Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This paper makes three suggestions to researchers for studying strategy process. First, define
the meaning of process. Process is often used in three ways in the literature: ( I ) a logic
used to explain a causal relationship in a variance theory, (2) a category of concepts that
refer to actions of individuals or organizations, and (3) a sequence of events that describe
how things change over time. The second suggestion is to clarifv the theory of process. An
interdisciplinary literature review identifies four types of theories of process that can be
drawn upon: life cycle, teleology, dialectics, and evolution. The third suggestion is to design
research to observe strategy process in such a way that is consistent with ones definition
and theory of process.
There is growing scholarly interest in strategy interrelated suggestions for studying strategy
process research, which is concerned with under- process.
standing how organizational strategies are formu-
lated and implemented and the processes of 1. Define the meaning of process.
strategic change (Chakravarthy and Doz, this 2. Clarify the theory of process.
issue). As this special issue of SMJ indicates, the 3. Design research to observe process.
body of strategy process research is diverse and
cannot be contained within a single paradigm.
Implicitly, scholars tend to adopt very different
views of strategy process, and the views they DEFINE THE MEANING OF PROCESS
adopt influence the questions they ask, the
research methods they employ, and the contri- A cursory review of the numerous process
butions they make. It is useful to make these models that have been proposed in strategic
different views explicit. Doing so can help management literature indicates that the term
individual scholars better understand the concep- process is used in many different ways. My first
tual basis of their research, can facilitate com- suggestion for studying strategy process is to
munications between scholars pursuing different reduce confusion in the literature by dis-
tinguishing between the different usages of this
views of strategy, and collectively can help us all
better understand promising directions and dead term. In particular, three meanings of process
ends in strategy process research. With these are often used: (1) a logic that explains a causal
objectives in mind, this paper makes three relationship between independent and dependent
variables, (2) a category of concepts or variables
that refers to actions of individuals or organiza-
Key words: Strategy process, development, change, tions, and (3) a sequence of events that describes
research methods how things change over time.
0 143-2O95/92/060169-20$15 .OO
0 1992 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
170 A. H . Van de Ven
Gluck, Kaufman and Walleck (1980) 1. Basic financial 2. Forecast-based 3. Externally- 4. Strategic
-Study of formal planning systems in planning planning oriented planning Management h
120 companies -meet budget -predict the -think --create the future
future strategically
Lorange (1980) 1. Objectives 2. Strategic 3. Budgeting 4. Monitoring 5. Rewards $
-Normative model of corporate setting programming --establish -measure -establish
strategic planning -identify -develop detailed progress incentives to P
relevant programs for action toward motivate
strategic achieving program for achieving goal
a8
h
alternatives chosen near-term strategies achievement
h
objectives on
E:
1980), and 01 ganization development (Scott, of developmental progressions that goes beyond
1971; Greiner, 1972). simple unitary stages and includes multiple,
While these three sets of process models are cumulative, conjunctive, and iterative pro-
concerned with the development of very different gressions of convergent, parallel, and divergent
things, they are strikingly similar in two respects, streams of activities that may unfold as a
and different in another. First, with the exception strategy develops over time. While many strategic
of Cohen et ats. (1972) garbage can model of management scholars may not be familiar with
choice, all the other process models were this vocabulary, it is useful for appreciating
developed inductively based on cross-sectional alternative forms of developmental progressions,
observations or retrospective case histories in a which in turn, is central to understanding
variety of companies. The stages or phases of the third meaning of process. Moreover, this
activities in each model were inferred either from vocabulary provides the analytical terms needed
company historical self-reports or by categorizing to make clear distinctions between the various
cohorts of companies into the stages or phases. models of strategy development in Table 1.
In no instance was any one company or organi- Based on mathematical set theory, van den
zational unit actually observed to go through all Daele (1969; 1974) and Flavell (1972) introduce
the stages or phases of a model over time. Thus, the following progressions that may describe
as discussed in the third section, there is a great temporal patterns in sequences of events.
need for systematic longitudinal research to
substantiate and elaborate these process models
of developmer t.
Second, in contrast with the variable entities/
attributes model used in the second meaning of
process, no variables are reflected in the process
Unitary progression
This is a sequence of the form: U - V +W,
where U, V, and W represent qualitativelydifferent
patterns, stages, or phases of activities or behaviors.
models in Table 1. Instead, the central focus of This model assumes that each stage may consist
developmental process models is on progressions of any number of subsets of activities, but that
(i.e. the nature, sequence and order) of activities these subsets must occur in an ordered progression.
or events that an organizational entity undergoes If a developmental progression has no more than
as it changes over time. As Table 1 exemplifies, one subset of events over time, it is called a simple
the most common form of progression in the unitary progression, as illustrated in Table 1 by
strategy literature is a linear sequence of stages or the two strategic planning models and Scotts
phases of development. For example, a rational (1971) stage model of corporate development.
process of decision making is typically viewed
as a sequence of separable stages (e.g. need
Multiple progres,sions
recognition, search, screen, and choice activities)
ordered in time and with transition routines to This model assumes that developmental processes
make adjustments between stages (March and can follow more than a single possible path.
Simon, 1958). As Poole and Roth (1989) demon- Three common forms of multiple progressions
strated, when researchers use a priori stages or among event sequences are the following parallel,
phases to destgn their research and collect data, divergent, and convergent progressions.
their results can easily become self-fulfillingproph- In multiple progressions a temporal sequence
esies. The linear sequential model of development of events may reflect more than one pathway at
is typically inadequate to deal with the complexities a given time in the ordered progression. For
of many strategy ventures because it assumes
invariance between and within all organizational
units in followinga prescribed order of developmen- Riegel (1969) considered four formal models that parallel
tal phases; one locked after another. van den Daeles. He outlined mathematical formulations for:
(1) branching processes. in which elements successively
There are many other forms of progression differentiate; (2) root models, based on progressive combi-
that are useful for thinking about and observing nation of positions; (3) jigsaw models. which show how
developmental processes. The child development patterns emerge from a given set of pieces: and (4) fallout
models, which illustrate progressive acquisitions of parts from
psychologists van den Daele (1969; 1974) and a predetermined store. Such formal treatments may offer
Flavell (1972) for example, propose a typology useful distinctions among event progressions in future work.
Strategy Process Suggestions 173
example, in the strategic decision process study detours, and terminated pathways all imply
of Mintzberg el al. (1976) in Table 1 more partially cumulative or substitution progressions
than one feasible path (or routine) of decision (as illustrated in the bottom two tracks above).
diagnosis, search, or evaluation might be pursued Such partial cumulation is reflected in Quinns
in each respective stage of identification, develop- (1980) logical incremental model of a long
ment and selection. These paths diverge from sequence of 14 stages, and clearly distinguishes
each other at the beginning of each stage, proceed it from the rational model of decision making.
in parallel progressions during each stage, and A cumulative progression may take the form
converge at the end to complete each stage. of addition, substitution, or modification (Flavell,
As this example suggests, any developmental 1972). In addition, a later-occurring event sup-
progression that has more than one subset of plements an earlier-occurring event. The out-
parallel paths at a time is called a multiple comes of two events E, and E2 may coexist and
progression. A description of how multiple are both equally available for E3. For example,
progressions of events diverge, proceed in paral- in Scotts (1971) model of corporate development,
lel, or converge over time provides a useful a multiple products divisionalized structure is
vocabulary for making process statements about largely produced by the addition (with slight
specific stages or the overall developmental modification) of a stage 1 single product entre-
pattern of a developing entity over time. preneurial structure with a stage 2 single product
functional structure. With substitutionthe outcomes
of a later event largely replace those of an earlier
Cumulative progression (in unitary or multiple
one. More precisely, E2 deletes or subtracts the
models) effects of E l , and replaces them by adding those
This model assumes that more than one stage of E2.For example, in Greiners (1972) model of
may belong to a unit at a time. In set theory organizational growth, crisis at the end of each
terms: U 3 a, V 3 ab, W 3 abc (unitary model). stage leads the organization to shift (or substitute)
For example, a multiple, parallel, partially- its focus and transition into the next qualitatively
cumulative model could look like this. new stage. In modification a later event represents
a differentiation, generalization, or more stable
U>a+V>ab+W>abc version of the earlier one (Flavell, 1972: 345). In
U>a+V>b +W>bc this case the outcome of El is revised or modified
U>a-,V>ab+W>c in E2, For example, in the strategic planning model
of Gluck (1980) the planning process and focus of
If events are cumulative, (as they are assumed each prior stage is modified and made more
to be in Scotts (1971) and Loranges (1980) elaborate in the next stage.
models in Table 1) then elements found in earlier
events or stages are added to and built upon in Conjunctive progressions (in unitary, multiple,
subsequent events or stages. Complete cumu- or cumulative models)
lation means that every event from each stage is
carried from its onset until the end of the Conjunctive progressions posit that the elements
developmental progression. This of course seldom of subsets may be related, such that aRb, or
happens, since losses of memory, mistakes and aRb. Conjunctive events are causally related
174 A. H Van de Ven
events, meaning that events in one pathway may within-unit variance (simple or cumulative
influence events in other pathways of a multiple structure), in the relationship of developmental
progression. Of course what is related at one elements (conjunctive or disjunctive), and
time may be viewed as unrelated at another. whether event sequences reoccur or not. This
Therefore, strict causality among events is difficult vocabulary of temporal relationships among
to establish. events can help scholars articulate the meanings
Conjunctive progressions may be probabilistic, of their process models in more operational and
inclusive, or mediated. Probabilistic relationships discriminating ways than has been the case in
between events occur when the trajectories of the past. However, as we will now discuss, this
multiple paths of activities happen to intersect. analysis of process as a sequence of events cannot
Such is the form of conjunction among streams go far without considering the alternative theories
of choices, problems, solutions, and participants of process that may explain specific developmen-
energy in the garbage can model of Cohen et al. tal progressions.
(1972). Inclusion occurs when the outcomes of
earlier events become incorporated into the later
one, as often observed with PERT charts. In this CLARIFY THE THEORY OF PROCESS
case E l , and E , 2 are logically integrated or
converge to yield EZ.For example, Loranges Whereas a definition of process indicates ones
strategic progr aming phase represents the logical meaning of process in relation to other uses in
inclusion of alternatives from stage 1 into a the literature, a theory of process consists of
strategic program in stage 2. In a mediurion statements that explain how and why a process
relationship an earlier event or element rep- unfolds over time. Such a theory is needed not
resents some sort of developmental bridge or only to ground the conceptual basis of a process
stepping stone (mediator) to the later one study on strategy formulation, implementation,
(Flavell, 1972 345). So Ez is required in order or some other substantive topic, but also to guide
to move from E, to E3,which may also pre- the design and conduct of empirical research.
empt alternative paths. For example, in Greiners Thus, the second basic suggestion for studying
model crisis events mediate and bridge transitions strategy process is to clarify the theory of process
between evolutionary stages of organizational underlying the substantive investigation.
