The DOI matches its Crossref record.
In search of rationality: the purposes behind the use of formal analysis in organizations
Abstract
This paper describes the results of a study that examines how formal analysis is actually used in practice in three different organizations. Four main groups of purposes for formal analysis – information, communication, direction and control, and symbolic purposes – are identified and related to the nature of the social and hierarchical relationships between those who initiate analysis, those who do it, and those who receive it. It is concluded that, far from being antithetical as often assumed, formal analysis and social interaction are inextricably linked in organizational decision making and that different structural configurations may generate different patterns of use of analysis. Editors' introduction This paper focuses on a key aspect of strategy practice: strategic analysis. It is therefore centrally about the concerns of the Strategy as Practice perspective. It also examines practice in relation to different organizational contexts and seeks to understand the relationship between the two. Further, it raises important issues of research design and methodology in relation to our field. It also raises other issues for consideration in comparison to other papers included in the book: the extent and nature of theorizing and appropriateness of levels of analysis for example. And, as with the Barley paper (chapter 4), it is interesting to ask just how much the quantitative analysis adds to the qualitative analysis. Paper summary The departure point for this paper is to point out that surprisingly little is known about the use of formal strategic analysis in organizations: ‘Is it in fact used at all? And, if so, when and why?’ (598).
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
Cited by
Completing the Practice Turn in Strategy Research
Whittington, R. (2006) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840606064101 · Cited by 1,972
Strategic decision-making processes: the role of management and context
Papadakis, V. M., Lioukas, S., & Chambers, D. (1998) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199802)19:2<115::aid-smj941>3.0.co;2-5 · Cited by 721
PROCEDURAL RATIONALITY IN THE STRATEGIC DECISION‐MAKING PROCESS*
Dean, J. W., & Sharfman, M. P. (1993) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1993.tb00317.x · Cited by 412
Leadership Complexity and Development of the leaderplex Model
Hooijberg, R., (Jerry) Hunt, J. G., & Dodge, G. E. (1997) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639702300305 · Cited by 339
Development of a framework for knowledge translation: understanding user context
Jacobson, N., Butterill, D., & Goering, P. (2003) · Journal of Health Services Research & Policy · doi:10.1258/135581903321466067 · Cited by 331
Metadata
- Authors
- Langley, A.
- Venue
- Strategy as Practice
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2007-08-02
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 121-136
- OpenAlex
- W2016388455
- Cited by
- 181
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.46
- Type
- book chapter
- 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: In search of rationality: the purposes behind the use of formal analysis in organizations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511618925.009
- The paper
- Langley, A. (2007). In search of rationality: the purposes behind the use of formal analysis in organizations. Strategy as Practice. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511618925.009
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.