Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T02:39:01.019Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Questioning the epistemic virtue of strategy: The emperor has no clothes!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Steven French ,
Alexander Kouzmin  and
Stephen Kelly
Steven French
Affiliation:
Southern Cross Business School, Coffs Harbour, NSW, Australia
Alexander Kouzmin
Affiliation:
Southern Cross Business School, Gold Coast Campus, Southern Cross Drive, Balinga, QLD, Australia
Stephen Kelly
Affiliation:
Southern Cross Business School, Coolangatta, QLD, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A critical analysis of contemporary strategic management theory and practice suggests that modernist, linear thinking has facilitated the development of an abstracted reality which is misleading to managers and fundamentally flawed. It is argued that formulaic strategic tools such as those propounded by Porter fail to capture the reality of the complex environments that confront firms and falsely suggest that an answer can be derived from a predetermined toolbox.

As an alternative to this dominant paradigm, the complexity of markets is presented not as something to be feared and ignored, but rather as a truth to be embraced. As a basis of taking this step, current knowledge on how complex environments work, perspectives on how they can be better understood and how people and organizations can engage within them, is presented. Ultimately it is recognised that both theoretical and practical foundations need significant, further development.

Keywords

chaoscomplexityepistemologyequilibriummodernismparadigmsself-adapting systemsstrategy
Type
Conceptual Paper
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , July 2011 , pp. 434 - 447
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2011

