Strategist: Role and Attributes Gordon Bowen & Deidre Bowen ...

Strategist: Role and Attributes Gordon Bowen & Deidre Bowen (Regent’s University London & SHS Charity) Abstract This paper is an empirical study of the role and characteristics of strategists in dynamic, uncertain and complex environments. Strategic management research appears to neglect the importance of strategists and early research consider them to be analyst and thus number crunchers of data. This is not a view that holds true in the 21st Century. Based on a sample of 9 strategist and using semi-structured interviews, the results show that strategists need to focus on interaction across the organisation and develop organisational opportunity routines. Strategists are idea-driven and thus catalyst for change and opportunities. To achieve this “proactiveness” is important and they should be experience, which implies they are senior individuals in the organisation and thus exhibit leadership qualities. Key words: strategist, ethics, heuristic learning, human resources and planning.

1.0 Introduction The role and purpose of a strategist is a neglected area in strategic management (Dameron and Torset, 2014 and Montgomery, 2012). Writers in the area of strategic management such as Andrews (1971), Mintzberg (1973) or Quinn (1988) showed little regard for the strategist in their early work. Mintzberg (1994) was one of the first to recognise the importance of the strategist. The theme strategy as practice is an approach adopted by Whittington (1996, 2003) and recognise the place of the strategist in strategy development. This was also taken-up by (Bowen, 2002) in his doctoral thesis. Strategy can be viewed through several lens and thus different views of “reality”. To construct the reality a discourse to strategy is an important step (Dameron and Torset, 2014). To analyse this reality Hardy and Philips (2004, and 1997) propose three perspectives concepts, objects and subjects. These categories enables an understanding on how people represent themselves in their own discursive conversations and thus constructing their own legitimacy (Oswick et al, 2000). Dameron and Torset (2014) suggest that strategists’ discourse on their practices and activities are the essence of what constitute strategy. Strategy is not a detached analytical exercise (Dameron and Torset, 2014 and Montgomery, 2012). Strategy is characterised in a survey of 2000 executives by plan, direction and competitive advantage but only 0.001% of the sample used leadership or visionary i.e. working with people. Tellingly the word strategist was not associated with strategy (Montgomery, 2012). The aim of this paper is to define the characteristics and role of a strategist and add to the limited research in this area of strategy.

2.1 How Strategist Learn

Organisational knowledge can be theoretically categorised as tacit and explicit (Grant, 1996 and Spender, 1996), who knows what is transactional knowledge (Reagans, Argote and Brooks, 2005), and procedural knowledge and declarative knowledge (Moorman and Miner, 1998). Explicit knowledge is based on experience and gives rise to “rational” strategy in unpredictable environments. Organisational processes are guided by rational strategies and are responsible for value creating strategies and is more effective than informationdemanding approaches (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011). Knowledge that is explicit improves process performance over time (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011). Organisational routines are learnt from process routines and are patterns of actions that contribute to organisational learning repositories and are linked to lessons based on experience (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011, Feldman, 2000, and Levitt and March, 1988). A third approach to organisational learning suggest that heuristic is a cognitive shortcut, when information, time and processing ability is limited (Newell and Simon, 1972). Heuristics are opportunity spotters i.e. opportunities to pursue, opportunities to execute, opportunities that are acceptable for ranking and opportunities that should be dropped. Organisational routines are ways to theorise what has been learnt (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011). Firms with higher opportunity-capturing heuristics have higher performance organisational processes (Bingham et al, 2007). Davis et al (2009) found the “simple rules” strategy based on a few heuristics is viable in stable environments and a requirement for unpredictable ones. Strategist operate across the organisation and would gain both tacit, explicit, procedural, declarative and transactional knowledge. They are in one of the “best” places in the organisation to develop heuristics routines that have organisational significance. However, this requires strategist taking a leadership role, which was not a characteristic associate with them. 2.2 Strategist Roles Mintzberg (1994) argues that the planner’s greatest contribution is in the analysis of the hard data. The planner’s role is around the strategy-making process and not “inside it”. To Mintzberg (1994) planners play a supporting role, they ask the “right” questions. According to Mintzberg (1994), planners are categorised as follows: strategy finders (look for emerging strategies) catalysts (encourage managers to think creatively and to challenge the status quo) and analysts (traditional view of a planner, they carry out analysis of issues). A planner can be “right-handed”, a planner in the traditional mode or “lefthanded”; this type of planner is less conventional and is looking for nuggets of information. Mintzberg (19751, 1994) challenges the established wisdom that managers are “reflective, and systematic planners”. According, to Mintzberg (1994) the planners cause “turbulence”, because their formal planning procedures are inflexible. Campbell (1999, p43) adds “This much is clear; when it comes to planning, corporate managers must limit themselves to giving advice in areas where they know they can add value.” Mintzberg (1994) suggests a planner’s greatest contribution is in the field of analysis. In this role, they play a supporting role. He also suggests that another type of planner exists, they are the thinkers looking, for emerging strategies. Which of Mintzberg’s (1994) two models of the strategic planner is correct? It is reasonable to speculate that both types of planners exist. However, the effectiveness of one type of planner over another depends on the market 1