growth. Adopting the third meaning of process, Scott
Poole and I conducted a literature review of the
theories available to explain the process of
Recurrent progressions (in unitary, multiple,
development, defined as the sequence of change
cumulative, or conjunctive models)
events that unfolds over the duration of an
These are repeating strings of events or activities entitys existence-its formulation, implemen-
over time. Although the previous progression tation, growth, adaptation, and termination (Van
models have been treated as nonrecurrent de Ven and Poole, 1991). A selected set of
sequences, parts or all of them may repeat over keywords was used to conduct a computerized
time. For example, what distinguishes Mintzbergs search of the literary data bases in various
model of strategic unstructured decision processes disciplines. Table 2 shows the number of times
from the others in Table 1 is its attention to that the selected keywords appeared in the titles
repeating routines, or iterative progressions, or abstracts of articles in the data bases.3
within each phase of decision making. Abbott Using factors of 10 to reduce complexity. we
(1990) discusses a variety of techniques for the reviewed about 200,000 titles, perused about
colligation and measurement of recurrent and 20,000 abstracts, which lead us to read 2,000
nonrecurrent event sequence data. papers, about 200 of which were found useful to
As our examples in Table 1 indicate, these identify about 20 different theories of develop-
alternative models of progression do not occur ment or change, which in turn, can be classified
independently. Every development process model
makes a commitment (implicitly or explicitly) to
. It is incredible that we know so little about development
some form of invariant sequential order, between and change processes after a half-million articles have been
unit variation (unitary or multiple sequence), written about this subject in various disciplines!
Table 2. Number of occurrences of keywords in titles and abstracts of articles in literary data bases
Basic Discipline --> Biology Meteorology Geography Medicine Psychology Education Sociology Bus & Econ
Data base --> Biosis Met/Geo Georef Medline Psyciit Eric Sociofile ABI Inform
Year --> Present 1966 -> 1970 -> 1785 -> 1966 -> 1974 -> 1%6 -> 1974 -> NOV.86 ->
Sept. 91 1991 Aug. 91 Oct. 91
Keywords
Development 295,868 9.839 39.597 312.853 73,861 227,191 35,454 44,791
Change 155.693 6.956 6,579 131.934 27,440 71,269 20,320 35,227
Channe process 6,451 0 2 5.235 2,126 5,184 89 125
Table 3. Families of theories on development and change processes 3
3
@>
-->_ _ _ _>- - CI (Synthesis)
Event unitary sequence of stages multiple cumulative recurrent convergence of recurrent, cumulative &
progression: moving to a progressive sequence of planning, multiple divergent conjunctive sequence of
differentiation of entity implementation, and progression mediated by variation, selection &
regulated by natural or adaptation of alternative partisan struggle between retention events
institutional laws. means to reach desired contradictory values or
end state events
Conditions: programdroutines or rules purposeful, adaptive pluralistic, diverse scarcity
prescribed by nature, interactive choice, contradictory, colliding commensalism
logic, or institutions collective action and sequences of events or population dynamics
learning values
Source: A. Van de Ven and M. S. Poole (1991). 'In Search of Theories on Development and Change processes', Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota.
Strategic Management Research Center, Working Paper.
Strategy P rucess Suggestions 177
into four basic families of theories. The four the most used theory of development and change
families of process theories are outlined in in the management literature.
Table 3, along with their members, pioneering Life cycle theory assumes that change is
scholars, logic, event progressions, and conditions immanent; that is, the developing entity contains
in which they are likely to operate. within it an underlying logic, program, or code
Life cycle, teleology, dialectics, and evolution that regulates the process of change and moves
are viewed as abstract ideal types of theories of it from a given point of departure toward a
change processes. These ideal types are based subsequent end which is already prefigured in
on fundamentallydifferent logics, which represent the present state. What lies latent, rudimentary,
the underlying generative mechanisms or laws or homogeneous in the embryo or primitive state,
(Tsoukas, 1989) that explain why observed events becomes progressively more mature, complex,
occur in particular sequence progressions when and differentiated. External environmentalevents
specific circumstances or conditions exist. In and processes can influence how the immanent
practice, of course, scholars across disciplines form expresses itself, but they are always
often combine elements of these ideal types of mediated by the imminent logic, rules, or
theories to explain observed processes of change programs that govern development (Van de Ven
and development in the subjects or objects and Poole, 1988: 37).
under investigation. However, in so doing the In terms of the vocabulary introduced before,
conceptual basis of applied theories can easily the typical progression of a life cycle process of
become confounded and incoherent. This is change is a unitary, cumulative, and conjunctive
because while the logic for each ideal type is sequence of stages, because the trajectory to the
internally consistent, borrowing elements from final end state is prefigured and requires a specific
different types of theories may result in an historical sequence of events. Each of these
incoherent concatenation of different logics. events contributes a certain piece to the final
As Poole and Van de Ven (1989) discuss, product, and they must occur in a certain order,
conceptually more robust explanations of change because each piece sets the stage for the next.
emerge when scholars explicitly address and work Each stage of development can be seen as a
out these logical inconsistencieswhen they borrow necessary precursor of succeeding stages.
and combine elements from different types of Life cycle theory is rooted in the approach of
theories in their applied theories of change the gross anatomist in biology who observes a
processes. sequence of developing fetuses, concluding that
each successive stage evolved from the previous
one. Hence, Nisbet (1970) claimed that develop-
Life cycle process theory ment is driven by some genetic code or prefigured
Life cycle theories include developmentalism program within the developing entity. Nisbets
(Nisbet, 1970), biogenesis (Featherman, 1986), interpretation has been expanded by Flavell
ontogenesis (Baltes, Dittman-Kohli and Dixon, (1982), who discusses a number of historically-
1986), and a large number of stage theories driven processes of cognitive development in
of child development (Piaget, 1975). human which each stage logically presupposes the next,
development (Levinson, 1978), moral develop- as when the development of manipulative skills
ment (Kohlberg, 1969), organizational develop- precedes writing. There is no reason to suppose
ment (Greiner, 1972; Kimberly and Miles, 1980), organizational systems could not have such
group decision making (Bales and Strodtbeck, processes as well.
