ABSTRACT
The narrative perspective in strategy has been introduced and developed by several authors (Boje, 1991; Barry and Elmes, 1997; Czarniawska-Joerges, 1996) who adopt a “post-modernist” approach toward organizations. These authors argue that organizations are losing their boundaries and are dissolving themselves in their environment. Furthermore, within the organization, several “polyphonic” voices are fighting each other, trying to become the “official,” “dominant” strategy. These authors emphasize the importance of listening to dissonant and often minority voices in order to construct and implement a sound strategy, but this goal seems elusive. The main limit of these post-modernist approaches is that they are too relativist and thus fail to explain how an organization can formulate and implement what would be a “good” strategy, or at least a better one. Moreover, in such a perspective, identity also loses its consistence since no one knows any more what it is and where it lies. What, then, is identity when an organization has no boundary and expresses itself through several conflicting voices?
