Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-10T17:23:12.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - An organizational action view of strategic management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2010

Loizos Heracleous
Affiliation:
National University of Singapore
Get access

Summary

The dominant strategic management approaches discussed in chapter 1 have been criticized on various grounds, leading to the emergence of what may be called an “organizational action” (OA) view of strategic management. This chapter locates dominant strategic management approaches in the functionalist paradigm, outlines their main critiques, and discusses the emergence of the OA view in terms of applications of interpretive sociology and organization theory to strategic management. It then discusses the conceptual building blocks of the OA view and their interrelationships, and concludes with some key theoretical features of this emerging OA view.

Theoretical antecedents of the organizational action view

Functionalist and interpretive paradigms

The theoretical antecedents of the OA framework can be traced to applications of the interpretive sociological paradigm to strategic management (Chaffee 1985; Smircich and Stubbart 1985), as well as critiques of dominant strategic management approaches as deterministic in their assumptions, reductionist in their models, and insufficiently relevant to practice (Bettis 1991; Bourgeois 1984). Dominant strategic management approaches are located within the functionalist paradigm of social science (Burrell and Morgan 1979; Morgan 1980). This paradigm assumes that social phenomena have a concrete, solid reality underlain by a systemic orderliness; the goal of research is to understand the machine-like interactions of variables within this reality, so that one can ideally and ultimately control and predict them. Social scientists in this perspective aspire to the natural science positivist model; they imagine themselves to be outside and separate from their subject matter, and aspire to value free, “pure” science.

Type
Chapter
Information
Strategy and Organization
Realizing Strategic Management
, pp. 23 - 37
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrews, K., 1971. The Concept of Corporate Strategy, Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin
Ansoff, H. I., 1965. Corporate Strategy, New York: McGraw-Hill
Astley, W. G. and Ven, A., 1983. Central perspectives and debates in organization theory, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 245–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, J. B., 1986. Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?, Academy of Management Review, 11: 656–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, P. and Luckmann, T., 1966. The Social Construction of Reality, London: Penguin
Bettis, R. A., 1991. Strategic management and the straightjacket: an editorial essay, Organization Science, 2: 315–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulding, K. E., 1956. General systems theory – the skeleton of science, Management Science, 2: 197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgeois, L. J., 1984. Strategic management and determinism, Academy of Management Review, 9: 586–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, E. H., 1990. Strategy changes: possible worlds and actual minds, in J. W. Fredrickson (ed.), Perspectives on Strategic Management, New York: Harper & Row: 9–37
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G., 1979. Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis, London: Heinemann
Chaffee, E. E., 1985. Three models of strategy, Academy of Management Review, 10: 89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, A., 1962. Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of American Industrial Enterprise, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Child, J., 1972. Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice, Sociology, 6: 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J., 1997. Strategic choice in the analysis of action, structure, organizations and environment: retrospect and prospect, Organization Studies, 18: 43–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J. and Smith, C., 1987. The context and process of organizational transformation – Cadbury Limited in its sector, Journal of Management Studies, 24: 565–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daft, R. L. and Lewin, A. Y., 1990. Can organization studies begin to break out of the normal science straitjacket? An editorial essay, Organization Science, 1: 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A., 1984. The Constitution of Society, Cambridge: Polity
Hambrick, D. C. and Mason, P. A., 1984. Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers, Academy of Management Review, 9: 193–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K., 1994. Competing for the Future, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Das, Hari T., 1983. Qualitative research in organizational behavior, Journal of Management Studies, 20: 301–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, J., 2000. Strategic decision making, discourse, and strategy as social practice, Journal of Management Studies, 37: 955–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, J., 2001. An ethnographic study of culture in the context of organizational change, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37: 426–446Google Scholar
Heracleous, L. and Barrett, M., 2001. Organizational change as discourse: communicative actions and deep structures in the context of IT implementation, Academy of Management Journal, 44: 755–778Google Scholar
Heracleous, L. and DeVoge, S., 1998. Bridging the gap of relevance: strategic management and organizational development, Long Range Planning, 31: 732–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heracleous, L. and Langham, B., 1996. Strategic change and organizational culture at Hay Management Consultants, Long Range Planning, 29: 485–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. and Wilson, D. C., 2002. Top teams and strategy in a UK university, Journal of Management Studies, 39: 355–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jemison, D. B., 1981a. The contributions of administrative behavior to strategic management, Academy of Management Review, 6: 633–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jemison, D. B., 1981b. The importance of an integrative approach to strategic management research, Academy of Management Review, 6: 601–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jick, T. D., 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action, Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 601–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G., 1987. Strategic Change and the Management Process, Oxford: Blackwell
Johnson, G., 1988. Rethinking incrementalism, Strategic Management Journal, 6: 75–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Learned, E. P., Christensen, R. C., Andrews, K. R. and Guth, W. D., 1965–9. Business Policy: Text and Cases (revised edn.), Homewood, IL: Irwin
Lemke, D. K., Schminke, M., Clark, N. E. and Muir, P., 1999. Whither goest thou? Seeking trends in organization theory into the new millennium, Academy of Management Proceedings, OMT: D1–D6
Litterer, J. A. and Young, S., 1984. Organizational paradigm as a tool to analyze organizations and their problems, Academy of Management Proceedings, 249–253
March, J. G., 1996. Continuity and change in theories of organizational action, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 278–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGahan, A. M. and Porter, M. E., 1997. How much does industry matter, really?, Strategic Management Journal, 18: 15–303.3.CO;2-T>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H., 1978. Patterns in strategy formation, Management Science, 24: 934–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, G., 1980. Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organization theory, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 605–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettigrew, A. 1992. On studying managerial elites, Strategic Management Journal, 13: 163–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, M. E., 1991. Towards a dynamic theory of strategy, Strategic Management Journal, 12: 95–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, M. E., 1999. A conversation with Michael E. Porter: a significant extension toward operational improvement and positioning (interviewed by R. M. Hodgetts), Organizational Dynamics, 28(1): 24–33Google Scholar
Quinn, J. B., 1978. Strategic change: logical incrementalism, Sloan Management Review, 1(2): 7–21Google Scholar
Rumelt, R. P., 1991. How much does industry matter?, Strategic Management Journal, 12: 167–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumelt, R. P., Schendel, D. E. and Teece, D. J. (eds.) 1994. Fundamental Issues in Strategy, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press
Shrivastava, P., Mitroff, I. I. and Alvesson, M., 1987. Nonrationality in organizational actions, International Studies of Management and Organization, 17(3): 90–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smircich, L., 1983. Concepts of culture and organizational analysis, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 339–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smircich, L. and Stubbart, C., 1985. Strategic management in an enacted world, Academy of Management Review, 10: 724–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffy, B. D. and Grimes, A. J. 1986. A critical theory of organization science. Academy of Management Review, 11: 322–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M., 1991. The nature of social action, in W. G. Runciman (ed.), Weber: Selections in Translation (E. Matthews, transl.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 7–32
Weick, K. E., 1977. Enactment processes in organizations, in B. M. Staw and G. R. Salancik (eds.), New Directions in Organizational Behavior, Chicago: St. Clair Press: 267–300
Whittington, R., 1996. Strategy as practice, Long Range Planning, 29: 731–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R., 2002. Practice perspectives on strategy: unifying and developing a field, paper presented at the Academy of Management Meeting, Denver, August 9–14

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×