Robust Action: Advancing a Distinctive Approach to Grand Challenges

Abstract Although management scholars have embraced grand challenges research, in many cases, been treated as merely a context for exploring extant theoretical perspectives. By comparison, our approach – robust action provides novel framework tackling challenges. In this invited article, we revisit 2015 model, clarifying and elaborating its key elements taking stock of subsequent developments. We then identify three promising directions future research: scaffolding, imaginaries, distributed actorhood. Ultimately, core message is remarkably simple: strategies participatory architecture, multivocal inscription experimentation jointly provide means that well matched to their complexities, uncertainties, evaluativities. Keywords Grand Robust Complexity Uncertainty Evaluativity Sustainability Citation Gehman, J., Etzion, D. Ferraro, F. (2022), "Robust Action: Advancing Distinctive Approach Challenges", Gümüsay, A.A., Marti, E., Trittin-Ulbrich, H. Wickert, C. (Ed.) Organizing Societal Challenges (Research the Sociology Organizations, Vol. 79), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 259-278. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20220000079024 Publisher: Limited Copyright © 2022 Joel Dror Etzion Fabrizio Ferraro License This chapter published under Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate create derivative works article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes), subject full attribution original publication authors. The terms licence be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Over past several years, produced growing body research on particular label relatively novel, topic resonates with longstanding interest addressing societal issues within organization studies (Hinings Greenwood, 2002; Selznick, 1996; Stern Barley, 1996). were fortunate own contributions (Etzion, Avidan, 2017; 2015) somewhat early cycle. Looking back, part what work enabled catalyzed together other was creation legitimation an intellectual space challenges, especially early-career researchers (Friesike, Dobusch, Heimstädt, 2022). When developing ideas, certainly had no inkling popularity paper would achieve. Rather than providing entirely de novo set brought (and sometimes eclectic) ideas integrated fashion. some instances, involved unpack from margins field; others it reimagining blurring) boundaries between literatures ways us expand conversation. embrace spirit further advance ideas. Specifically, editors take progress relative read interlocutors closely, does not aim either systematic or comprehensive review work. Rather, seek do things. First, eye selected elements, particularly areas where elaboration seems warranted, concepts interpreted anticipated. Second, how subsequently explored extended these strategies. Finally, stepping back framework, premise reflect opportunities wish up next, namely Complexity, Uncertainty, What are challenges? yet attract significant scholars. Both now, discussions invoked primarily phenomena-driven definitions. For instance, George et al. (2016) described “formulations global problems can plausibly addressed through coordinated collaborative effort” (p. 1880) and, following Canada, “specific critical barrier(s) that, if removed, help solve important problem high likelihood impact widespread implementation” 1881). Given backdrop, one distinctive features effort conceptualize define called “analytic facets challenges.” introduced facets: complexity, uncertainty, evaluativity. remainder section, facets, expounding understanding them (see Table 1). conceptualized matters concern entail evoke provoke concerns scope (such climate change), more localized. Whereas widely accepted poverty), be. And whereas ameliorable via removal common barrier, much less tractable. Critically, definition problematizes possibility drawing delimited list once all, such sustainable development goals. 1. Analytic Facets Challenges. Original Definition Commentary Complex characterized by interactions associations, non-linear dynamics Tackling goes beyond systems view complexity wherein relationality temporality given exogenous. Instead, themselves endogenized Uncertain evolution difficult forecast actors, who cannot properly possible states world entails expectations, often preventing coming pass, thereby undermining falsifiability Evaluative cut across jurisdictional boundaries, implicate multiple criteria worth, reveal new even they being tackled intrinsically values-laden endeavor. Requiring agreement first principles precondition likely fatal Source: (2015) authors’ analysis article. Two uncertainty overlap (at least superficially) perspectives wicked volatility, ambiguity (Barber, 1992; Rittel Webber, 1973). Yet, concept broader understandings term. Namely, most assume certain level ontological realism; perceived “real,” reality assumed exist independent humans, thus setting quest accurately map system intervention points. Such typically demands kind omniscience (Stacey, 2001). But sustainability innovation, there which endogenous, leading different strategic, policy, implications (Garud 2012; Garud, Kumaraswamy, Tuertscher, 2017). Similarly, conceptualization perhaps heterodox. potentially innumerable futures. Ergo attempts mathematical models computer