A Comprehensive Analysis of Strategic Choice vs Determinism Theories

This essay explores the long-standing debate between strategic choice and determinism theories in organizational management. Strategic choice theorists argue that managers proactively shape their organizations, while determinists believe environmental and structural factors limit managerial influence. The essay examines these theories at both organizational and industry levels, highlighting the strengths of strategic choice in empowering managers to impact organizational outcomes through learning, adaptation, and strategic decision-making. While acknowledging the limitations of strategic choice in certain contexts, such as small firms and specific time frames, the essay concludes that strategic choice offers a more compelling explanation for organizational restructuring and performance. Desklib provides access to similar essays and resources for students seeking to deepen their understanding of these concepts.

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

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 2
There has been a series of debates surrounding the application of organizational theories
for the past one decade revolving the issue of strategic choice versus determinism. The strategic
choice or free will theorists postulate that managers are autonomous agents that operate in
proactive and potentially innovative ways to manipulate the fate of their organizations
(Whittington, 2014). On the other hand, the determinists, on the other hand, are of the view that
managers are limited by the prevailing environmental and structural situations and thus cannot
manipulate the course of their organizations. Scholars classified as environmental determinists
entail population ecologists. Also, contingency theorists belong to the class of environmental
determinists. The proponents of strategic choice with the inclusion of voluntarists entail strategic
theorists and network theorists.
The paper views determinism and strategic choice as extremes of a sole continuum as a
misconception that diverts attention from other crucial fascinating issues. The power, the choices
and the capability of managers to make changes in their organizations depends entirely on the
expectations by determinists and voluntarists. The most vital issue with regards to strategic
choice versus the determinism is the nexus between them and how their associations and
resultant reactions unveil over time. This essay acknowledges such associations and tensions that
manifest between the two views and finds an alternative strategy to reconcile them. Reconciling
such extreme theories is possible through identifying limits by the determinists and free will by
prioritizing factors related to industry, time and organization.
Overview of the theories
Both theories of determinism and strategic choice have been evaluated at the level of
organization and industry. Based on some strategic choice and resource-based theorists, they
assess strategic choice at the organization level. However, others evaluate the same at the level

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 3
of clustered organizations. Scholars analyzing the phenomena at institutional level assert that the
dominant coalition within the organization facilitates decision making on time and the strategy
for restructuring effort and performance with regards to restructuring is a function of
management as opposed to the environment (Geddes, 2018). On the contrary, resource-based
theorists are of the view that managers over time, acquire specialized knowledge and unique
skills capable of yielding distinctive abilities and performance levels regarded as superior. In the
level of industry, the network theorists assert that cluster of organizations interacts to develop
their collective environment, regulations, and choices available in the context of their
environment by mobilizing action and resources.
Identical to the methodology of strategic choice, the determinists adopt the two-level
analysis that is the organization and the industry. The contingency theorists evaluate the issue at
an organizational level and assert that the environment-structure fit is crucial for organizational
effectiveness (Hilbig & Morten, 2014). In support of their premise, they are of the view that the
environment dictates the kind of structure that organizations adopt and implement for them to be
excellent performers. Taking into consideration, the positional school considers the deterministic
opinion and demonstrates that firms’ performance is limited by legal, technological and
competitive aspects that dominate the industry. For instance, the Purdue studies conducted in the
beer industry are a prototype of this school. At the industry level, determinists assert that
environmental resources are constrained, and it is thus the responsibility of organizations to
adapt their operations to tap on the benefits of the evolving base. Though inertial structures
characterize organizations, it makes it challenging to adjust without hardships.
Moreover, the environment chooses those organizations that it believes will thrive in the
long-run. The industrial economists, in this context, posit that the structure of the industry with

