inclusive and a reflection of the diverse constructive ideas of the actors of the process. However, the perspective of possibilities should be less rigid, fluid, and predictable to enable the inclusion of the ideas of other actors of the social process. Imagination guarantees freedom to the meanings held by the different actors of the change process. Imagination enables manages, group leaders and consultants to define future possibilities that transform into the vision of the organisation. Finally, co-creation capitalises on the latest interaction technology advancements to enhance people participation in decision-making by shifting their relations. It enables actors to identify and explore new areas that are potential milestones for organisational growth. Co-creation also requires the use of circular questions instead of fact-finding questions in addressing an issue. Circular questions present the issue to all actors thus attracting multiple responses and solutions thereby emphasising the critical role of social construction in the making or organisational vision. References Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A., & Dennison, P. (2003). A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks. Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter. Camargo-Borges, C., & Rasera, E. F. (2013). Social constructionism in the context of organization development. Sage Open, 3(2), 2158244013487540. Clegg, S and Stablein, R.(2006). The Social Construction of Organization. Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press Persic, A., & Markic, M. (2013). The Impact of Social Responsibility Vision and Strategy on Successful Corporate Operations. Managing Global Transitions, 11(1), 27. Janczak, S. (2005). The strategic decision-making process in organizations. Problems and Perspectives in management, 3(1), 58-70. McCown, N. (2014). Building leader-employee dialogue and relationships through internal public relations, leadership style, and workplace spirituality. PRism, 11(2). Ramaswamy, V. (2009). Leading the transformation to co-creation of value. Strategy & Leadership, 37(2), 32-37. Willem, A., & Buelens, M. (2006). Effects of Organizational Design Dimensions. Read More