As brought forward in the section concerning strategy as social interaction, the context is important to Strategy-as-Practice perspective, since as for example Cuccurullo and Lega (2013) note, the context aids to better understand the strategic decisions taken.
Similarly, from the Projects-as-Practice perspective, the context of project has been recognized as important in the previous research in order to describe and understand the conditions in and around a project (Hällgren and Lindahl, 2012).
Municipalities can be described to be pluralistic contexts since they are representations of divided power, different interests and multiple and conflicting goals both in and around the municipality organization (Jarzabkowski and Fenton, 2006; Denis, Langley and Rouleau, 2007; Cuccurullo and Lega, 2013). However, as Denis, Langley and Rouleau (2007) note, all organizations are pluralistic but to different degrees. Yet, I see municipalities as highly pluralistic due to their role. For example, municipalities as public organizations have a service provider role (Jarzabkowski and Fenton, 2006, p.634), which brings into the fore not only the interests and goals in the municipality organization but also those of the people outside the organization, specifically the people residing in the municipality. Moreover, the actions and decisions in a municipality are under the public eye and scrutiny, in whose conduct media has a central role (Crawford and Helm, 2009, p.73).
In addition and in relation to the pluralism, the planning in public organizations is characterized by politicking, which in the municipality organization’s case is not only limited to that of politicians but concerns all the people advancing their personal interests, such as managers and public servants. Therefore, the decisions in public sector organizations do not always follow from rational planning (Lozeau, Langley and Denis, 2002; Arnaboldi, Azzone and Savoldelli, 2004, p.217). In fact, as already brought forward when examining the strategizing in the City of Sydney (Kornberger and Clegg, 2011), some interests can be emphasized over others.
An important aspect of pluralistic organizations with regard to the decisions taken, is resource allocation (Cuccurullo and Lega, 2013). The importance of the resource allocation is heightened if the resources are limited. Consequently, projects compete for resources in pluralistic organizations such as municipalities (Parker, Parsons and Isharyanto, 2015).
Since there is divided power and interests over the decisions, problems of participation or inclusion in planning and strategizing can arise in pluralistic contexts. As previously brought forward in the section concerning strategizing as social interaction when the study of Mantere and Vaara (2008) was examined, secrecy can restrict the participation in strategic activities. Moreover, as was seen in the section Projects-as-Practice, secrecy is also connected to projects. Despite the good aspects that the inclusion can bring, the wider inclusion of people in a pluralistic context, as Cuccurullo and Lega (2013, p.624) argue based on their findings, results in unmanageable discussions.
In fact, strategizing in a pluralistic context such as municipality, and in the case of the present thesis in and around a strategic project, is challenging due to the various actors who are entitled to promote their different values, interests and goals. The different values, interests and goals further make the strategizing in a municipality emotionally complicated since it touches upon motivational aspects of individuals and groups (Cuccurullo and Lega, 2013, p.611). In essence, as can be withdrawn from Knights and Morgan (1991), inclusion in strategizing provides the people with a sense of well-being.
Moreover, communicating and coordinating the different values, interests and goals is difficult in a pluralistic context (Cuccurullo and Lega, 2013, p.611). The different interests, values and goals are closely related to practices, since as can be withdrawn from the section concerning Strategy as social interaction, which revolves around the ideas of Strategy-as-Practice perspective, practices can be norms or accepted behavior.
Consequently, the problems of communication and coordination also fall on the practices and inevitably on the practitioners who perform them and on the praxis they have in specific situations.
Denis, Langley and Rouleau (2007) present three theoretical frames for understanding the strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Actor-Network Theory, Conventionalist Theory and the social practice perspective, which they refer to as translation process, accommodation process and social practice, respectively. Without delving into each theoretical frame as it is not in the scope of the present thesis, important aspects can be
drawn from each frame. Also Denis, Langley and Rouleau (2007), suggest that each frame can partly contribute to the understanding of strategizing in pluralistic contexts and that they can be examined as a whole. Thus, strategizing in a pluralistic context, such as a municipality, should be looked at as an ongoing process where the needs and values of different actors inside and outside the organization need to be understood through the practices and routines. Moreover, there can be moments when the interests are aligned in a way that specific undertakings, such as projects can be advanced.
Indeed, with regard to a strategic project in a municipality, the interests should be aligned since the supportive context is recognized as important (Parker, Parsons and Isharyanto, 2015). According to Parker, Parsons and Isharyanto (2015) supportive context is created by possessing the adequate management capabilities, which further contribute to project success. Connecting to Denis, Langley and Rouleau (2007), the adequate management capabilities in a pluralistic context would mean understanding the interests and needs of different actors inside and outside the organization, with specific regard to their practices and routines.
With respect to the actors inside the organization, the interests of the top management should be considered, since the importance of the top management support for a project is emphasized (Arnaboldi, Azzone and Savoldelli, 2004; Brown and Botha, 2005; Crawford and Helm, 2009). In a municipality, the top management support comprises both the managers and the politicians. The top management interests can be discussed and aligned in committees, such as the one studied by Hoon (2007), which was presented in the section concerning Strategizing as social interaction.
The understanding of the interests of the actors outside the organization, is related to new public management thinking, which has arisen in the public sector (Crawford and Helm, 2009, p.75). Alongside new public management, public value management (Crawford and Helm, 2009) has brought forward the importance of considering a whole network of different stakeholders and their participation in decision-making. As the purpose of the present thesis is not to delve deep into new public management as such, it will not be further elaborated here. However, let it be mentioned, as noted for example by Crawford and Helm (2009, p.75), that the trend in public management is shifting toward a larger involvement of community members, which in a municipality’s case means involving the citizens in the strategizing.