Anticipating surprise: the case of the early warning system of Rijkswaterstaat in the Netherlands

References

• Angwin, D., Paroutis, S., & Mitson, S. (2009). Connecting up strategy: Are senior strategy directors a missing link? California Management Review, 51(3), 74–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansoff, I. (1975). Managing strategic surprise by response to weak signals. California Management Review, 18(2), 21–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, W. (2003). Foundations of futures studies. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Boin, A., & van Eeten, M. J. G. (2013). The resilient organization. Public Management Review, 15(3), 429–445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botterhuis, L., van der Duin, P., de Ruijter, P., & van Wijck, P. (2010). Monitoring the future. Building an early warning system for the Dutch Ministry of Justice. Futures, 42, 454–465.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1979). Symbolic power. Critique of Anthropology, 4, 77–85.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1992). Thinking about limits. Theory, Culture and Society, 9, 37–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1996). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bovens, M., & ‘t Hart, P. (1996). Understanding policy fiascoes. New Brunswick: Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Capano, G., & Woo, J. J. (2018a). Designing policy robustness: Outputs and processes. Policy & Society, 37(4), 422–440.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capano, G., & Woo, J. J. (2018b). Agility and robustness as design criteria. In M. Howlett & I. Mukherjee (Eds.), Routledge handbook of policy design (pp. 420–434). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Comy, A., & Whyte, J. (2017). Future making and visual artefacts: An ethnographic study of a design project. Organization Studies, Vol 39(8), 1055–1083.
   Google Scholar
• Delacour, H., & Leca, B. (2017). The paradox of controversial innovation: Insights from the rise of impressionism. Organization Studies, 38(5), 597–618.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. T. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J. H., Walker, W. E., & ter Maat, J. (2013). Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: A method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world. Global Environmental Change, 23, 485–498.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Head, B., & Alford, J. (2013, March 28). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society. Published online. doi:10.1177/0095399713481601
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herepath, A. (2014). In the loop: A realist approach to structure and agency in the practice of strategy. Organization Studies, 35(6), 857–879.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho, P. (2012, July 26). Governing for the future: What governments can do. Keynote speech at the anzsog annual conference 2012, Wellington, New Zealand.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. M. (2007). Institutions and individuals: Interaction and evolution. Organization Studies, 28(1), 95–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., Capano, G., & Ramesh, M. (2018). Designing for robustness: Surprise, agility and improvisation in policy design. Policy & Society, 37(4), 405–421.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilmola, L., & Kuusi, O. (2006). Filters of weak signals hinder foresight: Monitoring weak signals efficiently in corporate decision-making. Futures, 38(8), 908–924.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarzabkowski, P. (2005). Strategy as Practice. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. (2007). Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1), 5–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as Practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. (2008). On the problem of participation in strategy: A critical discursive perspective. Organization Science, 19(2), 341–358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mendonca, S., Cunha, M. P. E., Ruff, F., & Kaivo-Oja, J. (2009). Venturing into the wilderness; perparing for wild cards in the civil aircraft and asset-management industries. Longe range planning, 42, 23–41.
   Google Scholar
• Noordegraaf, M. (2007). From pure to hybrid professionalism. Present-day professionalism in ambiguous public domains. Administation & Society, 39(6), 761–785.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noordegraaf, M., van der Steen, M., & van Twist, M. (2014). Fragmented or connective professionalism? Strategies for professionalizing the ambiguous work of policy strategists. Public Administration, 92(1), 21–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, B., Capano, G., Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., Chou, M., & Ravinet, P. (2018). Designing for policy effectiveness: Defining and understanding a concept (elements in public policy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108555081
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B. G. (2017). What is so wicked about wicked problems? A conceptual analysis and a research program. Policy and Society, 36(3), 385–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poli, R. (2017). Introduction to anticipation studies. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Rasche, A., & Chia, R. (2009). Researching strategy practices: A genealogical social theory perspective. Organization Studies, 30(7), 713–734.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossel, P. (2012). Early detection, warnings, weak signals and seeds of change: A turbulent domain of futures studies. Futures, 44(3), 229–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE publications.
   Google Scholar
• Splint, E., & van Wijck, P. W. (2012). Using signposts in future studies. Futures, 44(5), 453–463.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies. New York: Oxford university press.
   Google Scholar
• Taleb, N. N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Välikangas, L. (2010). The resilient organization: How adaptive cultures thrive even when strategy fails. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Veenman, S. A. (2013). Futures studies and uncertainty in public policy: A case study on the ageing population in the Netherlands. Futures, 53, 42–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, W. E., Haasnoot, M., & Kwakkel, J. H. (2013). Review: adapt or perish: A review of planning approaches for adaptation under deep uncertainty. Sustainability, 5, 955–979.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (2001). Making sense of the organization. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Whittington, R. (2003). The work of strategizing and organizing: For a practice perspective. Strategic Organization, 1(1), 117–125.
   Google Scholar
• Whittington, R. (2004). Strategy after modernism: Recovering practice. European Management Review, 1(1), 62–68.
   Google Scholar
• Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613–634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy practice and strategy process: Family differences and the sociological eye. Londen: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar