E-Book, Englisch, 257 Seiten, eBook
E-Book, Englisch, 257 Seiten, eBook
Reihe: Research in Management Accounting & Control
ISBN: 978-3-8349-9632-9
Verlag: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Gabler
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Wasserzeichen (»Systemvoraussetzungen)
Dr. Daniel Kauer promovierte bei Prof. Dr. Utz Schäffer am Lehrstuhl für Controlling der European Business School, Oestrich-Winkel. Er ist als Unternehmensberater tätig.
Zielgruppe
Research
Weitere Infos & Material
1;Geleitwort;6
2;Vorwort;8
3;Contents;10
4;Tables;14
5;Figures;18
6;A Introduction;19
6.1;1. Research Topic and Objectives;19
6.2;2. Plan of the Study;24
7;B Cognitive Theory – The Theoretical Foundation of Strategic Sensemaking;27
7.1;1. Content and Process School – Two Approaches to Strategic Decision- Making;27
7.2;2. An Economic Perspective on Strategic Decision-Making;29
7.3;3. A Behavioral Perspective on Strategic Decision-Making;30
7.4;4. A Cognitive Perspective on Strategic Decision-Making;35
7.4.1;4.1 Important Assumptions of Cognitive Theory – Laying out the Theoretical Foundations of this Study;35
7.4.2;4.2 Research Streams of Cognitive Theory;44
7.4.3;4.3 Limitations of Cognitive Theory;50
8;C Strategic Sensemaking Theory;53
8.1;1. Strategic Sensemaking as a Multi-Level Activity;53
8.2;2. The Individual Process of Strategic Sensemaking;55
8.3;3. The Team Process of Strategic Sensemaking;59
8.4;4. Environment as an Influencing Factor of Strategic Sensemaking;67
8.4.1;4.1 General Industry Effects;67
8.4.2;4.2 Strategic Uncertainty;68
8.5;5. Organizational Context as an Influencing Factor of Strategic Sensemaking;69
8.5.1;5.1 Organizational Processes;70
8.5.2;5.2 Organizational Structure;71
8.5.3;5.3 Organizational Past Success and Ownership;73
8.6;6. Top Management Team Thinking and Acting as an Influencing Factor of Strategic Sensemaking;75
8.6.1;6.1 Managers as Influencing Factors of Individuals' Strategic Sensemaking;75
8.6.2;6.2 Managers as Influencing Factors of Strategic Sensemaking in Teams;81
8.7;7. Summary: Shortcomings of Previous Research on Strategic Sensemaking and Resulting Research Questions for this Study;91
9;D Research Design;95
9.1;1. Case Studies as Selected Research Methodology;96
9.1.1;1.1 Comparison of Case Studies to Other Research Strategies;96
9.1.2;1.2 Selection of Case Studies to Answer the Present Research Objectives;98
9.1.3;1.3 Literature Review as a Basis for the Case Study Field Work;100
9.1.4;1.4 Multiple Case Study Design to Increase the Explanatory Value;101
9.2;2. Definition and Selection of Units of Analysis;102
9.3;3. Data Collection;105
9.3.1;3.1 Data Triangulation;105
9.3.2;3.2 Description of Selected Data Sources;106
9.4;4. Data Analysis ;109
9.4.1;4.1 Preparing the Interview Data for Further Analysis;109
9.4.2;4.2 Preparing the Questionnaire Data for Further Analysis;111
9.4.3;4.3 Analyzing the Data: Within- and Cross-Case Analysis as a Basis for Explanation- Building;114
9.5;5. Quality-Ensuring Measures;116
9.5.1;5.1 Quality-Ensuring Measures in the Research Design Phase;117
9.5.2;5.2 Quality-Ensuring Measures during Data Collection;118
9.5.3;5.3 Quality-Ensuring Measures during Data Analysis;120
10;E Results: Experience as an Influencing Factor of Strategic Sensemaking;125
10.1;1. Eight Top Management Team Profiles;125
10.1.1;1.1 Team M1: Strategy as a Directors' Game;125
10.1.2;1.2 Team M2: A Team of Specialists in a Consensus-Oriented Company;128
10.1.3;1.3 Team M3: A Traditional Metal-Working Company Facing Speed Challenges from High- Tech Industry;132
10.1.4;1.4 Team M4: A Diverse Team of Friends without Clear Strategic Goals;135
10.1.5;1.5 Team M5: Problems of a Heterogeneous Team Succeeding a Patriarchal Leader;138
10.1.6;1.6 Team F1: The Challenge of Changing a Long-Established Way of Interaction;142
10.1.7;1.7 Team F2: A Homogeneous Team with Highly Formalized Processes;145
10.1.8;1.8 Team F3: A Heterogeneous Team Referring to Functional and Organizational Experiences;148
10.2;2. Exploration of the Effects of Managerial Experience on Individual Sensemaking;151
10.2.1;2.1 Effects of Functional Experience on Individual Sensemaking;152
10.2.2;2.2 Effects of Organizational Experience on Individual Sensemaking;159
10.2.3;2.3 Summary of Propositions: Experience and Individual Sensemaking;164
10.3;3. Exploration of the Effects of Managerial Experience on Sensemaking in Teams;167
10.3.1;3.1 Effects of Intrapersonal Functional Experience on Strategic Sensemaking in Teams;167
10.3.2;3.2 Effects of Organizational Experience on Sensemaking in Teams;178
10.3.3;3.3 Summary of Propositions: Experience and Strategic Sensemaking in Teams;187
10.4;4. Exploration of the Effects of Interaction on Sensemaking in Teams;190
10.4.1;4.1 Effects of Openness on Sensemaking in Teams;190
