Search results

1 – 10 of over 46000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 23 December 2005

Luca Zan

This article reflects on the lack of focus on history characterizing the strategic management field. Reasons and consequences of such a peculiar situation need to be…

Abstract

This article reflects on the lack of focus on history characterizing the strategic management field. Reasons and consequences of such a peculiar situation need to be pointed out in order to develop a better history-grounded research approach inside the field.

In terms of (the missing) history of thought, a fear of history seems to characterize the field, for a more aware historical understanding of strategic management and practices is likely to question not only notions and concepts, but the very perception of the field as a practically oriented discipline. A lack of historical reflection is usually preferred, wherein strategic management seems to come out of the blue, ignoring its inner evolution over time, and the relationships with previous bodies of knowledge in the business realm, such as for instance administrative sciences and accounting.

In terms of the history of practice the situation is – if possible – even worse, with an obscure understanding of contexts and features of managerial practices in the past. Archival research is called for here, drawing on two research projects on pre-industrial revolution context (the Spanish Royal Tobacco Factory in the XVIII century, and the Venice Arsenal in the turn of the XVI century), in order to examine how prior management practices can influence and inform our present understanding of the discipline of strategic management. A less simplistic view of managing practices in the past emerges, which challenges the commonly held cycle of innovation and discontinuity perpetually alleged in the strategic management field to legitimize its own existence as a research area.

While strategic management tools show a potential contribution to historical understanding in this archival research, a more historically aware understanding of the evolution of the field is thus intended as a way to falsify strategic management theory.

Details

Strategy Process
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-84950-340-2

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 26 September 2008

Milorad M. Novicevic, Michael G. Harvey, M. Ronald Buckley and Garry L. Adams

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis of methodological issues that accompany the articles reviewing past research in strategic management.

Downloads
2432

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis of methodological issues that accompany the articles reviewing past research in strategic management.

Design/methodology/approach

The topic of the philosophical underpinnings and implications of historicism in strategy reviews is examined by contrasting and explaining deterministic, indeterministic, and underdeterministic views of strategy's intellectual history.

Findings

Three diverse philosophical approaches to historicist interpretation are found to be embedded in key review articles in the field of strategic management.

Practical implications

This paper indicates the need to develop and teach an accepted methodology of systematically reviewing and interpreting available knowledge in strategic management.

Originality/value

The unique contribution of this paper is that it indicates new paths that are important not only for the development of an alternative way to construct a shared history of the subject but also for the development of common norms for review articles that could help to advance strategic management scholarship.

Details

Journal of Management History, vol. 14 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-1348

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 6 February 2007

Stephen Cummings

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the limitations of what the field of strategic management sees as its military foundations.

Downloads
1903

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the limitations of what the field of strategic management sees as its military foundations.

Design/methodology/approach

Categorizes and synthesizes the critical historical approach of Michel Foucault and uses this to interrogate assumptions made about military approaches to strategy in the strategic management literature.

Findings

Suggests that there is a much broader range of military approaches to strategy than that which has been seen as a foundation stone of strategic management, and that drawing on this broader range of perspectives can encourage new thinking about strategic management.

Research implications/limitations

While the historical survey upon which this hypothesis is developed is by no means exhaustive, it should encourage further investigation of different approaches to military strategy and how these might be applied to think differently in business settings.

Practical implications

This paper should encourage practitioners to question their often overly simplistic views of military strategy and to see this arena as a potentially rich seam of ideas that could be applied in business.

Originality/value

This is the first journal article to develop a clear method that draws on the many strands of Foucault's historical approach and apply this to fruitfully deconstruct a particular aspect of the field of management's assumed heritage.

Details

Critical perspectives on international business, vol. 3 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1742-2043

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 14 September 2015

Madeline Crocitto

– The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyze the topics published in the journal in the five-year period from 2005 to 2009.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyze the topics published in the journal in the five-year period from 2005 to 2009.

Design/methodology/approach

A qualitative examination of content by year identifies prevalent themes.

Findings

The beginning and ending of the time period demonstrate continued interest in major figures of our field and the context of their thinking. Quality, excellence and continuous improvement were recurrent topics as were those of business in society, ethics and social responsibility. The value of historical analysis with suggested methodologies for further study was included.