1951; Poole and Roth, 1989; Gersick, 1988), and A life cycle theory of organizations often
new venture development (Burgelman and Sayles, operates on the basis of institutional rules or
1986).4 Next to teleology, life cycle is perhaps programs that require developmental activities to
progress in a prescribed sequence. For example,
The classification of management and organization literature a legislative bill enacting state educational reform
into the life cycle and other ideal types of theories in this cannot be passed until it has been drafted and
paper is very loose and done for illustrative purposes only.
Since very little attention has been given to underlying gone through the necessary House and Senate
theories of change processes in the management and committees. So also, Garud and Van de Ven
organization literature, it is difficult to know what specific (this issue) describe the invariant sequence steps
theories of change the authors had in mind.
that are institutionally regulated by the U.S.
178 A. H . Vun de Ven
Food and Drug Administration which all firms or goals desired by an organizational unit, which
must follow to develop and commercialize a new it has to acquire in order to realizeits aspirations.
biomedical product in the U.S. Of course, there Development is movement toward attaining a
are teleological components to this institutional purpose, goal, function, or desired end state.
life cycle. For example, firms may choose not to That an entity attains this end state does
engage in legislation or biomedical product not mean it stays in permanent equilibrium.
development; but if they do they have no recourse Influences in the external environment or within
but to follow the institutionally required sequence the entity itself may create instabilities that push
of steps. it to a new developmental path or trajectory.
Theories that rely on a teleological process cannot
specify what trajectory development will follow.
Teleology process theory They can at best list a set of possible paths, and
Another commonly understood family of process rely on norms of rationality to prescribe certain
theories is teleology, which underlies many paths.
theories of administrative behavior, including:
functionalism ( Merton, 1968), decision making
(March and Simon, 1958); epigenesis (Etzioni, Dialectic process theory
1963), enactment (Weick, 1979), voluntarism
(Parsons, 1951), adaptive learning (March and A third family of process theories, dialectics,
Olsen, 1976), and most models of strategic begins with the assumption that the developing
planning and goal setting (Chakravarthy and entity exists in a pluralistic world of colliding
Lorange, 1991). A teleology process theory is events, forces, or contradictory values which
based on the assumption that the developing compete with each other for domination and
entity is purposeful and adaptive; by itself or in control. These oppositions may be internal to
interaction with others. It socially contructs an the entity because it may be prefigured with
envisioned end state and selects from alternatives contradictory laws or rules of development (i .e.
a course of action to reach it. incompatible life cycle programs), or it has
Unlike life cycle theory, teleology does not multiple conflicting goals or teleologies. Oppo-
presume a necessary sequence of events, yet it sitions may also arise external to the entity as it
does imply standards by which change can be pursues developmental paths that collide with
judged. There is no prefigured rule or logically those of others. For example, Riegel (1975)
necessary direction to a teleological process. proposes a dialectical theory of human develop-
However, we are still able to assess when an ment in which change in adults is brought
entity is developing; it is growing more complex, about by contradictions within or between four
or it is growing more integrated, or it is filling interacting progressions of life events: inner
out a necessary set of functions. We are able biological, individual-psychological, cultural-
to make this assessment, because teleological sociological, and outer-physical forces. So also,
theories posit a standard of what an envisioned Greiner (1972) proposes that tensions between
end state for an entity is and we are able to revolutionary and evolutionary forces propel
observe movement toward the end state. organizational growth through each stage of
This explanation draws on classical functional development shown in Table 1.
theory, which explains development in terms of Stability and change with a dialectical process
movement toward some final goal or state of theory are explained by the relative balance of
rest (however temporary). This goal can be power between opposing forces. Stability is
achieved via a number of paths, all tending produced through partisan struggles and accom-
toward the same endpoint. Teleological models modations which maintain the smus quo between
of development incorporate the systems theory oppositions. Change occurs when these opposing
assumption of equifinality; there are several values, forces, or events go out of balance. The
equally effective ways to achieve a given goal. relative strength, power, or legitimacy of an
There is no assumption about historical necessity. antithesis may emerge or mobilize to a sufficient
Rather, these models rely on voluntarism as the degree of force to overthrow the current thesis
explanatory principle: they posit a set of functions or state of affairs and produce a synthesis, which
Strategy Process Suggestions 1 79
then becomes the new thesis as the dialectical competition among forms, and the environment
process recycles and continues. selects those forms which optimize or are best
More specifically, a process theory that focuses suited to the resource base of an environmental
on the intercourse of opposites can explain niche (Hannan and Freeman, 1977: 939). Reten-
organizational changes that move toward: (1) tion involves the forces (including inertia and
equilibrium, (2) oscillation, and (3) chaos. First, persistence) that perpetuate and maintain certain
organizational stability and inertia result when organizational forms. Retention serves to counter-
the routines, goals, or values of the status quo act the self-reinforcing loop between variations
are sufficiently dominant to suppress opposing and selection. Weick (1979) and Pfeffer (1982)
minority positions, and thereby produce note that while variations stimulate the selection
incremental adaptations flowing toward equili- of new organizational forms, retention works to
brium. Such movements to equilibrium underlie maintain those forms and practices that were
exchange theories of conflict (Blau. 1964), models selected in the past. Thus, evolution explains
of organizational power (Pfeffer, 1981; Astley change as a recurrent, cumulative, and probabilis-
and Zajac, 1991), and planned organizational tic progression of variation, selection, and reten-
change (French and Bell, 1978). Second, organi- tion.
