Strategy beyond the box: an editorial prologue

Citation

Kelly, S. and Kouzmin, A. (2009), "Strategy beyond the box: an editorial prologue", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 28 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd.2009.02628aaa.001

Strategy beyond the box: an editorial prologue

Article Type: Introduction From: Journal of Management Development, Volume 28, Issue 1

Strategy has eluded a universal definition even though the concept is central to the field of management (Hatton and Bruce, 1994), an outcome ensuing from the contradictory perspectives of the diverse schools of thought evident in the literature and a research culture arguably far from mature (Caldart and Ricart, 2004, p. 96). Whether it is predominantly a concept founded on planning; thinking; configuring; positioning; competency acquisition; or emergence remains unclear and disputed. It is also evident that strategy is a term that is often misunderstood, frequently being seconded to make a statement seem more important or provide a decision with more weight or credibility.

Nevertheless, the deconstruction of strategy has evolved to a point where parsimonious solutions describing what strategy is and how it should be practised dominate management literature. “[R]esearchers tend to reduce complex organizational reality to a small number of variables and over- simplify theories” (Finlay and Cooksey, 2001, p. 15).

As a part of this simplification, management gurus have been allowed to successfully sell their wares. Practitioners are always looking for “the answer” and this has spawned ongoing bouts of “eureka solutions”. Re-engineering; empowerment; culture; change management; and quality have arisen, among many others, as the answer to the myriad of challenges facing organizations and, often, by default the essence of developing and/or implementing an effective strategy. However, these answers are generally not founded on robust academic analysis or critique. Rather, they derive from a notion and are often developed through compelling stories based on a small number of standout individuals and/or standout firms.

Especial attention is applied to the “epistemologically Imperialist” takeover of strategic theory by economists, with their propensity to “externalize” much of social, political, and economic, complexities. They assume the state’s existence, but give it no history and no functions and, one might add, give the state no organizational or policy sophistication, let alone, complexity or vulnerability:

Economists study complex economic systems by constructing drastically simplified models of economic behaviour, based on incompletely verified time and space evidence, in order to derive partially intuitive judgments about the past and future consequences of changes in the social and political context of economic activity (Kouzmin et al., 1996, cited in Fitzgerald, 1990, p. 24).

The presented papers critique the existing theoretical norms surrounding strategy and the underlying premise upon which these norms have developed. The papers can be read individually but the intent is to lead the reader through an argument that rejects Modernist (closed system) strategic practice. An open system categorisation is offered as a new way of considering strategy. This is important because “current dominant ways of thinking and talking about management are squarely based on Newtonian and system-environment notions of efficient and formative causality in which good enough long-term prediction is possible. The efficacy of the whole process of choosing aims, goals and visions, (Rationalist Teleology) in order to be in control, depends utterly on this foundation of predictability. If a system’s specific long-term behaviour is unpredictable, then setting specific goals for it is a questionable activity” (Stacey, 2000, p. 91).

About the authors

Stephen Kelly is an Associate Professor and Head of the School of Commerce and Management at Southern Cross University. He is also Director of the Centre for Enterprise Development and Research. He has published in a range of areas broadly incorporating small firm strategy, planning and performance; business-to-business networks and industrial clusters; service quality and delivery; venture capital; SME internationalization; and destination marketing. His current research is focused on the formation and development of ICT industrial clusters in Australia and China. Prior to joining academia he worked in the Australian building materials and construction industry in various staff and line positions predominantly within marketing and sales.

Alexander Kouzmin is an Adjunct Professor in the School of Commerce and Management at Southern Cross University and Adjunct Professor in Management in the School of Management at the University of South Australia. He has published eight books; contributed some 60 chapters to national and international monographs/books; presented research papers and keynote addresses at more than 200 international conferences and has published, to date, some 180 refereed papers and review articles.

Stephen Kelly, Alexander Kouzmin