The Strategy Creation - De-Strategization Paradox: Examining the Basic Duality Using Phronetic Iterative Qualitative Method

Subject Areas : Strategic Management Researches

Nima Eskandarinia ¹

1 - PhD in Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2022-12-14 Accepted : 2023-01-28 Published : 2023-06-20

Keywords: Competitive Disadvantage, Blind Spot, Strategy Knowledge Paradox, Effort-Result Paradox, Strategy Following Paradox, Job Stress Paradox,

Abstract :

In recent years, the topic of strategic management has become one of the most challenging topics among both researchers and top managers. While some scholars have supported various strategic management approaches, other scholars have challenged and criticized these approaches. In addition, there is a plurality of opinions among the scholars who have opposed strategic management. Despite the fundamental criticisms they have made on the nature of strategic management, they have not been able to find an alternative solution for the strategic management process. Therefore, the CEOs of the companies have faced a dilemma, whether they should follow the strategic management process or not, and if the answer is negative, then how should they achieve success and gain competitive advantage. The purpose of this research is to present the theory of de-strategization to answer these questions. In order to carry out this research, Phronetic iterative qualitative method has been used. The research sample includes fifteen companies in the private sector located in Tehran and its suburbs, which were selected purposefully. Based on the findings of this research, the adoption of de-strategizing policy is more effective than creating strategy. Strategy-creating policy will lead to systematic cognitive bias under the title of blind spot of competitive disadvantage and will cause the formation of four paradoxes including strategic management knowledge, effort-result, adherence to strategy-abandoning strategy, and job stress. But de-strategization does not mean inaction, so it is necessary to pay attention to the four recommendations mentioned in this article.

References:

 اسکندری نیا، نیما ( ب1400). استراتژی به مثابه چندگانه‌پنداری: روش ابداعی استعاره- نمایشنامه‌پژوهی یادگیرنده، مدیریت تبلیغات و فروش، 2 (3): 30-47.

اسکندری نیا، نیما ( الف1400). نظریه نئواستراتژی: مفاهیم، مفروضات و کاربردها، پژوهش ­های مدیریت راهبردی، 27 (80): 41-58.

Barney, J. B. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of management, 27(6), 643-650.

Bowman, E. H. (1980). A risk/return paradox for strategic management. SLOAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT.

Cunha, M. P. E, & Putnam, L. L. (2019). Paradox theory and the paradox of success. Strategic organization, 17(1), 95-106.

Dmitrijeva, J, Schroeder, A, Bigdeli, A. Z, & Baines, T. (2022). Paradoxes in servitization: A processual perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 101, 141-152.

Duhaime, I, M, Hitt, M. A. & Lyles, A. (2021). Strategic management: state of the field and its future. Oxford University Press.

Duhaime, I. M, Stimpert, L, & Chesley, J. (2012). Strategic thinking: Today’s business imperative. Routledge.

Duhaime, Irene M., Hitt, Michael A. & Lyles, Marjorie A. (2021). Strategic Management: State of the Field and Its Future. Oxford University Press.

Cunha, M. P, Gomes, E, Mellahi, K, Miner, A. S, & Rego, A. (2020). Strategic agility through improvisational capabilities: Implications for a paradox-sensitive HRM. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100695.

Edwards, M. G. (2021). The growth paradox, sustainable development, and business strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(7), 3079-3094.

Friesl, M, Stensaker, I, & Colman, H. L. (2020). Strategy implementation: Taking stock and moving forward. Long Range Planning, 1(1), 1-41

Grandy, G, & Mills, A. J. (2004). Strategy as simulacra? A radical reflexive look at the discipline and practice of strategy. Journal of management studies, 41(7), 1153-1170.

Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as Practice: Recursiveness, Adaptation, and Practices-in-Use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529–560

Jarzabkowski, P, Lê, J. K, & Van de Ven, A. H. (2013). Responding to competing strategic demands: How organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve. Strategic organization, 11(3), 245-280.

Jarzabkowski, P, Seidl, D, & Balogun, J. (2022). From germination to propagation: Two decades of Strategy-as-Practice research and potential future directions. Human Relations, 00187267221089473.

Johnson, G, Whittington, R, Regnér, P, Angwin, D, & Scholes, K. (2020). Exploring strategy. Pearson UK.

Jraisat, L, Jreissat, M, Upadhyay, A, Sajjad, F, & Balodi, K. C. (2022). Paradox of strategic partnerships for sustainable value chains: Perspectives of not‐for‐profit actors. Business Strategy and the Environment.

Kohtamäki, M, Whittington, R, Vaara, E, & Rabetino, R. (2022). Making connections: Harnessing the diversity of strategy‐as‐practice research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(2), 210-232.

Küpers, W, Mantere, S, & Statler, M. (2013). Strategy as storytelling: A phenomenological collaboration. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(1), 83-100.

MacKay, B, Chia, R, & Nair, A. K. (2021). Strategy-in-practices: a process philosophical approach to understanding strategy emergence and organizational outcomes. Human Relations, 74(9), 1337-1369.

Marcel, J. J, Barr, P. S, & Duhaime, I. M. (2011). The influence of executive cognition on competitive dynamics. Strategic Management Journal, 32(2), 115-138.

Miller, D. (1992). The Icarus paradox: How exceptional companies bring about their own downfall. Business Horizons, 35(1), 24-35.

Miller, D, & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2021). Paradoxical resource trajectories: When strength leads to weakness and weakness leads to strength. Journal of Management, 47(7), 1899-1914.

Mintzberg, H, Ahlstrand, B, & Lampel, J. B. (2021). Strategy safari. Pearson UK.

Mueller, F. (2018) 'Taking Goffman seriously: developing Strategy-as-Practice.', Critical perspectives on accounting, 53(1), 16-30

Neto, R. R, & Lavarda, R. A. B. (2017). The Language Studies in Strategy as Practice and the Middle Manager Roles: An Essay. REBRAE, 10(3), 366-380

Pina e Cunha, M, Giustiniano, L, Rego, A, & Clegg, S. (2017). Mission impossible? The paradoxes of stretch goal setting. Management Learning, 48(2), 140-157.

Porter, M. E. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard business review, 86(1), 25-40.

Porter, M. E, & Lee, T. H. (2015). Why strategy matters now. N Engl J Med, 372(18), 1681-1684.

Powell, T.C. (2017) Strategy as Diligence: Putting Behavioral Strategy into Practice, California Management Review 59(3): 162-190

Reeves, M, Haanaes, K, & Sinha, J. (2015). Navigating the dozens of different strategy options. Harvard Business Review, 93(6), 1-17.

- Rouleau, L, & Cloutier, C. (2022). It’s strategy. But is it practice? Desperately seeking social practice in strategy-as-practice research. Strategic Organization, 14761270221118334.

Sulphey, M. M. (2020). How Icarus Paradox Doomed Kingfisher Airlines. Vision, 24(1), 118-124.

Tippmann, E, Monaghan, S, & Reuber, R. A. (2022). Navigating the paradox of global scaling. Global Strategy Journal.

Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact (2nd Ed.). Wiley-Blackwell

Tsoukas, H. (2018). Strategy and virtue: Developing strategy-as-practice through virtue ethics. Strategic Organization, 16(3), 323–351

Whittington, R, Jarzabkowski, P, Mayer, M, Mounoud, E, Nahapiet, J, & Rouleau, L. (2003). Taking Strategy Seriously. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 396–409