{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02767134951042997, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01319710515112814, 'mean_word_length': 5.973293768545994, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
BUILDING STRATEGIC CHANGE CAPABILITIES THROUGH CREATING ORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE: AN EMPIRICAL MIX-METHODS STUDY OF A FINANCIAL SERVICE EXAMINING THE REFLECTIVE PRACTICES OF THEIR LEADERSHIP TEAM.

This paper reports empirical results from a case study (Yin, 2003) in the financial services industry with a U.S.-based firm undergoing strategic change through mergers/acquisitions and restructuring in an attempt to reposition itself within a rapidly changing industry in the period1998-2000. The study sought to understand the dynamic social process of creating organizational knowledge during strategic transformational change through understanding the nature of a firm’s knowledge structure concerning organizational change. To best understand firm’s social processes involved in the multi-dimensions of knowledge (Garud, 1997; Nicholls-Nixon, 1997), know what, where, when, why, and how to change, the researchers used mixed methodologies (Green, Caracelli, Graham, 1989) to gather real-time data to include qualitative and quantitative strategies such as: focus group storyboarding (Appendix A) using emerging pragmatic theory with informed sources who had both strategic and operational perspectives of the firm; interviews with top management team members; observations of planning meetings and daily routines; document review of stated strategic direction and transformational effort plans; and an organizational learning survey using a cross-section representation. The findings from this study contribute to our conceptual development about knowledge creation processes and necessitate some reflection on the existing theories and models relative to change and to collective cognition in three areas: (1) need for non-linear living systems approach to change, with consideration for a dualistic approach such as viewing living social systems as both openclosed, viewing organizational routines as both a source for stability-change, and viewing the need for both learning and performing actions for enduring deep-level transformation; (2) integration of reflective practitioner (Schon, 1978) with change models and other knowledge-creating processes that can be leveraged by leadership teams; and (3) recognizing the role of history, identity, and memory in sensemaking process that inhibits or enables creation of organizational knowledge.