simulations essentially untestable (Funtowicz Ravetz, 1993). example, scientific assessment frequency, intensity, damage caused extreme weather events climatically changed modeled mathematically, transposed into financial instruments, catastrophe bonds Kypraios, Forgues, 2019). However, approaches controlling, planning, adapting, otherwise managing unfalsifiable: [Catastrophe] perform peculiar epistemological magic. Because object exists only probabilistic future, never absolutely falsifiable same token, always improved incorporation observations science. (Johnson, 2015, p. 2511) greatest achievements grappling attain them, counterfactual unremarkable functions “normally,” devoid pandemics, failing ecosystems, social collapse. imaginary striking highly uncertain simultaneously appreciate value because so quotidian taken granted. Earning plaudits contributing endeavor celebrate status quo has preserved? third facet evaluativity aspect treatment As put article: “The tackled” 365). Implicated here axiological commitments (i.e., assumptions about things good, valuable, worth having doing) those excluded, questions value(s) pursued (Gehman, 2021). Taken seriously, formulation invites participants alike contend rationalities, logics, values, practices, orders forth all themes literature (Friedland Alford, 1991; Haveman Rao, 1997; Stark, 2009; Thornton Ocasio, 1999; Townley, Weber, 1946). Examples vein include role institutional logics enabling constraining efforts aimed (Cobb, Wry, Zhao, 2016; Claus, Amis, 2020; Lounsbury Wang, Zhao 2016). Action Strategies At 2 overview). section assumes familiarity arguments revisits them. clarify warranted 2. Strategies. Characteristic Strategy Participatory Architecture Multivocal Inscription Distributed Experimentation A structure rules engagement allow diverse heterogeneous actors interact constructively over prolonged timespans Discursive material activity sustains interpretations among various audiences evaluative manner promotes coordination without requiring explicit consensus Iterative generates small wins, evolutionary learning increases engagement, while allowing unsuccessful abandoned Dimension Structural Interpretive Practice foundations Governance commons (Dietz, Ostrom, Stern, 2003; 1990) flexibility (Pinch Bijker, 1987) Small wins (Plowman al., 2007; Weick, 1984) Hybrid forums (Callon 2009) Strategic use (Jarzabkowski Sillince, Jarzabkowski, Shaw, 2012) Experimentalist governance (Sabel Zeitlin, Expanded Deliberative integrative (Bachtiger Parkinson, 2019) Actor-network theory devices (Akrich, 1992) Abduction (Golden-Biddle, 2020) Modularity (Manning Reinecke, 2016) Local (Mair New Scaffolding (Ansell, 2011; Casasnovas 2021; Mair Fictional expectations (Augustine 2019; Beckert, actorhood: non-humans cities (Gehman Zuzul, There requires forms collaboration (governments, corporations, citizens, scientists, NGOs, non-human forests, oceans, lakes, cities) (e.g., Latour, To address circumstances, proposed defined “a timespans” (Ferraro 373). structural dimension meant capture need devise practices could harness identities, interests, actions productive ways. chose term architecture refer broad principles, rules, roles, guide collective construction policies standards potential shape behavior action. also built hybrid bring scientists citizens (Callon, Lascoumes, Barthe, 2009), evident, open source software communities (O’Mahony West O’Mahony, 2008), must developers corporations cooperate. wrote fields interests already advancing processes contexts. last decade witnessed explosion area, focus standard-setting (Levy, Manning, Manning 2016), national transnational regulation policy (Abbott, Levi-faur, Snidal, Brès, Mena, Salles-Djelic, 2019), cross-sectoral partnerships multistakeholder (Gray Purdy, 2018), shareholder Beunza, 2018; Goodman Arenas, 2015), movements (Briscoe Safford, 2008; DeJordy, Scully, Ventresca, Creed, McDonnell, King, Soule, name just few. Along way, studying stakeholder overcome tension dissensus architectures deeply contradictory systems. initially business ethics grounded Habermas’ (1996) deliberative democracy, versions stakeholders rely rational legitimate solutions divisive face (Palazzo Scherer, 2006; Scherer Palazzo, 2007). reliance regulative ideal criticized empirical perspective inability power imbalances (Banerjee, 2014; Moog, Spicer, Böhm, inadequately accounting profound differences values parties might engagements (Ehrnström-Fuentes, proponents alternative “agonistic” suggested should avoid conflict strategic considerations. ensures powerful participate process, leaves NGOs legitimately continue advocacy outside (Brand, Blok, Verweij, 2020). Recent aspire eliminate dualism dissensus, highlighting explicitly acknowledge manage pluralism modular architectures. Building study change group religious investors (ICCR) two automotive companies (Ford GM), Beunza (2018) developed communicative model dialogue contestation filing aggressive proposals) processes. Levy advanced process starts radical disruptive demands, but evolves increasingly accommodate reciprocal others’ constraints interests. ethics, Schormair Gilbert (2021) pragmatism Forester (2013) propose five-step discursive sharing follow situation conflict. recognizes not) differences, orient toward sufficient justification. way framed, course, pivotal