Search results

Accounting for quality and improved organizational performance has recently received attention in management control research. However, the extent to which process innovation changes have been integrated into management control research is limited. This paper contributes to that integration by drawing from institutional adaptive theory of organizational change and process innovation strategies. The paper utilizes a 2 by 2 contingency table that uses two factors: environmental conditions and organizational change/learning strategies, to build a process innovation framework. A combination of these two factors yields four process innovation strategies: mechanistic, organic, organizational development (OD) and organizational transformation (OT).

The four process innovation typologies are applied to characterize innovations in accounting such as activity based costing (ABC). ABC has been discussed as a multi-phased innovation process that provides an environment where both the initiation and the implementation of accounting change can occur. Technical innovation can be successfully initiated as organic innovation that unfolds in a decentralized organization and requires radical change and double loop learning. Implementation occurs best as a mechanistic innovation in a hierarchical organization and involving incremental change and single loop learning. The paper concludes that if ABC is integrated into an OD or OT intervention strategy, the technical and administrative innovation aspects of ABC can be utilized to manage the organization’s operating activities.

Enduring scholarly interest in the process of strategy-making stems from an abiding assumption that some ways of strategizing are more efficacious than others, and thus lead to higher firm performance in the long run; higher than luck alone would bring. Expressions of interest in and endorsements of the strategy process are abundant in the academic literature. As Pettigrew (1992) points out, Hofer and Schendel's pioneering definition of strategic management is processual in character emphasizing the development and utilization of strategy. Rumelt, Schendel, and Teece (1994) list the policy process question – how does policy process matter? – as a fundamental question of the strategic management field. Porter (1996) expresses preoccupation with the leadership and organizational challenges of managing the process. And, Hamel (1988) exhorts the field to devote as much attention to the conduct of strategy, i.e., the task of strategy making, as they have to its content. For senior managers and leaders, the question of how to make effective strategies stands usually at the top of their agenda. Not surprisingly then, the quest to uncover stable principles of good strategy making has attracted much support and interest over the years.

We blend knowledge creation and complexity perspectives in a model of strategy-making that explains how top managers in organizations that are reinventing their industries in high-velocity environments conceptualize the strategy-formation process. The model is grounded in four in-depth case studies of Internet banks that are part of different established financial groups in Spain. The main findings suggest that strategy-making seems to emerge out of the interplay of the following interrelated constructs: action, reflection-on-action, imagination, and simple guiding principles. The study of such constructs from the perspectives of knowledge creation and complexity theory suggests interesting implications. Action and reflection-on-action seem to form a first SECI (Socialization–Externalization–Combination–Internalization) spiral of knowledge creation. Out of the interaction of action and reflection-on-action, imagination may emerge when the system has reached a “critical state”. Imagination forms a second SECI spiral of knowledge creation. The interaction between imagination and action on a higher level results from the emergence and application of simple guiding principles, which provide the organization with coherence between what is imagined and what is done, and guide the actions taken throughout the organization with flexible planning. We conclude by proposing that strategy-making may be understood as a complex, double-loop process of knowledge creation.

Strategic management theory has failed to explain the underlying principles of strategy processes and the relationships between strategy process and strategy content. There seems to be no theory of strategy logic, i. e. the general process and management characteristics generating a certain strategy outcome. Strategy content research has presented a systematic analysis on the basis of competitive advantage, and strategy process research has provided careful in-depth descriptions and examinations of strategy making. However, the basic strategy logic, including the underlying procedures, activities and reasoning that generate a particular type of strategy, has been less commonly evaluated. In particular, principles and details of strategy making in complex situations seem less clear.

Macro- and microorganizational perspectives on strategy processes are typically treated as distinct lines of inquiry. This paper proposes an attention-based theory (March & Olsen, 1976; Ocasio, 1997) of strategy formulation processes to bridge both perspectives. In particular, it links evolutionary perspectives on strategy (Burgelman, 1991, 2002) and strategic choice (Child, 1972) perspectives on organizational and strategic decision making (Bower, 1970; Carter, 1971; Cyert & March, 1963; Frederickson, 1986). Our treatment of the strategy process extends theory by viewing strategy processes as assemblages of tightly and loosely coupled networks of operational and governance channels (Allison & Zelikow, 1999; Ocasio, 1997), strategy formulation as a fluid and distributed process, and environmental, organizational level and individual level forces as consequential. Like Lovas and Ghoshal (2000), we view strategy formulation as a process of guided evolution. Unlike Lovas and Ghoshal who view strategic intent as the objective function that guides evolution, we view strategy formulation processes as more fragmented and contested, with multiple foci of attention, rather than an explicit objective function, and both top-down and bottoms-up processes capable of generating changes in the strategic direction of the firm.

This article offers an action plan for CEOs who wish to constructively engage their boards in strategy development. In this approach, the board participates in the strategic thinking and strategic decision‐making processes, adding value but not infringing on the CEO’s and executive team’s fundamental responsibilities. More specifically, in value‐added engagement, the CEO and management lead and develop the strategic plan with directors’ input, and the board generally approves the strategy and the metrics to assess progress. The author details the five key elements critical to successful engagement of the board in strategy development: view strategy as a process, not an event; design parallel but lagged processes; inform and educate the board; collect and analyze director input; generate strategic alternatives. The recommended framework for engaging the board in strategy development is called the “strategic choice process”; it has six steps, with the CEO and his/her team leading the way.

