IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v28y2007i9p935-955.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field

Author

Listed:
  • Rajiv Nag
  • Donald C. Hambrick
  • Ming‐Jer Chen

Abstract

It is commonly asserted that the field of strategic management is fragmented and lacks a coherent identity. This skepticism, however, is paradoxically at odds with the great success that strategic management has enjoyed. How might one explain this paradox? We seek answers to this question by relying first on a large‐scale survey of strategic management scholars from which we derive an implicit consensual definition of the field—as tacitly held by its members. We then supplement this implicit definition with an examination of the espoused definitions of the field obtained from a group of boundary‐spanning scholars. Our findings suggest that strategic management's success as a field emerges from an underlying consensus that enables it to attract multiple perspectives, while still maintaining its coherent distinctiveness. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajiv Nag & Donald C. Hambrick & Ming‐Jer Chen, 2007. "What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(9), pages 935-955, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:28:y:2007:i:9:p:935-955
    DOI: 10.1002/smj.615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.615
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/smj.615?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:28:y:2007:i:9:p:935-955. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.