AN INTEGRATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGY MAKING PROCESSES: A CRITIQUE
This research critiques the article identified below this paragraph. The critique considers the relevance of the article to organization and management, the effectiveness of the author in convincing the reader of the reasonableness of the position stated, the reviewer's perception of the strengths and weakness of the article, and the reviewer's opinions on the points made in the article.
Hart, Stuart L. (1992). An integrative framework for strategy making processes. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 327 351.
As the article deals with strategy formulation, the relevance of the article in the contemporary environment of organization and management is firmly established, because organizational strategy and its formulation is not only an academic growth industry, it is also addressed in one form or another in most for profit organizations in the United States. Relevance, however, must also be considered from the perspective of whether yet another approach to strategy formulation is desired or required in the early 1990s. The answer to this question is also affirmative. In recent years, an increasing number of researchers are finding that new frames of reference are required for effective strategic planning in organizations (Nicholson, Rees, and Brooks Rooney, 1990, pp. 511 534; Ramanujam and Venkatraman, 1985, pp. 22 27).
Hart (1992, pp. 327 351) is effective in persuading the reader of the reasonableness of the position stated in the
article. The contention that strategy formulation must be a more encompassing and flexible process is supportable. As long ago as the mid 1970s, Charles Arrington and R. N. Sawaga (1974, pp. 148 160) observed that (1) strategic planning must include an external environmental issues analysis, (2) strategic planners and top managements must accept the concept of pluralism, and (3) organiz...