Search results

Managerial cognition is a fundamental area informing all sub-fields in strategy, and therefore, a systematic review of the methodological choices of premier strategy publications aids cognition researchers in choosing methods. However, past studies have given little attention to the methods recently published in premier journals. This chapter both illustrates a common cognitive method – content analysis – and uses it to analyze the methodological content of 573 publications from two prominent management journals. Our findings provide cognition scholars with useful information about current methodological standards. Our findings also will help students choose methods courses and will spark a healthy debate about methodological expectations.

Extant research posits that mergers and acquisition (M&As) do not create value. Still many firms adopt expansion strategies such as alliances, joint ventures (JVs), and M&As to grow and enhance their performance. Through performing a meta-analysis on 204 papers that assess the relationship between the three most prevalent expansion strategies formed by firms, alliances, JVs, and M&As and their different substantive and symbolic performance effects, this study contributes in two ways. First, it becomes clear that alliances and M&As enhance a firm’s substantive performance, while no positive performance effect is observed for JVs. In turn, all three expansion strategies boost a firm’s symbolic performance in terms of its legitimacy and status. Second, a distinction between their effects on a firm’s substantive performance in terms of their market-based and accounting-based performance shows that alliances and M&As both positively contribute to a firm’s accounting-based performance, while only the former spurs a firm’s market-based returns. This indicates that M&As have more long-term accounting-based performance effects compared to alliances and JVs, which suggests that in the long-term firms do best by expanding through M&As.

While qualitative work has a long tradition in the strategy field and has recently regained popularity, we have not paused to take stock of how such work offers contributions. We address this oversight with a review of qualitative studies of strategy published in five top-tier journals over an extended period of 15 years (2003–2017). In an attempt to organize the field, we develop an empirically grounded organizing framework. We identify 12 designs that are evident in the literature, or “designs-in-use” as we call them. Acknowledging important similarities and differences between the various approaches to qualitative strategy research (QSR), we group these designs into three “families” based on their philosophical orientation. We use these designs and families to identify trends in QSR. We then engage those trends to orient the future development of qualitative methods in the strategy field.

The authors evaluate the evolution of the intellectual structure of strategic management (SM) by employing a document co-citation analysis through a network analysis for academic citations in articles published in the Strategic Management Journal (SMJ).

The authors employed the co-citation analysis through the social network analysis.

The authors outlined the evolution of the academic foundations of the structure and emphasized several domains. The economic foundation of SM research with macro and micro perspectives has generated a solid knowledge stock in the literature. Industrial organization (IO) psychology has also been another dominant foundation. Its robust development and extension in the literature have focused on cognitive issues in actors' behaviors as a behavioral foundation of SM. Methodological issues in SM research have become dominant between 2004 and 2011, but their influence has been inconsistent. The authors concluded by recommending future directions to increase maturity in the SM research domain.

This is the first paper to elucidate the intellectual structure of SM by adopting the co-citation analysis through the social network analysis.

Longitudinal regression analysis is conducted to clarify causal relations and control for unwanted influences from actor heterogeneity and state dependence on theoretically important coefficient estimates. Because strategic management contains theory on how firms differ and how firm actions are influenced by their current strategic position and recent experiences, consistency of theory and methodology often requires use of longitudinal methods. We describe the theoretical motivation for longitudinal methods and outline some common methods. Based on a survey of recent articles in strategic management, we argue that longitudinal methods are now used more frequently than before, but the use is still inconsistent and insufficiently justified by theoretical or empirical considerations. In particular, strategic management researchers should use dynamic models more often, and should test for the presence of actor effects, autocorrelation, and heteroscedasticity before applying corrections.

Since March (1991) presented his ideas on organizational learning, hundreds of empirical tests have been conducted on relationships among the activities of exploration, exploitation, ambidexterity, and firm performance. Despite continued interest in his ideas, there has not been a systematic assessment of extant research to reveal whether, and to what extent, these activities relate to firm performance. This study uses meta-analysis to take a next step by aggregating results of 117 studies from more than 21,000 firms. I find strong performance effects for exploration and exploitation, but contrary to received theory, I discover ambidexterity yields weaker effects than a focus on either exploration or exploitation. Thus, I leverage these findings to offer future research opportunities.