Originally published in the Harvard Business Review (July-August 1975) and winner of the McKinsey prize for the best article in the Review in 1975. Copyright 1975 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College; all rights reserved. Reprinted with deletions by permission of the Harvard Business Review.

environment. When a market is changing very little over time the understanding in detail may give a company a competitive advantage, which is only sustainable if the status quo remains. A traditional planner would do a good job in this environment. To hypothesise briefly lets place the traditional planner in a dynamic, complex and uncertain environment. Will the planner still perform effectively? If the traditional planner uses the hard data skills, then it is unlikely he will survive. In the uncertain, dynamic and complex environment, data for analysis is scarce, out of date (because the market changes rapidly) or just wrong. The lack of data could prove a problem for the traditional planner. This environment requires planners to look for insights and look for patterns to build an understanding of the environment. The role of the planner is to produce qualitative information, rather than quantitative information. In fact, the planner must be flexible and adaptable and be able to manage in any environment. An inflexible strategy formulation process may hamper even a “left-handed” planner. Above all planners must know their limitations, otherwise they may be giving bad advice. They must know where to go to get the best advice. Montgomery (2012) suggests that strategist is a meaning maker. Thus requiring the strategist to define what the organisation will be and why. This is a challenge for any strategist to overcome, but also downplay the leadership role. The role of the strategist is now about choice and to do this successfully there is a need to give understanding and thus meaning to the choices available. Another point made by Campbell (1999) is that planning requires insights and without this, planning becomes little more than an administrative exercise. Camillus, Sessions and Webb (1998) point out that planning has been pushed down the organization to the “doers” i.e. the doers are the planners. Campbell (1999) argues that planning without insights is just an administrative exercise. Camillus, Sessions and Webb (1998) point out that planning is not a preserve of management and happens further down the organisation. Long (1993) holds the view that corporate planners co-ordinate rather than generate the contents for plans. Just like Mintzberg (1994) they are seen as a catalyst for change and strategic thinking. The five roles of the corporate planner are defined by Long (1993) as:  The purveyor of philosophy (a catalyst),  A sower of seeds (takes a broad view),  A leader of learning (communication techniques),  A doer of deals (executes strategic alliances) and  A keeper of the corporate conscience (confidence to involve the whole organization in strategic planning). Montgomery (2012) suggests that strategist must be momentum of change, which is a never ending task. Changes in strategy is inevitable, but the timing of the needs facilitating with the strategist. Reinvention is to the key to continual success. Berry, and Wechsler (1995) describe the roles of a planner in the public sector as follows:  Creating strength, weaknesses, opportunity, and threats analysis  Identifying and managing their constituents and stakeholders  Conducting environment scanning  Identifying and managing the agency’s policy portfolio. Long’s (1993) model represents planners in a private company, in a business sector, whilst Berry and Wechsler ‘s (1995) model is of the planners in a public sector. Planners in Long’s (1993) model are catalysts for change, but in Berry and Wechsler (1995) they have an analytical role. So, which model is more appropriate? In an environment where analysis is