Research limitations/implications

The paper is limited to the topical papers within this five-year timeframe and a qualitative analysis of themes. Fewer than expected papers were published on leadership and international subjects given their important to the field.

Practical implications

Aspiring authors may find the historical background for the current topics of entrepreneurship, quality, ethics and social responsibility convenient. Helpful advice from experts about how to study management history is highlighted. Cross-cultural and international historical linkages on themes and concepts are identified as areas in need of additional research.

Social implications

The social construction of studying and teaching history is discussed. The context in which major writers lived and events occurred is recognized as a major factor in interpreting situations.

Originality/value

The paper reviews over 100 articles to categorize the historical origins of current and recurring topics into major themes. Papers are organized by topic, person or event into a chart by year.

Details

Journal of Management History, vol. 21 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-1348

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 9 July 2010

Roy Suddaby, William M. Foster and Chris Quinn Trank

This paper develops a framework for understanding history as a source of competitive advantage. Prior research suggests that some firms enjoy preferential access to…

Abstract

This paper develops a framework for understanding history as a source of competitive advantage. Prior research suggests that some firms enjoy preferential access to resources as a result of their past. Historians, by contrast, understand past events as more than an objective account of reality. History also has an interpretive function. History is a social and rhetorical construction that can be shaped and manipulated to motivate, persuade, and frame action, both within and outside an organization. Viewed as a malleable construct, the capacity to manage history can, itself, be a rare and inimitable resource.

Details

The Globalization of Strategy Research
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-84950-898-8

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 April 2016

Gerardo David Abreu Pederzini

The implicit and indirect influence of classical science on strategic management has been of utmost importance in the development of the discipline. Classical science has…

Downloads
2650

Abstract

Purpose

The implicit and indirect influence of classical science on strategic management has been of utmost importance in the development of the discipline. Classical science has underpinned the main and even contrasting strategic management cultures. Classical science has undoubtedly allowed strategic management to thrive. Nevertheless, important limitations, roadblocks and challenges have also been produced. This paper aims to explore the influence of classical science on the main positivist and interpretive strategic management cultures.

Design/methodology/approach

A conceptual review is done on the influence of classical science on positivist and interpretivist traditions in strategic management.

Findings

The benefits and shortcomings of classical science in strategic management are explored and presented. Furthermore, the convoluted implicit relationship between strategic management and science is shown to be changing but persisting, as to face some of the challenges of the classical science culture of strategic management, a complexity culture, also inspired partially on science, seems to be developing in strategic management. Complexity seems to be emerging as an alternative, which might allow strategic management to solve some of its current dilemmas and, thus, change its implicit relationship with science.

Originality/value

The paper presents a novel way to conceptualize historical cultures of strategic management via their connection with academic cultures that have historically emerged from science. Through the analysis here done, a possible candidate for a Kuhninan normal strategic management and its potential revolution will be suggested, based on the recognition of the inheritance of classical science and currently complexity theory in strategic management.

Details

Journal of Management History, vol. 22 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-1348

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 21 September 2018

Mie Augier and Nicholas Dew

This paper reflects on the evolution of implicit and explicit behavioral ideas in the field of strategic management using Herbert Simon’s scholarship as a starting point…

Abstract

This paper reflects on the evolution of implicit and explicit behavioral ideas in the field of strategic management using Herbert Simon’s scholarship as a starting point, that is, his emphasis on empirically driven; interdisciplinary theorizing allowing and enabling two-way street learning. We argue that historically, there were plenty of behavioral ideas embedded in the field and, together with the recent movement towards explicit “behavioral strategy,” these provide several possible paths for future developments in strategic management research. In the spirit of broadening the tent for behavioral strategy in the future (Hambrick & Crossland, 2018), we suggest some topics and approaches for behavioral strategy in empirically driven, interdisciplinary directions which allows also for two-way street learning between concepts and real-world strategic phenomena.

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 May 2010

Robert J. Allio and Robert M. Randall

In this paper aims to interview Walter Kiechel III about his book, The Lords of Strategy: The Secret Intellectual History of the New Corporate World, and the lessons it

Downloads
5252

Abstract

Purpose

In this paper aims to interview Walter Kiechel III about his book, The Lords of Strategy: The Secret Intellectual History of the New Corporate World, and the lessons it offers for today's managers.

