One of the raging debates in organization study concerns the use of "templates" in qualitative research. This curated debate brings together many of the players in that debate, who make statements of position relative to the issues involved and trade accusations and counter-accusations about statements they have made that in their view have been misinterpreted or misconstrued. Overall, it is quite a lively debate that reveals positions, points of tension and grounds for disagreement. Denny Gioia wrote the triggering essay that prompted other players to weigh in with their personal and professional views.

Research Summary Ecosystems represent a key challenge for established firms, shifting their focus from products to system-level collaboration around integrated value propositions. This longitudinal case study of a machine manufacturer reports how an established firm created an ecosystem to enhance its focal product. Drawing on an activity system lens, we develop a model how firms can achieve fit around an integrated value proposition through mutual adaptation of product and ecosystem activities. This strategic transformation is supported by a shift towards collaborative organizational design. We elaborate on how firms can create non-generic complementarities between products and the emerging ecosystem through product adaptations, demonstrate the role of internal and external collaboration in developing ecosystem orchestration capabilities, and highlight data generation and processing as critical factors in realizing complementarities. Managerial Summary Digital ecosystems that enable new integrated value propositions pose a challenge for established firms, as these new activities often fundamentally conflict with the existing product business. Our case study of a machine manufacturer shows how a firm can leverage its product-focused activities to establish itself as an ecosystem leader through the mutual adaptation of its product and ecosystem activities. The focal firm modularized its products and enhanced their information-processing capacities while simultaneously embedding them in an integrative platform with open interfaces for partner components. The firm was thus able to realize data-driven complementarities between the platform and its components. Supporting the ecosystem-creation process required a shift of the organizational design towards collaboration, both internally and with partners.

In this article, we examine how scholars innovate research methods. Based on a review of published qualitative strategy and management research, we identify highly innovative academic papers, that is, papers that demonstrate substantial novelty in every part of the research process. We work through these papers in detail to demonstrate their novelty, highlighting concrete ways in which scholars have innovated three interconnected parts of the research process: data generation, data analysis, and presentation of findings. Based on our analysis, we develop a two-layered "iceberg" model of method innovation, which shows that important principles guide the innovative use of organizational research tools. These principles are engaging in holistic innovation, being excruciatingly clear in the presentation of methods, developing theory and method together, and being reflexive in innovating methods. Our model demystifies the largely implicit process of innovating research methods. We hope it serves to orient and encourage a more creative use of methods in future studies.

We use an in-depth, longitudinal case study of a machine manufacturer to explore how incumbents cope with emerging ecosystem-based competition. The existing literature explains the emergence of new ecosystems mainly as a disruptive process of technological change that challenges the existing, product-focused activities. Therefore, we know relatively little about how incumbents prevail when ecosystems profoundly transform entire sectors, but do not replace the product. We find that our focal incumbent created an ecosystem in a process of continuous change, where ecosystem creation followed a logic of strategic continuity, transforming and complementing the original product-focused business. We also show how the focal firm changed over multiple strategic cycles, engaging in in-house solutions and customized orchestration before successfully shifting to an ecosystem logic. Our main theoretical contribution is a process model of accumulated learning that recognizes historical embeddedness and continuous organizational learning as important, yet under-recognized drivers in ecosystem creation.

While qualitative work has a long tradition in the strategy field and has recently regained popularity, we have not paused to take stock of how such work offers contributions. We address this oversight with a review of qualitative studies of strategy published in five top-tier journals over an extended period of 15 years (2003–2017). In an attempt to organize the field, we develop an empirically grounded organizing framework. We identify 12 designs that are evident in the literature, or “designs-in-use” as we call them. Acknowledging important similarities and differences between the various approaches to qualitative strategy research (QSR), we group these designs into three “families” based on their philosophical orientation. We use these designs and families to identify trends in QSR. We then engage those trends to orient the future development of qualitative methods in the strategy field.

