The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future
Abstract
This review of cognition in strategic management research takes as its starting point the appreciation of the seminal paper, ‘Competitive groups as cognitive communities: the case of Scottish knitwear manufacturers’, by Porac, Thomas and Baden-Fuller on cognitive categorization of competition, published in the Journal of Management Studies only 20 years ago. In this paper, I reflect on the context in which their paper emerged, the impact it has had, and the future paths that research on cognition in strategy might take. In doing so, I highlight the challenges associated with establishing cognition as a legitimate factor in strategic management (alongside the traditional explanations of capabilities and incentives) and of showing the causal relationship between cognition and strategic outcomes. Subsequent work in cognition explored the dynamic relationship between cognition, capabilities, and incentives, and, in process models of framing, linked cognition with political action. Rather than managerial cognition becoming its own independent field, cognitive concepts have diffused throughout work in many different managerial fields, leading to a proliferation of terms, concepts, and approaches. I conclude by exploring some of the paths that research in cognition and strategy is taking in the present day – particularly those involving studies of the construction of markets and categories, each of which are themes that the work by Porac, Thomas and Baden-Fuller brought to our attention.
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
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315
Cognitive change, strategic action, and organizational renewal
Barr, P. S., Stimpert, J. L., & Huff, A. S. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131004 · Cited by 1,290
Eggers, J. P., & Kaplan, S. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0401 · Cited by 774 · cited 4×
“Eggers and I (Eggers and Kaplan, 2009; Kaplan, 2008b) explored these dynamics in larger samples to examine how CEO cognition interacts with organizational capabilities and incentives in shaping strategic outcomes.”
InfluentialSelf-citationThinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change
Kaplan, S., & Tripsas, M. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002 · Cited by 661
Self-citationMacrocultures: Determinants and Consequences
Abrahamson, E., & Fombrun, C. J. (1994) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1994.9412190217 · Cited by 444 · cited 1×
“These causal beliefs – similar to Spender’s (1980, 1989) notion of industry recipe or the concept of industry macrocultures developed slightly later by Abrahamson and Fombrun (1994) – are associated with a set of actions such as purchasing from a certain set of suppliers, using a specific type of equipment, working wi…”
Cited by
Unlocking the hidden value of concepts: A cognitive approach to business model innovation
Martins, L. L., Rindova, V. P., & Greenbaum, B. E. (2015) · Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal · doi:10.1002/sej.1191 · Cited by 581
Communication, Organizing and Organization: An Overview and Introduction to the Special Issue
Cooren, F., Kuhn, T., Cornelissen, J. P., & Clark, T. (2011) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840611410836 · Cited by 585
Metadata
- Authors
- Kaplan, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-01-19
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 665-695
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1492815943
- Cited by
- 465
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 28.97
- 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
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.