The question to examine in this essay has evolved from a statement
made by Elfring and Volberda (2001, p.1) which reads as follows: “In the
evolution of strategy research, a diversity of partly competitive and partly
supplementary paradigms have emerged.” The task is now to look behind the
statement and to ask why this fragmentation happened and how we can
make sense of all these different perspectives. Firstly, it is important to
examine the roots of the strategy field in order to understand why strategy
matters at all and why academics spend so much time and effort on defining
their view of “the right” corporate strategy. Following this, I will give an
overview of the most common perspectives and schools which emerged
along the way. Finally, I will conclude with the reasons behind this
diversification and give an outlook into the future of the strategy research.
Before starting up it is essential to underline the fact that there is no
such thing as the “one and only” strategy which has developed over time but
that with practically every new decade (starting with the 1960’s) there was a
new focus and a new way of seeing strategy. The field of strategy is one of
the most integrated research areas which exists and for that reason scientists
from many different academic backgrounds contributed to the mainstreams
of strategy. The point that Elfring and Volberda (2001, p.2) argue is to walk
away from inventing new directions and rather look back to pull ideas
together for creating a new academic basis to build on.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Introduction
- Historical Development of the Strategy Field
- Classifications and Different Perspectives of Strategy
- Classifications
- The 10 Schools of Strategy by Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel
- The Four Generic Approaches by Whittington
- Three Very Different Perspectives on Strategy
- Economics and Strategy
- Psychology and Strategy
- Sociology and Strategy
- Classifications
- Reasons for the Fragmentation of the Strategy Field
- Applicability of Theories
- Target Groups
- Changing Business World
- Quality Management
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This essay aims to explore the fragmentation within the strategy field, examining its historical development and the reasons behind its diversification. It seeks to understand how different perspectives and schools of thought emerged and why they are significant. Additionally, it analyzes how these diverse approaches can be unified to create a more comprehensive understanding of strategy in the modern business environment.
- Historical development of the strategy field
- Different perspectives and schools of thought in strategy
- Reasons for fragmentation in the strategy field
- The need for unification and a comprehensive understanding of strategy
- The future of strategy research
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- Introduction: Introduces the essay's objective, which is to explore the fragmentation of the strategy field, and its focus on understanding the diverse perspectives and their emergence. It emphasizes the importance of a unified approach to strategy.
- Historical Development of the Strategy Field: Traces the origins of strategic research in the 1960s, highlighting the shift from planning to strategic management. The chapter discusses the influence of authors like Ansoff, Andrews, and Chandler, who recognized the need for forward-looking planning. It emphasizes the growing importance of soft factors like knowledge, skills, and culture in shaping strategic thinking.
- Classifications and Different Perspectives of Strategy: Provides an overview of classifications and perspectives within the strategy field. It highlights the 10 Schools of Strategy by Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, and Lampel, along with the Four Generic Approaches by Whittington. The chapter also explores three distinct perspectives: Economics and Strategy, Psychology and Strategy, and Sociology and Strategy.
- Reasons for the Fragmentation of the Strategy Field: Examines the key factors that contributed to the fragmentation of the strategy field. It discusses the applicability of theories, target groups, the changing business world, and the influence of quality management.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
This essay focuses on key terms like strategy fragmentation, historical development of strategy, different perspectives, schools of thought, strategic management, business environment, and the need for unification within the field.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Elisabeth Luger (Autor:in), 2003, Reasons for the Fragmentation in the Strategy Field, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/21768
