The impossibility to preestablish the future behavior of organizations: a view from strategy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18041/1900-0642/criteriolibre.2012v10n16.1198Keywords:
Strategy, complexity, futureAbstract
This article pretends to discuss that it is impossible to know the future behavior of an Organization through strategic planning mechanisms, based on Stuart Kauffman’s thesis about the impossibility of knowing the configuration space of a system far from balanced. Along the document there are relevant aspects about the study of strategy, the author’s thesis and its relationship with Organizations. It also leaves an open discussion about the course taken by the research regarding the strategy field.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Azar, O. H.; Brock, D.M. (2008). “A citation-based ranking of Strategic Management journals”, in: Journal of economics and management strategy, 17, 3.
Boyd, B.; Finkelstein, S. & Gove, S. (2005). “How advanced is the strategy paradigm? The role of particularism and universalism in shaping research outcomes”, in: strategic management Journal, 26.
Caldart, A.; Ricart, J. (2004). “Corporate strategy revisited: a view from complexity theory”, in: european management review, 1.
Davis, J.; Eisenhardt, K. & Bingham, C. (2007). complexity theory, market Dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Stanford University, consultado el 10 de enero de 2012. Disponible en: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/ viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.115.6914
Furrer, O.; Thomas, H.A. & Goussevskaia, A. (2008). “The structure and evolution of the strate-
gic management field: A content analysis of 26 years of strategic management research”, in: international Journal of management reviews, 10.
Hafsi, T.; Thomas, H. (2005). “The field of strategy: In search of a walking stick”, in: european management Journal, 23.
Kauffman, S. (2003). investigaciones. Barcelona: Tusquets.
Nerur, S.P.; Rasheed, A.A.; Natarajan, V. (2008). “The intellectual structure of the Strategic Management field: An author co-citation analysis”, in: strategic management Journal, 29.
Prigogine, I. y Stengers, I. (2004). metamorfosis de la ciencia. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Weick, K. (1989). “Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination”, in: academy of management review, 14.
Boyd, B.; Finkelstein, S. & Gove, S. (2005). “How advanced is the strategy paradigm? The role of particularism and universalism in shaping research outcomes”, in: strategic management Journal, 26.
Caldart, A.; Ricart, J. (2004). “Corporate strategy revisited: a view from complexity theory”, in: european management review, 1.
Davis, J.; Eisenhardt, K. & Bingham, C. (2007). complexity theory, market Dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Stanford University, consultado el 10 de enero de 2012. Disponible en: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/ viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.115.6914
Furrer, O.; Thomas, H.A. & Goussevskaia, A. (2008). “The structure and evolution of the strate-
gic management field: A content analysis of 26 years of strategic management research”, in: international Journal of management reviews, 10.
Hafsi, T.; Thomas, H. (2005). “The field of strategy: In search of a walking stick”, in: european management Journal, 23.
Kauffman, S. (2003). investigaciones. Barcelona: Tusquets.
Nerur, S.P.; Rasheed, A.A.; Natarajan, V. (2008). “The intellectual structure of the Strategic Management field: An author co-citation analysis”, in: strategic management Journal, 29.
Prigogine, I. y Stengers, I. (2004). metamorfosis de la ciencia. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Weick, K. (1989). “Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination”, in: academy of management review, 14.
Downloads
Published
2017-12-01
Issue
Section
Artículos
How to Cite
The impossibility to preestablish the future behavior of organizations: a view from strategy. (2017). Criterio Libre, 10(16), 281-290. https://doi.org/10.18041/1900-0642/criteriolibre.2012v10n16.1198