zational business cycles, technological regimes, In organization and management applications,
and political contests occur when opposing forces evolutionary theory is often used to depict
alternate and push the organization somewhat global changes in organizational populations (e.g.
farther from an equilibrium orbit. Such recurrent Carroll and Hannan, 1989), although Burgelman
cycles are exemplified in models of vicious circles (1991) and Singh (1990) have adopted the
in organizations (Masuch, 1985), partisan mutual evolutionary model to explain processes of
adjustment (Lindblom, 1965; Quinn, 1980), and strategy making within organizations, and Weick
creative destruction (Schumpeter, 1942). Third, (1979) and Gersick (1990) have applied evolution
organizational transformations and anomie are at an even more micro level to explain
produced when strong oscillations occur between social-psychological processes of organizing.
opposing forces that push the organization out of Alternative theories of social evolution can be
its equilibrium orbit and produce deconstructions distinguished in terms of how traits can be
(Martin, 1990). bifurcations (Prigogine and Sten- inherited, whether change proceeds gradually
gers, 1984), and catastrophes (Zeeman, 1976) and incrementally or rapidly and radically,
leading to chaos. Thus, different patterns for and whether the unit of analysis focuses on
resolving dialectical oppositions can push an populations of organisms or species. Social
organization to flow toward equilibrium, to Darwinists (such as Hannan and Freeman, 1977;
oscillate in cycles between opposites, or to 1989; McKelvey, 1982; Nelson and Winter, 1982)
bifurcate far from equilibrium and spontaneously argue that traits can be inherited only through
create revolutionary changes. intergenerational processes, whereas Lamarkian
and cultural evolutionary theorists (Boyd and
Richerson, 1985; Weick, 1979; Burgelman, 1991;
Evolution process theory
and Singh, 1990) argue that traits can be
Although evolution is sometimes equated with acquired within a generation through learning and
change, as a specific family of process theories imitation. A Lamarkian view on the acquisition
we use evolution in a more restrictive sense to of traits appears more appropriate than strict
focus on cumulative changes in structural forms Darwinism for organization and management
of populations of organizational entities across applications of social evolution theory. To date,
communities, industries, or society at large strict social Darwinists have developed no
(Campbell, 1969; Hannan and Freeman, 1977; adequate solutions to operationally identify an
Aldrich, 1979). As in biological evolution, change organizational generation and an intergener-
proceeds in a continuous process of variation, ational transmission vehicle.
selection, and retention. Variations, the creation Social Darwinian theorists emphasize a continu-
of novel forms are often viewed to emerge by ous and gradual process of evolution. In The
random chance; they just happen (Aldrich, Origin of Species, Darwin (1936: 361) wrote, as
1979). Selection occurs principally through the natural selection acts solely by accumulating
180 A. H . Van de Ven
slight, successive, favourable variations, it can punctuated equilibrium model adds a hierarchical
produce no great or sudden modifications; it can dimension to evolutionary theory by dis-
act only by short and slow steps. Other tinguishing this sorting (a description of differen-
evolutionists posit a saltational theory of evo- tial birth and death) from species selection (a
lution, such as punctuated equilibrium (Gould causal claim about the basis of sorting). Speci-
and Eldrich, 1977; Arnold and Fristrup, 1982), ation is a property of populations (organisms do
which Tushman and Romanelti (1985) and not speciate) , while extinction [a sorting process]
Gersick (1991) introduced to the management is often a simple concatenation of deaths among
literature. Whether an evolutionary change pro- organisms (Gould, 1989: 122). This multilevel
ceeds at gradual vs. saltational rates is an view of evolution is extended by Arnold and
empirical matter, for the rate of change does not Fristrup (1982), who emphasize that adaptation
fundamentally alter the theory of evolution-at and selection can occur at multiple levels (both
least as it has been adopted thus far by strategy the species and organism levels). Adaptation is
scholars. However, measurement of the rate of the class of heritable characters that have a
evolutionary change is a formidable empirical positive influence on the fitness of an organism
challenge. The French author and aviator, Saint within a constraining situation. Selection focuses
Exupery, aptly stated the time which adds on the evolutionary process of choosing new
something new is by no means the same as the situations (i.e. variations). So selection assumes
time which spreads itself out (quotation in variation, while adaptation assumes fitting within
De Rosney, 1970). The time required for a selected environment (Arnold and Fristrup,
phylogenesis (the generation of originals through 1982: 119).