based on questionable data an ability to be insightful is more important. An environment that is uncertain, complex and dynamic would be better served using Long’s (1993) model. Burnett, Yeskey, and Richardson (1984) see corporate planning becoming the focal point for implementation and strategy development, with a growing focus on marketing strategy. Johnson (1985) opine that the future planner will need to have a better understanding of management, be able to draft plans that are actionable, do what if analysis and prepare contingency plans for all possibilities, look outside to the marketplace, and because knowledgeable on the dynamics of the business and help the organization to develop more creative strategies. Burnett, Yeskey and Richardson (1984) advise that corporate planning is about strategic marketing. On the other hand, Johnson (1985) is of the view that planners need to be creative thinkers. They all agree that the planner is responsible for the implementation of the plan. Comeau-Kirschener (1999) defines the roles of a planner in a company – as a catalyst, advising senior management on issues and refining the analytical and logical skills of the management. This is close to the traditional view of a planner. Berry and Wechsler (1995) advise that the planner uses the plan to set organizational direction and they should be more involved in organization building than chasing numbers. His view is that the organization builders will the strategic leaders of the future. Comeau-Kirschener’s (1999) view of a planner is in the traditional mould. Berry and Weschler (1995) takes a different view that the planner is a creative force in the organisation. Montgomery (2012) suggests that strategists are the voice of reason. Visionary leaders could become over-confident, which is a familiar trait in some successful entrepreneurs, which conflicts with senior managers, who see themselves as problem solvers. Firms can leave a business because of competitive forces, so a leader may come along with a bold strategy to pre-empt this. The strategist must serve as the voice of reason to prevent over-confidence and fully understand the implications of this bold strategy. Floyd and Woolridge (1994) state that the roles of middle managers include championing strategic alternatives, synthesizing information, facilitating adaptability and implementing deliberate strategy. Brussee (1995) states that the organization must strike a balance between the two approaches, strategic analysis (the planners) versus the intuition (the manager’s). Floyd and Woolridge (1994) are of the opinion that middle managers are champions of strategic alternatives and are implementers of current strategy. Are middle managers strategic planners? Middle managers are strategic planners but they use intuition, versus the planner who uses strategic analysis (Brussee, 1995). Montgomery (2012) suggests that the strategist is an operator and needs to make strategic binary decisions along the way. Thus the boundary between strategy and implementation is blurred. Sometimes the ideal situation of a strategy that flows smoothly into implementation, is a rarity. However, teaching of strategy tends suggests the ideal situation. Rowden (1999) defines three roles for human resource in the strategic planning process, these are the advocate role (recognise the need for strategic planning), the stakeholder role (linking the organization’s overall strategic plan to human resource’s plan) and the facilitator role (helps the planning team with process issues). Walker (1994) defines four roles for human resource these are training, support, consulting and leadership. The consulting and leadership roles are the areas companies want to emphasise according to Walker (1994). Rowden (1999) defines three roles for human resource concentrates on the strategic roles, Walker’s (1994) roles for human resource is in the traditional areas of training and support.

