for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
  Subjects -> BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS (Total: 3004 journals)
    - ACCOUNTING (86 journals)
    - BANKING AND FINANCE (256 journals)
    - BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS (1149 journals)
    - COOPERATIVES (2 journals)
    - ECONOMIC SCIENCES: GENERAL (156 journals)
    - HUMAN RESOURCES (92 journals)
    - INSURANCE (26 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE (124 journals)
    - INVESTMENTS (17 journals)
    - MACROECONOMICS (14 journals)
    - MANAGEMENT (501 journals)
    - MARKETING AND PURCHASING (79 journals)
    - MICROECONOMICS (24 journals)
    - PUBLIC FINANCE, TAXATION (33 journals)


The end of the list has been reached or no journals were found for your choice.
Journal Cover Strategic Organization
  [SJR: 1.664]   [H-I: 12]   [11 followers]  Follow
   Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
   ISSN (Print) 1476-1270 - ISSN (Online) 1741-315X
   Published by Sage Publications Homepage  [842 journals]
  • Understanding the relational dynamic capability-building process
    • Authors: Donada, C; Nogatchewsky, G, Pezet, A.
      Pages: 93 - 117
      Abstract: There is a significant body of research on relational dynamic capabilities, but little is known about how a firm builds these capabilities. Using a longitudinal case study analysis of the French car manufacturer Renault, this research fills that gap. It provides a three-phase sequence model of a relational dynamic capability-building process. Each phase (identifying, building, and integrating) corresponds to a level of strategic intent (from emerging to deliberate) and a set of shaping factors that evolve with the changing environment. These factors are combinations of external triggers associated with macro-economic and industry conditions and internal enablers, including agent skills and missions, dedicated organizational structures, assets, and tools.
      PubDate: 2016-04-29T04:50:07-07:00
      DOI: 10.1177/1476127015615286
      Issue No: Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016)
  • Knowledge asymmetry and brokerage: Linking network perception to position
           in structural holes
    • Authors: Hahl, O; Kacperczyk, A. O, Davis, J. P.
      Pages: 118 - 143
      Abstract: Although brokers who span structural holes have been shown to occupy a valuable position in organizations, emerging research suggests that the returns to these brokers can vary depending on whether alters can credibly threaten to disintermediate the broker and close the structural hole. Yet, the factors that shape the likelihood of disintermediation have not been extensively explored. In this article, we build from the premise that an alter’s knowledge about the structural hole is a necessary condition for disintermediation. Without this knowledge, the alter will not know with whom to disintermediate. Drawing on research about cognitive social structures, we argue that individuals are most likely to be in a structural hole under the condition of knowledge asymmetry—that is, when brokers know about the structural hole, but alters do not—which reduces the likelihood of disintermediation by alters and increases the benefits for brokers. Using advice network data from a high-tech organization, we find evidence of knowledge asymmetry in existing structural holes, and moderation of this relationship by two factors also related to disintermediation: (1) broker’s reputation and (2) alter’s position as a provider (vs. acquirer) of resources. We also show that knowledge asymmetry is related to higher returns for brokers. The broader theoretical contribution is a better understanding of how network perceptions are related to positions across structural holes, an important structure from which power is derived in organizations and markets.
      PubDate: 2016-04-29T04:50:07-07:00
      DOI: 10.1177/1476127015624274
      Issue No: Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016)
  • So!apbox Forum: The Strategic Organization of Strategic Management
    • Authors: David, R; Felin, T, Langley, A, Rowley, T, Verona, G.
      Pages: 144 - 145
      PubDate: 2016-04-29T04:50:07-07:00
      DOI: 10.1177/1476127016644089
      Issue No: Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016)
  • Strategist, organize thyself
    • Authors: Barnett; M. L.
      Pages: 146 - 155
      Abstract: Thousands of scholars and hundreds of millions of dollars are devoted to the study of management. What has society gained from this significant and ongoing allocation of scarce talent and money? As many of our most senior scholars have noted, less than we would like. We can do better. Through an organized process, we can develop more managerial knowledge with fewer resources. In this essay, I outline two suggestions—roadmaps and the Theories of Management Catalog—that could organize and advance management knowledge and bring us into better fit with our decreasingly munificent environment.
      PubDate: 2016-04-29T04:50:07-07:00
      DOI: 10.1177/1476127015604842
      Issue No: Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016)
  • Divide and conquer, or the disintegration of strategic management: Its
           time to celebrate
    • Authors: Arend; R. J.
      Pages: 156 - 166
      Abstract: Every so often it is useful for a field of study to take the time to self-reflect and consider its existence from a high level in order to re-evaluate and possibly re-direct its resource allocations moving forward (where such reflection has become a wonderful and valuable standard in Strategic Organization!). In this essay, we counter Hambrick’s call to consolidate with a radical suggestion to separate the field of strategic organization into at least two camps. We offer a sound logic for that split and detail its hypothetical positive implications for the field in terms of the possibilities for improved research resource allocation and improved practical impact.
      PubDate: 2016-04-29T04:50:07-07:00
      DOI: 10.1177/1476127016629774
      Issue No: Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016)
  • Collegial "nests" can foster critical thinking, innovative ideas, and
           scientific progress
    • Authors: Schwab, A; Starbuck, W. H.
      Pages: 167 - 177
      Abstract: How can management and strategy scholars organize to generate more productive, more innovative, and more impactful research? With appropriate cultures and leaders, small and egalitarian discussion groups that we call "collegial nests" can become powerful generators of innovative ideas and creators of extraordinary scholars. Collegial nests need cultures that free participants to think critically, to cherish new viewpoints, and to speak freely without fear of ridicule. They also need leaders who model such cultures and facilitate frequent discussions. Two case examples illustrate how productive collegial nests can create better science and better scientists. To generate scientific innovation and progress on a large scale, many autonomous groups tackling related issues are desirable. Modern communication technology is making it feasible for groups to operate over large distances and to coordinate with each other at very low cost. Collegial nests offer greater potential for enhancing scholarly productivity and innovation than do attempts to regulate scholarship via hierarchical structures. Multiplicity can lower the probability of wasting resources on low-yield paths, egalitarian control can reduce the influence of vested interests, and a combination of shared goals and partial autonomy can integrate enthusiasm with sensible risk taking.
      PubDate: 2016-04-29T04:50:07-07:00
      DOI: 10.1177/1476127016643715
      Issue No: Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016)
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Your IP address:
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-2016