The disagreement concerning basic concepts and definitions is still characteristic of strategic management as a field of study. Strategic plans can be elaborated within different frameworks, for example, the descriptive or prescriptive (Mintzberg 1987, pp. 2–6). Since varying, even conflicting paradigms and methodologies are employed, strategic plans for the same organisation elaborated by independent researchers are different. Varying solutions show strengths and weaknesses, unavoidably inherited from the frameworks within which they were formulated. This circumstance, in turn, creates problems in comparing different strategic plans in order to choose the best alternative, or to make use of their strengths in an attempt to prepare somewhat eclectic, but comprehensive, plans. Such a situation is reinforced by the lack of meta‐paradigm which allows us to evaluate different outcomes resulting from different paradigms.
CitationDownload as .RIS
MCB UP Ltd
Copyright © 1989, MCB UP Limited