The DOI matches its Crossref record; 95 of the 95 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Strategy‐as‐practice: A review and future directions for the field
Open accessAbstract
This review maps and critically evaluates the rapidly growing body of research in the strategy‐as‐practice field. Following an introduction on the emergence and foundations of strategy‐as‐practice, the review is structured in three main parts, based on the terminology, issues and research agendas outlined in the field. First, the paper examines the concepts of practitioners and praxis. A typology of nine possible domains for strategy‐as‐practice research is developed, based on the way that different studies conceptualize the strategy practitioner and the level of strategy praxis that they aim to explain. Second, the paper reviews the concept of practices, which has been adopted widely but inconsistently within the strategy‐as‐practice literature. While there is no dominant view on practices, the review maps the various concepts of practices that inform the strategy‐as‐practice field and outlines avenues for future research. The final section attends to the call for strategy‐as‐practice research to develop and substantiate outcomes that may better explain or inform strategy praxis. Five categories of outcomes are found within existing empirical studies, and an agenda for building upon this evidence is advanced. The paper concludes with a summation of the current state of the field and some recommendations on how to take strategy‐as‐practice research forward.
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 Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
Naegele, K. D., & Goffman, E. (1956) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089106 · Cited by 25,991
The Interpretation of Cultures
Fenn, R., & Geertz, C. (1974) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.2307/1384392 · Cited by 19,154
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life
Goffman, E. (2023) · Social Theory Re-Wired · doi:10.4324/9781003320609-59 · Cited by 17,562
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Bourdieu, P. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621749 · Cited by 17,271
The Interpretation of Cultures
(2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912128310 · Cited by 16,449
Wallace, A. F. C., & Garfinkel, H. (1968) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2092245 · Cited by 12,445
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Powers, C. H., & Giddens, A. (1988) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2579442 · Cited by 8,828
The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis
Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226185941.001.0001 · Cited by 7,617
Cited by
Debating big data: a literature review on realizing value from big data
Günther, W. A., Rezazade Mehrizi, M. H., Huysman, M., & Feldberg, F. (2017) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2017.07.003 · Cited by 880
Strategy-as-Practice: Taking Social Practices Seriously
Vaara, E., & Whittington, R. (2012) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2012.672039 · Cited by 698
Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research
Hiebl, M. R. W. (2023) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428120986851 · Cited by 635
Tallon, P. P., Queiroz, M., Coltman, T., & Sharma, R. (2019) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2018.12.002 · Cited by 453
The Interface of the Top Management Team and Middle Managers: A Process Model
Raes, A. M. L., Heijltjes, M. G., Glunk, U., & Roe, R. A. (2011) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2009.0088 · Cited by 339
Metadata
- Authors
- Jarzabkowski, P., & Paul Spee, A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Management Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-01-05
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-95
- ISSN
- 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2370
- OpenAlex
- W1986617055
- Cited by
- 929
- References
- 95
- FWCI
- 81.91
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Strategy‐as‐practice: A review and future directions for the field. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00250.x
- The paper
- Jarzabkowski, P., & Paul Spee, A. (2009). Strategy‐as‐practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00250.x
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.