Search results

An increasingly large group of scholars in Europe have begun to take a practice lens to understanding problems of strategy making in organizations. Strategy-as-practice research is premised on the notion that all social life is constituted within practices, and that practices and practitioners are essential subjects of study. Applying this lens to strategy foregrounds the mundane, everyday work involved in doing strategy. In doing so, it expands our definition of the salient outcomes to be studied in strategic management and provides new perspectives on the mechanisms for producing such outcomes. As strategy-as-practice scholars, we have been puzzled about how much more slowly the ideas in this burgeoning field have traveled from their home in Europe to the United States than have other ideas in strategic management traveled from the United States to Europe. In this chapter, we contribute some thoughts about the development of the strategy-as-practice field and its travels in academia.

Purpose – This chapter is intended to identify the actual and potential linkages between history and strategy research.

Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on examples from research at the intersection of history and strategy, we identify research topics that have received attention from a historical-strategy lens, and those that are thus far understudied. We then place the studies that appear in this volume into their relevant context.

Findings – The chapter outlines benefits that the strategy field can gain from a greater emphasis on history, and that the history field can gain from a greater use of strategic insights.

Originality/value – The chapter sets the context for the studies in this volume, and provides a lens for evaluating the benefits of historical-strategy research.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

How do managers make sense of strategy? Good question but it is a pity that attempts to answer it tend to result in more queries than firm conclusions, not to mention a certain amount of residual bafflement. When more than a thousand managers were questioned at length, their comments subjected to learned scrutiny, and the results presented to them in a personalized summary of their representation of strategy, several of them said they felt at a loss in how to deal with the various issues examined in the study. Some said they were keen to pass on their questionnaire to consultants on the assumption that its contents would help them in their work.

The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world's leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to digest format.

The purpose of this paper is to review the strategy literature in such a manner as to identify the key approaches and themes of current interest and thus provide a platform to position organisational cybernetics, in particular, the viable system model (VSM), as a complement to these established approaches.

The paper reviews the dominant themes of three conceptual strands to the business strategy domain (the resource‐based view, the strategy‐as‐practice approach and the strategy‐structure debate) to ascertain how they inform about the notion of strategy as the content of the process of strategising. Concepts from organisational cybernetics are examined to reveal how they can enrich our understanding of strategy, and complement the strategy domain conceptualisations.

This analysis presents the view of strategy as discourse for action. The VSM provides a device to support discussions about the organisational implications both of the process of strategising, as well as of considered strategies.

The different themes found within the strategy literature (e.g. the process of strategising, internationalisation, collaborative ventures and mergers and acquisitions) offer a rich domain within which organisational cybernetics and the VSM can enrich through its systemic epistemology. Likewise, the strategy domain can inform interpretations of the VSM. Together, this offers the opportunity for a new stream of enquiry.

The insights provided suggest that assistance can be given to organisations for them to improve, not only their strategy‐related activity, but also how they evaluate the organisational implications of considered strategies.

The paper bridges the two conceptual domains of strategy and organisational cybernetics to promote the view that they usefully enrich each other when attempting to understand strategy.

This chapter aims to develop a conceptual framework to probe evidence of open strategy (OS) phenomenon as being practiced by adaptive small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in manufacturing industries. Specifically, this study focuses on the act and doing of strategy communications, based on a set of readying and entrepreneurial practices, involving a plurality of internal and external actors (i.e., owner manager/entrepreneur, middle managers, shop floor employees, suppliers, etc.). The empirical study is based on a deep collaboration with a Scottish SME that supplies outsourced bottling and packaging services to the Scotch Whisky industry through a seven-year longitudinal qualitative inquiry. This study finds that the OS phenomenon is classified into transparent, participatory, and inclusive practices. These nested OS practices are enacted progressively as particular events are unfolding during organizational lifecycle and renewal processes. Sustaining temporal openness in strategy is underpinned by important boundary readying practices in SMEs.

To assess the impact of TCE on the field of strategy, we first quantified the distribution of TCE-related research articles across all disciplines and fields. Specifically, we identified every article that appeared in a journal included in the Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI's) Web of Knowledge between 1975 and 2008 and that included among its keywords some variation of “transaction costs.” We then removed those articles for which this term clearly did not refer to transaction costs of the Coasean kind (primarily articles in finance and computing, for which “transaction cost” has a different meaning). Finally, we categorized each journal according to its discipline or field. Granted, this requires some judgment, but we attempted to be objective in our categorizations.¹ As Table 1 shows, articles that are self-described as part of the TCE research stream have appeared more frequently in strategy journals than in the journals of any other discipline or field. We interpret this as evidence of TCE's impact on strategy, and of the importance of the strategy field to TCE.

