战略思维:理论发展与评价

IF 3.8 Q2 MANAGEMENT Journal of Strategy and Management Pub Date : 2023-07-26 DOI:10.1108/jsma-10-2021-0212
Michael T. Geier
{"title":"战略思维:理论发展与评价","authors":"Michael T. Geier","doi":"10.1108/jsma-10-2021-0212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of the article was to identify the core dimensions of strategic thinking and create a measure that provides a comprehensive operationalization of the construct.Design/methodology/approachThe construct validity of the measure was assessed in two studies using four samples with a total of 985 participants. The measure was created using a multi-step process that included item development and content validation, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity, criterion validity and test-retest validity.FindingsThe exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported the existence of the three dimensions of strategic thinking (visionary, synthetic and creative thinking) as conceptually proposed. The measure was reduced to nine items. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed the three dimensions and revealed acceptable factor loadings and model fit. Convergent, discriminant and criterion validity were established, and the measure demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability.Originality/valueAn individual's ability to think strategically is vital for making strategic decisions and relevant to upper echelon theory and strategic management. The definition and core dimensions of strategic thinking are unclear in the literature, creating confusion. This study added to the literature by defining the core dimensions of strategic thinking and developing the strategic thinking assessment (STA) to measure the construct.","PeriodicalId":46229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategy and Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategic thinking: theoretical development and assessment\",\"authors\":\"Michael T. Geier\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jsma-10-2021-0212\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe purpose of the article was to identify the core dimensions of strategic thinking and create a measure that provides a comprehensive operationalization of the construct.Design/methodology/approachThe construct validity of the measure was assessed in two studies using four samples with a total of 985 participants. The measure was created using a multi-step process that included item development and content validation, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity, criterion validity and test-retest validity.FindingsThe exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported the existence of the three dimensions of strategic thinking (visionary, synthetic and creative thinking) as conceptually proposed. The measure was reduced to nine items. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed the three dimensions and revealed acceptable factor loadings and model fit. Convergent, discriminant and criterion validity were established, and the measure demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability.Originality/valueAn individual's ability to think strategically is vital for making strategic decisions and relevant to upper echelon theory and strategic management. The definition and core dimensions of strategic thinking are unclear in the literature, creating confusion. This study added to the literature by defining the core dimensions of strategic thinking and developing the strategic thinking assessment (STA) to measure the construct.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46229,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Strategy and Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Strategy and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jsma-10-2021-0212\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strategy and Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jsma-10-2021-0212","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的目的是确定战略思维的核心维度,并创建一个措施,提供了一个全面的操作结构。设计/方法/方法在两项研究中评估了该测量的结构效度,使用了四个样本,共有985名参与者。该量表采用多步骤流程创建,包括项目开发和内容验证、探索性和验证性因素分析、收敛效度和区别效度、标准效度和重测效度。探索性因素分析(EFA)支持战略思维的三个维度(远见、综合和创造性思维)的存在。该措施被缩减为9个项目。验证性因子分析(CFA)确认了三个维度,并揭示了可接受的因子负荷和模型拟合。建立了收敛效度、判别效度和标准效度,测试结果表明该测量具有可接受的重测信度。创意/价值一个人的战略思考能力对于制定战略决策至关重要,并且与上层理论和战略管理相关。在文献中,战略思维的定义和核心维度不明确,造成混乱。本研究通过界定战略思维的核心维度,并开发战略思维评估(STA)来测量战略思维的结构,从而对文献进行补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Strategic thinking: theoretical development and assessment
PurposeThe purpose of the article was to identify the core dimensions of strategic thinking and create a measure that provides a comprehensive operationalization of the construct.Design/methodology/approachThe construct validity of the measure was assessed in two studies using four samples with a total of 985 participants. The measure was created using a multi-step process that included item development and content validation, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity, criterion validity and test-retest validity.FindingsThe exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported the existence of the three dimensions of strategic thinking (visionary, synthetic and creative thinking) as conceptually proposed. The measure was reduced to nine items. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed the three dimensions and revealed acceptable factor loadings and model fit. Convergent, discriminant and criterion validity were established, and the measure demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability.Originality/valueAn individual's ability to think strategically is vital for making strategic decisions and relevant to upper echelon theory and strategic management. The definition and core dimensions of strategic thinking are unclear in the literature, creating confusion. This study added to the literature by defining the core dimensions of strategic thinking and developing the strategic thinking assessment (STA) to measure the construct.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
9.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Strategy and Management is an international journal dedicated to: -improving the existing knowledge and understanding of strategy development and implementation globally in private and public organizations -encouraging new thinking and innovative approaches to the study of strategy -offering executives strategic insights based on outcomes of original scholarly research; and -establishing effective communication between researchers and executives managing public and private organizations.
期刊最新文献
Promoting BMI through organizational culture: the mediating role of strategic flexibility Stablecoins and inflation in Latin America: the case of Argentina Farmers’ willingness to adopt digital application tools in Ogun State, Nigeria The effect of technological overlap on acquisition premiums: moderating roles of target firm's technology clockspeed and industry munificence Knowledge management as a driver of economic performance in the Spanish wine industry: the mediating role of open innovation
×
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