Enabling processes as routines that facilitate cognitive change

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of capacity building in reverse mentoring as an enabling routine in bringing about changes in cognitions and capabilities for strategy formulation/implementation and organisational change. Design/methodology/approach This paper is based on an action research case study of a reverse mentoring initiative for digital transformation in a large metal multinational based in India. The capacity-building action research was carried out during a consultancy project. Findings Top management team (TMT) change does not always provide the route to change in managerial cognition. Sometimes the TMT has to develop cognitive changes and new cognitions through learning and engage in way-finding to formulate/implement a strategy. Such learning requires routines, here digital reverse mentoring with capacity-building intervention, to enable development of personal knowledge (Eraut, 2000), along with cognitive changes, leading to development of capabilities. Such capacity-building routines serve as the enabling processes that facilitate learning and cognitive change. Research limitations/implications This study demonstrates the value of enabling process routines to facilitate learning and cognition change in bridging strategy implementation and change. It also suggests the need to look at a strategy as way-finding in order to better understand the gap between strategy formulation, implementation and change. Practical implications The study suggests the need for development of learning and cognition change routines as enabling processes in firms and provides insights into how old economy firms may adapt to digital era. Originality/value This study documents the routine of digital reverse mentoring as an enabling process for strategy development/implementation.

Automated summary

This study shows the importance of enabling process routines in facilitating learning and cognitive change in bridging strategy implementation and change. It also suggests the necessity of viewing strategy as way-finding to better comprehend the gap between strategy formulation, implementation, and change.