A review of empirical research on dynamic competitive strategy, страница 2

In an effort to reflect the progress that the field of strategic management has made with respect to dynamic competitive strategy, this review will focus specifically on longitudinal studies on competitive strategy content (Rajagopalan and Spreitzer 1993). For the purpose of this review, we see longitudinal studies as ones in which (a) the variables are collected at two or more distinct points in time, (b) the subjects or cases that are analyzed are the same, or at least comparable, from one time period to the next, and (c) the analysis includes some comparison of data either between or among time periods (Bergh 1993; Menard 1991).

The strategy content perspective was chosen based on the large increase in relevant research emphasizing a dynamic perspective over recent decades (Bergh 1993). Rather than taking a static theoretical and methodological approach, many studies take a historical approach to central concepts such as strategic fit and organizational alignment (Zajac et al. 2000). Advances in the field have been made, building on the resource-based view of the firm (Barney 1991), using alternative approaches to strategic change (Kraatz and Zajac 2001), and with studies on short-term and long-term competitive dynamics (Ketchen et al. 2004), all of which have since then strongly intensified the interest in dynamic phenomena and longitudinal research approaches. As a result of these developments, we consider a review on dynamic strategy content a warranted choice for this review.

Identification of Literature

We began by looking at many articles in academic journals and their quality rankings (Extejt and Smith 1990; Franke et al. 1990; Johnson and Podsakoff 1994; MacMillan 1989, 1991; Podsakoff et al. 2005; Tahai and Meyer 1999). We also looked at the scope description in the Business Source Premier database. After weighing information on quality and impact, topical appropriateness and empirical orientation, we selected nine journals as a basis for the review (see Table 1 for an overview). Because of the selection process, the need for a consistent set of keywords, and to prevent a proliferation of results, specialty journals focusing, for example, on specific industry sectors or aspects of organizational development were not included in the search.