Knowledge Management through Storytelling and Narrative – Semiotics of Strategy Graeme Carswell MacLeod Smith MA. DipM. PGCLTHE. MCIM. FIDM. AFHEA School of Business, Law and Communications Solent University Southampton A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Nottingham Trent University and Solent University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of Solent University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2019 i Copyright Statement This work is the intellectual property of Graeme Smith. You may copy up to 5% of this work for private study, or personal, non-commercial research. Any re-use of the information contained within this document should be fully referenced, quoting the author, title, university, degree level and pagination. Queries or requests for any other use, or if a more substantial copy is required, should be directed to the owner of the Intellectual Property Rights. ii Acknowledgments The author wishes to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of the following people whose contribution, advice and encouragement have done so much to bring this work to fruition. To Professor Steven Henderson, my former Director of Studies, whose advice, interest and expertise was always inspiring. You instilled in me so many research skills, such as critical thinking and helped to guide me away from many a youthful folly. And Professor Deborah Blackman who set me on this road of discovery in the field of knowledge management. To Emeritus Professor Mike Wilkinson, who stepped in as Director of Studies and instilled some ‘management’ rigour to the project and immediately saw merit in this whole endeavour. To Dr Laurie Wright, for his guidance and support on the use of Q Methodology and factor analysis when I needed it most. To the Senior Management Team at Solent University who participated as the respondent base and gave willingly of their time and without their co-operation a substantial part of this project would not have been possible. To my parents, who always encouraged me to be inquisitive and bold; and instilled in me a philosophy that to question is to learn if you ask the right question. I would like to dedicate this thesis to my very significant Partner, Brenda, you were my “Songbird” throughout. Finally, to my children and grandchildren that this thesis is living proof that whatever your humble beginnings, an inquiring mind allows you to achieve your aspirations. iii Abstract This study reviews knowledge management as a construct for analysing strategy discourse; identifying key strategy artefacts; and how they may be interpreted by key stakeholders engaged in strategy discourse. The context of this study is set initially in three case studies that illuminate the nature of storytelling and narrative as a strategy discourse. In seeking to clarify the nature of storytelling and narrative and the import of social architecture, further enquiry was required. The importance of storytelling and narrative in the development of strategy is recognised. In developing the notion of strategy as a people orientated construct, this study provides a theoretical foundation for the determination of how actors in strategy may take a position on strategy. To understand the nature of strategy discourse, this study reviews the field of semiotics, as a form of social constructivism, and its importance in revealing the way artefacts in strategy discourse may be interpreted as it regulates behaviour towards establishing a position in relation to strategy. Some readers of strategy have flirted with the notion of semiotic theory in the field of strategy discourse, but the flirtation is fleeting and does not attempt to read strategy from a semiotic locus. In this study, the focus is on the way strategy conversation changes as the nature of the story is changed. This locus revealed a knowledge gap in current literature and therefore the relevance of this study. The mixed methodology in this study draws upon existing semiotic theory to explicate strategy as a story of intent; with a focus on the semiotic components; the artefacts; and the vocabulary of strategy discourse that so determine how actors in strategy take a position on strategy. This study uses three case studies as the genesis for this investigation, rooted in the academic field of knowledge management to set the context of this study on Semiotics of Strategy. These studies are practice based and define an organisational model of the social interactions affecting knowledge transfer within organisations arising from problems of knowledge location, knowledge retention; and knowledge transfer. The research framework chosen to achieve the research aims of this study, includes using Q Methodology, and the complexity of the Q Sort data demanded a logical and consistent analysis of the data to triangulate a semiotic view of strategy discourse. This ontological approach captures the epistemological characteristics of strategy artefacts interpreted by the Senior Management Team, as actors, at Solent University. This research project underpins the value of a semiotic view as a diagnostic tool to determine the position that actors take in the context of existing strategy discourse. From an etymological perspective this study posits a typology based upon a semiotic framework to help diagnose how actors take a position based on their interpretation of key strategy artefacts; and to understand the nature of interpretation as a means of intervention by which the strategy narrative may be reshaped. What is of interest is how storytelling and narrative empowers individuals as they seek to disseminate and transfer knowledge from the past in order to shape the future. This study reveals the inflection that individuals may exert on knowledge artefacts; and the motivation of those who trade in knowledge assets, through storytelling and narrative, as players in the game of strategy search for coping strategies in an attempt to adapt to the new reality. Ultimately this study provides new insight into the power of semiotics in the early stage; and constructivism in the later stages of the knowledge management continuum; and describes how participants in strategy adopt a position on strategy. iv Contents: Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................... iii Abstract ....................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures: ............................................................................................................. ix List of Tables:............................................................................................................... xi List of Appendices ....................................................................................................... xii 1 CHAPTER ONE – Introduction and Overview ........................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Background .............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Context .................................................................................................................... 2 1.3.1 Knowledge Management ......................................................................................................... 4 1.3.2 What is Strategy ....................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.3 Discourse Analysis .................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 14 1.4 Research problem.................................................................................................. 15 1.5 Aims and Objectives of the Study; and Research Questions ................................ 16 1.5.1 Aims ....................................................................................................................................... 16 1.5.2 Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 16 1.5.3 Research Questions ............................................................................................................... 17 1.6 Knowledge Gap ...................................................................................................... 17 1.7 Gaps in Research and Practice .............................................................................. 18 1.8 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 19 1.9 Research Approach and Planned Journey ............................................................. 19 1.9.1 Definition and Design ............................................................................................................. 20 1.9.2 Data collection ....................................................................................................................... 20 1.9.3 Analysis, Findings and Conclusions ........................................................................................ 21 1.10 Thesis Structure ....................................................................................................