Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T20:37:05.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Business Strategy

A Historical Review of Swedish Strategy Research and the Rigor-Relevance Gap

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2024

Thomas Kalling  and
Lars Bengtsson
Thomas Kalling
Affiliation:
Lunds Universitet, Sweden
Lars Bengtsson
Affiliation:
Lunds Universitet, Sweden

Summary

There are many explanations for the so-called rigor-relevance gap in academic research on strategic management. This Element reviews the existing literature on the matter and argues that it must go beyond the typical explanations of knowledge and language differences and look at more fundamental, societal, and cultural explanations. The empirical focus of this Element is the history and possible particularities of strategic management research in Sweden where the authors show how almost 300 years of relevance-centered research have undergone significant changes over the last 30 years, and that the historical development is based very much on societal pressure, academic culture and shifting perspectives on the role of academic research. The authors conclude by offering a couple of examples of how Swedish research, close to its traditional approaches, still can contribute to relevance and thus help balance the rigor-relevance divide.
Get access

Keywords

strategySwedenrigourrelevanceindustry–academy collaboration
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Business Strategy
Online ISBN: 9781108648158
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 04 April 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, N., Elmquist, M., & Norrgren, F. (2009). The challenge of managing boundary-spanning research activities: experiences from the Swedish context. Research Policy, 38(7), 1136–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler, N., Shani, R., & Styhre, A. (eds.) (2004). Collaborative Research in Organisations: Foundations for Learning, Change and Theoretical Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agarwal, R., & Hoetker, G. (2007) A Faustian bargain? The growth of management and the relationship with related disciplines. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1304–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahlmann, H., & Rhenman, E. (1964). Rationaliseringsarbete. Organisation och Planering. En systematik och nyare teori tillämpad på en specialistavdelnings organisationsproblem [Rationalisation Work – Organisation and Planning: A Systematics and Recent Theory Applied to a Specialist Department’s Organizaitonal Problem]. Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Andersson, L. (2013). Pricing capability development and its antecedents. Doctoral thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
Andersson, U., & Forsgren, M. (1996). Subsidiary embeddedness and control in the multinational corporation. International Business Review, 5(5), 487–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. (2001). Subsidiary embeddedness and competence development in MNCs: a multi-level analysis. Organization Studies, 22(6), 1013–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. (2002). The strategic impact of external networks: subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 979–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrésen, A.-M., Kalling, T., & Wikström, K. (2012). The Rise and Fall of the Scandinavian Institutes for Administrative Research (SIAR): Lessons Learned from a Nordic Management Consulting Pioneer. Lund: Lund Business Press.Google Scholar
Andrews, K., Learned, E., Christensen, R., & Guth, W. (1965). Business Policy: Texts and Cases. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
Ansoff, I. (1965). Corporate Strategy: An Analytical Approach to Business Policy for Growth and Expansion. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Ashby, W. R. (1956). The effect of experience on a determinate dynamic system. Behavioral Science, 1(1), 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augier, M., & March, J. G. (2007). The pursuit of relevance in management education. California Management Review, 49(3), 128–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldridge, D. C., Floyd, S. W., & Markóczy, L. (2004). Are managers from Mars and academicians from Venus? Toward an understanding of academic quality and practical relevance. Strategic Management Journal, 25(11), 1063–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, C. (1938). The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartunek, J. M. (2007). Academic-practitioner collaboration need not require joint or relevant research: toward a relational scholarship of integration. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1323–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. (2010). The construction of ‘implications for practice’: what’s in them and what might they offer? Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9(1), 100–17.Google Scholar
Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. (2014). Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike: the paradoxes of academic-practitioner relationships. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, L. (1993). Intern diversifiering som strategisk process [Internal diversification as a strategic process]. Doctoral thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