curtailing actors. These frames operate provisional truces nature below), initial adversarial stance. guaranteed. extent gradually develop ambitious frames, generate pushback incompatible Berkowitz Grothe-Hammer (2022) studied International Whaling Commission, showed commission switched goal whaling whale conservation, Japan order lacking any decision-making agency (“decidability”) left Commission. Bringing insights together, believe emphasized collaborate, evidence suggest capacity deeper robust, stopping short delegitimating stances facilitating (Schifeling Hoffman, deliberation political science enrich processes, ability design effective structures recent review, see Bachtiger Our “discursive criteria, consensus” fuses notion multivocality, (Padgett Ansell, 1993), actor-network theory’s 1992). combining hoped foreground artifacts properties, function bridging mechanism attracts holds worldviews (Etzion 2010). practice, inscriptions enable multiactor initiatives concern. They serve metaphorical speed bumps exit find alienating. interpretive enables justify why remain committed, hooks eliciting others. studies, continues understood synonymous ambiguity. McMahan Evans (2018, 860) reinforced Reinecke’s arguing case “ambiguity, follows, stimulate … play crucial creating zones engagement.” More generally, benefits highlighted corporate responsibility (Meyer Höllerer, circular economy (Niskanen, Anshelm, McLaren, 2020), (Martí, urban revitalization (Jalonen, Schildt, Vaara, (Turnheim Nykvist, Consequently, foreclosed; rather, invested persistence (Chliova, Mair, Vernis, too recipe failure, when unable share cognitive representations (Zuzul, Since truly master inscription. domain nanotechnology, Grodal O’Mahony (2017, 1820) variety employed rhetoric “grafted challenge onto existing broadening away [the] ambitions” domain’s founders Feront Bertels, 2021 responsible investing). instrumental coffee industry deliberate negotiate around “economic farmers,” cornerstone Fairtrade movement. interpretation eventually standards, 25% premium certified earmarked investments boosting farmers’ productivity quality long-term economic benefit, were. time, chipped empowerment farmers established foster. Multivocality, clear, necessarily ensure optimal outcomes involved, perpetuate imbalances. Of few politically neutral, incumbents strong maintaining (Benschop, It therefore explore legitimizes slows down challenge. fossil fuel companies, analyzed utility clever wordplay Lefsrud, Graves, Phillips, 2017 “ethical oil”), façades (Cho, Laine, Roberts, Rodrigue, communication deflect attention individual responsibilities (Supran Oreskes, cuts ways; promote activism inactivism (Mann, Thus, emphasize catch-all utterance post-truth world. Baseless assertions “vaccines cause autism”) tribalism multivocal. Landing zinger media platform “pwning” ideological adversary unlikely lead enrollment engagement. Propaganda, saying, (Neither hype.) efforts, indubitably, rallying support, applying pressure, positions; however, directive non-ambiguous, conscript From network perspective, rather forging alliances nodes, tend close ranks cliques, reducing robustness addition, multivocality “anything goes” call relativism. reflects onto-epistemological sciences (plural) construct facts neither converge nor commensurable Mol, Sarewitz, 2004). Often, underlying driving proclaimed used justification, factual employed. collapse scrutiny. withstands repeated probing deploy sets facts. such, precursor outcome sustained needed prompt whether thwarting progress. Is predict will achieve multivocality? One presence absence intentionality missing factor. Padgett Ansell (1993) concluded Cosimo de’ Medici practitioner action, decipher his intentions, he himself quick determine intentions. paradox goal-oriented (or managerialist) people are, easier “see through” objectives, successfully employed? Despite endemic shy abduction infer plausible explanations connections specific general (Bartel Golden-Biddle, Mantere Ketokivi, 2013). keeping insights, strategy practice form experimentation, “iterative abandoned” 376). contributes specific, urgent improving impairing) problem-solving. pointed out instructive examples. despite long standing criticisms US federal level, plethora local including city, state, multistate initiatives, claimed potent top-down considered collectively (Lutsey Sperling, 2008). arrangements, Forestry Stewardship Council Fair Labor Association (Bartley, reason positive feedback loop created win momentum, making next shifting resources direction winners Reay, Germann, 1984). Even experiments out, generative, prompting additional involvement, motion search solutions, promoting redefinition itself Sabel 2012). made contribute interesting regard Porter, Huysman’s (2020) examination Save Oceans, initiative maritime health oceans fostering shipping practices. Central crowdsourcing platform. Porter identified proved ill-structured experimentation. encouraged maintain large options. facilitated co-creation end implementing candidate resulting adaptive supported groups acting learning” 271). Third, allowed occur, came went roles levels Making ideation persistent visible later phases informed directly in. 272) Fourth, ongoing definition. According served temporal “by encouraging inclusive future” 274). Beyond platforms “keeping