Strategic Management: Concepts and Analysis

This assignment delves into the core principles of strategic management. It examines various theoretical frameworks used to analyze organizational strategies, such as resource-based view, market attractiveness analysis, and evolutionary approaches. The discussion also touches upon the process of strategy formation, highlighting cognitive styles and multi-disciplinary perspectives involved. Furthermore, it explores how managers make strategic decisions and the impact of factors like competitive advantage on organizational success.

Running Head: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 1
Whittington’s Approaches to Strategic
Planning

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 2
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Evolutionary School of Strategy......................................................................................................3
Processual School of Strategy.........................................................................................................4
Similarities and Differences between Evolutionary and Processual Schools of Strategy...............4
Classical School of Strategy............................................................................................................7
Challenges to Classical School of Strategy.....................................................................................8
Evolutionary Approach................................................................................................................8
Processual Approach....................................................................................................................9
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................9
References......................................................................................................................................11

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 3
Introduction
There were so many authors, who have given different opinions about strategy. In the year 1993,
Richard Whittington had identified four approaches of strategy formulation, i.e. classical,
evolutionary, systematic and processual approach. To describe these strategic trends and
concepts, Whittington uses two variables such as; strategic processes and strategic goals. These
two variables are placed on two axes, with the objectives on vertical axis and outcomes on
horizontal axis. In today’s business world, it is very important to find most appropriate school of
strategy for the goals of organization and it offers great reward for it (Whittington, 2002). This
paper includes the analysis about differences and similarities between evolutionary and
processual approach. The author recommended that these approaches can be distinguished on the
basis of outcome of strategy, profit maximization and practices on both the axes to present it
visually about two significant questions, i.e. “what is strategy to?” and “how an organization
develops the strategy?”
The critical analysis has been evaluated that processual approach of Whittington is the best as
compared to other approaches of strategic planning. Whittington has compared all the
approaches on the basis of their objective, planning and outcome of the implemented strategy.
Processual approach is better than evolutionary approach because it emphasizes on plural
objectives than profit maximization and it recognizes different possible results than only profit
and revenues. The comparison of both the approaches is done by considering the possible
outcomes of the approaches to strategy making. It is best suitable for the current business
environment as it considers different functions and areas in an organization.
Furthermore, it includes the challenges of differences and similarities of evolutionary and
processual approaches to the thoughts about classical school of strategy. Evolutionary and
processual approaches are challenging for the classical approach because these both approaches
are emergent and classical is deliberate. These practices challenge the thoughts and objectives of
the classical approach, given by Whittington. About these approaches, it can be said that
approach of organization to strategy-formulation process has different implications for knowing
about and implementation of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM).

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 4
Evolutionary School of Strategy
According to Richard Whittington, evolutionary approach of strategy is utilized to formulate the
strategies with the objective of survival. This is affected by biology and economics and strategy
is formulated based on external factors, majorly market. Under this approach of strategy, short-
term strategies are developed for surviving in the industry and not to sustain the business in long
run. The components of this approach believe that success of a company depends on its
environment than on its management (Barney, 2014). This perspective of strategy was developed
during the market led 80s that was only about the survival of the company and its business. It
shifts the emphasis from business and outcomes to creating a different when attempting
organizational success. This approach of strategic planning recommends that markets are very
much competitive for costly strategizing and volatile to outguess. The people, who are
evolutionists, believe that refined strategies can offer only temporary benefits and some of them
recommend emphasizing on transaction cost management and efficiency.
Processual School of Strategy
One of Whittington’s generic approaches is processual school of strategy. Under this approach,
the strategies are developed with the unclear goals. This classification is affected by the
psychology and formulation of strategy is done based on internal aspects, primarily perception
and politics (Barbuto, 2016). The strategies, which come under this category, are very risky and
the companies implementing these strategies are risk oriented. This type of approach denies to
both the strategic method and profit increment objective. For attaining the goals of company, the
processual theoreticians describe the strategy of organization as the sum of thoughts, opinions
and efforts of individuals. This is one of the significant approaches for strategy formulation.
Under this approach, organization establishes the objective for enhancing the quality and
increasing the market share of company (Cole, 2013).
Similarities and Differences between Evolutionary and Processual
Schools of Strategy
However, all the approaches of strategic planning are created on the basis of different
phenomenon, but they share some similarities in terms of profit maximization, outcome of
strategy etc. From the analysis, it can be stated that to survive in the processual and evolutionary

