The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The value of formal planning for strategic decisions: Review of empirical research
Open accessAbstract
A review of research from organizational behaviour supported the guidelines by corporate planners: that is, use an explicit approach for setting objectives, generating strategies, evaluating strategies, monitoring results, and obtaining commitment. To determine whether these findings could be applied to strategic decision making in organizations, a review was made of all published field research on the evaluation of formal planning. Formal planning was superior in 10 of the 15 comparisons drawn from 12 studies, while informal planning was superior in only two comparisons. Although this research did not provide sufficient information on the use of various aspects of the planning process, mild support was provided for having participation by stakeholders. Formal planning tended to be more useful where large changes were involved, but, beyond that, little information was available to suggest when formal planning is most valuable. Future research should assess the formal planning process, the situation in which it is used, and its effects on the total system.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Review of Research on the Application of Goal Setting in Organizations.
Latham, G. P., & Yukl, G. A. (1975) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/255381 · Cited by 588
Motivational effects of knowledge of results: A goal-setting phenomenon?
Locke, E. A., Cartledge, N., & Koeppel, J. (1968) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0026737 · Cited by 264
Research works printed but not linked: 52
- 10.1016/0024-6301(80)90076-X · DOI
- 10.1016/0024-6301(79)90079-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/0024-6301(70)90001-4 · DOI
- Ansoff H. Igor, 1965, Corporate Strategy
- Armstrong J. Scott, 1982, The Strategic Management Handbook
- 10.1037/0021-9010.61.1.103 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.506 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.63.4.428 · DOI
- Blumberg Paul, 1968, Industrial Democracy: The Sociology of Participation
- 10.1037/h0033369 · DOI
- Coe Barbara J., 1981, The Changing Marketing Environment: New Theories and Applications, 13
- 10.1016/0030-5073(78)90018-1 · DOI
- 10.2307/255521 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.62.5.624 · DOI
- Fulmer Robert M., 1974, The practice and profitability of long‐range planning, Managerial Planning, 22, 1
- 10.2307/2345251 · DOI
- 10.2307/254803 · DOI
- Hofer Charles W., 1976, Research on strategic planning: a survey of past studies and suggestions for future efforts, Journal of Economics and Business, 28, 261
- 10.1016/S0024-6301(79)80001-1 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.64.4.349 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/255414 · DOI
- 10.1016/0024-6301(78)90099-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/0024-6301(75)90027-8 · DOI
- Katerberg Ralph‘An examination of the quality of goal setting: relationships to job attitudes and role stress’ Proceedings of the American Institute for Decision Sciences November1980 pp.387–389.
- 10.1037/0021-9010.61.1.48 · DOI
- 10.2307/255493 · DOI
- Kudla Ronald J., 1981, Strategic planning and risk, Review of Business and Economic Research, 17, 1
- 10.1037/h0036530 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.63.2.163 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.64.2.151 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.61.2.166 · DOI
- 10.1002/smj.4250010107 · DOI
- 10.2307/255507 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.90.1.125 · DOI
- Maier Norman R. F., 1963, Problem‐solving Discussions and Conferences
- Malik Zafar A., 1975, Does long‐range planning improve company performance?, Management Review, 64, 27
- Montanari John R. G.MoorheadandE. O.Montanari. ‘A laboratory study of a strategic decision making methodology’ Proceedings of the American Institute for Decision Sciences November1980 pp.472–474.
- 10.2307/255745 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1976.tb00717.x · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.23.5.499 · DOI
- Perlmutter Lawrence C., 1977, The importance of perceived control: fact or fantasy?, American Scientist, 65, 759
- 10.2307/2522572 · DOI
- Rue Leslie W.andRobert M.Fulmer. ‘Is long‐range planning profitable?’ Proceedings of the Academy of Management Boston Mass. 1973 pp.66–73. · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.363 · DOI
- Steiner George A., 1969, Top Management Planning
- 10.1037/0021-9010.66.5.541 · DOI
- 10.1016/0007-6813(70)90162-X · DOI
- 10.2307/257121 · DOI
- 10.1177/001872678003301003 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0076912 · DOI
- 10.2307/255741 · DOI
- 10.1002/smj.4250020209 · DOI
Cited by
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
“solve some of the conflicting results in this literature (Armstrong, 1982; Rhyne. 1986).”
ResultSWOT analysis applications: An integrative literature review
Benzaghta, M. A., Elwalda, A., Mousa, M., Erkan, I., & Rahman, M. (2021) · Journal of Global Business Insights · doi:10.5038/2640-6489.6.1.1148 · Cited by 615
Cortimiglia, M. N., Ghezzi, A., & Frank, A. G. (2016) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/radm.12113 · Cited by 194
Globocnik, D., Faullant, R., & Parastuty, Z. (2020) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2019.08.005 · Cited by 79
The Control Group and Meta-Analysis
Hunter, J. E., Jensen, J. L., & Rodgers, R. (2014) · Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences · doi:10.2458/azu_jmmss.v5i1.18302 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Armstrong, J. S.
- Venue
- Strategic Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1982-07
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 197-211
- ISSN
- 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0266
- OpenAlex
- W2123640034
- Cited by
- 560
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
