Tactics of Implementation

Nutt, Paul C.

doi:10.5465/256187

Cited by 103 publications

(165 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

160

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Line-level employees may use delay or prevent attempts toward change that they find particularly threatening or disagreeable. Nutt (1986) suggests that managerial tactics and leadership style can play a crucial role in overcoming the lower-level "obstructionism" that is prevalent (to some degree) in many implementation efforts. Strategic decisions are nevertheless formulated by senior-level managers of the firm and then administratively imposed on lower-level management and non-management employees with little consideration of the resulting functional-level perceptions (Nutt, 1987).…”

Section: Lower Management and Non-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forman and Argenti (2005) find that the alignment between the corporate communication function and the strategic implementation process was particularly visible in those companies that were going through fundamental strategic change: "All of the firms studied were involved in significant efforts in internal communications and felt that IT was central to the success of the function, particularly in terms of implementing strategy and building reputation" (Forman and Argenti, 2005). Nutt (1986Nutt ( , 1987Nutt ( , 1989, Bourgeois & Brodwin (1984), Lehner (2004), Sashittal & Wilemon (1996), Akan & Allen & Helms & Spralls (2006) research the effects of implementation tactics on strategy implementation. Nutt (1986) identified four types of implementation tactics used by managers in making planned changes by profiling 91 case studies: intervention, participation, persuasion, and edict.…”

Section: Lower Management and Non-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examples of such ambiguous studies are Bourgeois and Brodwin (1984), Nutt (1986Nutt ( , 1987Nutt ( , 1989, Noble (1999b), Lehner (2004, Higgins (2005), Harrington (2006), and Schaap (2006).…”

Section: Organizational Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Making Strategy Work: A Literature Review on the Factors Influencing Strategy Implementation

Guo-hui

Eppler

2010

Handbook of Research on Strategy Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although numerous studies acknowledge that strategies frequently fail not because of inadequate strategy formulation, but because of insufficient implementation, strategy implementation has received less research attention than strategy formulation. In this study, we review the factors that enable or impede effective strategy implementation, and survey the state-of-the-art in this domain. We highlight how strategy implementation has been researched so far -and in which contexts -and how this field may be moved forward. As a result of our literature analysis, spanning the last twenty-four years, we find nine crucial factors for strategy implementation that are frequently discussed in the literature as well as two approaches of aggregating and relating relevant factors. We find several important research needs regarding these factors and outline how they could be addressed.

show abstract

Section: Lower Management and Non-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lower Management and Non-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Making Strategy Work: A Literature Review on the Factors Influencing Strategy Implementation

Guo-hui

Eppler

2010

Handbook of Research on Strategy Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nutt 16,17,18 identifies four styles for implementation: by intervention, participation, persuasion and edict.…”

Section: Group Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritisation of an IT budget within a local authority

Jessop

2002

J Oper Res Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro t purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. PRIORITISATION OF AN IT BUDGET WITHIN A LOCAL AUTHORITY AbstractThis paper describes the prioritisation of an IT budget within a department of a local authority. The decision problem is cast as a simple multiattribute evaluation but from two perspectives. First, as an exercise in group decision making. Here the emphasis is on a shared process wherein the object is to obtain consensus. The use of an explicit evaluation framework and the ability to interact with the evaluation data in real time via a simple spreadsheet model were found to improve the decision making. Second, the prioritisation is made analytically. The motivation is to determine the degree to which the rankings are the result of the structural characteristics of the projects themselves rather than of the differences in importance attached to the achievement of the goals represented by the project attributes. Three methods are used: Monte Carlo simulation of ranks, cluster analysis based on attributes and an approach based on entropy maximisation. It is found that in the case studied the structure inherent in the data is high and so the results of the analyses are robust. Finally, a procedure is suggested for the appropriate use of these analyses via a facilitator to aid prioritisation decisions.

show abstract

“…The lack of change space in many development contexts often goes ignored, contributing to developmental failures: Projects and interventions generally call for more and different space than is available, do nothing to enhance or shape the space (depending rather on what Nutt (1986) calls "implementation by edicts" of pre-determined solutions) and fail as a result. Often, as Pritchett and Woolcock (2004) muse, these solutions become future problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%