Something fundamental is changing – or is it? The firms are preoccupied by transformations and disruptions, the scholars are reassessing the validity of old theories, the politicians are wondering where the power is, and the individuals are struggling to understand how to go about making a living tomorrow. Has this always been the normal, or are we evidencing an era that can rightfully be called a New Normal? 

This research is an attempt to synthetize knowledge from several rich sources in order to understand the drivers of the changes emerging from the phenomenon labelled digitalization. The research quandary of this conceptual monograph is the impact of digitalization – as a sociotechnical trinity of digital technological systems, humans and perceptions – on strategizing, the individual level actions and decisions tackling the fundamental uncertainty of anything future-oriented, subsequently coalescing into collective level outcomes. 

This research explores the constitutions of strategizing, uncertainty and digitalization in order to understand the impact of the drivers of digitalization on the constitution of uncertainty dealt with in strategizing, and the subsequent changes therefore reflected on strategizing. Tracing these ripples requires reconceptualizing uncertainty as consisting of three dimensions: lack of knowledge, difficulty of choosing between diverse standards of desirability, and the infathomability of the meaning making mechanisms that underpin the creation of those standards of desirability. 

As findings, this dissertation presents three theses: first, digitalization obliterates one type of uncertainty, while changing and enforcing other types; secondly, digitalization erodes the boundaries of extant entities and creates new boundary forming mechanisms; and thirdly, digitalization changes the shape and impact of what we take for granted, consider normal – the doxa. These findings have implications for both the theorists and the practitioners. 

As scholars, we need to redefine such units of analysis, as heretofore captured by concepts like the firm, market or nation. As practitioners, we need to cherish such rationalities that do not compete with the algorithmic intelligence, to emphasize such creative thinking a machine cannot do. As individuals, we need to understand how many of our actions are grounded on the unreflective acceptance of what we take for granted, and how susceptible our notion of normal is to manipulation. Together, we need to understand that the digital representation of reality, being constructed today to give the shape for our tomorrow, reflects not only the physical entities datafied and digitized, but also our values and preferences – whether we reflectively acknowledge them or not.