Summary Articles – Strategy
Nag et al. – What is Strategic Management, Really? Inductive Derivation of a Consensus Definition
of the Field
- An academic field is a socially constructed entity, has socially negotiated boundaries and only exists
if a critical mass of scholars believe it to exists and adopt a shared conception of its essential meaning
- Strategic management has an academic field which is fragile or even lacking consensual meaning.
The field is young, reconceptualised and relabelled, overlapping and definitions vary
- The field maintains collective identity and distinctiveness because of a strong implicit consensus
about the essence of the field, even though there may be ambiguity about its formal definition
(paradox)
- In this paper the authors will identify the consensus definition – both implicit and explicit – or the
very meaning of the field
Conceptual background
- 1979: business policy -> strategic management (with a new paradigm)
- The fields identity is ambiguous and contestable; definitions vary -> not too many attention for the
question ‘what is strategic management?’
- Definitions from the appendix:
Studie 1: afleiden van de consensuele impliciete definitie van het veld
- A scientific field is a community of scholars who share a common identity and language
- Paradigm (Kuhn): the existence of commonly shared goals, values, and norms that demarcate the
members of the community holding that paradigm form other (non-)scientific communities.
- Language provides the basis for the emergence of a distinctive identity shared by members of a
scientific community. Scientific fields are ‘word systems’ created and maintained by their members.
- Method: let panel rate abstracts; do they represent strategic management articles or not?; analyses
responses; six elements for possible definition; test validity
- Definition: ‘The field of strategic management deals with (a) the major intended and emergent
initiatives (b) taken by general managers on behalf of owners, (c) involving utilization of resources (d)
to enhance the performance (e) of firms (f) in their external environments.’ <- these six elements
1
,make up the implicit consensual definition of the field of strategic management, represents the way
members think about the field.
- After validation: ‘The field of strategic management deals with the major intended and emergent
initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to
enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.’
Study 2: explicit definition of the field
- Explicit definitions reflect an intentionality and deliberateness that may be missing in implicit
definitions. A scholars explicit definition of the field may reflect his or her strongly held views,
conscious assertions of what strategic management is (and is not) and even hints of where the field
should be headed
- Boundary spanners: economics, sociology and marketing students / Mainstream management
students for comparison -> were asked ‘what is your definition of the field of strategic management?’
- Conceptual elements explicit definition: strategic initiatives; internal organization; managers and
owners; resources; performance; firms; environment
2
, - The four groups do not differ significantly in their mentions. Differences are primarily in specificity or
in the tendency to note individual elements of the strategic management framework, rather than in
fundamental assertions.
- Distiction SM and economics: degree of interest in the challenges facing practicing managers
- Distiction SM and sociology: differences in primary causal logics of rationality, technical superiority
and economic fitness
- Distinction SM and markting: marketing is more specifics-oriented, detail-oriented and operational
Conclusion
- Amorphous boundaries and inherent pluralism of strategic management act as a common ground
for scholars to thrive as a community, without being constrained by a dominant theoretical or
metedological strait-jacket. Strategic managerment is an intellectual brokering entity. Entities are
dynamic and malleable, yet at the same time held togheter by a common, underlying but permeable
core
Beer & Eisenstat – The Silent Killers of Strategy Implementation an Learning
- Companies have silent killers working below the surface, mutually reinforcing barriers that block
strategy implementation and organizational learning. The silent killers can be overcome, but first the
leaders must engage people throughout their organization in an honest conversation about the
barriers and their underlying causes.
- Perfectly sound strategies are not easilly implemented, the challege is the most evident in global
strategy
- Organisational Fitness Profilng (OFP): starts with the top team of the business unit definig its
strategy. A task force of eight lower level managers collect data about percieved strenghts and
barriers to implemeting the strategy. The task force then interviews 100 people two or three levels
below the top team and some internal/external costumers. Then the root causes of the problems are
diagnosed and a plan to change is developed and identified. The plan will be refined and then
implemented.
Obvious Strenghts, Hidden Barriers
- Employees saw the overall problem rooted in fundamental management issues of leadship,
teamwork and strategic direction, not in the commitment of people of thei functional competence.
Implementation needs more than a leader it requires teamwork form a leadership group that,
through dialogue and collaboration, stays connected to the knowledge ebedded in lower levels
The Silent Killers
1. top-down or laisses-faire senior management style: discomfort with conflict, frequent absences to
manage an acquisition and use of the top team for administratie matters rather than focusses
strategic discussions
2 & 5: conflicting priorities and the resulting poor coordination: go hand in hand
3: ineffective senior management: no effective cooperation, operation in own silos
4: poor vertical communication: avoidance of potentially threatening and embarrassing issues, causes
cynicism
6: inadequate down the line leadership skills and development: lower-level managers are not
developing skills
How the Six Barriers Interact to Block Strategy Implementation an Learning
- Grouped into three categaries to explain interaction
3
Nag et al. – What is Strategic Management, Really? Inductive Derivation of a Consensus Definition
of the Field
- An academic field is a socially constructed entity, has socially negotiated boundaries and only exists
if a critical mass of scholars believe it to exists and adopt a shared conception of its essential meaning
- Strategic management has an academic field which is fragile or even lacking consensual meaning.