Schuler (1994) sees linking human resource strategy and business strategy as a major role for human resource. Wiley (1992) has devised three categories for human resource these are strategic process, legal aspects, and operational role. The skills associated with the strategic process role are consultant, innovator, change agent, catalyst, business partner and assessor. Schuler (1994) and Wiley (1992) both agree human resources have a role to play in the strategic process. Schuler (1990) lists several roles for human resources these are business - person, shaper of change, consultant to the organization and partner to line, strategy formulator and implementor, talent manager, and asset manager and cost controller. Ulrich (1994) gave the following human resource roles – strategic partner, change agent, employee champion and administrative expert. The skills and roles defined for human resources are similar to the skills and roles expected of a corporate strategic planner. Schuler (1990) and Ulrich (1994) agree that one role for human resources is for it to act as change agents. The emergence of the CIO as a strategist is becoming a reality. Traditionally the CIO role involved informational, decisional and interpersonal activities. Influencers on the CIO’s ability to operate as a strategist depends on the reporting level (linked to formal power) and the CIO’s education background (technical education and experience). The role of the CIO as a strategist is closely related to their formal power and the ability to absorb and disseminate information. When it comes to the traditional role of the CIO then technical credibility is more important for performance in terms of decisional and interpersonal (Carter et al, 2011). The strategist needs to have formal power in the organisation and is expected given they have to work across the organisation at senior management level and below. This also supports the notion that strategist should be leaders to identify opportunities appropriate and relevant to the organisation (Dameron and Torset, 2014 and Montgomery, 2012). 2.3 Ethics and the Strategist Early strategy scholars such as Andrews (1971) and Barnard (1956) have commented on the importance and influence of moral issues on corporate strategy. Strategy content, strategy process and strategy context are influencers on the ethics-link to strategy (Bonini et al, 2006, Dowling, 2004 Hosner, 1994). The social acceptance of decisions requires ethical reflection. When individuals value are one integration takes place into a common pattern of action. Fostering this integrating action, strategy formulation and ethical reflection enhances the countenance of common corporate and social identity. Ethical reflection and strategy making can reduce uncertainty. Ethical reflection lowers uncertainty in a similar way the strategy making reduces environmental uncertainty. Ethical reflection reduces societal environment complexities leading to less uncertainty. The strategy process is an appropriate area for ethical reflection within corporations (Behman and Rasche, 2009).

3.0 Methodology The empirical research is based on a technology firm specialising in telecommunications across many industries and markets in many countries. An interpretivistic philosophical approach is used to underpin the research and the themes generated from semi-structured interviews are employed to develop the ideas on the role and characteristics of the strategist. Because this is a case study, one needs to be careful in terms of generalisability, but the

research provides valuable insight into the behavioural characteristics expected of a strategist. The sample is based on nine individuals that work fulltime in strategist roles for different parts of the strategic business unit. Because of the specialist nature of the topic a purposeful sample selection was considered the most appropriate approach.

4.0 Results and Discussion The results focus the following: job responsibilities of a planner; how they go about getting information they require; their perception of the value planners add to an organisation and finally if the skills of a human resource professional is the type of skills a planner needs. The job responsibilities of product strategic planners include market analysis, market sizing, and scenario planning and business case analysis. The other aspect of the product strategic planners’ responsibilities is to network with business development team, manufacturing, and product marketing to gain a comprehensive view of the market. They require having presentation, facilitation, consulting and networking skills. A statement from a planner (manager) on the other aspects of the job “The other aspects we look at whether the corporation scores and appropriate business goals, use all the other stuff I have just mentioned which is really the market and business analysis for ourselves and our customers, look at where the market is going, get input from our product marketing team. These people who own the products and own the evolution of the products and get input from the development teams, the people who develop the products and get the products up at the factory. Then we get some input from business development teams, the people who see the customers and pull all this together and using a template develop a plan and present the plan to these people who are stakeholders in the plan. Then we review the plan twice a year.” The corporate planner has similar responsibilities to a product strategic planner but the emphasis is on market trends, country trends (fast growth) and market sizing for all products within EMEA. The corporate planner’s role involves co-ordination across several business units to facilitate product solutions. His role is the breakdown the ‘silo’ mentality endemic in some of the product groups. A head of strategic planning said his responsibilities are “I am responsible for ensuring that we have a strategic plan, for making sure that it is put together and that we produce the plan and it is reviewed with the rest of the business . . . . and managing of people who actually do this type of planning.” Most of the respondents thought their responsibilities were comprehensive and could not think of additional areas of responsibility. However, one of the product strategic planners is taking on additional responsibility to research small telecommunication companies that can complement the product range. This is an unusual activity for a planner normally this remit goes to business development or product marketing. The formal processes to gain information include databases, and hiring external companies to do market analysis, in order to estimate market share and size and investment analyst. As one planner states the informal information comes from “conversations” with product primes,