Study on the internal legalization process of strategic change for a large number of ultra-large enterprises in China.

This paper takes formulation process of Suning Appliance Group’s 10-year strategy (2010–2020) as the research case, designs the research issues, propositions and analysis unit of the case study, and uses the data collection and analysis methods in the grounded theory to realize the theoretical development from data to viewpoint conceptualizing and to proposition categorizing.

There are four key concepts that affect the judgment of overall strategic legitimacy of super-large enterprises: Emerging-market opportunities and strategic operational positioning, legitimacy perspective mainly manifests as legitimacy judgment of strategic direction within organization. Positioning of core resources (including intangible resources) and their value identification methods or value evaluation criteria, the legitimacy perspective is mainly reflected in the organization's internal legitimacy judgment of functional planning, especially implementation path. The impact factors of the key performance of each SBU are positioned, and the legitimacy perspective is mainly reflected in the organization’s internal judgment on the legitimacy of strategic supporting measures, especially the resources needed for the implementation of the strategy and capacity development. The periodical strategic objectives and performance measurement indicators of each SBU are mainly reflected in the organization’s internal legitimacy judgment on strategic alignment and specific action plans for strategic operational units. The legitimacy of these four key concepts is strongly influenced by the rationality of these strategic concepts, which are closely related to their shaping patterns driven by right-brain and left-brain thinking modes.

This case is a longitudinal study of the strategic decision-making process, not a longitudinal follow-up of the actual implementation of the strategy. In addition, given that the case enterprise was facing the emerging market at that time and focused on pushing firms to seize opportunities, not much research has been done on the impact of external legitimacy on the strategic formulation process, a variable that is increasingly being focused on today.

This model has guidance significance and practical demonstration role for a large number of enterprises that are implementing the “+Internet” strategic change under traditional offline operation.

According to the summary of the connection between data and propositions in several rounds, this paper constructs a theoretical model of left and right brain thinking mode driving key concepts to achieve the internal legalization process of strategic changes.

In the analysis process, the legalization theory and the sense-making method are introduced into enterprises’ strategy making process. Based on this analysis framework, this paper analyzes in detail that the top decision-making level and the middle and high executive level form key strategic concepts to promote the internal legalization process of strategic decision-making driven by the right-brain intuitive thinking mode and the left-brain rational thinking mode, which greatly improves the quality of strategy formulation and the operability of strategy implementation.

The purpose of this paper is to build on the research-supported view that interactions between top and middle management enhances effective implementation of organizational strategies by exploring the role of internal actors in driving organizational strategy at the intersection between strategy formulation and strategy implementation.

Adopting a social practice perspective, we undertook semi-structured interviews of 27 top and middle level managers drawn from a single case organization. Data collected were analysed using thematic analysis.

Differences in managerial perception of strategy has significant impact on implementation of strategic decisions as well as creating tensions in recursive communication practices between internal social actors. Furthermore, individual perceptions cannot only limit the extent of strategy awareness amongst key actors, the manifestations through social interaction between top and middle managers is a critical determinant of effective communication and realization of organizational strategy.

The research contributes to the strategy process and practice literature by exploring the dynamic interactions taking place at the intersections of strategy formulation-implementation phases of organizational strategy. It particularly highlights practical issues in top and middle manager interactions and implications for successful strategy implementation.

This paper aims to describe the context and relevance of strategic foresight in the chemical industry. By using a case study of a multinational chemical company, the authors intend to show how global organizations use scenario planning as part of their strategic planning processes. Concentrating on scenario planning for regional strategies, the authors want to contribute to best practice of scenario methodology and ideally inspire academic research.

Reviewing the literature of scenario planning and strategy elaboration, the authors focus on the Hax strategy process of strategy formation, as been applied in the case study’s company. They explain the scenario creation process in detail using a concrete example of India. The outcomes of the scenario creation process are then linked to the Hax strategy process’s description, to identify where scenario planning has created concrete value. Finally, the authors describe lessons learnt and list best practices for practitioners.

Based on the analysis, the authors argue that scenario processes add value when embedded in established strategic planning processes. Lessons learned include among others that it is beneficial that the participants creating the scenarios are also those who join the strategy elaboration and that significant effort needs to go into systematically translating scenarios into implications for the organization.

This designed case study is based on the experience of 17 process iterations during a period of five years with over 170 participants during which the core scenario process moderator team did not change.

Over the past few years, corporate universities, as they are called, have become increasingly common. Independent of this, strategy process theory is also finding a place in international management research. In this paper, it will be shown that strategy process theory demonstrates an affinity with the concept of the corporate university. A survey of the 1,000 largest German companies for the “Federal Ministry of Education and Research” is examining for the first time how widespread corporate universities are in Germany and how they are organized. On the basis of this empirical data it will be shown to what extent the concept of the corporate university in practice is in line with the theoretical findings of strategy process theory.