Evolution in Strategic Management

This article discusses the evolution of strategic management and its significance in organizations. It explores different research approaches and the shift towards industrial culture and market competition. The article also examines the concept of strategy formation and the differences between intended and realized strategies.

MANAGEMENT 1
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Name of student
Name of instructor
Name of institution
Course code
Date

MANAGEMENT 2
Firms should study the great evolution in strategic management. The concept began as a
capstone basic management course in schools. Currently, strategic management has become a
major pillar in business and organization study (Hoskisson, Hitt, Wan & Yiu, 1999). The field
has experienced numerous research resulting in great growth and diversification within a short
time. Barney and Wernerfelt adopted a resource-based view approach, which stresses on internal
strengths and weaknesses in relation to the external opportunities and threats (Hoskisson, Hitt,
Wan & Yiu, 1999). The various research approaches prompt the question of whether strategic
management has finally got back to the root stages like the swing of a pendulum. In the early
1960s the rise of resource-based view had caused the pendulum to swing on the other side
(Siegel, 2015). However, in the 1970s, research done by Porter, Bain and Mason about industrial
organization economics swung the pendulum externally (Powell, 2014). The researchers have
fostered a move towards industrial organization economics. Therefore, organizations shifted
attention towards industrial culture and market competition.
In the 1970s, research publications by Hunt, Newman and porter shifted the pendulum
externally (Hoskisson, Hitt, Wan & Yiu, 1999). The researchers contradicted the industrial
organization approach with an approach that placed firms into groups. Therefore, the focus on
strategic group research continued with the new approach. Internal consideration surfaced though
works done by Gimeno and Chen in 1996 (Siegel, 2015). The scholars exposed internal
characteristics by stressing on competitive dynamics and boundary relations. Researches by
Hoskisson and Hill swung the pendulum back to qualitative approaches (Siegel, 2015). The
concept of industrial organization introduced scientific conclusions drawn from large
populations. The scientific approach called for the use of multivariate statistical tools such as
regression and cluster analysis. However, the existence of resource-based view poses a challenge
to scientific studies (Hoskisson, Hitt, Wan & Yiu, 1999). The resource-based view required

MANAGEMENT 3
multiple methods to establish, measure and have a better knowledge of special firm resources that
result in sustainable competitive advantage.
Before formulating a strategy, firms should understand the various outcomes to enable
suitable dealing with the outcome. Various authors such as Mintzberg and Waters defined
strategy formation as a consistent pattern in a stream of many decisions (Mintzberg & Waters,
1985). The definition tends to operationalize strategy to a tangible format on which research is
conducted in organizations. Mintzberg stated that one could isolate streams of behaviour and
identify strategic consistencies (Mintzberg & Waters, 1985). Furthermore, one could establish the
origin of strategies by paying attention to relationships between leadership plans and
organisational intentions. Mintzberg differentiated strategy into two parts namely intended and
realized (Mintzberg & Waters, 1985). Therefore, a strategy refers to a pattern in a stream of
actions and not decisions. The studies that focus on comparing intended and with realized
strategies allow in creating an appropriate definition. For example, deliberate strategies are
realized as intentional managerial decisions. On the other hand, emergent strategic patterns are
realized in the absence of intentions.
Mintzberg and Waters emphasized that before labeling a strategy as perfectly deliberate,
at least three conditions require satisfaction (Robertson, Blevins & Duffy, 2012). One condition
requires a pre-existing intention without doubt about the original desired action before anything
was done. Additionally, the decisions should stem from organizational decisions either arising
from developers’ beliefs or widely accepted managerial decisions. The decisions should arise as a
response to a set of controls or issues facing the organisation (Robertson, Blevins & Duffy,
2012). Finally, the realization of the intentions should occur without external influences such as
market and political factors. The process of strategy realization should experience a stable
environment or one which the organisation has the power to influence. Additionally, the

MANAGEMENT 4
organization’s management should adequately predict the trends and patterns of the environment.
The three factors represent the various conditions for labelling a strategy as perfectly deliberate.
Therefore, the existence of the conditions rules out the chances of coming up with emergent
conditions. The organisation should have a say in the events occurring during the development of
the strategies (Robertson, Blevins & Duffy, 2012).
Scholars such as Galbraith defined that for an emergent strategy, there must exist an order
of consistency in actions for a long period (Newbert, David & Han, 2014). Lack of consistency
indicates no strategy or an unrealized strategy and unmet intentions. One cannot imagine the
existence of actions in the absence of intention within various sections of the organisation. The
leadership shows intention and actions, which proves the realization of a purely emergent
strategy difficult. However, some situations result in almost perfect emergent strategies
(Newbert, David & Han, 2014). A good example includes such as when the environment imposes
a pattern of action on an organisation. Therefore, there exist tendencies of deliberate and
emergent strategies rather than perfect forms. The two form the basis on which real-world
strategies form. Explicit leadership or intention occurs in a more precise manner (Newbert, David
& Han, 2014). Additionally, there exists central control over organizational actions with a more
stable environment.

MANAGEMENT 5
References
Hoskisson, R., Hitt, M., Wan, W., & Yiu, D. (1999). Theory and Research in Strategic Management:
Swings of a Pendulum. Journal of Management, 25(3), 417-456. doi:
10.1177/014920639902500307
Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. (1985). Of Strategies, Deliberate and Emergent. Strategic Management
Journal, 6(3), 257-272. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250060306
Newbert, S., David, R., & Han, S. (2014). Rarely Pure and Never Simple: Assessing Cumulative
Evidence in Strategic Management. Strategic Organization, 12(2), 142-154. doi:
10.1177/1476127014529895
Powell, T. (2014). Strategic Management and the Person. Strategic Organization, 12(3), 200-207. doi:
10.1177/1476127014544093
Robertson, C., Blevins, D., & Duffy, T. (2012). A Five-Year Review, Update, and Assessment of Ethics
and Governance in Strategic Management Journal. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(1), 85-91. doi:
10.1007/s10551-012-1511-3
Siegel, D. (2015). Special Issue of Strategic Organization: “Strategic Management Theory and
Universities”. Strategic Organization, 13(4), 365-367. doi: 10.1177/1476127015616707