Organizational performance is widely recognized as an important – if not the most important – construct in strategic management research. Researchers also agree that organizational performance is a multidimensional construct. However, the research implications of the construct's multidimensionality are less understood. In this chapter, we use a synthesis of previous attempts to describe the dimensions of performance and our own analysis of performance measurement in the Strategic Management Journal to build a conceptual model of organizational performance and its dimensions. Our model suggests that operational performance and organizational performance are distinct, and that organizational performance can be further dimensionalized into accounting returns, stock market, and growth measures. The model has implications for how future research might advance understanding about performance and how empirical studies should conceptualize and measure performance.

Over the last several decades, businesses have faced mounting pressures from diverse stakeholders to alter their corporate operations to become more socially and environmentally responsible. In turn, many firms appear to have responded by implementing more sustainable practices — measuring, documenting, and publishing annual CSR or sustainability reports to showcase how they are addressing important issues in this area, including: resource stewardship, waste management, greenhouse gas emission reductions, fair and safe labor practices, amongst other stakeholder concerns. And yet, research in this domain has not yet systematically examined whether businesses have, on the whole, changed their practices in tandem with the important changes in its institutional context over time. Have corporate CSR initiatives, in fact, been growing over the last 25 years or has the increased attention to CSR actually been much ado about nothing? In this chapter, we review the empirical literature on CSR to uncover that common measures of CSR such as the KLD do not support the concept that CSR practices have increased substantively over the last 25 years. We supplement this historical review by modeling the growth curves of CSR implementation in practice and find that the pace of positive change has indeed been glacial. More alarmingly, we also look at corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR) and find that, contrary to expectations, businesses have become more, not less, irresponsible during this same time period. Implications of these findings for theory are presented as are suggestions for future research in this domain.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the level of strategic management topic representation within the academic field of hospitality. The study addresses the following questions: what is the frequency of articles related to the topic of strategy in recent hospitality journals? How does the content of these articles differ from the more general field of strategic management? And, what are the potential gaps where researchers in the hospitality field can make contributions?

This study looks at the number and percentage of strategy-related articles published in leading hospitality journals for 2005 through 2009. The determination of the percentage of strategy-related articles published and categorizing these articles by key strategy topic area required several steps: defining strategic management as an academic area within hospitality; determining key strategy topic areas and key words or terms; and defining characteristics of the hospitality field that may impact what is and what is not strategic management in hospitality. Hospitality journal articles were then coded as strategy-related or other, and (if determined to be strategy-related) the articles were categorized into one of ten key topic areas.

Overall strategy articles represent about 27 percent of the total journal articles from the five-year period. In comparing hospitality journals to the sole top-tier business journal focusing on strategy, this study indicates differences exist among key topic areas of focus. These differences seem to indicate that researchers in general strategic management tend to focus on less applied and more theoretical notions of strategy where researchers in hospitality strategic management tend to focus on more tactical methods when addressing questions of strategy.

The limitations of this study are: the study focuses on four hospitality journals and the top-rated general strategy journal; and categorizing strategy articles was done using inter-judge reliability by the authors. Future research might identify a socially constructed definition of strategic management in hospitality.

The importance of strategic management and strategic thinking in hospitality and hospitality research has never been greater. With increasing turbulence in the global environment, the field of hospitality (and its related research) must assess and provide strategic approaches to address challenges and opportunities for the future.

The value of this study is in providing an overview of what has been studied in hospitality strategy in the recent past and pointing out future research opportunities for hospitality strategic management issues.

This paper aims to help scholars to know the frontiers in the strategic management field. On studying, it was noted that business strategic management originated from America in the 1960s and has experienced more than half a century. However, strategic management development lacks systematical summary in the twenty-first century. The scientometric method was appliedto find out the frontiers and progress of the research of strategic management in the twenty-first century, based on the literature from 2001 to 2012 in the Strategic Management Journal.

In the paper, the authors mainly used the scientometric method and applied keywords, co-occurrence method combined with multistatistical methods and mutation words analysis, author co-citation, literature co-citation and keywords co-occurrence (national).

The findings show that the strategic management research focuses on the following theories and academic thoughts: knowledge-based view, network organization research and dynamic capability are the mainstream; besides, strategy risk, the stakeholders analysis of strategy management, corporate reputation and strategic concept also attract the attention of researchers; Barney, Teece and Porter have made significant contributions to strategy management research since the twenty-first century.

The findings in the paper will help scholars in the field of strategic management to know the main frontiers of the theory, as well as the main contributors.