The field is young, reconceptualised and relabelled, overlapping and definitions vary
- The field maintains collective identity and distinctiveness because of a strong implicit consensus
about the essence of the field, even though there may be ambiguity about its formal definition
(paradox)
- In this paper the authors will identify the consensus definition – both implicit and explicit – or the
very meaning of the field
Conceptual background
- 1979: business policy -> strategic management (with a new paradigm)
- The fields identity is ambiguous and contestable; definitions vary -> not too many attention for the
question ‘what is strategic management?’
- Definitions from the appendix:
Studie 1: afleiden van de consensuele impliciete definitie van het veld
- A scientific field is a community of scholars who share a common identity and language
- Paradigm (Kuhn): the existence of commonly shared goals, values, and norms that demarcate the
members of the community holding that paradigm form other (non-)scientific communities.
- Language provides the basis for the emergence of a distinctive identity shared by members of a
scientific community. Scientific fields are ‘word systems’ created and maintained by their members.
- Method: let panel rate abstracts; do they represent strategic management articles or not?; analyses
responses; six elements for possible definition; test validity
- Definition: ‘The field of strategic management deals with (a) the major intended and emergent
initiatives (b) taken by general managers on behalf of owners, (c) involving utilization of resources (d)
to enhance the performance (e) of firms (f) in their external environments.’ <- these six elements
1
,make up the implicit consensual definition of the field of strategic management, represents the way
members think about the field.
- After validation: ‘The field of strategic management deals with the major intended and emergent
initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to
enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.’
Study 2: explicit definition of the field
- Explicit definitions reflect an intentionality and deliberateness that may be missing in implicit
definitions. A scholars explicit definition of the field may reflect his or her strongly held views,
conscious assertions of what strategic management is (and is not) and even hints of where the field
should be headed
- Boundary spanners: economics, sociology and marketing students / Mainstream management
students for comparison -> were asked ‘what is your definition of the field of strategic management?’
- Conceptual elements explicit definition: strategic initiatives; internal organization; managers and
owners; resources; performance; firms; environment
2
, - The four groups do not differ significantly in their mentions. Differences are primarily in specificity or
in the tendency to note individual elements of the strategic management framework, rather than in
fundamental assertions.
- Distiction SM and economics: degree of interest in the challenges facing practicing managers
- Distiction SM and sociology: differences in primary causal logics of rationality, technical superiority
and economic fitness
- Distinction SM and markting: marketing is more specifics-oriented, detail-oriented and operational
Conclusion
- Amorphous boundaries and inherent pluralism of strategic management act as a common ground
for scholars to thrive as a community, without being constrained by a dominant theoretical or
metedological strait-jacket. Strategic managerment is an intellectual brokering entity. Entities are
dynamic and malleable, yet at the same time held togheter by a common, underlying but permeable
core
Beer & Eisenstat – The Silent Killers of Strategy Implementation an Learning
- Companies have silent killers working below the surface, mutually reinforcing barriers that block
strategy implementation and organizational learning. The silent killers can be overcome, but first the
leaders must engage people throughout their organization in an honest conversation about the
barriers and their underlying causes.
- Perfectly sound strategies are not easilly implemented, the challege is the most evident in global
strategy
- Organisational Fitness Profilng (OFP): starts with the top team of the business unit definig its
strategy. A task force of eight lower level managers collect data about percieved strenghts and
barriers to implemeting the strategy. The task force then interviews 100 people two or three levels
below the top team and some internal/external costumers. Then the root causes of the problems are
diagnosed and a plan to change is developed and identified. The plan will be refined and then
implemented.
Obvious Strenghts, Hidden Barriers
- Employees saw the overall problem rooted in fundamental management issues of leadship,
teamwork and strategic direction, not in the commitment of people of thei functional competence.
Implementation needs more than a leader it requires teamwork form a leadership group that,
through dialogue and collaboration, stays connected to the knowledge ebedded in lower levels
The Silent Killers
1. top-down or laisses-faire senior management style: discomfort with conflict, frequent absences to
manage an acquisition and use of the top team for administratie matters rather than focusses
strategic discussions
2 & 5: conflicting priorities and the resulting poor coordination: go hand in hand
3: ineffective senior management: no effective cooperation, operation in own silos
4: poor vertical communication: avoidance of potentially threatening and embarrassing issues, causes
cynicism
6: inadequate down the line leadership skills and development: lower-level managers are not
developing skills
How the Six Barriers Interact to Block Strategy Implementation an Learning
- Grouped into three categaries to explain interaction
3