variation or speciation processes) is much greater In conclusion, we might think of these alterna-
and less predictable than the time required for tive families of process theories as having three
ontogenesis (the reproduction of originals through components: a set of starting conditions, a
selection and adaptation processes). Empirically, functional end-point, and an emergent process
the different temporal durations involved in the of change. Life cycle theory incorporates all three
generation vs. the reproduction of originals in parts, although it largely directs attention to the
the social sciences are very difficult to determine, starting input conditions of institutional rules,
because the nature of uncertainty is profoundly customs, or habits that prescribe programs or
different; in ontogenesis the improbability of routines of action that must be followed in
reproduction is given at the beginning, while in developing an organization entity. By describing
phylogenesis the improbability of origination is in some detail a required stage sequence, a life
gathered at the end of the process. Thus, the cycle theory implies a final state and a process
temporal duration of generating an original can of change. Of course, these latter parts are often
only be known retrospectively after the fact, left implicit in the description of stages. A
while the temporal duration of reproducing teleological theory has two of the components,
originals can be determined prospectively before although its central emphasis is on visions of
the fact. future goals or final end states of an organizational
The paleontologist, Gould (1989), has argued entity. At the outset, it does not specify a
that another basic distinction between Darwinian required sequence of events or stages, but it does
evolution and his punctuated equilibrium theory describe the form of organization which is
is hierarchical level. This distinction has not yet the end-point of the development, and, by
been incorporated in the management literature, implication, the process for getting to the end.
but ought to be. Gould (1989) points out Thus, both life cycle and teleological theories are
that classical Darwinism locates the sorting of predictive. Dialectical and evolutionary theories
evolutionary change at a single level of objects. center on the means of action themselves; i.e.
This sorting is natural selection operating through the dynamic process of social construction and
the differential births and deaths of organisms, transformation of alternative forms within and
as exemplified in many recent studies on organi- across generations of competing organizational
zational birth and death rates by population routines, forms and institutions. Dialectical and
ecologists (see reviews in Carroll and Hannan, evolutionary theories explain only how change
1989, and Hannan and Freeman, 1989). The and development occur, along with indicators to
Strategy Process Suggestions 181
enable us to identify key developmental constructs Regularly scheduled and intermittent real-time
(e.g. selection, action loops) at any point in observations are necessary to observe if and how
time. While dialectical and evolutionary theories changes occur over time. Repetitive surveys and
provide rich explanations of emergent processes interviews provide comparative-static obser-
of change, they are not predictive; they are only vations of the organizational unit or strategy
explanatory process theories. being tracked over time. Difference scores
between time periods on these dimensions would
determine if and what changes occurred in the
DESIGN RESEARCH TO OBSERVE organizational unit or strategy. But to understand
PROCESS how these changes came about, there is a need
to supplement regularly-scheduled data collection
Most studies of strategy process to date have with intermittent real-time data. For example,
been retrospective case histories conducted after this would involve observing key committee
the outcomes were known. However, it is widely meetings, decision or crisis events, and conducting
recognized that prior knowledge of the success informal discussions with key organizational
or failure of a strategic change effort invariably participants. Thus, while difference scores on
biases a study's findings. While historical analysis dimensions measured through regularly scheduled
is necessary for examining many questions and surveys and interviews identify if and whar
concerted efforts can be undertaken to minimize changes occurred, real-time observations are
bias, it is generally better, if possible, to initiate needed to understand how these changes
historical study before the outcomes of a strategic occurred.
change process become known. It is even better As Argyris (1968; 1985) has forcefully argued
to undertake real-time study of strategic change over the years, significant new methods and skills
processes as they unfold in their natural field of action science are called for to conduct
settings. this ' kind of longitudinal real-time research.
Time itself, sets a frame of reference which In addition, it implies significant reseacher
directly affects our perceptions of change. As commitment and organizational access, which
Pettigrew (1985) notes, the more we look at few researchers have achieved to date. As a
present-day events, the easier it is to identify consequence, very few developmental studies of
change; the longer we stay with an emergent strategy formulation and implementation have
process and the further back we go to disentangle been conducted. One reason why gaining organi-
its origins, the more likely we are to identify zational access has been problematic is because
continuities. Appreciating this dilemma motivates researchers seldom place themselves into the
my third recommendation that investigators manager's frame of reference to conduct their
carefully design their studies to observe strategy studies. As Van de Ven, Angle, and Poole (1989)
process in such a way that is consistent with their discuss, without observing a change process from
definition and theory of process. a manager's perspective, it becomes difficult (if
For example, if the purpose of a study is to not impossible) for an investigator to understand
understand how to manage the formulation or the dynamics confronting managers who are
implementation of an organizational strategy, it involved in a strategic change effort, and thereby
will be necessary for researchers to place them- generate new knowledge that advances the theory
selves into the manager's temporal and contextual and practice of strategy process.
frames of reference. Presumably, this would Furthermore, if organizational participants do
initially involve conducting a retrospective case not understand the relevance of a study, there
history to understand the context and events is little to motivate their providing access and
leading up to the present strategy being investi- information to an investigator. At issue here is not
gated. However, the major focus of the study that strategic management research incorporates
would entail conducting real-time observations of elements of consulting practice. The issue is one
the events and activities in strategy development of formulating and addressing important research
while they occur in time, and without knowing questions that capture the attention and moti-
a priori the outcomes of these events and vation of scholars and practitioners alike in the
activities. merits for studying them. Clearly, the outcomes
182 A. H . Van de Ven
of research on an important question may not procedures in each step.) First, it is often
provide immediate pay-offs to practitioners or necessary to obtain baseline information and
academics. Often by definition, truly important develop a retrospective case history of the context
research questions do not have clear solutions and events leading up to the present venture
until after the research has been conducted. If being investigated. While the historical baseline
solutions are well known in advance of the is being developed, real-time study can begin
research, the question may be appropriate for using a variety of data collection methods, and
consulting practice or an internal management by attending and observing regularly scheduled
study, but clearly not for basic scientific research. meetings of the management team, administrative
Thus, at the time of designing research and review meetings, and conferences related to the
negotiating access to organizations, prospective venture being investigated as it unfolds over
solutions to applied problems are secondary in time.
