The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix

Orientation: In 2009, Strategy-as-Practice (S-as-P) research, as a subfield of strategy research, was grouped into nine different domains, and researchers were advised to frame their research within these domains. The papers or works (herein used interchangeably) published with S-as-P as subject, we...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Karen Stander, Marius Pretorius
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: AOSIS 2016-07-01
Series:Acta Commercii
Subjects:
Online Access:https://actacommercii.co.za/index.php/acta/article/view/328
id doaj-45c08f91b27945d1a7ef7943231d4ee8
record_format Article
spelling doaj-45c08f91b27945d1a7ef7943231d4ee82020-11-25T00:37:38ZengAOSISActa Commercii2413-19031684-19992016-07-01161e1e1110.4102/ac.v16i1.328242The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrixKaren Stander0Marius Pretorius1Department of Business Management, University of PretoriaDepartment of Business Management, University of PretoriaOrientation: In 2009, Strategy-as-Practice (S-as-P) research, as a subfield of strategy research, was grouped into nine different domains, and researchers were advised to frame their research within these domains. The papers or works (herein used interchangeably) published with S-as-P as subject, were counted, categorised, and a typology matrix was constructed. Researchers use this count to indicate a need for research in a specific domain. Research purpose: The main purpose of this study is to construct a comparative S-as-P typology matrix which accurately depicts the number of papers published in each domain between 2008 and 2015. Motivation for the study: The S-as-P typology matrix was first published in 2009 (Jarzabkowski & Spee 2009), and at the present moment, six years later, researchers still use the dated number of papers counted in each of the S-as-P domains to indicate a research gap. Research design, approach and method: A content analysis of all papers, listed by researchers on the official S-as-P website, was conducted. The papers were disseminated and key variables were counted. Main findings: The comparative typology matrix shows that relative to other domains, domain D appears overly researched, whilst no research has been carried out on domains C and H from 2008 to 2015. Practical/managerial implications: The comparative S-as-P typology matrix allows researchers to accurately evaluate the need for current research within the chosen domain. Contribution/value-add: The comparative typology matrix should prevent, as is the case currently with domain D, that domains are over-researched, whilst others receive no research attention.https://actacommercii.co.za/index.php/acta/article/view/328Strategy-as-PracticeTypology MatrixStrategyStrategizingStrategic
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Karen Stander
Marius Pretorius
spellingShingle Karen Stander
Marius Pretorius
The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix
Acta Commercii
Strategy-as-Practice
Typology Matrix
Strategy
Strategizing
Strategic
author_facet Karen Stander
Marius Pretorius
author_sort Karen Stander
title The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix
title_short The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix
title_full The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix
title_fullStr The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix
title_full_unstemmed The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix
title_sort next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: a comparative typology matrix
publisher AOSIS
series Acta Commercii
issn 2413-1903
1684-1999
publishDate 2016-07-01
description Orientation: In 2009, Strategy-as-Practice (S-as-P) research, as a subfield of strategy research, was grouped into nine different domains, and researchers were advised to frame their research within these domains. The papers or works (herein used interchangeably) published with S-as-P as subject, were counted, categorised, and a typology matrix was constructed. Researchers use this count to indicate a need for research in a specific domain. Research purpose: The main purpose of this study is to construct a comparative S-as-P typology matrix which accurately depicts the number of papers published in each domain between 2008 and 2015. Motivation for the study: The S-as-P typology matrix was first published in 2009 (Jarzabkowski & Spee 2009), and at the present moment, six years later, researchers still use the dated number of papers counted in each of the S-as-P domains to indicate a research gap. Research design, approach and method: A content analysis of all papers, listed by researchers on the official S-as-P website, was conducted. The papers were disseminated and key variables were counted. Main findings: The comparative typology matrix shows that relative to other domains, domain D appears overly researched, whilst no research has been carried out on domains C and H from 2008 to 2015. Practical/managerial implications: The comparative S-as-P typology matrix allows researchers to accurately evaluate the need for current research within the chosen domain. Contribution/value-add: The comparative typology matrix should prevent, as is the case currently with domain D, that domains are over-researched, whilst others receive no research attention.
topic Strategy-as-Practice
Typology Matrix
Strategy
Strategizing
Strategic
url https://actacommercii.co.za/index.php/acta/article/view/328
work_keys_str_mv AT karenstander thenextstepinthestrategyaspracticeevolutionacomparativetypologymatrix
AT mariuspretorius thenextstepinthestrategyaspracticeevolutionacomparativetypologymatrix
AT karenstander nextstepinthestrategyaspracticeevolutionacomparativetypologymatrix
AT mariuspretorius nextstepinthestrategyaspracticeevolutionacomparativetypologymatrix
_version_ 1725300334469840896