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 4
regards to the size and number of firms dictates the inherent revenues and profitability be
accrued in such sectors. Thus, at the core of this discussion is the discretion the manager has to
impact outcomes in an organization.
Why strategic choice is superior to the deterministic theories
The primary motive and direction of this essay are to establish the foundations of
applicability of theories with regards to determinism and strategic choice (Gopalakrishnan,
1998). To establish the favorability of strategic choice over determinism will require analyzing
the strengths of strategic choice and the underlying weaknesses in the deterministic theory. A
more concise way would be to establish a strawman that explains the drawbacks of that view and
postulate arguments in favor of the other view. In this context, determinism is the strawman
where significant drawbacks with regards to it get exposed, on the other hand, the strengths of
strategic choice as the viable option to get expounded. Based on the evidence adduced it is
apparent that leaders play a crucial role than environment in impacting meaningful outcomes in
their organizations. Also, organizations have been found to be learning entities. Slack on the
other hand has been attributed to yielding a change in an organization. Emerging organizational
structures have been found to evolve to adapt to environmental variations due to managerial
focus.
The determinists argue that leaders have limited power at their discretion and this makes
managers have limited roles in their respective organizations. Though population ecologists limit
the role leadership has on emerging organizations, the contingency theorists postulate managers
as symbols whose actions are constrained by systems that are social and economical in the
environment. Thus, the influence of leaders on performance is limited to a great extent. Many
citations back the general notion that compared to elements such as general economic conditions

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 5
and organizational effects, the impact managerial decision making has on organization results as
a function of limitations (Bradley, 2018). Though such a study was imperative, its implications
with regards to managerial performance are misquoted. Later on, there was a reanalyzation of
data that revealed different views and outcomes. It was found that even though managers
impacted on sales and net earnings little, they had a substantial impact on profit margins. Such
empirical evidence backs the analogy that leaders have considerable impact in delivering
outcomes in their respective organizations.
Moreover, other studies have revealed that managerial experience and formulation of
decisions by divisional managers are strongly linked to the growth and expansion of the division.
Managers use their wealth of knowledge and experience in meaningful ways to effect substantial
outcomes in their organizations. Also, managers who tend to be successful start to believe in
their abilities to impact results within the organization and such a reinforcement motivates them
to become more proactive which has the effect of providing greater initiative.
The determinists postulate that the environment controls and limits organizations.
Proponents of strategic choice imply that managers can have a say in choosing the environment
they wish to operate in making them influence the decision-making process to match their view
of the world. In one of the empirical studies conducted evaluating the nexus between
environment and performance it came clean that despite different managers perception of the
environment from the objective evaluation, it did not substantially affect the performance of the
organization. Managers have the power to maintain organizational performance despite them
having different subjective opinions that do not match the traits of the objective environment.
Other studies have gone further to assert that the effectiveness of strategic decision framework
was a direct function of collecting and utilizing information rationally by the managers as

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 6
opposed to engaging in the political conduct. Thus, the environment had little or no role in
impacting the effectiveness of decisions made.
The view of the population ecologists is that large organizations are inertial and thus not
in a position to adapt fast enough to the changes in the environment. However, such arguments
fail to comprehend that large organizations possess capacities that enable them to learn and adapt
to their respective environments. Observations in the past have demonstrated the constant efforts
by large organizations in establishing search patterns necessary for scanning the environment for
meaningful information. The success of such search patterns enables organizations to learn to
integrate patterns in their repertoire of operations. On the contrary, the failure of search patterns
pushes the organization to adapt them and seek new solutions. Thus, organizations have the
power to reap from the benefits of feedback mechanisms in establishing their decision-making
process.
The determinists fail to explain how organizations restructure when there are many
adversaries and how such organizations adapt their activities to enable them to survive. There are
assertions that managers engage in primary substantive as well as symbolic activities at the onset
of the reorientation phase. In one of the studies that comprised of twenty-five minicomputers
producers, it emerged that the appointment of a new manager increased the probability of
revolutionary transformation in the framework, strategy, and distribution of power in the
organization. With a new manager, there came a unique experience for the organization and a
different comprehension of effective organization action to be taken along with anticipation for a
change. It is such anticipation that is responsible for channeling in organizational transformation.
The population theories assert that an optimal amount of slack exists in the environment.
They also assume the magnitude of coupling that can either end up being tight or loose is a

