Strategic Management: Comparing Strategy Schools and Approaches

This essay delves into the realm of strategic management, focusing on a comparative analysis of the evolutionary and processual schools of strategy, as well as their relationship with the classical approach. The study begins by introducing strategic management as a crucial tool for achieving organizational objectives, emphasizing the role of managers in effectively managing strategies. It then highlights Richard Whittington's unique strategy model, which integrates various theories to propose four distinct approaches. The essay's primary objective is to compare and contrast the evolutionary and processual schools, examining their differing beliefs, methodologies, and applications in the context of a dynamic business environment. It explores the differences in how these approaches perceive environmental changes, profit maximization, and organizational actions. Furthermore, the essay identifies the similarities between the evolutionary and processual approaches, such as the aim of developing effective strategies and the emergent nature of the strategy development process. Finally, the essay extends the comparison to include the classical school of strategy, discussing its popularity, components, and applications, and contrasting it with the evolutionary and processual approaches, including their focus, rationale, and strategy development processes. The essay concludes by highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, emphasizing the challenges and opportunities they present in developing organizational strategies.

Running head: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Strategic Management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s Note

1STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
Introduction.....................................................................................................1
Comparison between Evolutionary and Processual School of Strategy...........2
Differences...................................................................................................2
Similarities....................................................................................................3
Evolutionary and Processual Approach against Classical Approach................4
Evolutionary and Classical School of Strategy..............................................5
Processual and Classical School of Strategy.................................................7
Conclusion.......................................................................................................9
References.....................................................................................................11

2STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Introduction
In today’s business world, Strategic Management is considered as a
major tool in order to achieve organizational goals and objectives. Strategic
management refers to the process to identify and describe major strategies
so that they can be used for achieving major goals of the companies (Vaara
and Whittington 2012). Thus, it is the responsibility of the organizational
managers to manage the organizational strategies in an effective way
(Galpin and Lee Whittington 2012). There are different kinds of strategy
models for assisting the organizational managers. However, the strategy
model of Richard Whittington is unique as well as effective in its own ways.
Richard Whittington has developed his strategy model by combining different
kinds of theories about strategies. Based on this analysis, he developed four
different approaches for strategic management. They are shown in the
following diagram:
Figure 1: Strategy Approaches of Whittington
FourPerspectivesofSCLASSICPROCESSUALEVOLUTIONARYSYSTEMETIC

3STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
(Source: Marietto, Sanches and Meireles 2012)
The aim of this study is to make a comparison between Evolutionary and
Processual school of strategies. After that, this study attempts to distinguish
these two approaches with the Classical strategy approach.
Comparison between Evolutionary and Processual School of
Strategy
It needs to be mentioned that there are certain differences and
similarities between Evolutionary and Processual strategy approach. They
are discussed below:
Differences
It needs to be mentioned that both evolutionary and processual
approaches have different beliefs. The main belief of evolutionary approach
is that the world economic environment is continuously changing. For this
reason, business organizations are required to develop strategies based on
these changes so that they can maximize organizational profit (Klerkx, Van
Mierlo and Leeuwis 2012). However, the belief is different in case of
processual approach. Under processual approach, organizational managers
develop necessary strategies by following existing rules and regulations of
the organizations (Tavakoli, Schlagwein and Schoder 2015). According to the
principles of evolutionary approach, it is not possible for the business
organizations to predict the future changes in business environments
(Guerras-Martín, Madhok and Montoro-Sánchez 2014). For this reason, it is
not possible for the organizational managers to develop long-term business
strategies based on the changes in business environments. At the same
time, the principles of processual approach refuse the approach and
principles of evolutionary approach. According to the processual approach,
there is not any basis of profit maximization in the business organizations
(Sminia and de Rond 2012). This approach states that the organizational

4STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
managers are required to develop the business strategies based on the
results of various policitical activities within the organizations.
In this context, it is required to be mentioned that under the approach
of evolutionary model, the aim of the organizational managers is to keep the
costs low so that the efficiency of overall business operations can be
increased (Mantere 2013). This aspect also keeps the options open for the
organizations for organizational improvements. In case of processual
approach, organizational managers develop the business strategies based on
the various organizational actions (Liem 2014). Under this strategy, the
generation of many strategies can be seen in the organizations as every
individuals are allowed to develop strategies for achieving the goals and
objectives. It needs to mentioned that this particular aspect is considered as
a major limitation of processual approach as it is not goods for the
organizations to have many strategies.
Similarities
Apart from the differences, there are some major similarities between
evolutionary approach and processual approach. It needs to be mentioned
that the aim of both evolutionary and processual approach is to develop
effective business strategies in order to achieve organizational goals and
objectives. Both the approaches believe that process of developing
organizational strategies is prominent or emergent. Thus, it can be seen that
both the approaches take attempts to develop strategies from different
aspects of the business organizations. It needs to be mentioned that
evolutionary approach develop strategies from various aspects of business
environment. Business organization is also considered as a vital part of
business environment. In this case, similarity can be seen between
evolutionary and processual approach as the organizational managers
develop their strategies based on their business environment. With the help
of this strategy, the organizational managers are able to perform in a more
effective and efficient way. Another major similarity can be seen in case of

5STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
the users of these approaches. It has been seen that the organizational
managers of the established companies have a knack to use the principles of
evolutionary and processual approaches.
Evolutionary and Processual Approach against Classical Approach
The above discussion shows various aspects of the strategy school of
Evolutionary approach and Processual approach. In this context, it is required
to be mentioned that another major part of Whittington’s strategy model is
Classical or Classic School of strategy. In most of the business organizations
all over the world, vast use of the different principles of classical approach
can be observed. From this, it can be understood that this particular
approach has large popularity among the business organizations all over the
world. In this context, it needs to mention that there are various components
of classical school of strategy development (Liem 2014). Under the
strategies of classical approach, organizational managers develop necessary
business strategies by using the organizational resources in the most optimal
way. In this process, they use different kinds of features like rational analysis
and others for the development of effective business strategies (Whittington
2014). It has been mentioned earlier that Whittington has developed his
strategy development model by combing different kinds of strategic
management theories and approaches. For this reason, the application of
different kinds of strategic management tools can be seen in classical
approach; they are the application of Porter’s Five Forces model, PESTEL
analysis and many others.
From the earlier part of the discussion, it can be seen that there are
many differences and similarities between models of evolutionary approach
and processual approach. However, it can also be seen that both the
approaches have been successful in developing effective business strategies.
Thus, it is obvious that will be certain similarities and differences between
evolutionary approach and processual approach with the classical approach.

6STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
For this reason, it is required to consider some major factors. Following
discussion shows the comparison between evolutionary and processual
approach with classical approach.
Evolutionary and Classical School of Strategy
Both Classical and evolutionary school of strategy are integral part of
the strategy model of Whittington. It can be seen that both the approaches
have popularities all over the world. It needs to be mentioned that there are
certain similarities between the approaches of evolutionary and classical
approach. Both these schools of strategy share some similarities. The main
aim of these two schools of strategy is to maximize the profits of the
organizations (Catalano et al. 2014). However, both the evolutionary and
classical approach applies different kinds of means for the achievement of
end objectives. There are basic differences between evolutionary and
classical approach’ and the evolutionary approach of strategy development
can challenge the classical approach form different aspects. The process of
strategy development under classical approach is formal. It implies that the
organizational managers develop strategies in a formal manner under the
classical approach. On the contrary, it has been seen that under evolutionary
approach, organizational managers of the companies develop organizational
strategies by taking into consideration all the necessary changes in the
business environment. For this reason, the strategy development process
under evolutionary approach is more efficient as the organizations become
able to perform well in every kind of business environment (Quinn 2015).
Another major aspect is the rationale of these two approaches. In case of
classical approach, the main rationale is profit maximization. On the other
hand, the rationale of evolutionary approach is to ensure the survival of the
businesses. Sometime, it is not enough for the companies to maximize the
profits as only profit maximization cannot alone ensure the survival of the
businesses. At the same time, under the approach of evolutionary school of
strategies, organizational managers develop business strategies by

7STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
considering all the survival aspects of the companies. These include strategy
for profit maximization, corporate governance strategy, sustainability
strategy and many others. Thus, in this particular area, evolutionary
approach can easily challenge the classic approach. It can be seen that the
adoption of evolutionary approach helps the business organizations in
gaining overall efficiency with the achievements of organizational goals and
objectives.
However, there are some major areas where both classical and
evolutionary approach can challenge each other. One of such areas is
“focus” of these approaches. The focus of classical approach is the internal
factors of the businesses. More precisely, classical approach helps in the
development of organization strategies in order to develop various internal
plans of the companies. However, the focus area of evolutionary approach is
different. With the help of evolutionary approach, business managers
develop strategies for external factors of the businesses like the external
market (Quinn 2015). Both internal and external factors have their own
importance in order to achieve the goals and objectives. Thus, in case of
focus area, both evolutionary and classical approach can challenge each
other. The strategy development process of both classical and evolutionary
approach is different from each other. Under the classical approach,
organizational managers develop organizational strategies with the help of
various analytical approaches. However, in case of evolutionary approach,
the development of business strategies is done on Darwinian basis
(McDonough et al. 2016). It implies that the development of strategies is
done on exploration basis. According to evolutionary approach, the
development of key business strategies depends on the changing business
environment rather than the organizational managers. At the time of
determining the choice strategies for the organizations, organizational
managers allow the market to determine it. In case of the management of
organizational resources, classical approach plays a superior role than

8STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
evolutionary approach. The application of various strategic management
tools under classical approach helps the organizational managers in
managing the organizational resources in the most efficient way. Thus,
based on the above discussion, it can be seen that evolutionary approach
have more superiorities that classical approach in the development of
organizational strategies. However, it can also be seen that classical
approach is superior to evolutionary approach in some of the areas. In
addition, in some of the cases both the evolutionary approach and classical
approach have equal contribution towards the development of organizational
strategies (McDonough et al. 2016). Hence, based on the above discussion, it
can be said that evolutionary approach can challenge classical approach in
the development of necessary organizational strategies.
Processual and Classical School of Strategy
In case of classical and processual approach for strategy development,
some major differences can be seen. In case of processual approach,
organizational managers develop business strategies by working with the
employees of the companies. In this aspect, a major difference can be seen
between processual approach and classical approach. In case of classical
school of strategy, organizational managers develop strategies with the help
of different analytical procedures. However, the process is different in case
of processual approach (Sammut-Bonnici and Paroutis 2013). Under
processual approach, organizational managers consider all the existing
organizational rules, regulations and policies at the time of developing
organizational strategies. Thus, under processual approach, organizational
managers can develop strategies by complying with the regulations and
rules of the organizations and it ensures the success of the businesses. It
proves the superiority of processual approach over classical approach. On
the other hand, major differences can be seen between classical and
processual approach in case of their focus areas. It can be seen that both
classical and processual approach focus on the internal factors of the

9STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
companies while developing the organizational strategies. However, in case
of processual approach, organizational mangers focus on some of the
additional factors in the internal factors of the business organizations. Under
processual approach, organizational managers use some valuable as well as
non-imitable resources in order to develop business strategies. With the help
of these strategies, they are able to outperform their major competitors. The
approach of processual school of strategy states that knowledge is the most
valuable resource in the business organizations (Júnior and Antunes 2016).
The main reason is that they knowledge is non-tradable and they are not
easy to manage. For all these reasons, organizational managers adopt the
strategy of processual approach for the development of organizational
strategies. Thus, in this aspect, processual approach can challenge classical
school of strategy. In this situation, it is required to be mentioned that there
is not any specific rational to processual approach for the development of
business strategies. The main aim of processual approach is to develop
business strategies so that the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the
companies can be increased (Júnior and Antunes 2016).
There is another major area of differentiation between classical and
processual approach. In case of classical approach of strategy development,
first, the organizational managers develop the optimal business strategies;
after the development of business strategies, they implement them.
however, this system is different in case of processual approach. Under
processual approach, organizational managers use to discover various
business strategies with their actions (Júnior and Antunes 2016). Under this
approach, every members of the companies are entertained to take part in
the strategy development process. Thus, it can be observed that
organizational managers under processual approach put more focus on
internal insights rather than external insight. Under classical schools of
strategy development, only organizational managers are responsible for the
development of organizational strategies. According to the approach of

10STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
processual school of strategy, organizational strategies are developed from
everyday business operations (Ceko 2014). In this process, organizational
managers construct business strategies from middle-up-down incremental
processes. In this situation, it is important to mention the fact that various
leadership styles play an important part in the development of organizational
strategies under processual approach. Most of the businesses persons all
over the world consider that it is a messy process to develop the business
strategies with the help of processual approach (Ceko 2014). However, the
effectiveness of this approach cannot be ignored. Thus, based on the above
discussion, it can be seen that some of the major elements of strategy
development is missing under classical approach of strategy development. In
addition, organizational managers under classical approach do not consider
all the necessary factors while developing the business strategies. At the
same time, organizational manager under processual approach take into
consideration all the necessary factors for developing the business strategies
(Ceko 2014). The presence of all the crucial factors proves the superiority of
processual approach over classical approach. Thus, for all these reasons,
processual school of strategy can challenge classical school of strategy.
Conclusion
The above discussion shows various analyses on the strategy model of
Whittington. Some major differences as well as similarities can be seen two
of the major aspects of the strategy model of Whittington, evolutionary
school of strategy and processual school of strategy. The major similarity is
the development of organizational strategies, but they do it in different ways.
According to the above discussion, some superior qualities in both
evolutionary and processual approach help them to challenge the approach
of classical school of strategy. Thus, based on the above discussion, it can be
said that both evolutionary and processual approach of strategy
development are the improved versions of classical school of strategy.

11STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Robert Whittington developed the approaches of evaluation and processual
by considering the approach of classical.

12STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
References
Baird, C., 2014. Why is there so much disagreement about what strategy Is.
Catalano, S.R., Whittington, I.D., Donnellan, S.C. and Gillanders, B.M., 2014.
Parasites as biological tags to assess host population structure: guidelines,
recent genetic advances and comments on a holistic approach. International
Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife, 3(2), pp.220-226.
Ceko, E., 2014, May. Relations between Strategic Management, Operations
Management and Environment Protection. In International Conference-"
Fostering Sustainable Development through Creation of Knowledge
Society (Vol. 17, p. 18).
Galpin, T. and Lee Whittington, J., 2012. Sustainability leadership: From
strategy to results. Journal of Business Strategy, 33(4), pp.40-48.
Guerras-Martín, L.Á., Madhok, A. and Montoro-Sánchez, Á., 2014. The
evolution of strategic management research: Recent trends and current
directions. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 17(2), pp.69-76.
Júnior, Q. and Antunes, E., 2016. A realistic approach to strategic thinking
and acting. Cadernos EBAPE. BR, 14(1), pp.182-206.
Klerkx, L., Van Mierlo, B. and Leeuwis, C., 2012. Evolution of systems
approaches to agricultural innovation: concepts, analysis and interventions.
In Farming Systems Research into the 21st century: The new dynamic (pp.
457-483). Springer Netherlands.
Liem, A., 2014. Toward prospective reasoning in design: an essay on
relationships among designers' reasoning, business strategies, and
innovation. Le travail humain, 77(1), pp.91-102.
Mantere, S., 2013. What is organizational strategy? A language‐based
view. Journal of Management Studies, 50(8), pp.1408-1426.

13STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Marietto, M.L., Sanches, C. and Meireles, M., 2012. Strategy as practice: a
discussion of the epistemological appropriation of historical-cultural activity
theory by the activity-based view. Revista de Administração FACES
Journal, 11(4).
McDonough, C.E., Whittington, E., Pitnick, S. and Dorus, S., 2016. Proteomics
of reproductive systems: Towards a molecular understanding of postmating,
prezygotic reproductive barriers. Journal of proteomics, 135, pp.26-37.
Quinn, J., 2015. re-introducing evolutionary theory to business history:
making sense of today's structure. Business History, 57(5), pp.655-663.
Sammut-Bonnici, T. and Paroutis, S., 2013. Developing a dominant logic of
strategic innovation. Management Research Review, 36(10), pp.924-938.
Sminia, H. and de Rond, M., 2012. Context and action in the transformation
of strategy scholarship. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7), pp.1329-
1349.
Tavakoli, A., Schlagwein, D. and Schoder, D., 2015. Open strategy:
Consolidated definition and processual conceptualization.
Vaara, E. and Whittington, R., 2012. Strategy-as-practice: taking social
practices seriously. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), pp.285-336.
Whittington, R., 2014. Corporate Strategies in Recession and Recovery
(Routledge Revivals): Social Structure and Strategic Choice. Routledge.

14STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT