No abstract

Confronted by increasingly turbulent and complex environments, general managers have become more interested in understanding the conditions and forces that enable or disable successful changes in organizational strategies. Yet, largely because of their tendency to use f u z z y definitions and inadequate methodologies, empirical studies of changes in strategy have not provided practitioners with a set of well-tested theories. To provide a basis for circumscribing, evaluating, and directing future research, this paper begins by developing a framework f o r assessing and modelling changes in strategy. After discussing the forces that influence their occurrence and performance ouicomes, the paper reviews a representative sample of empirical studies in terms of two major questions: (1) how are changes in strategy conceptualized and modelled? and (2) what methods cif observation and analysis are employed? This review concludes with a report of importartt patterns and concerns followed by suggestions f o r future research.

This paper interprets the corporate strategies of multi‐business firms as patterns in their aggregate deployment of resources to functional uses across businesses. By integrating business and corporate levels in the study of strategy‐making, such a perspective facilitates analyzing aggressiveness in corporate posture as a concept distinct from, but complementary to, competitive strategy and diversification. Changes in aggressiveness, we argue, result from the interplay of two sets of forces: (1) inhibitors that create inertia; and (2) inductors that stimulate redeployments. Specific hypotheses are tested using data drawm from a random sample of 352 firms in ten economic sectors between 1977 and 1984. Results support the view that prior performance and sector volatility have a curvilinear impact on the propensity of firms to change their corporate aggressiveness. Change in corporate posture is significantly inhibited by size and prior resource deployments. However, the inductive forces of prior performance and volatility act to stimulate change.

Cognitive approaches to strategy have examined the subjective nature of business environments and competitive situations, but have failed to show how managerial mental models lead to superior economic performance. In contrast, resource‐based views of strategy acknowledge the importance of managerial skills in creating economic rents, but have not examined the processes through which managerial cognitions lead to sustained competitive advantage. To address this deficit, this article develops a sociocognitive capability approach that integrates cognitive and economic theories. This approach: (1) identifies sociocognitive foundations of differentiation and cost; (2) examines how these foundations emerge from the process of strategy development; (3) explains how group capabilities influence this process; and (4) shows how human and organizational resources give rise to group capabilities. The article concludes by discussing implications and directions for future research.

No abstract