comparison with the importance of the research Researchers could use an event as the datum,
question. A good indicator of such a research o r unit of observation, and record all the events
question is its self-evident capability (when that occur as the venture develops over time.
properly articulated) to motivate attention and Events require careful definition, and vary with
enthusiasm of scholars and practitioners alike. the subject and concepts being investigated. Only
In launching our Minnesota Innovation by being clear about the subject and conceptual
Research Program (see Van de Ven et al., 1989), categories does the researcher know what
we found that a useful way to begin this kind of eventdactivities to record, and where to look
longitudinal research is to conduct meetings for them. If the researcher doesnt look in the
(often with a served breakfast or lunch) with right place, then nothing may be recorded, or
small groups {eight to twelve) managers or if the conceptual category is too broad, it can
representatives of various organizations which include confounding data. For example, in our
were about t o initiate comparable strategic change study of the internal corporate venturing process,
efforts or ventures in their natural organizational Garud and Van de Ven (this issue) defined
settings. In these hour-and-a-half meetings we events as instances when changes were observed
introduced our research question (e.g. How to occur in each of the constructs of the
and why do innovations develop over time?), conceptual model: i.e. in the innovation idea and
discussed why it is important to advancing theory activities, personnel appointments and roles, unit
and practice, and outlined a longitudinal real- relationships with others, environmental and
time research strategy for studying the research organizational context, and outcomes.
question in comparable field settings over time. Data on the occurrence of each event could
Participants then shared their opinions of the be entered into a qualitative computer data base
research question, why it was important or useful (such as Rbase), and at a minimum should
to study, and how the research design might include the date, actor, action, outcome (if
be modified to make it workable in their observable), and data source. A chronological
organizational settings. The meetings concluded recording of these events as they occur over time
by thanking participants for their useful ideas becomes the raw data base. Each of these
and indicating that we would contact them events is then coded on a set of dichotomous
individually to negotiate access to study the variables, which reflect the presence/absence or
question in their organizational settings. Follow- occurrencehonoccurrence of indicators selected
ing these meetings, the research design was to measure key constructs in ones conceptual
modified as deemed necessary, and negotiations model. For example, an indicator of strategy
began with individual organizations. A substantial formulation might be to code each event in terms
subset of those represented at the meetings of whether actors did or did not articulate a
agreed to provide access to conduct the research. change in ideas about the strategy.
Having negotiated access to a manageable This coded event sequence data base can then
(small) number of comparable organizational be analyzed in terms of the vocabulary and
sites, the longitudinal research can begin by alternative forms of temporal progressions dis-
undertaking the following basic steps. (See Van cussed before. Unfortunately, space limitations
de Ven and Poole (1989; 1990) for detailed prevent an adequate discussion of the data
Strategy Process Suggestions 183
analysis problems of identifying patterns in event To illustrate this conclusion, let us reexamine
sequence data and of inferring what they mean. Greiners (1972) well-known model of organi-
Obviously, event sequence data do not necessarily zational growth outlined on the bottom of
speak for themselves. Van de Ven and Poole Table 1. Greiners model clearly uses the third
(1989) discuss some of the steps involved in meaning of process as a developmental sequence
drawing statistical and conceptual inferences from of events, and proposes that organizational
event sequence data. Abbott (1990) proposes growth progresses through five stages of evolution
methods for identifying temporal sequence pat- and revolution: (1) creativity and leadership, (2)
terns among coded events in such a dataset. In direction and autonomy, (3) delegation and
addition, substantive models of strategy process control, (4) coordination and red tape, and (5)
can be evaluated by using log-linear and logit collaboration and revitalization. Readers may
analysis on categorical time series data, and wish to read footnotes 5-9 during this section,
standard time series regression analysis on fre- since they represent excerpts from an interesting
quency counts of coded events computed for and constructive dialogue that I carried on with
fixed temporal intervals (e.g. weekly, monthly, Professor Greiner about my reexamination of his
or quarterly intervals). Garud and Van de Ven model.
(this issue), Van de Ven and Polley (1992), and To evaluate the status of Greiners applied
Van de Ven and Garud (1992) illustrate this new theory, it is useful to recognize that he implicitly
methodology of event sequence analysis to borrows conceptual elements from three of the
examine process models of internal corporate ideal types of process theories. In so doing,
venturing, trial-and-error learning, and the co- Greiners model contains a number of conceptual
evolution of technological and institutional inno- anomalies, which in turn suggest a number of
vations, respectively. promising areas for further theory building. In
the main, the model is rooted in a life cycle
theory of change, in which historical forces
CONCLUDING EXAMPLE OF [organization age, size, growth rate, and stages
SUGGESTIONS MADE (WITH of evolution and revolution] shape the future
REACTIONS FROM LARRY E. growth of organizations (Greiner, 1972: 166).