Bengtsson, L. (2000). Corporate strategy in a small open economy: reducing product diversification while increasing international diversification. European Management Journal, 18(4), 444–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, L. (2004). Explaining born globals: an organisational learning perspective on the internationalisation process. International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, 1(1), 28–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, L., Elg, U., & Lind, J.-I. (1997). Bridging the transatlantic publishing gap: how North American reviewers evaluate European idiographic research. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13(4), 473–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, M., & Kock, S. (2000). ‘Coopetition’ in business networks: to cooperate and compete simultaneously. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(5), 411–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, M., & Kock, S. (2014). Coopetition: quo vadis? Past accomplishments and future challenges. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 180–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, L., Lakemond, N., Lazarotti, V., et al. (2015). Open to a select few? Matching partners and knowledge content for open innovation performance. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(1), 72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, M., & Sölvell, Ö. (2004). Climate of competition, clusters and innovative performance. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 20(3), 225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennis, W. G., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools have lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83(5), 96–104.Google Scholar
Berch, A. (1749). Tal om den proportion, som de studerande ärfordra til de ledige beställningar i riket (Speech about the skill sets necessary for available positions in government]. Speech given to students in Uppsala. Stockholm: Printed by L. Salvius (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Bergek, A., Berggren, C., Magnusson, M., & Hobday, M. (2013). Technological discontinuities and the challenger for incumbent firms: destruction, disruption or creative accumulation? Research Policy, 42, 1210–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergkvist, T. (2017). På jakt bland forskare och managementkonsulter [Looking for Researchers and Management Consultants]. Rapport VR 2017:04. Stockholm: Vinnova (Verket för Innovationssystem [Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems]).Google Scholar
Birkinshaw, J., Lecuona, R., & Barwise, P. (2016). The relevance gap in business school research: which academic papers are cited in managerial bridge journals? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(4), 686–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björk, J., & Magnusson, M. (2009). Where do good innovation ideas come from? Exploring the influence of network connectivity on innovation idea quality. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(6), 662–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bower, J. L. (1970). Planning within the firm. American Economic Review, 60(2), 186–94.Google Scholar
Bruzelius, L., & Skärvad, P.-H. (1974). Integrerad administrationslära [Integrated Administration Theory]. Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
Burgelman, R. A. (1983). Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management: Insights from a process study. Management Science, 29(12), 1349–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgelman, R. A. (1988). Strategy making as a social learning process: The case of internal corporate venturing. Interfaces, 18(3), 74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. (1951). Executive Behavior. Stockholm: Strömbergs.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. (1964). Development Economics and Administration. Stockholm: Svenska Bokförlaget.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. (1966). International Business Research. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. (1975). How Foreign Is Foreign Trade? A Problem in International Business Research. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.Google Scholar
Carlsson, R. H. (ed.) (2000). SIAR – Strategier för att tjäna pengar [SIAR – Strategies to Make Money]. Stockholm: Ekerlids Förlag.Google Scholar
Carlsson, R. H. (2013). Tidig med allt. Alltid före sin tid. Biografi över Eric Rhenman [Early With Everything. Always Ahead of His Time. Biography of Eric Rhenman]. Stockholm: Ekerlids Förlag.Google Scholar
Chakravarthy, B. S., & Doz, Y. (1992). Strategy process research: focusing on corporate self‐renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1), 5–14.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Empire. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1977). The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1990). Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, M. W. (1936). Sweden: The Middle Way. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Collin, S. O., Johansson, U., Svensson, K., & Ulvenblad, P. O. (1996). Market segmentation in scientific publications: research patterns in American vs European management journals. British Journal of Management, 7(2), 141–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Daft, R. L., & Lewin, A. Y. (2008). Perspective – rigor and relevance in organization studies: idea migration and academic journal evolution. Organization Science, 19(1), 177–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlqvist, K., Eriksson, L., & Fritzell, A. (2019). Mål- och resultatstyrning i staten – vad vi sett och insett: med fokus på universitets- och högskolepolitik 1988–1995 inom utbildningsdepartementet [Objectives- and Output-Based Control in the State – What We Have Seen and Realised: With a Focus on University and Higher Education Policy 1988–1995 within the Minstry of Education]. Stockholm: Kungliga Musikhögskolan.