Strategy’s futures

International audienceIf asked: “What is the time?” you will look at your phone or at your wrist and provide a swiftanswer; yet if asked: “What is time?” you will most likely struggle to provide a coherent answer,no matter where you look. This vignette is attributed to Augustinus, who, in the space of twolines, makes us painfully aware what difficult an idea time actually is. In this essay we set out tobring some of the subtleties and complexities of time to the discipline of strategy – a discoursethat has been firmly focused on the future (and hence engaged with time) yet has shown littleappetite nor much ability to problematize time adequately. We ask: what is the complex nature oftime, and how does that nature alter strategy? By exploring this question we problematize thenature of the future, and discuss how the future is enacted in strategy practice and through whichstrategy tools the future is turned into an object of the present. We argue that a fruitful approachto the problem of time in strategy needs to be attentive to the multiple forms of futures at play(such as the common distinction between short term and long term futures), the actors who carrythem and the tools through which they materialize. We illustrate this approach with two examplesin which the relationship of strategy with the long term was problematized: debates on themanagement of forests in the 18th and 19th century, and debates on the financialization ofcorporations in the 20th century. We pursue the analysis of strategy’s futures by examining thetemporalities of three common strategy tools: models, plans, and discounting. The overallcontribution of this essay to this SI is to make strategy researchers and practitioners aware oftime’s complex nature, and how this complex nature plays a critical role in the pursuit of strategy