Collaborations and partnerships that span economic sectors heighten the complexity of decision-making processes and introduce challenges for structuring collective action. As hybrid organizations designed for cooperation, multi-sector partnerships involving firms from the private, public, and nonprofit industries are more likely to utilize a platform of open strategy than their single-sector counterparts. Through studying the decision-making process of multi-sector partnerships, the purpose of this paper is to suggest that the formative extra-organizational boundary conditions of these partnerships create fertile ground for a platform of open strategy.

This manuscript presents a thorough analysis of the literature regarding multi-sector partnerships and the construct of open strategy to consider the importance of goal interdependence and strategic openness in the strategic decision-making process. The combination of these research streams results in a theoretical model of open strategy to be validated in the multi-sector partnership context.

Partnerships that span multiple market sectors (multi-sector partnerships (MSPs)) are often founded on cooperation as opposed to competition and this fundamental distinction impacts organizational strategy and, more specifically, the manner in which strategic decisions are made. As proposed, the open strategy process model outlined in this work relies on goal interdependence, stakeholder legitimacy, participatory decision making, transparency, and inclusiveness as core components.

Future research that considers the implications of open strategy on performance and other organizational outcomes in the MSP context is warranted. Similarly, future research could ascertain the effects of open strategy on individual-level outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover, and related constructs. Additionally, later scholarship in the context of MSPs could serve to illuminate the possible effects of strategic openness on the social structures of partner organizations as well as highlight possible unintended consequences of its implementation.

In practical terms, this research provides direction for managers of MSPs, particularly during the formative phases of collaboration. Establishing a clear recognition of interdependence toward partnership goals is demonstrated to be a valuable first step for establishing the preconditions for a platform of strategic openness. Subsequently, implementing techniques and disciplines to enhance the inclusiveness and transparency of information, to foster participation in decision making, and to recognize all stakeholders with a claim on outcomes during the strategic decision-making process combine to achieve the outcomes demonstrated by early adopters of open strategy.

This research has the potential to further the understanding of several questions arising from collaboration scholarship such as: what are the strategies and capabilities required to succeed in managing organizational forms that fuse and cross well-established public and private sector boundaries? How can public and private actors mutually learn and develop such capabilities? The authors hope that by putting forth this new model of open strategy in multi-sector social partnerships, the authors can stimulate both practice and empirical study to separate the general principles from the contingencies. The weighty social issues of the day can benefit from these efforts.

This work links, both theoretically and conceptually, heretofore disparate streams of literature to outline a process by which strategic decisions are made in multi-sector collaborations. Traditional notions of competitive strategy have been demonstrated to be inadequate to guide theory and practice regarding the decision-making process within multi-sector collaborations. This work attempts to resolve that deficiency by considering goal interdependence and various dimensions of strategic openness (inclusiveness, transparency, stakeholder legitimacy, and participatory decision making) as aspects of cooperative strategy. The resulting model contributes to the instrumental view of stakeholder theory, the conceptual richness of the open strategy construct, and suggests a normative governance platform for multi-sector partnerships.

The purpose of this study is to extend existing knowledge in corporate sustainability (CS) and digitalization literature. Innovation strategies (namely, exploration, exploitation and ambidexterity) are used to identify an innovative employee domain that influences a firm’s non-financial performance. Digital reputation – i.e. the set of stakeholders’ sentiments toward the company’s digital footprint – is observed as a moderating variable able to explain where and when the innovative employee domain impacts the non-financial performance.

Using a sample of firms listed on the Fortune 500 list in the period 2015–2018, this study pursued both a qualitative and quantitative analysis. First, content analysis is carried out through a non-financial report-based operational model to operationalize the innovative domain. Second, a regression and moderator analysis are conducted on optimized panel data.

Consistent with previous literature, the results show that the employee domain positively impacts a firm’s non-financial performance. It was found that digital reputation operates as a moderator in this relationship.

This study contributes to the theoretical debate on CS by introducing a new concept relevant to an employee domain of exploration, exploitation and ambidexterity. It enriches the innovation debate by providing a new perspective on how firms can balance exploratory and exploitative innovation strategies in the employee domain to enhance non-financial performance. Finally, it provides a novel definition of digital reputation.

The strategic planning process has been used and appreciated for many years, and there is a well‐established body of knowledge regarding how this process supports conventional business operations. Little attention, however, has been given in the literature or in practice to what planning activities support business‐creating efforts—the initial stages required for developing new, embryonic businesses. In addition, very little has been said about what specific planning processes would be most appropriate in supporting business activities that have exceptional opportunity for growth, given their positive results in the early experimentation phase. Ideally, innovative business activities, followed by the rapid expansion of successful experiments, will strengthen the core business of the firm. While the classical strategy process can do an adequate job within the context of an established business, different strategic planning processes are required in the early stages of development and rapid expansion. Each of these business contexts requires a strategy process tailored to its unique environment and issues.