1997
DOI: 10.1177/017084069701800104
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strategic Choice in the Analysis of Action, Structure, Organizations and Environment: Retrospect and Prospect

Abstract: This paper examines the place of the strategic choice perspective in the study of organizations and considers its contemporary contribution. The main fea tures of the original analysis are summarized, followed by a review of the key issues which arise from it. The paper discusses the integrative potential of strategic choice theory within organization studies and examines its contribu tion to an evolutionary perspective on the subject.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

15
573
0
61

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 890 publications
(649 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
15
573
0
61
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the presented findings extend beyond this idea of path dependence to the extent that they emphasize the generative influence that path-dependent organizations may have on their environment. While the extant literature on path dependence and related research predominantly focuses on the reception and enactment of positive feedback from market outcomes, the findings in the present study indicate that pathdependent processes may not only be affected by the environment in which they are embedded (Dobusch and Schüßler 2013;Koch et al 2009); rather, path-dependent organizations may also conversely shape their environment to a certain extent (see also Burgelman 1991;Child 1997). With that, the study indicates that the strategic premises of path-dependent organizations may not only ''self-perpetuate'', as the literature on incumbents' rigidities and path dependence suggests (e.g., Gilbert 2006;Miller 1994;Koch 2011).…”
Section: Producing Market Outcomes: the Generative Influence Of Pathdmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…However, the presented findings extend beyond this idea of path dependence to the extent that they emphasize the generative influence that path-dependent organizations may have on their environment. While the extant literature on path dependence and related research predominantly focuses on the reception and enactment of positive feedback from market outcomes, the findings in the present study indicate that pathdependent processes may not only be affected by the environment in which they are embedded (Dobusch and Schüßler 2013;Koch et al 2009); rather, path-dependent organizations may also conversely shape their environment to a certain extent (see also Burgelman 1991;Child 1997). With that, the study indicates that the strategic premises of path-dependent organizations may not only ''self-perpetuate'', as the literature on incumbents' rigidities and path dependence suggests (e.g., Gilbert 2006;Miller 1994;Koch 2011).…”
Section: Producing Market Outcomes: the Generative Influence Of Pathdmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Consequently, strategic choices about HPWPs are directly affected by an entrepreneur's knowledge and attitudes. Strategic choice refers to the process whereby the entrepreneur decides upon a specific course of action that is to be taken by the firm in response to the (competitive) environment, the available resources and the design of the structure, rules and routines of the organisation (Child 1997;Edwards et al 2006). Indeed, when asked, small firm entrepreneurs commonly indicate that they critically evaluate the introduction and use of HR practices against the situation and needs of their firm (Drummond and Stone 2007).…”
Section: Strategic Decision-makingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here we turn to the notion of strategic choice and the effect of the human capital of the owner on strategic decision-making in small firms (Child 1997). Given that most small firms do not employ a specialist HR professional, decision-making concerning HRM normally rests in the hands of the entrepreneur (Matlay 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relatively large influence of firmlevel factors suggests that, given particular corporate attributes, firms are able to choose particular CSP initiatives proactively and strategically. Instead of higher-level environmental forces structuring corporate decisions, there seems to be considerable leeway for economic agency independent of these higher level factors (Child, 1997;Oliver, 1991); otherwise, the firm level would explain only a much smaller proportion of the CSP variance. These results are also consistent with arguments in favor of the alignment of strategy with CSP (Orlitzky et al, 2011;Porter & Kramer, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%