Design/methodology/approach

In this interview, Strategy & Leadership asked Walter Kiechel III about his book, The Lords of Strategy: The Secret Intellectual History of the New Corporate World (Harvard Business Press. 2010), and the lessons it offered for today's managers. First as a Fortune writer, then as its editor and finally as editorial director of Harvard Business Publishing, Kiechel has interviewed originators of the core ideas behind strategy and, to a lesser extent, strategic management and executives at the large companies where it was first practiced.

Findings

Kiechel chronicles the rise and stumbles of a number of leading consultancies – primarily Boston Consulting Group, Bain and McKinsey – as they, Professor Michael Porter and a few others “invent” the concept of strategy over the course of about six decades.

Practical implications

Kiechel highlights the lasting accomplishments of the pioneering consultants he calls the Lords of Strategy and the tools they developed like the experience curve and the BCG matrix. He concludes that Greater Taylorism, the application of analytics to virtually every aspect of what a company does, is as important a product of the strategy revolution as strategy itself.

Originality/value

Senior managers will find his combination intellectual and business history engrossing and they should learn many lessons from it. For example: the development of strategic thinking has caused a genuine revolution in the way business is done; strategy is now the dominant framework by which companies understand what they are doing and want to do; and the intellectual models of innovative consulting firms have played a key role in figuring out competitive advantage.

Details

Strategy & Leadership, vol. 38 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1087-8572

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 January 2011

Robert Moussetis

The purpose of this paper is to revisit Igor Ansoff's work and how it interfaces with the various schools of strategic management.

Downloads
16522

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to revisit Igor Ansoff's work and how it interfaces with the various schools of strategic management.

Design/methodology/approach

Ansoff's work of 40 years is reviewed and related to other schools of thought in strategic management.

Findings

Ansoff's work is much more comprehensive than the literature suggests. His later work (after 1990) is largely unnoticed by academics, nevertheless, it is the empirical findings of his theoretical postulations. Moreover, his work interfaces with virtually all schools of thought in strategic management.

Research limitations/implications

It will provide a broader view of Ansoff's work and perhaps trigger additional research as a result of his later work. Most researchers continue to associate Ansoff with his early thoughts.

Practical implications

Ansoff's work has found wide applications in a variety of industries. His work was mostly with industries that used his propositions in order to better strategies.

Social implications

Ansoff's later research and empirical findings could provide a launchpad for re‐examining the method by which organizations assess their environment, strategic behaviour, and internal capability. Therefore, organizations may have an alternative method to develop strategy.

Originality/value

This is the first attempt to provide a historical view of Ansoff's work and perhaps his timeliness. The recent economic crisis only further supports Ansoff's basic position that companies must create custom strategies to fit their environment, culture, and capabilities.

Details

Journal of Management History, vol. 17 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-1348

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 5 April 2019

Craig Randall and Eric B. Dent

Early works in strategic management described strategy process and were quickly followed by a plethora of strategy content articles focusing on tools, theories, frameworks…

Abstract

Purpose

Early works in strategic management described strategy process and were quickly followed by a plethora of strategy content articles focusing on tools, theories, frameworks and models for use in strategizing. Subsequently, strategy research and pedagogy diverged along these lines and the two streams have not been satisfactorily reconciled. As the process incorporates content and content requires process, this paper seeks to answer the question; can some relational consistency and historical reconciliation be developed? The purpose of this paper is to propose a process/content interrelation and a generic model of strategizing.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors first identify the opportunity for this integration through the historical development of the two streams. The authors then review contemporary scholarly literature, strategic management textbooks and university syllabi to determine which elements of the strategy process and content are most frequently promulgated.

Findings

The authors discover a generally ubiquitous core of concepts, but great inconsistency in how they are emphasized, linked and/or applied. Beyond these core concepts, faculty syllabi included a wide range of more idiosyncratic content (appearing very infrequently – possibly related to instructor research or interest areas), such as blue ocean or game theory. The authors then propose a 2 × 2 matrix with axes of the level of analysis and stage of activity. The authors provide a populated matrix and discuss the implications of this matrix for future scholarship and teaching.

Originality/value

This paper begins a process of integrating the historical divide between strategy process and strategy content. It provides insights for classroom faculty, historians and practitioners.

Details

Journal of Management History, vol. 25 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-1348

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 46000