Towards An Organic perspective on strateg. The Mechanistic perspective, страница 24

Strategic decisions are dynamic decision tasks. Taking time into account can be either in terms of considering the duration needed to make the decision, the optimal time to make a decision, or the changes in the decision structure over time (Arieli and Zakai, 2001). These aspects are relatively neglected in strategy research and in models of strategic choice and management. Particularly, the rational unitary actor model used in the mechanistic perspective is largely insensitive to the notion of time. The best-known model of organizational decision making that does take time and timing seriously into account, the ‘garbage can’ model (Cohen, March, and Olsen, 1972), is mainly a descriptive model of organizational anarchy. Is it possible to come up with other strategic decision-making models, descriptive or prescriptive, that will take into account continuous changes in resources, interests, competitive responses, and other factors, including those happening within the decision making period?

Dual classes of units of analysis and their interaction

An important distinction in process and evolutionary analysis is between bounded entities (individuals, work units, firms, groups) that strategically interact, and the units (such as routines, strategies, rules, institutions, transactions, competencies) carried by these entities (e.g., Baum and Singh, 1994; Aldrich, 1999). An advantage of making this distinction is that one can learn about the development processes of a unit from one class by examining how units from the other class develop. For example, as shown in the work of Nelson and Winter (1982), the evolution of routines can shed light on firm and industry evolution as well as be informed by this evolution. Other domains of inquiry, particularly relevant to the strategy field, may include the diffusion of strategies, the evolution of networks, and the relationships between institutions (e.g., norms, conventions) and rivalry (for other examples see Moldoveanu, 2001). Although not simple to design, studies that look simultaneously at the two classes of units of analysis can shed light on how micro and macro processes interact and enhance cross-fertilization of disciplinarybased ideas.

Imperfect adaptation and inefficiency

Much of the empirical research on strategy is often criticized for being outcome based and confining itself to instances of success (e.g., Carroll, 1993). The focus of the organic perspective on process and path enables a better appreciation of imperfect adaptive processes and instances of inefficiency, mistakes, and failures. One remedy for the potential existence of a bias may involve sample selection. However, several more substantive questions remain to be addressed. For example, in what ways are the prerequisites and contributing processes for firm survival different from those contributing to sustained exceptional performance? What are the implications of the difference in the time frames involved in firms sustaining superior performance as opposed to experiencing decline and bankruptcy? In what ways, if at all, are the sources and development of strengths different from those of weaknesses?

The economics of firm’s transitions

Another area of research that is consistent with our emphasis on process is the efficiency by which firms change their strategy, structure, products, technology, and the like. The mechanistic emphasis on static efficiency, evident in frameworks such as the value chain, have precluded a better understanding of how efficient firms are in their transitions. Issues such as how efficiently firms move from one position to another, and from one market to another, or how adept they are in implementing acquisitions, alliances or organizational changes, are not adequately captured by the notion of switching costs either. Among other concerns of the field, the analysis and measurement of the economics of transitions can improve the understanding of sources of firm success and failure, extend traditional static frameworks of comparative analysis of competitors and other interacting actors, improve the analysis of various decision alternatives, and strengthen the links between concerns of strategy formulation and realization.