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 5
perspectives, there is more significance that is attributed to the resource based and firm specific
view in comparison to classical approach. When it comes to compare and contrast both
evolutionary and processual perspectives, it can be seen that there are both similarities and
differences as well. However, both the perspectives give different views of a firm can formulate
its strategies to attain its long term and short term objectives. Understanding these differences
and similarities can assist in knowing about the objectives and term of its business operations in
competitive business environment (Cox, Ladle and Moore, 2016).
First, there is the discussion about the similarities, which can be seen while comparing the
evolutionary and processual approach of strategy. There are various similarities in both
perspectives. Both the processual and evolutionary perspectives have same insights on strategy
making process that these both approaches are emergent. It states that most of the strategies
emerge as a component of competitive process. Under this process, stronger performers get
success and weak are overwhelmingly clasped from ecological position. In addition, both
approaches are uncertain about the capacity of strategist to lead the strategy in a balanced
hierarchical manner (Drucker, 2007). Under the schools of strategy, Whittington includes that
classical strategy is created on the basis of probability and stability. But processual and
evolutionary perspectives consider this predictability and stability as improbable and, thus these
are more careful and emphasized upon creating different contingencies rather than long term
programs. Moreover, Evolutionists and Processualists suggest that the strategy makers be more
flexible in their view, to become capable to handle the sudden and unpredicted changes in
operating contexts. Same as Evolutionary approach, rational planning is not considered in the
processual approach. They state that strategy develops from fundamental processes of
organizational practices and strengths of market, in which the capabilities are entrenched in
bottom-up trend of company (Eden & Ackermann, 2013). In the process of strategic formulation,
processual and evolutionary perspectives share similarity to cope with an uncertain atmosphere.
Both of these perspectives seem to become more suitable to industries that are in the early
growth stage and in-flux. It can be understood by looking at the industry life cycle. These are
accounted to come into the process component of the strategy, such as; it states that how the
company develops or emerges its strategies and tactics.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 6
Apart from these similarities, there are some differences between processual and evolutionary
approaches. As discussed above, evolutionary perspective claim that environment is change too
fast, so management team should focus on the routine operations and viability while making the
option open. Processual approach has the uncertainty that both market and organization work
with the hardnosed effectiveness and efficiency that evolutionary claims and it ascents towards
strategies with refinement of core competencies and incremental adaptation (Gallén, 2006). In
contrast to evolutionary perspective, processual follow the pluralist objectives because it pursues
more than profit maximization as an estimated result of implemented strategy. Processualists
argue that companies emphasize on fulfilling rather than profit maximization and organizational
managers tend to comply with the preset routines because they make efforts to make simpler.
They focus on developing competencies and flexibility for developing adjustment. This approach
emphasizes on bottom-up phenomenon, under which the strategy emerge from the people in the
company seeking to incorporate their individual objectives as a part of company’s goals
(Johnson, et al, 2014).
Moreover, evolutionary considers allowing the market for determining the appropriate strategy,
whereas processual requires from the company to sustain the status quo and go ahead with it.
Processual Approach states that one should adopt the world as it is, instead of implementing
changes, while evolutionary believes that the growth and success of the company is dependent
on the environment and it is working in and not its management. Like evolutionary, processual
approach will be cautious, but it will emphasize deeply and strategic responses will be given on
the basis of small scale and frequent re-adjustments (Hill, Jones and Schilling, 2016). It states
that profit maximization is comparatively unrealistic objective.
Processual approach refuses the classical approach and claims that strategy is constructed,
whereas evolutionary approach do agree with the classical approach in maximizing the profits
and consider that it is necessary for the survival of company. Moreover the major focus of the
evolutionary is to determine externally via the effect of market and the approach of Darwin of
natural selection, like; the survival of business is dependent on differentiation strategy, while
major focus in processual is on determining the success of failure internally via political
processes and skills and competencies of human resources, working with the organization.
Against evolutionary perspective, processual perspective is not more confident about the firm in