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstat, R. A., Beer, M., Foote, N., Fredberg, T., & Norrgren, F. (2008). The uncompromising leader. Harvard Business Review, 86(7–8), 50–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Enberg, C., Lindkvist, L., & Tell, F. (2006). Exploring the dynamics of knowledge integration: acting and interacting in project teams. Management Learning, 37(2), 143–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eneroth, K. (1997). Strategi och kompetensdynamik: en studie i Axis Communications [Strategy and competence dynamics: a study in Axis Communications]. PhD thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
Engwall, L. (1986). Mercury meets Minerva. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies, 3(2), 121–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engwall, L. (2020). Fenomenet Företagsekonomi [The Phenomenon of Business Administration]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Engwall, L., Kipping, M., & Üsdiken, B. (2010). Public science systems, higher education and the trajectory of academic disciplines: business studies in the United States and Europe. In Whitley, R., Glaser, J. & Engwall, L. (eds.), Reconfiguring Knowledge Production: Changing Authority Relationships in the Sciences and the Consequences for Intellectual Innovation, 325–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Foote, N., Eisenstat, R., & Fredberg, T. (2011). The higher ambition leader. Harvard Business Review, 89(9), 94–105.Google Scholar
Forsgren, M. (2002). The concept of learning in the Uppsala internationalization process model: a critical review. International Business Review, 11(3), 257–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsgren, M. (2016). A note on the revisited Uppsala internationalization process model: the implications of business networks and entrepreneurship. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(9), 1135–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsgren, M. (2017). Theories of the Multinational Firm: A Multidimensional Creature in the Global Economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Stakeholder Management: Framework and Philosophy. Mansfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. (1970). A Friedman doctrine: the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 13(1970), 32–3.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Gibbons, M., Limoges, L., Nowotny, H., Schwartman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Gibe, J. (2007). The microstructure of collaborative e-business capability. PhD thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
Gioia, D. (2022). On the road to hell: why academia is viewed as irrelevant to practicing managers. Academy of Management Discoveries, 8(2), 174–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. E. (1959). Higher Education for Business. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granstrand, O. (2000). The shift towards intellectual capitalism: the role of infocom technologies. Research Policy, 29(9), 1061–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimmer-Solem, E. (2003). The Rise of Historical Economics and Social Reform in Germany, 1864–1894. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Håkansson, H., & Snehota, I. (1995). Developing Relationships in Business Networks. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Håkansson, H., & Snehota, I. (1998). The burden of relationships or who’s next. In Naude, P. & Turnbull, P. W. (eds.), Network Dynamics in International Marketing, 16–25. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Hallberg, N. (2008). Pricing capability and its strategic dimensions. PhD thesis. School of Economics and Management, Lund University.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C. (1994). What if the academy actually mattered? Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, B. (1971). On man-computer interaction in organizational decision-making: a behavioral approach. PhD thesis. Gothenburg University.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B. (ed.) (1994). Imaginära organisationer [Imaginary Organisations]. Malmö: Liber-Hermod.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B., Edström, A., Müller, W., & Wilpert, B. (1975). The Impact of Computer Technology on Organizational Power Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, B., & Ericson, A. (1979). Insiktströghet och manövertröghet i organisationers omorientering [Insight Inertia and Manoevre Inertia in Organisations’ Reorientation]. Research Report. Gothenburg University.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B., & Jönsson, S. (1977). Strategy formulation as a discontinuous process. International Studies of Management and Organization, 7(2), 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, B., & Jönsson, S. (1978). Designing semi-confusing information systems for organizations in changing environments. In Emmanuel, C., Otley, D. & Merchant, K. (eds.), Readings in Accounting for Management Control, 149–73. Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B., & Jönsson, S. (1989). Between myth and action. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 5(3), 177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, B. L., Nystrom, P. C., & Starbuck, W. H. (1976). Camping on seesaws: prescriptions for a self-designing organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 41–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, B., Sjöberg, S., & Targama, A. (1972). Styrsystem och företagsdemokrati [Management Systems and Corporate Democracy]. Gothenburg: Centraltryck.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B., & Sjöstrand, S. E. (1979). Från företagskriser till industripolitik [From Corporate Crises to Industrial Politics]. Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