account facing individuals and operational reviews. The use of a “straw man” to engage the stakeholders was a popular approach, ideas from conversations help to formulate ideas and then test these ideas with the stakeholders. Some of the topics that a planner (middle manager) covers with stakeholders “Then talking to stakeholders, getting their input on what is happening to the market and what they believe is happening to the network, how we should develop products to fit the new networks and then getting the factory to put out those products in a reasonable time frame to address the market and with a future view so that we will have we hope a jump on our competitors.” Other methods to capture formal information include conferences, seminars, and information sharing functions between different companies, research projects, benchmarking activities, web, trade shows and brochures. Information came from customers (good route for competitive information). Interestingly, all the respondents agree to the requirement for a network of contacts to obtain informal information. Many ideas came from the respondents on who should own the strategic planning process. The majority of the interviewees thought headquarters in North America should be the ultimate owners of the process, with local regional responsibility with the strategic planning groups in EMEA, with stakeholders from the product groups and the account groups having joint control. The CEO and the president of carrier solutions providers, EMEA should be sponsors of the strategic planning process and ultimately the strategic plan. A high profile sponsor has the following benefit “So it has a greater amount of profile and also that it is pushed within the organisation, so that all the stakeholders will be involved.” Another interesting answer to who should own the strategic planning process was that finance should own it. Finance is King! Apparently, planning is an important activity, but it is hidden beneath, finance rules. They base their reasoning on the fact that finance is good at manipulating numbers. This suggests that the person thinks strategic planning is only about financials. They say on why finance is the best function to manage the strategic planning process “The reason why I say this is that they know how it is done, how the different market shares and how the different revenues are dealt with in the industry and different accounting practices . . . ., and how you can manipulate figures . . . .” The president of carrier solutions service providers and his cabinet should signal changes to the strategic plan or other senior management teams. However, on changes to the strategic planning process the thought is that the stakeholders must be part of the decision-making process and no one person can decide. A head of planning says “I must step back to the last question a bit, there is a broader process, in that there must be some degree of uniformity across the larger organisation who should modify it. At that level there are two drivers; firstly, the users of it need to make sure it’s delivering results to them, what we need to avoid is the situation where we modify the process to do something that doesn’t provide useful results. So, kind of saying that lots of people ought to be involved in the modification.”

On the question of what value a planner brings to an organisation a few suggestions put forward include, planners help the organisation to achieve the strategy in place, facilitators of the strategic planning process and are capable to act as change agents. A senior planner states on the value they bring “The value is two-fold. One is as an integrator of the many plans but the second value is as being the market analysis prime. So to take a view of what is happening in the market and integrating that with what is happening in the company.” A head of planning states on the value he brings “It has a clearer view as to the direction in which the business should go and how that fits in the outside environment and what kind of things we should be aiming to do if we’re going to achieve those results and capitalise on those changes.” There is plenty of agreement on the value a planner brings to an organisation. Findings on the tools used by the planners are in the next paragraph. The type of tools in use within strategic planning groups include scenario planning, Boston Consulting Group matrix and excels spreadsheet. Networking (especially business development as they are a valuable source of information and analysis) and workshops to develop scenarios are tools that are in use. Methodologies to test consistency of data and information are ad-hoc. Different planners use different methodologies to analyse the same data this makes comparison difficult. The reason why different methodologies are used is that Corporate Planning, EMEA have not co-ordinated this process effectively. This makes the strategic planning process more arbitrary. On the use of methodologies a statement from a planner “The methodologies are pretty ad-hoc really, there’s clearly a view taken from the quantitative part of the plan on the basis of historical results. From a financial point of view, there’s some science behind it that clearly backs up the view as to what the market place is doing and that sort of thing.” The corporate planner (manager) thought that the Firm is moving away from tools. This is because the strategic plans no longer contain frameworks on markets e.g. BCG and SWOT. Powerpoint is a tool frequently mentioned. Powerpoint is a powerful way to express and display concepts and is the most common method of presentation in firm A. Tools mentioned by the Business Excellence group include process mapping, problem solving techniques and a metrics package. The planners tended to work with product managers, business development, finance marketing, marketing communications, product development and manufacturing. Involvement with human resource for all respondents is minimal. A comment from the corporate planner (manager) on human resources involvement “I would say that our involvement with HR was now minimal with the scaled-down strategic plan that has been encouraged by the corporation. There is a requirement forthey do get considered-but not part of the main strategic planning process. HR has access to useful information that they manage and would be valuable to the strategy process”

