Breaking the Bounds of Organization in Strategic Decision Making

This paper examines the exercise of power in organizational decision making. Four case studies are presented in the text and are analyzed in terms of the power plays of senior managers who were centrally involved in the decision-making process. In particular, the analysis distinguishes between bounded and unbounded decisions. In the former case the power plays of interests are constrained by preestablished organizational rules and procedures, while in the latter case unbounded decisions are relatively free from such organizational parameters and allow actors to exercise power selectively to secure their own interests. The data suggest that decisions may become unbounded in four ways: through unaccustomed forms of data, individual conflict, and novel topics for decision and where the problem is initiated from an unexpected or unusual source. Where decisions become unbounded the data suggest that those actors who are existing power holders through the control of critical contingencies are also able to take advantage of the rules and procedures of the institution to further their own interests

IMPLANTED DECISION‐MAKING: AMERICAN OWNED FIRMS IN BRITAIN [I]

decision‐making processes are compared in American and British subsidiaries in Britain to investigate how far processual characteristics as distinct from structural features, may be implanted in subsidiaries abroad. Managements in the British owned subsidiaries tend to route their biggest decisions through the formalities of standing committees in conformity with customary procedures, taking a comparatively long time to do so. Managements in the American owned subsidiaries tend to rely on informally assembled working groups which help to arrive at a decision comparatively rapidly through a process which does not ostensibly follow any recognized procedure. The British mode is formal within a non‐formalized customary pattern, the American mode informal within a formalized frame. Copyrigh

SPORADIC, FLUID AND CONSTRICTED PROCESSES: THREE TYPES OF STRATEGIC DECISION MAKING IN ORGANIZATIONS1

Using 136 cases of strategic decision‐making described by a number of variables drawn from the literature, three distinct types of decision‐making processes are found. These are termed sporadic, fluid and constricted processes. They are parsimonious characterizations of decision‐making processes which, given the variety of the 30 organizations from which the cases are drawn, should be generalizable to a wide range of contexts. Copyrigh

Strategic Decision Making: Influence Patterns in Public and Private Sector Organizations

This paper pursues the question of whether differences exist between influence patterns in decision making in public and private sector organizations. Results are reported from an analysis of the interest units appearing in 150 strategic decision-making processes studied in 30 British organizations. We conclude that, while there is an overall similarity in the involvement of types of interest units in the two sectors, there are notable differences in the influence exerted

Research methods for the empirical investigation of the process of formation of operations strategy

This paper reviews the methodological options for the empirical investigation of the process of formation of operations strategy. A case study approach is likely to be the most favoured research strategy for this type of work. Five possible methodologies that might be used within such case studies (ethnography, interviews, strategy charting, questionnaires and documentation) are critically reviewed and assessed. The advantages and disadvantages of each, together with circumstances in which they might best be used, are identified. The paper especially focuses on the practical implications for researchers using each of these methodologies