Reinstating the radical: Trajectory, debates, and proposals for strategy as practice

IF 10.5 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Business Research Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115055
Qian Li , Paula Jarzabkowski
{"title":"Reinstating the radical: Trajectory, debates, and proposals for strategy as practice","authors":"Qian Li ,&nbsp;Paula Jarzabkowski","doi":"10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Strategy as practice (SAP) has developed from a relatively radical idea emphasising situated and knowledgeable strategy practices to a well-recognised field explaining a wide range of strategy activities and practices. Despite this remarkable trajectory, SAP continues to be shaped by ongoing onto-epistemological debates. This essay follows the call to embrace SAP’s early roots in social practices and proposes reinstating the radical in SAP research. We briefly review SAP’s trajectory, showing how advocates and critics have co-constructed the field as it is today. Based on this review, we identify two ongoing debates of intentionality and the macro–micro divide and highlight the onto-epistemological nature of these debates and the methodological challenges to move beyond the debates. Finally, we propose three research ‘bridges’ across these debates<!--> <!-->to further advance<!--> <!-->the radical SAP agenda and its growth as a vibrant intellectual community open to a wide range of research and phenomena as part of the field’s continuous process of becoming.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15123,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Research","volume":"187 ","pages":"Article 115055"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296324005599","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Strategy as practice (SAP) has developed from a relatively radical idea emphasising situated and knowledgeable strategy practices to a well-recognised field explaining a wide range of strategy activities and practices. Despite this remarkable trajectory, SAP continues to be shaped by ongoing onto-epistemological debates. This essay follows the call to embrace SAP’s early roots in social practices and proposes reinstating the radical in SAP research. We briefly review SAP’s trajectory, showing how advocates and critics have co-constructed the field as it is today. Based on this review, we identify two ongoing debates of intentionality and the macro–micro divide and highlight the onto-epistemological nature of these debates and the methodological challenges to move beyond the debates. Finally, we propose three research ‘bridges’ across these debates to further advance the radical SAP agenda and its growth as a vibrant intellectual community open to a wide range of research and phenomena as part of the field’s continuous process of becoming.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重塑激进主义:作为实践的战略的轨迹、辩论和建议
作为实践的战略(SAP)已经从一个相对激进的理念发展成为一个广受认可的领域,解释了广泛的战略活动和实践。尽管走过了这一非凡的轨迹,但 "作为实践的战略 "仍被持续不断的 "作为认识论 "的争论所左右。这篇文章呼吁人们拥抱 SAP 早期的社会实践根源,并建议在 SAP 研究中重塑激进主义。我们简要回顾了 SAP 的发展轨迹,展示了倡导者和批评者是如何共同构建了这一领域的今天。在此基础上,我们确定了意向性和宏观与微观之分这两个正在进行的争论,并强调了这些争论的认识论性质以及超越争论所面临的方法论挑战。最后,我们提出了跨越这些争论的三条研究 "桥梁",以进一步推进激进SAP议程,并使其成长为一个充满活力的知识界,向广泛的研究和现象开放,成为该领域持续发展过程的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.30
自引率
10.60%
发文量
956
期刊介绍: The Journal of Business Research aims to publish research that is rigorous, relevant, and potentially impactful. It examines a wide variety of business decision contexts, processes, and activities, developing insights that are meaningful for theory, practice, and/or society at large. The research is intended to generate meaningful debates in academia and practice, that are thought provoking and have the potential to make a difference to conceptual thinking and/or practice. The Journal is published for a broad range of stakeholders, including scholars, researchers, executives, and policy makers. It aids the application of its research to practical situations and theoretical findings to the reality of the business world as well as to society. The Journal is abstracted and indexed in several databases, including Social Sciences Citation Index, ANBAR, Current Contents, Management Contents, Management Literature in Brief, PsycINFO, Information Service, RePEc, Academic Journal Guide, ABI/Inform, INSPEC, etc.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Reinstating the radical: Trajectory, debates, and proposals for strategy as practice The past, present, and future of sustainability marketing: How did we get here and where might we go? Don’t make me hate you, my love! Perceived brand betrayal and the love-becomes-hate phenomenon Content dissimilarity and online review helpfulness: Contextual insights
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1