Another statement on the involvement with human resources from a planning manager is “HR very little-basically they just let me know if we have hired someone who has previously worked for a competitor so I can have a quick chat and that’s about it.” The respondents indicated that from the model of the role of a human resource professional only consultancy and leadership skills were important skills for a planner. Other attributes in the model support and training are not necessary skills for a planner. The reasons given for highlighting consultancy and leadership is summarised by a planner “Not much training. Clearly you can argue that the role of the planner certainly at presenting what has been done is a primary consulting role for the rest of the business. Certainly a leadership role in terms of saying this is what I think you should go and do and a supporting role in terms of providing the information of this is why we should go and do it. So I can see all those apart from the training one.” The attributes required by a planner to be successful in fast moving, complex and uncertain environments are derived from the survey of the literature, the interviewees and company documentary information. This model represents an approach to get the planner to look at the future and not just the existing market. A review of the literature on models used to represent strategic planners did not include the attribute of information from informal networks. To gather information informally implies strategic planners must be able to network effectively and be effective filters of information from the many different sources. In an uncertain and complex market, the main attributes are “proactiveness” and the willingness to take risks. The features and attributes in the Planners’ Model (Chart 1) are skills that come with experience and not many individuals are competent in all the skills in Chart 1. Therefore, strategic planners are likely to be experienced individuals in the organisation with potential for senior management roles or are already in a senior management role. Individuals with potential could be trained to become strategic planners, but the emphasis should be on the soft skills in the Planners Model. The advantage of using individuals with the skills identified and with senior management potential enables political processes to be built at the top of the organisation, thus ensuring strategic planning gets the attention of senior management. These are skills required by the “Entrepreneurial Detective” to redefine or create new markets. This model is an attempt to describe the attributes of a planner in the telecommunications industry and may be applicable to other markets that exhibit similar phenomena. Chart 1 Planners’ Model Feature 

Change mentality:

        

Risk (advice): Political skills: Horizon: Make things happen: Initiative: Adaptability: Organisation: Success factor: Information:

Attribute Create the future/future looking High Consensus taker/negotiator Futures Facilitator/high profile Proactive Flexible/learner Decentralise Innovation/time to market Informal network/critically assess information

Adapted from Abell, D., Managing with Dual Strategies: Mastering the Present, Preempting the Future. 1993:Free Press.

