Second language listening strategy research: methodological challenges and perspectives

This paper explores methodological issues related to research into second language listening strategies. We argue that a number of central questions regarding research methodology in this line of enquiry are underexamined, and we engage in the discussion of three key methodological questions: (1) To what extent is a verbal report a valid and reliable way of eliciting information about strategies? (2) Should we control for learners' level of linguistic knowledge when examining their listening strategy use? and (3) What are the problems surrounding the analysis of data gained through verbal reports? We discuss each of these three methodological issues within the framework of a research project investigating listening strategies deployed by learners of French in secondary schools in England. Implications from these findings for future research are discussed.

Using multilevel modeling and mixed methods to make theoretical progress in microfoundations for strategy research

The microfoundations research agenda presents an expanded theoretical perspective because it considers individuals, their characteristics, and their interactions as relevant variables to help us understand firm-level strategic issues. However, microfoundations empirical research faces unique challenges because processes take place at different levels of analysis and these multilevel processes must be considered simultaneously. We describe multilevel modeling and mixed methods as methodological approaches whose use will allow for theoretical advancements. We describe key issues regarding the use of these two types of methods and, more importantly, discuss pressing substantive questions and topics that can be addressed with each of these methodological approaches with the goal of making theoretical advancements regarding the microfoundations research agenda and strategic management studies in general.

A strategy-as-practice approach to strategy research and education

This conclusion to the Dialog proposes a strategy-as-practice based approach to bringing strategy research and education closer to practice. Strategy-as-practice rejects the choice, proposed in the previous articles, between theory and practice. The authors argue for strategy research based rigorously on sociological theories of practice. Such research complements the parsimony and generalizability of economics-driven theory, extending strategy research to incorporate the messy realities of doing strategy in practice, with a view to developing theory that is high in accuracy. The authors suggest that practice-based research can also inform strategy teaching by providing students with rich case studies of strategy work as actually practiced, analyzed through such sociological lenses as ethnomethodology, dramaturgy, and institutional theory. Strategy-as-practice research does not aim to give students parsimonious models for analysis or expose them to cases of best practice but rather to help them develop practical wisdom through a better understanding of strategy in practice.

Directions for a troubled discipline:strategy research, teaching and practice introduction to the dialog

This Dialog responds to a growing debate about the relevance of business schools generally and the value of strategy theory and research for strategic management practice. The authors propose that academic theory and management practice can be better connected through management education. The academy researches practice, derives theory, and returns it to practice through the development of teaching materials and the teaching of current and future practitioners. The three articles in this Dialog examine how different approaches to strategy research inform strategy teaching and its application to practice. Joseph Bower explains the rise of business policy and the process research approach that informed that teaching tradition at Harvard Business School. Robert Grant responds by emphasizing the economic theory underpinnings of strategic management research and its impact on teaching. Paula Jarzabkowski and Richard Whittington conclude by proposing a strategyas-practice perspective and suggesting ways to better incorporate strategy-as-practice research into strategy teaching.

Interpretation of time and future in strategy research

Time is in constant motion: the present, the future and the past, although they are not concepts having a fixed meaning, they are present in everyday life both at the conscious and the unconscious levels. The author’s intention in this paper is to grasp the relationship of companies to time and to the future in the mature and nascent states of their life cycles. As discussed in this paper, this relationship may appear with little reflection in the form of assumptions in the eyes of strategy researchers and practitioners. At first the interrelatedness of theory and practice is discussed in order to focus on the role of scholars and practitioners in creating theory and putting it to practice or vice versa. This general introduction will lay the ground for the study of interpretations of the future and time from the perspective of strategy research and strategy practice, respectively.

Enhancing research-policy linkages in Australian housing: an options paper

A key ingredient in the successful delivery of a policy relevant research program is a process of engagement between the research and policy communities, centred on the conduct, dissemination and use of research. The research recommends that AHURI continue to build and extend its 'engagement strategy' to further realise the benefits of a research program relevant to policy.

