Strategic Choice vs Determinism Theories

STRATEGIC CHOICE VERSUS DETERMINISM 1
Strategic choice vs Determinism theories
Name
Course
Tutor
University
City/State
Date

STRATEGIC CHOICE VERSUS DETERMINISM 2
The underlying literature is that strategic choice and environmental determinism bring
out mutually exclusive yet competing revelations of organizational adaptation (Hrebinak &
Joyce, 1985). This essay will analyze both the choice and determinism as independent variables
that can be explained to establish the context of organizational adaptation. The most pervasive
and core arguments in understanding organizational adaptation entail distinguishing if it is
derived managerially or environmentally. Adaptation is viewed as a process that displays choice
and selection visa vis environmental forces that are peremptory. In a nutshell, the matter is
considered as one that commands voluntarism or determinism in change processes that are
strategic.
Choice vs determinism
Based on exhaustive reviews by scholars, there seems to be distinct differences between
strategic choice and determinism theories of organizational adaptation. One of the arguments is
the typology that they are a continuum that spans from determinism to strategic choice that
classifies primary schools of organizational analysis into mutually exclusive classifications.
Though the placement of analytical schools in different classes implies the kind of debate on
choice or determinism. Most approaches regarding the matter of strategic choice or adaptation
focus on mutually exclusive ends that end up becoming a sole continuum. A similar implication
is that prevailing literature is a mere assumption that binary differences between choice and
determinism consider the reality of organization behavior and transformation.
The determinism theory postulates that a marketplace has less control of itself. Firms are
thus compelled to adapt to changes in the market and have to constantly seek unexpected
changes and variations in consumer patterns. The general industry, marketplace, and the
environment dictate how organizations are to be structured. A company’s mission here should

STRATEGIC CHOICE VERSUS DETERMINISM 3
entail setting goals focused on enabling such a company survive while generating revenues and
profits.
Strategic choice structure
This theory has received a credential in its applicability and is embedded in the strategic
structure where it is believed that a business exercises some degree of control and leverage in
both the market and also in influencing the behavior of the consumer (Thiétart & de Rond,
2004). The business, in this case, has leverage on some aspects such as advertisements, varying
its pricing strategies and developing networks with other enterprises. Through focusing on its
goals and objectives, the strategic choice is of the view that managers can manipulate the market
to attain its goals and objectives.
The distinctive difference that exists between deterministic and strategic theories with
regards to the organizational structure is the extent of adaptability that each theory carries. The
deterministic organizational framework asserts that the business is compelled to be dynamic with
regards to changing environmental conditions even when it is not desirable. The strategic choice,
on the other hand, adopts changes and flexibility in the hope that adapting to anticipate consumer
demands would increase brand awareness of the organization while establishing its position in
the market.
Determinism versus strategic choice
The works in debates involving determinism and voluntarism contrast with endeavors
devoted to the premise that strategic choices are greatly determined by pressures that are both
environmental and institutional in nature (Bradley, 2018). Porter’s implication that profitability
is a function of the five generic forces remains to be part of the strategic choice. The resource-
based view analogy remains focused on primary resources and capabilities as prerequisites for