Conclusion The paper suggests that strategist must be flexible in nature and that their role is political and thus the ability to lead and be the voice of reason (Montgomery, 2012). However, this needs to be balanced with the ability to analyse and carryout research etc. There appears to be a dual nature to the skills of a strategist i.e. soft skills and hard skills. Interestingly, the executives in the research carried out by Montgomery (2012), was mentioned by 0.001%. The idea that strategist need to be entrepreneurial and ideas –driven links with the heuristic “simple rules” of strategy. Organisational routines are areas strategists can make a substantial difference to the organisation, because they work across the organisation. There are interaction and networking opportunities afforded to them that enables opportunity ranking, opportunity acceptance and opportunity execution (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011). Related to opportunity routines that a strategist can bring is that from the research strategists add value by clarifying and aggregation of plans. However, this requires experience as a strategist and thus suggest that strategist is experience in the industry or business. Strategy then becomes ideas which needs to be expressed and that it is not always about analysis and research. This was suggested by one of the respondents who suggested that Powerpoint is a powerful tool for expressing strategic ideas and opportunities. The respondent may be alluding to strategy making based on ideas. The analytical/mathematical approach appears to be less popular. Changes to the strategic plan is something that must happen at some time (Montgomery, 2012). Who should suggest the changes could be from the strategists, because of their unique position and role in the organisation, and the research appears to support this by suggesting the president from carrier solutions should signal changes to the strategic plan. Hopefully, the president of carrier solutions would consultant with the strategist before signalling the changes. At the very least the strategists are part of the “conversations” and thus part of the decision-making process. This implies the strategist is not just someone with hard skills, but needs to engage with senior management, which is again supported by Carter et al, (2011). To act as a strategist requires formal power in the organisational hierarchy and thus the ability to be a leader is important (Montgomery, 2012 and Carter et al, 2011). Mintzberg (1994) stereotype of a planner/strategist is not wholly appropriate for the 21st century.

Future Research The research is based on a case, but using professional strategist. Consequently, the issue of generalisability is an issue. However, the research is based on a multinational corporation and may not be appropriate for smaller firms. The environmental consequences will influence the role and attributes of a strategist. In stable environments the nature to be proactive etc. is less importance, but other characteristics may be more important. The paper also raises that the suggestion that the strategist should be experience, but what is the nature of this experience. What is the profile of this experience? Can organisational routines base on “simple rules” be developed for ethical reflection to safeguard the strategy process in the societal environment?

References Abell, D. (1993). Managing with Dual Strategies: Mastering the Present, Preempting the Future. Free Press. Andrews, K. R. (1971). The Concept of Corporate Strategy. Homewood, IL: Dow-Jones Irwin. Barnard, C. (1956). The Functions of the Executive. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Behman, M., Rasche, A. (2009). ‘Are Strategists from Mars and Ethicists from Venus?’ – Strategizing as Ethical Reflection. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 79 -88. Berry, F. S., and Wechsler, B. (1995). State Agencies’ Experience with Strategic Planning: Findings from a National Survey. Public Administration Review, 55,2, 159-172. Bingham, C. B, Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011). Rational Heuristics: The ‘Simple Rules’ that Strategists Learn from Process Experience. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 1464 – 1464. Bingham, C.B, Eisenhardt, K.M, Furr, N.R. (2007). What makes a process a capability? Heuristics, strategy, and effective capture of opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 1(1/2): 27–47. Bingham, C. B, Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011). Rational Heuristics: The ‘Simple Rules’ that Strategists Learn from Process Experience. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 1464 – 1464. Bonini, S. M. J., L. T. Mendonca, and J. M. Oppenheim. (2006). When Social Issues Become Strategic, McKinsey Quarterly 2, 20–31. Bowen, G. H. G., Strategy formulation and the role of the strategic planner in a fast moving technological environment. 2002: DBA thesis Hull University Business School. Brussee, F. C. (1995). Managing Change in the Health Care Industry. Sloan Management Review, 36,3, 98-101. Burnett, C. D., Yeskey, D. P., and Richardson, D. (1984). New Roles for Corporate Planners in the 1980s. The Journal of Business Strategy, 4,4, 64-68. Camillus, J. C., Sessions, R. T., and Webb, R. (1998). Visionary Action: Strategic Processes in Fast-cycle Environments. Strategy & Leadership, 26, 1, 20-24 Campbell, A. (1999). Tailored, not Benchmarked, a Fresh Look at Corporate Planning. Harvard Business Review, Mar-April, 41-50. Comeau-Kirschner, C. (1999). Strategic Planners’ Expanded Roles. Management Review, 88,6, 7. Carter, M., Grover, C., Bennett, J. (2011). The Emerging CIO Role of Business Technology Strategist. MIS Quarterly Executive, 10,1, 9 -29. Dameron, S., and Torset, C. (2014). The Discursive Construction of Strategists’ Subjectivities: Towards a Paradox Lens on Strategy. Journal of Management Studies 51,2, 291 -319. Davis, J.P, Eisenhardt, K.M, Bingham, C.B. (2009). Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Administrative Science Quarterly 54(3): 413–452. Dowling, G. R. (2004). Corporate Reputations: Should You Compete on Yours?, California Management Review. 46(3), 19–36. Feldman, M.S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science 11(6): 611–629. Floyd, S. W., and Wooldridge, B. (1994). Dinosaurs or Dynamos? Recognizing Middle Management’s Strategic Role. The Academy of Management Executive, 8,4, 47-55. Grant, R.M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue 17: 109–122. Hardy, C. and Philips, N. (2004). Discourse and power. In Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C. and Putnam, L. (Eds), Handbook of Organizational Discourse. London: Sage, 299–316.