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

Buckley, W. (1967). Sociology and modern systems theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1993). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Camillus, J. C. (1996). Reinventing strategic planning. Planning Review, 24(3), 6–12.Google Scholar
Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
Checkland, P., & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft systems methodologies in action. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Coleman, H. J. (1999). What enables self-organizing behavior in businesses. Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 1(1), 33–48.Google Scholar
Contractor, N. S. (1999). Self-organizing systems research in the social sciences: Reconciling the metaphors and the models. Management Communication Quarterly, 13(1), 154–166.Google Scholar
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1993). The challenge of chaos. The Owner Manager, 14(2), 2–7.Google Scholar
Deming, W. E. (1986). Quality, productivity and competitive position. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Drazin, R., & Sandelands, L. (1992). Autogenesis: A perspective on the process of organizing. Organization Science, 3(2), 230–249.Google Scholar
Ezzamel, M., & Willmott, H. (2004). Rethinking strategy: Contemporary perspectives and debates. European Management Review, 1(1), 43–48.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, T. (1990). Economics: Broad and narrow. Australian Society, 9(12), 21–24.Google Scholar
Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
French, S. (2009). Cogito ergo sum: Exploring epistemological options for strategic management. Journal of Management Development, 28(1), 18–37.Google Scholar
Gleick, J. (1993). Chaos: Making a new science. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a construct. Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 1(1), 49–72.Google Scholar
Gregersen, H., & Sailer, L. (1993). Chaos theory and its implications for social science research. Human Relations, 46(7), 777–802.Google Scholar
Hamel, G. (1996). Strategy as revolution. Harvard Business Review, 74(4), 69–82.Google Scholar
Hamel, G. (1997). Killer strategies that make shareholders rich. Fortune, 70–88.Google Scholar
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1995a). Seeing the future first. Executive Excellence, 12(11), 15–16.Google Scholar
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1995b). Competing for the future. Success, 42(9), 36–37.Google Scholar
Harfield, T. (1998). Strategic management and Michael Porter: A Postmodern reading. The Electronic Journal of Radical Organization Theory, 4(1). Available at http://www.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/depts/sml/journal/special/harfield.htmGoogle Scholar
Holland, J. H. (2000). Emergence from chaos to order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Horkheimer, M. (1982). Critical theory. New York: Seabury Press.Google Scholar
Horkheimer, M. (1993). Between philosophy and social science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe; the search for the laws of complexity. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Kelly, S. (1999). What business can learn from the simple science of complexity. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 22(5), 221–224.Google Scholar
Kouzmin, A., & Jarman, A. M. G. (1999). De-institutionalising ‘group think’: From state welfarism and towards cyber-netizenship in the ‘smart’ state. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21(4), 474–484.Google Scholar
Kouzmin, A., Korac-Kakabadse, N., & Jarman, A. M. G. (1996). Economic rationalism, risk and institutional vulnerability. Risk Decision and Policy, 1(2), 229–257.Google Scholar
Kouzmin, A., Leivesley, R., & Korac-Kakabadse, N. (1997). From managerialism and economic rationalism: Towards ‘re-inventing’ economic ideology and administrative diversity. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 19(1), 19–42.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Levy, D. L., Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (2001). Critical approaches to strategic management. Proceedings of the Critical Management Studies Conference. Manchester, UK.Google Scholar
Lissack, M., & Gunz, H. (Eds.). (1999). Managing complexity in organizations: A view in many directions. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
McKelvey, B. (1999). Complexity theory in organization science: Seizing the promise or becoming a fad? Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 1(1), 5–32.Google Scholar
McKiernan, P. (1996). Historical evolution of strategic management. Aldershot: Dartmouth, UK.Google Scholar
Magee, B. (2001). The story of philosophy. London: Dorling Kindersly.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, M. (1997). Strategy's two worlds. Accountancy, 119(1244), 70–72.Google Scholar
Masuch, M. (1985). Vicious circles in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(1), 14–33.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of strategic planning. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (1998). Strategy safari, a guided tour through the wilds of strategic management. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H., Quinn, J. B., & Voyer, J. (1995). The strategy process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Ohmae, K. (1982). The mind of the strategist: The art of Japanese business. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Ohmae, K. (1985). Triad power: The coming shape of global competition. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Parker, D., & Stacey, R. (1994). Chaos, management and economics: The implications of non-linear thinking. Hobart Paper 125. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
Parker, M. (2002). Against management: Organization in the age of managerialism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Pascale, R. T. (1999). Surfing the edge of chaos. Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 83–94.Google Scholar
Polley, D. (1993). Chaos as metaphor and science: Applications and risks. Proceedings of the Academy of Management Annual Conference, Atlanta.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy? Harvard Business Review, 57(2), 137–145.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy, techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage, creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1991). Toward a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S2), 95–117.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1997). Response to letters to the Editor. Harvard Business Review, 162–163.Google Scholar
Prigogine, I. (1997). The end of certainty: Time chaos and the new laws of nature. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Richards, D. (1990). Is strategic decision making chaotic. Behavioral Science, 35(3), 219–232.Google Scholar
Russell, B. (1946). History of western philosophy. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday Currency.Google Scholar
Shivasharan, N. S., & Shashidhar, P. (2005). Research in strategic management: A theoretical exposition. Available from http://www.smfi.org/convention/researchxseminar/shivasharanx&xshashidhar.pdfGoogle Scholar
Sotirin, P., & Tyrell, M. (1998). Wondering about critical management studies. Management Communication Quarterly, 12(2), 303–336.Google Scholar
Stacey, R. (2000a). Strategic management and organizational dynamics: The challenge of complexity. London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Stacey, R. (2000b). The emergence of knowledge in organizations. Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 2(4), 23–39.Google Scholar
Sterman, J. D. (1989). Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 301–335.Google Scholar
Svyantek, D. J., & DeShon, R. P. (1993). Organizatio nal attractors: A chaos theory explanation of why cultural change efforts, often fail. Public Administration Quarterly, Fall, 17(3), 337–353.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action; Social science bases of administrative theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Thornton, S. (2009). Karl Popper. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Spring 2009 edition. Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2009/entries/popper/Google Scholar
Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. W. (1951). Some social and psychological consequences of the long wall method of coal getting. Human Relations, 4, 6–24 and 37–38.Google Scholar
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1969). General system theory. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organizations (Parsons, T. & Henderson, A.M., Trans.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Westley, F., & Mintzberg, H. (1989). Visionary leadership and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 10(S1), 17–32.Google Scholar
Wheatley, M. J. (1992). Leadership and the new science: Learning about organization from an orderly universe. San Francisco: Berett-Koehler.Google Scholar
Whittington, R. (1993). What is strategy and does it matter? London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Willmott, H. (1993). Breaking the paradigm mentality. Organization Studies, 14(5), 681–720.Google Scholar