Abstract
The case of the Honda Motor Company has been cited frequently in the strategic management literature. A review reveals that Honda's strategy has been used to illustrate and support apparently contradictory positions on a series of conceptual dichotomies, namely analytical planning versus learning, market positioning versus resource‐based and, within the last of these, core competencies versus core capabilities. A critical analysis of this literature reveals empirical inaccuracies and a focus on Honda's strategic successes to the neglect of its failures. More significantly, explanations and general strategy implications are couched in terms of reductionist one‐sided theories, a tendency which is only deepened when strategy thinkers debate ‘the meaning of Honda’. This theoretical approach is particularly ill suited to Honda, an important strategic capability of which appears to be precisely the reconciliation of dichotomous management concepts. Western strategy thinkers have therefore missed the opportunity to develop a more appropriate and productive paradigm for learning from Honda.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