Hardy, C. and Philips, N. (1997). Managing multiple identities: discourse, legitimacy and resources in the UK refugee system. Organization, 4, 159–85. Hosmer, L. T. (1994). Strategic Planning as if Ethics Mattered, Strategic Management Journal 15(Summer Special Issue), 17–34. Johnson, N. P. (1985). Management Focus: The Planner’s Role in Strategic Management. Managerial Planning, 33,6, 76-77. Levitt, B., and March, J.G. (1988). Organizational learning. American Review of Sociology 14: 319–340. Long, R. L. (1993). Changing Role of Corporate Planning. Executive Excellence, 10,6, 13-15. Montgomery, C. (2012). How strategists lead, Mckinsey Quarterly, 3, pp. 67-73, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 23 November 2015. Mintzberg, H. (1994). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb, 107-114. Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. New York: Harper and Row. Newell, A, Simon, H.A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Oswick, C., Keenoy, T. and Grant, D. (2000). ‘Discourse, organizations and organizing: concepts, objects and subjects’. Human Relations, 53, 1115–22. Quinn, R. E. (1988). Beyond Rational Management. Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of High Performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Reagans, R, Argote, L, and Brooks, D. (2005). Individual experience and experience working together: predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together. Management Science 51(6): 869–881. Rowden, R. W. (1999). Potential roles of the Human Resource Management Professional in the Strategic Planning Process. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 6,3, 22-28. Schuler, R. S. (1994). The Changing Role of Human Resource: Systematically Linking with the Business. Unpublished paper (cited in Human Resource Roles: Creating Value, not Rhetoric. Conner and Ulrich, 1996). Schuler, R.S. (1990). Repositioning the Human Resource Function: Transformation or Demise. Academy of Management Executive, 4,3 49-60. Spender, J.C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue 17: 45–62. Ulrich, D. (1994). HR Partnerships: From Rhetoric to Results. Strategic Partners for High Performance Work in America Institute, 45-61. Walker, J. W. (1994). Integrating the Human Resource Function with the Business. Unpublished paper (cited in Human Resource Roles: Creating Value, not Rhetoric. Conner and Ulrich, 1996). Whittington, R. (2003). The work of strategizing and organizing: for a practice perspective. Strategic Organization, 1, 117–25. Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29, 731–5. Wiley, C. (1992). A Comprehensive View of Roles for Human Resource Managers in Industry Today. Industry Management, Nov-Dec, 27-29.

Key terms: Strategist – a decision maker that has responsibility for strategy formulation and implementation of strategic plans. Ethics – moral principles that govern behaviour and actions.

Heuristic learning – the use of simple rules or routines to make decisions. Human resources – hiring of personnel with skills the firm requires for a given period. Planning – implementation and monitoring of plans to meet organisational goals.