Introduction The broader field of management and organisational studies has embraced body-aware or non-verbal research in the last few years. However, the strategic management and the general management fields are reluctant to embrace research that incorporates the body, which has led to them being theorised and viewed as disembodied. As such, this paper analyses the necessity of giving voice to the non-verbal aspect in strategic management through the conceptualisation of the body to ensure the growth of the practice. However, this study is not limited to the living body. Summary of the article In this article, Minocha and Stonehouse (2007) explore the role of the body in strategic research and the importance of embracing body-aware research in the field. The authors note that the field of strategic organisation is highly concerned with talk and speech as the means of articulation while disregarding the role of the body in the creation of strategies. Any form of strategizing that does not consider the animalism of the strategist does not embody completeness. This assertion holds because the body contributes in different ways in the process of the creation of strategies, thus affecting the outcome of the processes. Therefore, the authors are calling for the acknowledgement of the body language input in the strategizing process. The authors further state that in a bid to appreciate the input of the body in the strategizing process, understanding the composition of the body is important. This goal is achievable only through an in-depth study of the body. According to the article, the body is made up of two elements that include the physical and the sociocultural elements. Therefore, the body goes beyond the physical to include the meaning-made body, the lived body, and the becoming body (Minocha & Stonehouse, 2007). Limitation of the body to the verbal aspect is shallow. According to the authors, strategists note are not talking heads separate from the body and as such, their bodies can sometimes subvert or reinforce their verbal expressions, thus influencing their strategic thinking process and decisions. In addition, the authors applaud the efforts in the broader field of management and organisation to recognise the role of the body in research. They state that body-based management and organisational scholars have influenced research after realising that work, on organisational aesthetics, should embrace embodiment for it to be practical and complete. To sum up their arguments on the presence of the body in the strategic organisational field, the authors state that the current position remains that the body in this particular field is talking, but absent. This assertion holds because the verbal aspect is the only input that is being recognised and appreciated. The authors do not just criticise the absence of the body, but they explore several steps that can be taken to ensure that the presence of the body is felt and appreciated in the strategic management field. The steps include understanding how and where the actual strategizing work is done, the skills required in the work of strategizing and organising coupled with how they are acquired. Others include understanding the tools and techniques of organising and strategizing together with how