Die Fähigkeit zum Management strategischer Initiativen und Programme gehört heute zum festen Prozessrepertoire von vielen Unternehmen. Aufgrund der steigenden Wettbewerbsintensität und -dynamik in den meisten Branchen, aber auch aufgrund der hohen Erwartungen aktiver Investoren und Kapitalmärkte kann heute kaum ein Unternehmen darauf verzichten, strategische Themen fokussiert über eigenständige Initiativen und Programme zu adressieren. In diesem Beitrag ordnen wir diese Thematik in das Strategische Management ein und zeichnen nochmals nach, wie es zu unserer dazugehörigen Publikation im Jahre 2011 in der SGO-Schriftenreihe kam und welche Zielsetzung sich damit verband. Danach werfen wir einen heutigen Blick auf diese Thematik und unseren Kenntnisstand, um dann noch einen kurzen Ausblick zu wagen. So besteht bei dieser Thematik sicherlich weiterhin Innovationsbedarf, da man sich gerade angesichts solcher immer wiederkehrenden Programme und der gewachsenen Vielzahl von Initiativen fragt, wie nachhaltig diese sind und welche alternativen Wege hierfür denkbar wären.

This case study focuses on the creation and management of Daimler's mobility ecosystem in China. It analyzes how the German car manufacturer rolled out its ecosystem strategy in China and managed to establish a car-sharing platform with multiple partners. Daimler adapted its strategy from a station-based to free-floating car sharing and had to deal with different ecosystem partners to succeed over time. The case discusses the underlying business models, competitive strategies to respond to local rivals, and the impacts of future megatrends on Daimler's 'car2go' ecosystem. It ends with a discussion of future challenges for Daimler, including possible collaboration with BMW's 'ReachNow' and Geely's ride hailing service Cao Cao. The case is suited to discuss the benefits and challenges of ecosystem strategies from a strategic management angle, both for undergraduate and MBA classes.

In order to better understand how strategy scholars use qualitative methods to achieve theoretical contributions we review empirical papers published in the top strategy and management journals over the past fifteen years. We find evidence of standardization, resulting in an increased focus on the technical mastery of established research designs. Technical mastery, however, is a necessary but not sufficient condition for publication in top-tier journals. Papers also demonstrate the skillful adaptation and innovation of research methods, something we call ‘creative crafting’. In line with these findings, we present our paper in two parts. First, we review the empirical qualitative strategy literature in order to map established approaches and show trends in the use of qualitative designs. Second, we review practices of methodological innovation to highlight how authors creatively craft methods to move beyond established designs, thereby maximizing the value of their contribution.

This paper uses a comparative case study of six multichannel retailers' adoption of new cross-channel solutions to explore how top managers empower their middle managers in top-down strategic renewal. Although there is significant research on how top managers maintain control over emergent strategy, we still have a relatively limited understanding of how top-managers empower their mid-levels in deliberate strategic change. Our study produces two empirical findings that somewhat contrast recent research: (i) While current studies recognize the limits to top managers' direct presence at middle levels in dynamic change settings and argue for an active role of middle managers, we find that top managers in firms with relative success in top-driven renewal personally engage with middle managers on a frequent basis, direct and evaluate their change activities through guiding mechanisms, and ensure accessibility to provide feedback to mid-levels. (ii) While prior research shows that middle management empowerment can result from top managers' symbolic invitation to play a broader strategic role, top managers in our successful cases revived hierarchies to maintain an active leadership function in the face of major change which, in turn, became a resource for middle management during deliberate strategic change. In contrast, in less successful cases, top managers refrained from playing an active leadership function, thereby refuting hierarchical relationships. Most fundamentally, we complement the recent focus on symbolic power as a critical means for empowering mid-levels in top-down change by showing how building relational power in the form of functioning hierarchies may be another effective way of fostering middle managers' contributions in deliberate strategic change.

Values and processes of evaluation affect the exploration of new, potentially disruptive business models. This paper seeks to advance the understanding of how firms actually manage tensions between new and existing values in the effort to develop new business models. We propose that value tensions, originating in the business model’s institutional field, deter activities at the company’s core, while inspiring activities in the periphery. Over time, tensions re-surface as business models try to connect to complementary core resources, requiring the resolution of value tensions by integrating values or re-evaluating the business model. Our model is based on an in-depth, participatory case study of two episodes of new business model development (for e-Business and BoP) in a leading multinational financial service company.