Hedlund, G. (1976). Det multinationella företaget, nationalstaten och fackföreningarna: en diskussion av utgångspunkter och metoder [The Multinational Corporation, the State and the Trade Unions: A Discussion of Approaches and Methods]. Stockholm: Ekonomiska Forskningsinstitutet vid Handelshögskolan (EFI) [Economic Research Institutes at the School of Economics].Google Scholar
Hedlund, G. (1986). The hypermodern MNC – a heterarchy? Human Resource Management, 25(1), 9–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedlund, G. (1994). A model of knowledge management and the N‐form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S2), 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedlund, G., & Nonaka, I. (1993). Models of knowledge management in the West and Japan. In Lorange, P., Chakravarthy, B., Ross, J. & Van de Ven, A. (eds.), Implementing Strategic Processes: Change, Learning, and Cooperation, 117–44. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hellgren, B., & Löwstedt, J. (1997). Tankens företag: kognitiva kartor och meningsskapande processer i organisationer [The Business of Thought: Cognitive Maps and Sense-Making Processes in Organisations]. Stockholm: Nerenius & Santérus.Google Scholar
Hellgren, B., & Löwstedt, J. (1998). Agency and organization: a social theory approach to cognition. In Eden, C. & Spender, J.-C. (eds.), Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Theory, Methods and Research, 40–57. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hellgren, B., & Melin, L. (1993). The role of strategists’ ways-of-thinking in strategic change processes. In Hendry, J., Johnson, G. with Newton, J. (eds.), Strategic Thinking: Leadership and the Management of Change, 47–68. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Högskoleverket [Swedish Higher Education Agency]. (2006). Rapport [Report] 2006:3 R. Högre utbildning och forskning 1945–2005. En översikt [Higher Education and Research 1945–2005: An Overview]. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
Holmqvist, M. (2018). Handels. Maktelitens skola [The Stockholm School of Economics: The School of the Power Elite]. Stockholm: Atlantis.Google Scholar
Hope, J., & Fraser, R. (2003). New ways of setting rewards: the beyond budgeting model. California Management Review, 45(4), 104–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, M., Hellström, T., Adler, N., & Norrgren, F. (2000). From sponsorship to partnership in academy‐industry relations. R&D Management, 30(3), 255–62.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1990). The mechanism of internationalisation. International Marketing Review, 7(4), 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (2009). The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: from liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9), 1411–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as Practice: Research Directions and Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: towards an activity‐based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalling, T. (1999). Gaining competitive advantage through information technology: a resource-based approach to the creation and employment of strategic IT resources. PhD thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
Khurana, R. (2007). From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transition of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kieser, A., & Leiner, L. (2009). Why the rigour–relevance gap in management research is unbridgeable. Journal of Management Studies, 46(3), 516–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakemond, N., Bengtsson, L., Keld Laursen, K., & Tell, F. (2016). Match and manage: the use of knowledge matching and project management to integrate knowledge in collaborative inbound open innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 25(2), 333–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, R. (1993). Case survey methodology: quantitative analysis of patterns across case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1515–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, R., Bengtsson, L., Henriksson, K., & Sparks, J. (1998). The interorganizational learning dilemma: collective knowledge development in strategic alliances. Organization Science, 9(3), 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, R., & Finkelstein, S. (1999). Integrating strategic, organizational, and human resource perspectives on mergers and acquisitions: a case survey of synergy realization. Organization Science, 10(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latham, G. P. (2019). Perspectives of a practitioner-scientist on organizational psychology/organizational behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawler, E. E. III, & Benson, G. S. (2022). The practitioner-academic gap: a view from the middle. Human Resource Management Review, 32(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, J.-I. (1993). Kommuner som marknadsskapare. Systemskifte i praktik och teori [Municipalities as Market Makers: System Change in Practice and Theory]. Stockholm: Kommunförbundet FoU-råd [Association of Municipalities R&D Council].Google Scholar
