Pedro S. Hurtado

Interpreting, categorizing and responding to the environment: the role of culture in strategic problem definition

The focus of this article is to closely examine the role of cross‐cultural factors on interpreting, categorizing and responding to the environment. To that effect, this article examines two different streams of research. The first is a review of the literature on the environment, and the second is an assessment of certain cross‐cultural factors that may systematically influence strategic problem definition. Based on an examination of the literature on the environment, two frameworks are developed. The first framework addresses issues associated with categorizing the environment and the second framework highlights organizational responses. Hofstede’s dimension of individualism‐collectivism is used to suggest that managers are likely to differ systematically on strategic problem definition on the basis of culture. Conclusions are derived that relate culture, environment, strategic problem definition and organizational responses.

Assessing the use of Bourdieu's key concepts in the strategy‐as‐practice field

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the elucidation of key concepts in the new field of strategy‐as‐practice, in order to clarify the proper object of inquiry/unit of analysis. It does so by evaluating the degree of incorporation of Pierre Bourdieus “theory of practice” in the literature. Bourdieu is one of the pioneers of the “practice turn” in sociology.Design/methodology/approach – A summary and graphical framework of the key concepts of Bourdieus “theory of practice” are developed. A small “theoretical sample” (in the sense used in “grounded theory” methodology) of representative authors and articles in the new field of strategy‐as‐practice is analyzed vis‐a‐vis the developed framework to probe and evaluate the degree of inclusion of Bourdieus key concepts in the literature.Findings – The incorporation of Bourdieus key concepts is very limited and sometimes misinterpreted. His concept of “habitus” is generally cited, but its collective implications are not emphasized and neithe...