GREINER) The quest for growth represents an underdevel-
oped teleological element in the model. Greiner
In conclusion, we must touch upon a few basic states his position that the future of an organi-
normative and teleological questions. Where do zation may be less determined by outside forces
we go with this strategy process research and than it is by the organizations history. . . [B]e-
search for process models? Where do we want havior is determined primarily by previous events
to end up? While readers may have different and experiences, not by what lies ahead (p. 166).
answers, my first suggestion, defines the meaning Beyond this introductory statement, the pull of
of process, implies that we not only want to an envisioned end state of growth is largely
assume or describe the occurrence of strategic
change processes, we also want to explain
how -and why they occur. Scientifically valid 1 sent a prepublication draft of this paper to Pro!. Larry
E. Greiner at the University of Southern California. He
explanation not only requires systematic pro- responded with a very useful set of comments, which not
cedures for Observing and events as only clarify, amplify and correct my reexamination of his
they occur over time (along the lines of my third model, but also exemplify how the meanings, theories, and
suggestion), it also requires the development and vocabulary Of process suggested in this paper cdn facilitate
more penetrating and constructive dialogue among scholars
evaluation Of theories Of the change process than in the past, In order to exemplify this constructive level
(the second suggestion). Hopefully this journey of dialogue, I have not changed my reassessment of the
yield more robust ways to understand how model in the text from that which Prof. Greiner reviewed,
and (with his permission) include his comment> in footnotes
and why strategic change develops over time. to pertinent made in the text.
Moreover, it may produce more constructive Greiner: You might give my article a little context in terms
and penetrating dialogue among scholars and of time and place-since it was written in 1977, one of the
first such models. I might add too that f think the model
practitioners about their models of strategy was the orecursor if not the first Dunctuated eauilibrium
process. model-at least Tushman has said this to me.
184 A. H. Van de Ven
ignored by Greiner, as are considerations of this overly brief critique suggests, a fruitful way
alternative paths to achieve the desired end of to evaluate and extend applied models of process
growth; instead only one particular sequence of is to anchor the analysis in more basic and
developmental stages is discussed. The term general theories of process.
evolution is used loosely to describe prolonged To empirically examine Greiners model (as
periods of growth where no major upheaval (or formulated in 1972) from a developmental process
revolution) occurs in organizational practices. perspective, one would ask the following kind of
Thus, Greiner does not borrow conceptual question, Does organizational growth commonly
elements from the ideal type evolutionary theory progress through the sequence of stages that
(as we have described it). He does, however, Greiner proposes? A key conceptual move for
entertain dialectical theory by observing that as addressing this research question is to view
a company progresses through developmental Greiners stages as categories of events, and not
phases, each evolutionary period creates its own to assume that these categories of events occur
revolution (p. 166). However, with the exception in any particular sequence of progression over
of asserting the life cycle view that crises are time. Thus, instead of viewing organizational
immanent to each evolutionary stage, Greiner growth as a unitary progression of a linear
does not explain how these divergent forces sequence of stages based on a life cycle theory
emerge out of unitary progressions within each of change, one is open to more empirical
stage, and how these antagonistic forces converge possibilities if the process of organizational
and collide to mediate a synthesis in the next growth is viewed in terms of a variety of other
stage, as a dialectical theory would require.h As models of event progressions and theories of
change process.
One way to do this is to adopt a research
Greiner: This [sentence] hurts a bit because I tried very
consciously to use dialectical explanation (without calling it design as illustrated in Figure 1. In comparison
that to HBR readers) throughout the evolving stages and with Greiners initial formulation of the model
crises. I think you will see this logic if you go through each in Table 1, this research design redefines the five
stages description, such as at the end of the Phase 2
description where I write, although the new directive stages of organizational evolution and the four
techniques channel energy more efficiently into growth revolutionary crises identified within the stages
(thesis), they even wally become inappropriate for controlling into nine conceptual tracks or categories of
a larger, more diverse and complex organization. Lower level
employees find themselves restricted by a cumbersome and events, and shifts time from a vertical to
centralized hierarchy. . , thus a crisis develops from demands horizontal axis. In so doing, one can not only
for greater autonomy by lower level managers (antithesis). gain a richer appreciation of how events pertaining
The synthesis link I then make (but perhaps not as explicitly
as I should) when I introduce Delegation in stage 3 as lower to organizational evolution and revolution unfold
levels receive more autonomy-though this autonomy is over time, but also how the multiple tracks of
different from the kind they were asking for-and this in event categories are related and thereby facilitate
turn becomes the new thesis. You or others might not agree
with how I use dialectics or that I dont explain them clearly and constrain the overall process of organizational
enough, but I can say that I was very conscious of it at the growth.
time, and I do think it is more evident in my more concrete Guided by this research design, one could
explanations thai you note. In fact, I have had past
correspondence with some dialectical sociologists about the undertake longitudinal study of a number of
models use of dialectics, which was quite uncommon at the organizations from birth to maturity. One would
time in management literature. I also think it is the dialectics gather data on the chronological sequence of
that added the power struggle reality and made the article
so successful in managerial reaction. activities or events that occurred in the develop-
[But in agreement with you] I would say my model is a ment of each organization. The observed activities
reasonably expliciaattempt to combine unitary life cycle with
dialectical theories-but not teleological. For me. life cycle
explains the form of the unitary stages, while the dialectics dynamics within the organization that are driving it forward-
explain the underlying dynamics of movement. For example, convergence around the thesis of each stage and then running
I put the crises in the model hecause 1 could not find data into resistance (antithesis) and requiring reorientation for the
showing the stages as naturally and automatically evolving conflict to be resolved. The model in fact has no ending and
one after the other. Thus. it is not a model where a future concludes with a question mark.
life or end state is assure&(there are even divergent paths Van de Vcn: A careful examination of the conceptual
which are not really discussed in the article. such as failing overlap between the nine substantive event categories in
to solve a crisis or dying if the crisis continues). My reason Greiners model would prune the set to a smaller and more
for saying it is not teleological is that there is no envisioned manageable number of tracks. However, we will not
end state that pulls the process-for me it is the current undertake this needed theory building tiisk in this example.
Strategy Process Suggestions 1 85