Lind, J.-I., & Rhenman, E. (1989). The SIAR school of strategic management. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 5(3), 167–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, R. R. (1985). Business education in Germany: past systems and current practice. Business History Review, 59(2), 232–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnusson, L. (1987). Mercantilism and ‘reform’ mercantilism: the rise of economic discourse in Sweden during the eighteenth century. History of Political Economy, 19(3), 415–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnusson, L. (1992). Economics and the public interest: the emergence of economics as an academic subject during the 18th century. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94(1), S249–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
McLaren, P. G. (2019). Stop blaming Gordon and Howell: unpacking the complex history behind the research-based model of education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 18(1), 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melin, L. (1977). Strategisk inköpsverksamhet – organisation och interaktion [Strategic purchasing operations – organisation and interaction]. PhD thesis. Linköping University.Google Scholar
Melin, L. (1985). Strategies in managing turnaround. Long Range Planning, 18(1), 80–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melin, L. (1987). The field-of-force metaphor: a study in industrial change. International Studies of Management & Organization, 17(1), 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melin, L. (1989). The field-of-force metaphor. Advances in International Marketing, 3(1), 161–79.Google Scholar
Melin, L. (1992). Internationalization as a strategy process. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S2), 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D., & Mintzberg, H. (1974). Strategy formulation in context: some tentative models. Working paper. McGill University.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1977). Strategy formulation as a historical process. International Studies of Management & Organization, 7(2), 28–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1987). The strategy concept I: five Ps for strategy. California Management Review, 30(1), 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monsen, N. (2002). The case for cameral accounting. Financial Accountability & Management, 18(1), 39–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muhic, M., & Bengtsson, L. (2021). Dynamic capabilities triggered by cloud sourcing: a stage-based model of business model innovation. Review of Managerial Science, 15(1), 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Normann, R. (1969). Variation och omorientering. En studie av innovationsförmåga [Variation and Reorientation: A Study of Innovativeness]. Stockholm: SIAR.Google Scholar
Normann, R. (1971). Organisational innovativeness: product variation and reorientation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(2), 203–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Normann, R. (1975). Skapande företagsledning [Creative Corporate Management]. Stockholm: Aldus.Google Scholar
Normann, R. (1976). Management and Statesmanship. Stockholm: SIAR.Google Scholar
Normann, R. (1984). Service Management: Stategy and Leadership in Service Business. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Normann, R. (1989). Invadörernas dans – eller den oväntade konkurrensen [The Dance of the Invaders – or the Unexpected Competition]. Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
Normann, R. (2001). Reframing Business: When the Map Changes the Landscape. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Normann, R., & Ramirez, R. (1993). From value chain to value constellation: designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review, 71(4), 65–77.Google ScholarPubMed
Pehrsson, A. (2004). Strategy competence: a successful approach to international market entry. Management Decision, 42(6), 758–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pehrsson, A. (2006). Business relatedness and performance: a study of managerial perceptions. Strategic Management Journal, 27(3), 265–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pehrsson, A. (2008). Strategy antecedents of modes of entry into foreign markets. Journal of Business Research, 61(2), 132–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pehrsson, A. (2009). Barriers to entry and market strategy: a literature review and a proposed model. European Business Review, 21(1), 64–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pehrsson, A. (2016). Firm’s strategic orientation, market context, and performance: literature review and opportunities for international strategy research. European Business Review, 28(4), 378–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penrose, E. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pierson, F. C. (1959). The Education of American Businessmen: Ford Foundation Report. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, M. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Porter, M. (1985). Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Porter, M. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, M. E., & Sölvell, Ö. (1998). The role of geography in the process of innovation and the sustainable competitive advantage of firms. In Chandler, A. D., Hagström, P. & Sölvell, Ö. (eds.), The Dynamic Firm: The Role of Technology, Strategy, Organisations and Regions, 440–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.Google Scholar
