The way culture is often talked about in business settings is essentially strategic, as some-thing to be rolled out in order to meet an ulterior objective. If you've ever wondered why so many culture change programmes fail to point of grievance, it's because “culture as strategy” curtains a fundamental core of human life. It may seem far-fetched at first, but the blind spot is that we primarily think of ourselves as having biological bodies – an idea ingrained into us by upbringing and educational system, but pass over the existential fact that we simultaneously are expressive bodies by which we consensually make sense of organisational life. It is managerial hubris to think the way people affectively attune behaviour amongst one another locally can be managed opportunely in a top-down fashion. I propose the rift between what a growing niche of organisational scholars have to say about this and what (some of the biggest) consultancies try to sell their clientele needs to be addressed explicitly and bridged constructively1.
“C ulture eats strategy for breakfast,” the saying goes. This memorable aphorism is attributed to a respected cultural elder of management, Peter Drucker. At executive business schools and in corporate management, it is frequently deployed to highlight the phenomenon that however well-thought-out a strategy may be, as soon as it hits the real world, thus
