The Challenge of Strategy: A Comment (original) (raw)
Understanding Modern Warfare
In moments of reflection, both management teachers and practitioners acknowledge that choices are constrained by the availability of information, the ability to make sense of it, and the ability to communicate it. This study of strategy practice in organisations shows that choice is more than constrained; it is also socially constructed. Everyday strategy is guided by 'taken for granted' practices rooted in social reality; an objective reality that is the product of subjective processes. At the same time, practitioners construct their social reality through practice; through, for example, shared meaning, heritage, the patterning of experiences. These observations are based on a phenomenological study of strategy and innovation in three unrelated organisations all of whom regard innovation as essential for their survival: a bank, a telecommunications service provider, and a business school. Others have helped me develop my ideas. My thanks to Professor David Bloor for our discussions on Wittgenstein's and Mary Douglas' work, Professor Friso den Hertog for reading and commenting on an early draft of my 'research design and method' chapter, and Professor Lefebvre for his suggestions on organisational behaviour. My thanks also to those who shared their time and ideas with me at seminars and informal chats, particularly from: the Research Centre for Social Sciences, and the Business Studies department at the University of Edinburgh; MERIT, and the Faculty of Arts and Culture at the University of Limburg in The Netherlands; the Faculty of Applied Economic Sciences at Limburgs Universitair Centrum in Belgium. I am also very grateful to Kit Gardner and her team in the Business Studies office at Edinburgh and Corien Gijsbers at MERIT for clearing away those administrative and practical obstacles that reared up from time to time. With their help I was able to enjoy my task even more. This study was made possible through the cooperation of staff in the organisations studied. For this I am especially grateful to Robin Browning of the Bank of Scotland, Patrick Hurd of Ascom Timeplex, and David Asch of the Open Business School, for providing me with time and access to their colleagues. In many ways Katerina, my wife, has been critical to the production of this thesis. She has supported me by managing our household, reading various early drafts, and giving me the freedom to think and walk around in a distracted state preoccupied with my own thoughts. This research was funded by the Joi nt Panel of the Science and Engineering Research Council and Economic and Social Research Council. I am very grateful to the Panel for their support and their belief that the marriage of my industrial background and academic research could advance our understanding of the nature of strategy and the management of innovation. CONTENTS List of Figures ix List ofAppendicies x 1959: 86). Lindblom's branch method seems descriptive of firms that develop through incremental product changes and manufacturing process improvements, and firms which Freeman (1982) might describe as following an 'imitative' strategy. These firms operate in established and stable technologies, relying on more innovative firms to develop both the technological improvements and markets. Lindblom's analysis highlights the role of social values and the futility of a determinate metaphor. However, his suggested 'successive limited comparison' approach risks producing 28 completely arbitrary outcomes in the face of a fast changing and developing environment, because he denies or significantly understates the scope for strategic intent shaping outcomes. 2.3.4 Social construction An emerging set of ideas about strategy, "emphasizes the importance of symbol manipulation, shared meaning, and cooperative actions of individuals" (Chaffee, 1985: 95). This perspective posits a more sociological view of strategic management in that managers operate on a reality which is socially constructed and manage the organisation by co¬ operative agreements or social contracts, "entered into by individuals with free will" (Chaffee, 1985: 93). Many writers both within and outwith the strategy field, equate organisations with Boulding's (1956: 205) hierarchy of general systems, in which there are eight levels. The lower levels are mechanical, moving up in complexity through the biological, with "symbolic images in human behavior" at level eight, and 'transcendental systems' at level nine. The variables determining the pattern include: language, discourse, laws, roles, ritual, custom, ceremony, norms, folklore, stories, beliefs, myths. These patterns are symbolic constructions and are the means by which organisational members make sense of their interrelationships. The validity of conceiving of strategic implications as a social construction is implicitly supported by Loveridge's study of the implementation of IT to improve services in banking, retaining, and health care. Loveridge notes that managers' subsequent interpretation of IT as having systemic significance is "shaped by earlier 'problem' applications and, often, by the crises that triggered the search for earlier IT solutions"(1990: 341). The consequences of this, as he points out, is that managers' creativity in terms of how IT may be used is guided and informed by their previous learning. Similarly, Metcalfe and Gibbons (1989) in their development of an evolutionary metaphor for technological innovation, note that firms' development options are severely constrained by their knowledge base: existing technological knowledge and ways of organisation. Moreover, Chaffee (1985: 96) notes that The Open University (1993), Board of the School ofManagement: School Plan 1994-98. The Open University (1993), Plans for Change, Leaflet. Thomson A. (1994), 'Information systems and information technology strategy committee: A preliminary report from the Advisory Group on strategy for the 'Electronic Strand' of the University', The Open University, presented as internal seminar paper March 15, 1994: 1-62.