10.4.2;4.2 Effects of Political Behavior on Sensemaking in Teams;193
10.4.3;4.3 Effects of Task Conflict on Sensemaking in Teams;195
10.4.4;4.4 Effects of Relationship Conflict on Sensemaking in Teams;198
10.4.5;4.5 Summary of Propositions: Team Interaction and Strategic Sensemaking in Teams;200
10.5;5. Control Factors;203
10.5.1;5.1 Derivation of Propositions for Control Factors;203
10.5.2;5.2 Summary of Propositions: Control Factors;210
11;F Implications and Outlook;215
11.1;1. Theoretical Implications;215
11.2;2. Managerial Implications;223
11.3;3. Limitations and Outlook;225
12;Appendix I Interview Guidelines;229
12.1;1 Einleitung (10 Minuten);230
12.2;2 Inhaltliche Erläuterungen (5 Minuten);231
12.3;3 Interview zu Problemen im Issue Management (30 Minuten);232
12.4;4 Zusammenfassung und Ausblick (15 Minuten);240
13;Appendix II Coding Tree;241
13.1;Evaluation of individual sensemaking;241
13.2;Evaluation of team sensemaking;241
13.3;Root causes at the individual level;242
13.4;Root causes at the team level;242
13.5;Team interaction;243
13.6;Control factors;243
13.7;Additional codes;244
14;References;245
Cognitive Theory — The Theoretical Foundation of Strategic Sensemaking.- Strategic Sensemaking Theory.- Research Design.- Results: Experience as an Influencing Factor of Strategic Sensemaking.- Implications and Outlook.
A Introduction (p. 1)
"Foolish he who trusts in the future, he who laughs Friday will cry Sunday". Jean Racine (1639-1699)
1. Research Topic and Objectives
Increasing levels of environmental turbulence and uncertainty in the business context have been documented for several decades and by a variety of scholars. To survive in such turbulent environments, where competitive advantages can be nullified rapidly, organizations must frequently reconsider and revise their strategies and therefore have to thoroughly understand their competitive environment. But not all organizations manage to detect, interpret and – if necessary – react to environmental changes: In two studies, for example, published in 2002 and 2005, WIGGINS AND RUEFLI show that while many companies can manage short-term bursts of high performance, only a few can sustain this in the longer run:
The authors sort a sample of 6,772 companies over 23 years into superior, middle and inferior performers in their industries. Only , percent of these companies remain in the superior stratum for 10 years or more. WIGGINS AND RUEFLI conclude that the short-term performers are successful executers that have lost their way when the environment shifted. The companies have neither interpreted upcoming challenges correctly, nor have drawn the right conclusions and disregarded the fact that all sources of competitive advantage are temporary.
To answer the question why some organizations successfully cope with environmental changes while others fail, various researchers suggest a crucial role of top managers, because they "[…] are charged with formulating, directing, coordinating, and managing the organizations response to rapid environmental change". Before being able to formulate the organizations response however, top managers need to detect that there is an environmental change, which has the potential to jeopardize the strategic position and performance of the organization. Such environmental changes are often referred to as "strategic issues".
Many researchers have noted the importance of managing strategic issues and have pointed to the relevance of information about strategic issues in order to enable effective organizational actions. As early as 1967, AGUILAR for example stressed that "[…] the need for top management to foresee and understand changes in the environment has become increasingly important […]".
But he also recognized that "[…] top managements understanding of the […] process was found to be generally inadequate, and there was little evidence of any coordinated, overall consideration of the problems involved". , ANSOFF pointed out that strategy concepts should be able to answer the question of how to configure the resources of a firm to effectively respond to unanticipated surprises. DAVENI supported this claim noting that in order "[…] to be effective in times of change, strategy must look to an industrys future".
However, a growing number of researchers, especially from the "cognitive theory school" stresses, that this "look to an industrys future" is not objective. It is "[…] socially created rather than concrete [… and] the environment is the joint product of the actions of purposeful actors and accompanying efforts to make sense out of these actions". , Building on the assumption of "purposeful actors" affecting the management of strategic issues, STARBUCK AND MILLIKEN argue that "[…] the stimuli that one executive receives may be precisely the same stimuli that another executive filters out.