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 7
attaining the maximum profitability. Under processual, strategy will fail, if the company does not
possess required skills and abilities, but environment and market play more significant role than
skills in evolutionary approach (Jenkins, Ambrosini & Collier, 2016).
Thus, it can be clearly stated that processual and evolutionary schools of strategies are both
similar and different. They are different in terms of objective, strategy, rationale, key influences
and majorly focus. This can be understood by looking at the below-given diagram. The diagram
includes three different schools of strategic planning. It clearly indicates the difference between
evolutionary, processual and classical approach of strategic planning.
Source: (Whittington, 2002)
By considering these approaches, an organization can make decisions on its strategy and tactic
for achieving its predetermined objectives and goals, which may be related to different practices
of the organization, like; profit maximization, marketing objectives, employee satisfaction,
improvement in the quality of products and services, product differentiation etc. Using these
perspectives, the companies will be able to formulate effective strategies, which will lead the
organization to overall growth and success in today’s competitive business environment (Kotlar,
& Armstrong, 2014).

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 8
Classical School of Strategy
The classical school of strategy is considered as most prominent approach of all the approaches
to strategy formulation. It is a deliberate and rational method of strategic planning with the single
objective of profit maximization. This perspective of strategy undertakes the environment of
business to be anticipated and so it creates a logical and rational scheme, which will make the
company able to attain its overall objectives and goals (Laszlo, 2010). It is processed via long
term planning, which the users of this approach are able to attain the profit-oriented objectives of
strategy. This approach is about to plan how to utilize resources of organization appropriately
for attaining the long term objectives. The major features of this perspective are rational
evaluation, isolation of conception from implementation and obligation of profit maximization.
This perspective was introduced in duration of 1960s by Alfred Chandler, theorist Igor Ansoff
and businessman Alfred Sloan. All three had given same viewpoints on classical perspective that
is named as rational and planned approach of strategic planning. Under this approach, company
understands that senior executives are in the control of creation of policy, whereas managers in
operations are accountable to the execution of that strategy. As per the classical approach, the
strategy of an organization is to determine the long term objectives and goals of a company and
execution of actions and effective allocation of resources essential for those objectives (Model,
Soule and King, 2016). Under this approach, rational planning is used, such as; PESTLE analysis
to formulate strategy and tactics. This approach has a limitation, i.e. the improbability of events
may happen in the micro environment of organization, which may solidify the approach
obsolescent. The authors highlighted this approach in the model of different components in
effective strategies, where, there are obvious objectives, comprehending the competitive
environment, resource allocation and appraisal and implementation of strategies. Under this
approach, the strategy of company can be seen at three levels, firstly at corporate level, then at
business level and thirdly at operational level (Olavarrieta, 2015).
Challenges to Classical School of Strategy
Both of these approaches challenge the thought of Whittington towards classical school of
strategy (Whittington, 2002). The challenges to Classical approach are stated below;

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 9
Evolutionary Approach
The challenges of evolutionary approach are less effective than processual approach as both of
these approaches focuses on an only objective, i.e. profit maximization. The objective under
classical approach is very much clear. The evolutionary and classical methods share similarity,
because they both have only objective of profit maximization as a result of strategy. But,
evolutionary approach takes a diverse place because it depends on the capability of market to
safeguard the maximization of profits (Pearce, and Robinson, 2011). The approach challenges
classical approach because if the company prefer to implement evolutionary approach, then it
will make focus on environment and not on its managers and employees. This phenomenon will
be changed with the implementation of classical approach, as it focuses on utilization of
resources for attaining long term objectives of the company. It can be stated that classical method
focuses that management will implement profit maximization strategies via rational planning, but
evolutionary does not use rational planning. Thus, there is a major role of management and
hierarchical structure in classical approach, but evolutionary focuses on the environment
primarily, not on its managers (Peteraf, Gamble & Thompson, 2014).
Processual Approach
There are so many challenges, which are posed by processual approach and they impact the
thoughts under this approach. In classical approach, strategy planners prefer to do rational
analsyis, but processualists deny and state that the strategies must comply with the existing
regulations and rules of a company. This poses threats to the thoughts and opinions of this
approach. Moreover, in classical approach, the strategy is first created and then executed. In
processual approach, it is another way because it is through course of actions, which the strategy
gets revealed. This approach emphasizes on internally vision of the company rather than external
anticipation (Thompson, 2016). Against classical view, processual approach of strategy is less
confident about the company in attaining the profitability and revenues. The goal of classical
approach is to maximize the profit, which is very clear, but goal of processual approach is vague.
It challenges the implementation of the approach of strategy in an organization. The focus in
classical approach can be determined by looking at the internal factors via quality of planning
and management, whereas success can be determined by internal politics and skills and abilities
in processual approach (Whittington, 2002).

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 10
Thus, it can be understood that each of approaches, i.e. evolutionary and processual can pose
challenges on what Whittington calls about the classical school of strategy. Implementation of on
approach can challenge the execution of another approach (Varadarajan, 2010).
Conclusion
Each and every company and individual exist and run the business in changing business
environment with the objective of attaining one goal or time to time with diverse goals, subject
to different circumstances, thus executing irrelevant approaches in favor of options and more
related approaches. No doubt, Whittington has made a significant contribution to the strategy
making process, which will go ahead with the passage of time, because it responds to the
changes in the business environment. Strategy is an important aspect for the organization
because it provides meaning to a company and its business operations. It makes its employees
able to expand their own identity. As discussed in above report, there are different approaches,
which come under two processes, such as; emergent and deliberate. The report includes the
discussion about three approaches majorly, i.e. Evolutionary, Processual and Classical approach.
Both processual and evolutionary approaches pose the challenges on the thoughts of classical
approach.
From the above critical analysis, it can be concluded that it is not sufficient for a company to
possess an effective strategy, the development and execution of strategy must flow
simultaneously through the process of strategy planning. It can be stated that processual
approach is the best approach to deal with the issues in the current business environment. The
organization in today’s business environment should go ahead with this approach as it fulfills
various objectives of the company rather than profit maximization. From the description of
Whittington, it can be analyzed that processual approach is an emergent approach, which
emphasizes on the internal development of organization. For external development, it is very
important to develop the workplace internally. It forces the people in organization to follow the
existing rules and regulations in the company. Thus, it can be stated that processual approach is
better evolutionary approach of Whittington.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 11
References
Barney, J.B., 2014. Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. Pearson Higher Ed.
Barbuto Jr, J.E., 2016. How is strategy formed in organizations? A multi-disciplinary taxonomy
of strategy-making approaches. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 3(1).
Cole, G.A., 2013, Strategic Management, Cengage Learning.
Cox, C.B., Ladle, R. and Moore, P.D., 2016. Biogeography: an ecological and evolutionary
approach. John Wiley & Sons.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 12
Drucker, P. F., 2007. The Practice of Management. Classic Drucker Collection ed. Burlington
(MA): Elsevier.
Eden, C., & Ackermann, F, 2013, Making strategy: The journey of strategic management. Sage.
Gallén, T., 2006, Managers and Strategic Decisions: Does the Cognitive Style Matter? Journal of
Management Development, 20(2), 118-133.
Hill, C.W., Jones, G.R. and Schilling, M.A., 2014. Strategic management: theory: an integrated
approach. Cengage Learning.
Hill, C.W. and Jones, G.R., 2013. Strategic management theory. South-Western/Cengage
Learning.
Jenkins, M., Ambrosini, V. & Collier, N., 2016. Advanced Strategic Management: A Multi-
Perspective Approach. 3rd ed. London: Palgrave.
Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Scholes, K. & Regnér, P., 2014. Exploring Strategy: Text and
Cases. 10th ed. Harlow(England): Pearson Education Ltd.
Kotlar, P. & Armstrong, G, 2012, Principles of Marketing (14 edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
Laszlo, A., 2010, Redefining success: designing systemic sustainable strategies. Systems
Research and Behavioral Science 27(1) p. 3-21.
Model, J., Soule, S.A. and King, B., 2016. Shareholder Activism in the United States: A
Processual Approach. Working Paper.
Olavarrieta, S., 2015. Market attractiveness, resource-based and evolutionary approaches to
strategy: a comparison. In Proceedings of the 1996 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS)
Annual Conference (pp. 149-153). Springer, Cham.
Pearce, JA., and Robinson, RB., 2011, Strategic management: Formulation, implementation, and
control. 12th edn. McGraw Hill Higher Education.
Peteraf, M., Gamble, J., & Thompson Jr, A., 2014, Essentials of strategic management: The
quest for competitive advantage. McGraw-Hill Education.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 13
Thompson, A.A., 2016. Strategy core concepts & analytical approaches. Blue Ridge, IL:
McGraw Hill Education.
Varadarajan, R., 2010, Strategic Marketing and Marketing Strategy: domain, definition,
fundamental issues and fundamental premises, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38
(2), pp. 119-140.
Whittington, R, 2002, Theories of Strategy (2nd ed), Sage, London.