Re-Reading The Term “Strategy”
International journal of business and social research, 2014
The aim of this paper is to understand the denotations and connotations ascribed to the term “strategy”, which is critical to the strategic management field. On the basis of the term, it has been appeared that the field takes mostly a normative position and could not escape from producing analytical tools for managers because of having a managerialistic focus since the 1960s, beginning of the field. This article provides a reader with re-reading the term “strategy” from a different point of view. The methodology of this study is based on qualitative content analysis of the selected articles. The results show that the strategic management field is still dominated by a managerialistic view. Therefore the knowledge and analytical tools are produced by the orders of managers which create asymmetric power relations in the field. This study analyzes the basic articles published in SSCI. It would be more comprehensive view to broaden the article pool. Although analyzing articles published ...
Security & Defence Quarterly, 2021
Strategy is a category of growing importance in contemporary scientific debate. “Strategy” as a concept is derived from military thought, but it has become popular in many areas of expertise in recent decades. This term can be found in professional literature in the field of military science, political studies, psychology, economics and management. It is therefore worth taking a look at a book that explains the classical understanding of this concept. The book reviewed here is positioned in the area of strategic studies and war and conflict studies. The review will look at the structure and content of this publication, as well as assess its usefulness in scholarly and didactic practice.
2003
The term strategy if often found describing military, political, and business manoeuvrings. But the term strategy - while ever present - seems to elude concise definition. There is a sense in which acting strategically requires additional cognitive virtue beyond that of rationality alone. But is it not just rational to act strategically? Or even strategic not to act rationally?.....It remains unclear as to what makes a choice truly strategic? In this book, Lune investigates the cognitive virtues that separate strategic reasoning from rational justification. By identifying the virtues that characterise strategic thinking, Lune validates the term strategic as an unambiguous and practical descriptor. The book provides the key elements for the strategist: an overview of the literature on strategy, a contextualized theoretical analysis, and a theory of strategy that plays out in the historically evidenced behaviours of Napoleon, Machiavelli, von Clauswitz, nuclear strategists, and busine...
Why is there so much disagreement about what strategy is?
With such a large quantity of disagreement existing within the strategy field, it is important that individuals do not become overwhelmed by it. This paper provides the essential opportunity to understand the reasons behind differences over what strategy is. By assessing Richard Whittington's four 'well--regarded' schools of strategy, this paper gains a structured framework that allows us to address the reasons for disagreement within three main areas of strategy: the outcomes of strategy, the process of strategy, and the rationality of strategists. We begin to ascertain that no body of knowledge on strategy is omniscient and sacrosanct.
Strategy as a field of study: Why search for a new paradigm
Long Range Planning, 1995
The fundamental structural transitions in a wide variety of industries brought about by major catalysts such as deregulation, global competition, technological discontinuities, and changing customer expectations are imposing new strains on managers around the world. Old recipes do not work anymore. Managers, concerned with restoring competitiveness of their firms, are abandoning traditional approaches to strategy; they are searching for new approaches that give guidance in a turbulent environment. Many academics, confronted with the same reality, are reexamining the relevance of the concepts and tools of the strategy field. In the absence of a consistent and useful strategy paradigm that they can use, managers appear to have embraced attention to 'implementation' as their saviour, more or less abandoning strategy as either unimportant or uninteresting. Academics continue to search for new approaches. This special issue of the Strategic Management Journal presents creative and new thinking dealing with substantive issues and methodologies that can lead to the evolution of a new paradigm(s). As we entered the 1990s, strategy as a field of study had fallen on hard times. Humbled by new global competitors, managers were consumed with TQM, reengineering, downsizing, teamwork and employee empowerment. Managerial preoccupation was with 'catching up' with the best of breed among their competitors. Issues of strategy seemed either remote, unimportant or uninteresting to many. The key words were 'implementation' and 'execution'. Strategy, some managers seemed to assume, was easy; implementation was the hard part. As a consequence, strategy staffs were dramatically reduced or eliminated. Consultants readjusted their wares to cope with the new client demands. Even wellknown consulting firms, such as McKinsey and Boston Consulting Group (BCG), who built their Key words: Strategy paradigms, innovative strategy research, paradigm evolution I See, for example, the focus of BCG on 'Time Based Competition'. Two senior consultants of BCG wrote the very popular book on the subject, George Stalk, Jr. and Thomas M. Hout, (1990). Competing Against Time: How Time Based Competition is Reshaping Global Markers, Free Press, New York.