Prencipe, A., & Tell, F. (2001). Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms. Research Policy, 30(9), 1373–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pufendorf, S. von. ([1688]/1934). De Jure Naturae et Gentium libri octo [Eight Books on the Law of Nature and Nations]. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Quinn, J. B. (1978). Strategic change: ‘logical incrementalism’. Sloan Management Review, 20(1), 7–21.Google Scholar
Regnér, P. (2003). Strategy creation in the periphery: inductive versus deductive strategy making. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 57–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehnberg, J. (2009). The First 100 Years: Stockholm School of Economics. Stockholm: Informationsförlaget.Google Scholar
Rhenman, E. (1961). Tre uppsatser om organisation [Three essays on organisation]. Licentiate thesis. Stockholm School of Economics.Google Scholar
Rhenman, E. (1962). Det administrerande systemet. En organisationsmodell [The organisation as a control system]. Ekonomisk Tidskrift [Economic Journal], 64(3), 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhenman, E. (1964). Företagsdemokrati och företagsorganisation [Corporate Democracy and Corporate Organisation]. Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Rhenman, E. (1968). Organisationsplanering. En studie av organisationskonsulter [Organisational Planning: A Study of Organisational Consultants]. Stockholm: SIAR.Google Scholar
Rhenman, E. (1969a). Företaget och dess omvärld. Organisationsteori för långsiktsplanering [The Corporation and Its Environment: Organisation Theory for Long-Term Planning]. Stockholm: Bonniers.Google Scholar
Rhenman, R. (1969b). Centrallasarettet. Systemanalys av ett svenskt sjukhus [The Central Hospital: System Analysis of a Swedish Hospital]. Stockholm: SIAR.Google Scholar
Rhenman, E., & Stymne, B. (1965). Företagsledning i en föränderlig värld [Business Management in a Changing World]. Stockholm: Aldus/Bonniers.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations, 3rd ed. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. (2006). Is there such a thing as ‘evidence-based management’? Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 256–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. (2007). A sticky, leveraging, and scalable strategy for high-quality connections between organizational practice and science. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1037–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumelt, R. P. (1974). Strategy, Structure, and Economic Performance. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Rumelt, R. P, Schendel, D. E., & Teece, D. J. (1994). Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research Agenda. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Schriber, S. (2016). Nordic strategy research: topics, theories and trends. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 32(4), 220–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwenk, C. R. (1982). Why sacrifice rigour for relevance? A proposal for combining laboratory and field research in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 3(3), 213–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in Administration. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Shani, A. B., Mohrman, S. A., Pasmore, W. A., Stymne, B., & Adler, N. (eds.) (2007). Handbook of Collaborative Management Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Simon, H. (1947). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sjöstrand, S. E. (1997). The Two Faces of Management: The Janus Factor. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning Business Press.Google Scholar
Sölvell, Ö. (1987). Entry barriers and foreign penetration: emerging pattern of international competition in two electrical industries. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Stockholm School of Economics.Google Scholar
Sölvell, Ö., Zander, I., & Porter, M. E. (1991). Advantage Sweden. Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik.Google Scholar
Spender, J.-C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starkey, K., & Madan, P. (2001). Bridging the relevance gap: aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of management, 12(1), S3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Styhre, A., & Sundgren, M. (2005). Action research as experimentation. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 18(1), 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stymne, B. (1970). Values and Processes: A Systems Study of Effectiveness in Three Organisations. Stockholm: SIAR.Google Scholar
Stymne, B. (1995). Eric Rhenman – nydanare inom svensk företagsekonomi [Eric Rhenman – Innovator in Swedish Business Administration]. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.Google Scholar