While qualitative work is becoming increasingly popular within the strategy field, we have not paused to take stock of the contributions it offers and how it offers them. We address this oversight with a review of qualitative studies of strategy published in four top-tier journals over the past decade (2001-2010). We use the review to organize qualitative studies in strategy into ten design types. This enables us to develop an empirically grounded framework capturing ‘designs-in-use’ that correspond to the actual research practice of strategy scholars, rather than ‘ideal types’ that ignore the tendency of scholars to amalgamate designs in an eclectic fashion. Our framework captures the plurality of qualitative strategy research, which is a source of generative capacity and enables it to make unique, rich theoretical contributions. After reviewing some current trends in the field, we conclude our paper by offering suggestions for how qualitative methods can support both the creative pluralism and coherent distinctiveness of strategy research and theory.

Strategische Initiativen und Programme sind heute ein etabliertes Instrument der Unternehmensfuhrung. Auf Ergebnissicherungsprogramme, Change-Programme oder Wachstumsinitiativen kann kaum eine Organisation verzichten. Strategische Initiativen und Programme werden vielfach lanciert. Wir wissen aber noch wenig daruber, ob und wie sie erfolgreich gemanagt werden. Unternehmen stellen aus gutem Grund in ihrer Berichterstattung vor allem die Erfolge bei Initiativen und Programmen heraus. Befragungen von Managern zeichnen jedoch ein weniger optimistisches Bild. Auch wenn die einzelnen Studien variieren und sich der tatsachliche Effekt strategischer Initiativen und Programme oft schwer exakt messen lasst, deuten alle Studien auf eine niedrige Erfolgsquote hin. Beispielsweise wurden in einer Studie der Strategieberatung McKinsey & Co. nur etwa 30% der strategischen Initiativen als vollumfanglich oder zumindest im wesentlichen Teilen erfolgreich bewertet [1]. Andererseits zeigen einige Unternehmen, dass ein professioneller Einsatz strategischer Initiativen und Programme zu nachhaltigen Wettbewerbsvorteilen fuhren kann. Ein aktuelles Beispiel ist die Deutsche Lufthansa AG, die nicht zuletzt durch ihre strategischen Programme zum fuhrenden Luftfahrtkonzern in Europa wurde.

In der Praxis konzentriert man sich zumeist darauf, die einzelnen strategischen Initiativen und Programme erfolgreich umzusetzen. Die hohe Wettbewerbsdynamik und entsprechend hohe Taktfrequenz strategischer Veränderungen erlauben es kaum, sich mit Fragen der langfristigen Prozessgestaltung und Organisationsentwicklung zu befassen. Es gibt jedoch einige Unternehmen, die ihr Management strategischer Initiativen und Programme als eigenständigen Strategieprozess systematisch aufbauen und kontinuierlich weiterentwickeln. Tatsächlich bestätigt die empirische Forschung, dass überlegene Strategieprozesse eine Quelle nachhaltiger Wettbewerbsvorteile sein können [1]. Beispielsweise erreichte General Electric über viele Jahre auch deshalb eine überdurchschnittliche Kapitalmarkt-Performance, weil man die strategischen Programme sehr professionell managte und sich immer wieder durch Managementinnovationen in diesem Bereich differenzierte. Auch die langjährige Erfolgsgeschichte von Intel wird der Tatsache zugeschrieben, dass das Unternehmen nicht starr an etablierten Strategieprozessen festhielt, sondern immer wieder neue Prozessdesigns entwickelte und so in der Lage war, sich an die schnell ändernden Branchenbedingungen anzupassen [2].

Konzerninitiativen sind ein wichtiges Instrument des Corporate Managements. Dieser Beitrag informiert uber das Management von Initiativen aus Sicht der Konzernzentrale eines diversifizierten Unternehmens. Die Autoren arbeiten konzeptionelle Grundlagen heraus und geben einen Uberblick uber empirische Ergebnisse. Sie grenzen Initiativen systematisch von Projekten ab, skizzieren das zugrunde liegende evolutionare Strategieverstandnis und stellen anhand von vier Handlungsfeldern wesentliche Herausforderungen und Praktiken des Initiative-Managements vor.

During the past 25 years, a substantial amount of research in strategic management has focused on the contributions of middle management. Although useful, the research is characterized by considerable diversity in terms of focal constructs and relationships. The purpose of this review is to organize this research and identify important constructs, relationships, and contributions. The review serves not only to catalog the state of the art and accumulate knowledge; it also facilitates the critique necessary for charting directions and enhancing the cumulative nature of future research.