Purpose The implicit and indirect influence of classical science on strategic management has been of utmost importance in the development of the discipline. Classical science has underpinned the main and even contrasting strategic management cultures. Classical science has undoubtedly allowed strategic management to thrive. Nevertheless, important limitations, roadblocks and challenges have also been produced. This paper aims to explore the influence of classical science on the main positivist and interpretive strategic management cultures. Design/methodology/approach A conceptual review is done on the influence of classical science on positivist and interpretivist traditions in strategic management. Findings The benefits and shortcomings of classical science in strategic management are explored and presented. Furthermore, the convoluted implicit relationship between strategic management and science is shown to be changing but persisting, as to face some of the challenges of the classical science culture of strategic management, a complexity culture, also inspired partially on science, seems to be developing in strategic management. Complexity seems to be emerging as an alternative, which might allow strategic management to solve some of its current dilemmas and, thus, change its implicit relationship with science. Originality/value The paper presents a novel way to conceptualize historical cultures of strategic management via their connection with academic cultures that have historically emerged from science. Through the analysis here done, a possible candidate for a Kuhninan normal strategic management and its potential revolution will be suggested, based on the recognition of the inheritance of classical science and currently complexity theory in strategic management.
The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.
Market principles in higher education seem to have generated a neoliberal awakening. A corollary of such market principles is the need for universities to develop effective strategies that give them competitive advantage. Thus, competitive advantage represents a key construct of neoliberalism, where the focus in this paper is on how university leaders, therefore, make sense of competitive advantage. Based on a comparative and instrumental case study using two close rival universities in England, three sensemaking dilemmas emerge as core elements of how university leaders conceptualize competitive advantage. The first one is about environmental fit or misfit. The second one is about seizing or missing opportunities.The third one is about finding a frame of reference. These dilemmas are valuable as they provide a possibility to understand what competitive advantage means in higher education, where the standard tenets of the concept, such as higher profits, might not always be helpful.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.