Sund, L. G., Melin, L., & Haag, K. (2015). Intergenerational ownership succession: shifting the focus from outcome measurements to preparatory requirements. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(3), 166–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svalander, P.-A. (1979). Att förnya sjukvårdens organisation [Renewing the Organisation of Health Care]. Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
Svalander, P.-A. (1982). Primärvårdspolitiken and makten [Primary Health Care Policy and Power]. Stockholm: Socialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teece, D. J., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capability of firms: an introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3), 537–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tell, F. (2000). Organizational capabilities: a study of electrical power transmission equipment manufacturers, 1878–1990. Doctoral dissertation. Linköping University.Google Scholar
Tell, F. (2011). Knowledge integration and innovation: a survey of the field. In Berggren, C., Bergek, A., Bengtsson, L., Hobday, M. & Söderlund, J. (eds.), Knowledge Integration and Innovation: Critical Challenges Facing International Technology-Based Firms, 20–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tell, F., Berggren, C., Brusoni, S., & Van de Ven, A. (2017). Managing Knowledge Integration Across Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tengblad, S. (2003). Classic, but not seminal: revisiting the pioneering study of managerial work. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 19(1), 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. D. (1956). On building an administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1(1), 102–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Tongur, S., & Engwall, M. (2014). The business model dilemma of technology shifts. Technovation, 34(9), 525–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vahlne, J. E. (2020). Development of the Uppsala model of internationalization process: from internationalization to evolution. Global Strategy Journal, 10(2), 239–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vahlne, J. E., & Johanson, J. (2017). From internationalization to evolution: the Uppsala model at 40 years. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9), 1087–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vahlne, J. E., & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1973). Economic distance: model and empirical investigation. In Hörnell, E., Vahlne, J.-E. & Weidersheim-Paul, F. (eds.), Export och Utlandsetableringar [Export and Foreign Establishments], 81–159. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H. (2002). 2001 presidential address – Strategic directions for the Academy of Management: this academy is for you! Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 171–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H., & Johnson, P. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 802–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veblen, T. (1918). The Higher Learning in America: A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities by Businessmen. New York: B. W. Huebsch.Google Scholar
Wadin, J. L., Ahlgren, K., & Bengtsson, L. (2017). Joint business model innovation for sustainable transformation of industries: a large multinational utility in alliance with a small solar energy company. Journal of Cleaner Production, 160, 139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wadström, P. (2020). Corporate strategizing: building the group without busting the businesses. PhD thesis. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Wadström, P. (2022). Advancing Strategy Through Behavioural Psychology: Creating Competitive Advantage in Relentlessly Changing Markets. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
Wakefield, A. (2005). Books, bureaus, and the historiography of cameralism. European Journal of Law and Economics, 19(3), 311–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, C., Nummela, N., & Liesch, P. (2016). Editorial – the internationalization process model revisited: an agenda for future research. Management International Review, 56(6), 783–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitley, R. (1984). The fragmented state of management studies: reasons and consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 21(3), 331–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy practice and strategy process: family differences and the sociological eye. Organization Studies, 28(10), 1575–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wikström, S., & Normann, R. (1994). Knowledge and Value: A New Perspective on Corporate Transformation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (1987). Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. In Teece, D. J. (ed.), The Competitive Challenge, 159–84. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
Woodward, J. (1965). Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Zander, U. (1991). Exploiting a technological edge: voluntary and involuntary dissemination of technology. Doctoral dissertation. Institute of International Business, Stockholm.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A Historical Review of Swedish Strategy Research and the Rigor-Relevance Gap
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

A Historical Review of Swedish Strategy Research and the Rigor-Relevance Gap
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

A Historical Review of Swedish Strategy Research and the Rigor-Relevance Gap
Available formats
×