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 7
function of environment. Thus, organizations end up having minimal control over how they
utilize slack to help them adjust to uncertainties in the environment. It has been demonstrated
that when organizations have slack resources in excess, then they end up being loosely attached
to the environment. Organizational slack has been categorized broadly as a cushion of potential
resources that can enhance innovative strategic conduct and a catalyze an organization from
unforeseen environmental risks. Theorists of the strategic choice postulate that the slack in one-
time frame empowers powerholders to institute the recommended structural changes enabling
such firms to improve their performance in the future. Slack enables organizations to adopt and
effect technological innovations that can influence their rank in the environment. To generate
slack depends on the coordination of managerial operations and is a product of teamwork by
executive management.
The determinists fail to give a proper explanation as to the cause of the emergence of
various structural types. As per the population ecologists, structures appear as an origin of
random disparities. The contingency theorists utilize the environment as the salient point behind
the process of structuring. The strategic theorists, on the other hand, are better positioned to give
convincing logic behind the existence of unique structures in organizations. They postulate that
structuring as a process of personal attention, that entails reconstructing the perceived
environment. Therefore, the organization becomes a communication web where actors regularly
process information. The structure then gets inferred from uncertainties as per the behavior of
such actors as they are scrutinized over time.
Conclusion
Even though strategic choice seems to have particular strengths, there are scenarios
where the environment has been found to weaken the managerial effect. Strategic choice is

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 8
limited to small firms compared to large firms. The time frame priority is one of the elements
that impact the degree of choice at the manager’s disposal. Categorically, empirical studies are of
two kinds. The longitudinal study is one that is conducted over a long duration while a cross-
sectional study is performed over a shorter time frame. The strategic choice theory explains the
managerial implications and organizational operations in the short-run. It is apparent that in the
short run the degree to which the environment can change is constrained. The existence of stable
environmental conditions translates to managers having a substantial impact on organizational
results, for instance, the growth of sales, profitability and improved market shares which comes
through their efforts. The population ecology experiments are longitudinal and as such assume a
long-term perspective viewing evolution of organizations as time goes by. Such studies come
handy in expounding outcomes such organization growth with regards to the population. In the
long-term, the effect of managerial decisions is streamlined by the activities in the environment.
The fluctuations in the environment are probably to lead organizations encountering substantial
variations in performance in the long run. It is the downturns connected to significant
achievement that lead to environment singling out organizations.
A good example is when the executive management of AT&T decided to have the
company split into three small enterprises. Such a split saw the prices of stock rise dramatically
implying that managerial decisions can usher in positive outcomes in the short run. On the
contrary, in the medium term, AT&T predicaments in business still prevail, and the management
finds itself constrained.

STRATEGIC CHOICE VS DETERMINISM THEORIES 9
References
Bradley, J., 2018. Deterministic Vs. Strategic Organizational Structure. [Online]
Available at: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/deterministic-vs-strategic-organizational-structure-
65533.html
[Accessed 19 October 2018].
Geddes, B., 2018. Uses and limitations of rational choice. In: In Latin America in Comparative
Perspective. s.l.:Routledge, pp. 81-108.
Gopalakrishnan, S., 1998. Strategic choice versus environmental determinism: A debate
revisited. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 6(2), pp. 146-164.
Hilbig, B. E. & Morten, M., 2014. Generalized Outcome-based Strategy Classification:
Comparing deterministic and probabilistic choice models. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 21(6),
pp. 1431-1443.
Whittington, R., 2014. Corporate Strategies in Recession and Recovery(Routledge
Revivals):Social Structure and Strategic Choice. s.l.:Rouledge.