Strategy and Circumstance: the Response of American Firms to Japanese Competition in Semiconductors, 1980-1995

The transistor was an American invention, and American firms led the world in semiconductor production and innovation for the first three decades of that industry's existence. In the 1980s, however, Japanese producers began to challenge American dominance. Shrill cries arose from the literature of public policy, warning that the American semiconductor industry would soon share the fate of the lamented American consumer electronics business. Few dissented from the implications: the only hope for salvation would be to adopt Japanese-style public policies and imitate the kinds of capabilities Japanese firms possessed. But the predicted extinction never occurred. Instead, American firms surged back during the 1990s, and it now seems the Japanese who are embattled. This striking American turnaround has gone largely unremarked upon in the public policy literature. And even scholarship in strategic management, which thrives on stories of success instead of stories of failure, has been comparatively silent. Drawing on a more thorough economic history of the worldwide semiconductor industry (Langlois and Steinmueller 1999), this essay attempts to collect some of the lessons for strategy research of the American resurgence. We argue that, although some of the American response did consist in changing or augmenting capabilities, most of the renewed American success is in fact the result not of imitating superior Japanese capabilities but rather of taking good advantage of a set of capabilities developed in the heyday of American dominance. Serendipity played at least as important a role as did strategy.

Microfoundations of strategic management: Toward micro–macro research in the resource-based theory

Over the last few years, a new stream of research has emerged in the field of strategic management which focuses on the analysis of its microfoundations. This line of research analyzes strategic topics examining their foundations rooted in individual actions and interactions. The main purpose of this paper is to examine this emerging literature of microfoundations, indicating its usefulness and main characteristics. Through a systematic literature review, this paper contributes to the field by identifying the main areas studied, the benefits and potential of this approach, and some limitations and criticisms. Moreover, the paper studies how the integration of micro and macro aspects in strategy research may be carried out, examining several works that use a multilevel approach. Some methodological approaches that may help to effect this integration are indicated. These aspects will be analyzed in relation to the resource-based theory.

Actionable strategy knowledge:a practice perspective

Increasingly the body of knowledge derived from strategy theory has been criticized because it is not actionable in practice, particularly under the conditions of a knowledge economy. Since strategic management is an applied discipline this is a serious criticism. However, we argue that the theory-practice question is too simple. Accordingly, this paper expands this question by outlining first the theoretical criteria under which strategy theory is not actionable, and then outlines an alternative perspective on strategy knowledge in action, based upon a practice epistemology. The paper is in three sections. The first section explains two contextual conditions which impact upon strategy theory within a knowledge economy, environmental velocity and knowledge intensity. The impact of these contextual conditions upon the application of four different streams of strategy theory is examined. The second section suggests that the theoretical validity of these contextual conditions breaks down when we consider the knowledge artifacts, such as strategy tools and frameworks, which arise from strategy research. The third section proposes a practice epistemology for analyzing strategy knowledge in action that stands in contrast to more traditional arguments about actionable knowledge. From a practice perspective, strategy knowledge is argues to be actionable as part of the everyday activities of strategizing. © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Taking "strategy-as-practice" across the Atlantic

An increasingly large group of scholars in Europe have begun to take a practice lens to understanding problems of strategy making in organizations. Strategy-as-practice research is premised on the notion that all social life is constituted within practices, and that practices and practitioners are essential subjects of study. Applying this lens to strategy foregrounds the mundane, everyday work involved in doing strategy. In doing so, it expands our definition of the salient outcomes to be studied in strategic management and provides new perspectives on the mechanisms for producing such outcomes. As strategy-as-practice scholars, we have been puzzled about how much more slowly the ideas in this burgeoning field have traveled from their home in Europe to the United States than have other ideas in strategic management traveled from the United States to Europe. In this chapter, we contribute some thoughts about the development of the strategy-as-practice field and its travels in academia.

The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy

This article addresses the recent turn in strategy research to practice-based theorizing. Based on a data set of 51 meeting observations, the article examines how strategy meetings are involved in either stabilizing existing strategic orientations or proposing variations that cumulatively generate change in strategic orientations. Eleven significant structuring characteristics of strategy meetings are identified and examined with regard to their potential for stabilizing or destabilizing existing strategic orientations. Based on a taxonomy of meeting structures, we explain three typical evolutionary paths through which variations emerge, are maintained and developed, and are selected or de-selected. The findings make four main contributions. First, they contribute to the literature on strategy-as-practice by explaining how the practice of meetings is related to consequential strategic outcomes. Second, they contribute to the literature on organizational becoming by demonstrating the role of meetings in shaping stability and change. Third, they extend and elaborate the concept of meetings as strategic episodes. Fourth, they contribute to the literature on garbage can models of strategy-making.