The DOI matches its Crossref record; 79 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field
Abstract
It is commonly asserted that the field of strategic management is fragmented and lacks a coherent identity. This skepticism, however, is paradoxically at odds with the great success that strategic management has enjoyed. How might one explain this paradox? We seek answers to this question by relying first on a large‐scale survey of strategic management scholars from which we derive an implicit consensual definition of the field—as tacitly held by its members. We then supplement this implicit definition with an examination of the espoused definitions of the field obtained from a group of boundary‐spanning scholars. Our findings suggest that strategic management's success as a field emerges from an underlying consensus that enables it to attract multiple perspectives, while still maintaining its coherent distinctiveness. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095101 · Cited by 38,435
Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage
Barney, J. B. (2004) · Advances in Strategic Management · doi:10.1016/s0742-3322(00)17018-4 · Cited by 38,152
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S., & Schlegel, R. (1963) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3050879 · Cited by 35,538
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (2004) · Advances in Strategic Management · doi:10.1016/s0742-3322(00)17011-1 · Cited by 25,802
A resource‐based view of the firm
Wernerfelt, B. (1984) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250050207 · Cited by 25,635
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition
Kuhn, T. S., & Hacking, I. (2012) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226458144.001.0001 · Cited by 21,170
The social construction of reality : a treatise in the sociology of knowledge
Simpson, G., Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2091739 · Cited by 16,462
Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations
Williamson, O. E. (1979) · The Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1086/466942 · Cited by 10,190
Cited by
von Krogh, G., Rossi-Lamastra, C., & Haefliger, S. (2012) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2012.05.001 · Cited by 300
Koseoglu, M. A. (2016) · BRQ Business Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.brq.2016.02.001 · Cited by 242
Keding, C. (2021) · Management Review Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11301-020-00181-x · Cited by 231
Corporate voluntary carbon disclosure strategy and carbon performance in the USA
Datt, R. R., Luo, L., & Tang, Q. (2019) · Accounting Research Journal · doi:10.1108/arj-02-2017-0031 · Cited by 103
When does brokerage matter? Citation impact of research teams in an emerging academic field
Collet, F., Robertson, D. A., & Lup, D. (2014) · Strategic Organization · doi:10.1177/1476127014530124 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Nag, R., Hambrick, D. C., & Chen, M.
- Venue
- Strategic Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-03-22
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 935-955
- ISSN
- 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0266
- OpenAlex
- W1976935471
- Cited by
- 836
- References
- 79
- FWCI
- 48.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/smj.615
- The paper
- Nag, R., Hambrick, D. C., & Chen, M. (2007). What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. Strategic Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.615
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.
