The next step in the strategy–as–practice evolution: A comparative typology matrix

Abstract

Orientation: In 2009, Strategy-as-Practice (S-as-P) research, as a subfield of strategy research, was grouped into nine different domains, and researchers were advised to frame their research within these domains. The papers or works (herein used interchangeably) published with S-as-P as subject, were counted, categorised, and a typology matrix was constructed.Researchers use this count to indicate a need for research in a specific domain.Research purpose: The main purpose of this study is to construct a comparative S-as-P typology matrix which accurately depicts the number of papers published in each domain between 2008 and 2015.Motivation for the study: The S-as-P typology matrix was first published in 2009 (Jarzabkowski & Spee 2009), and at the present moment, six years later, researchers still use the dated number of papers counted in each of the S-as-P domains to indicate a research gap.Research design, approach and method: A content analysis of all papers, listed by researchers on the official S-as-P website, was conducted. The papers were disseminated and key variables were counted.Main findings: The comparative typology matrix shows that relative to other domains, domain D appears overly researched, whilst no research has been carried out on domains C and H from 2008 to 2015.Practical/managerial implications: The comparative S-as-P typology matrix allows researchers to accurately evaluate the need for current research within the chosen domain.Contribution/value-add: The comparative typology matrix should prevent, as is the case currently with domain D, that domains are over-researched, whilst others receive no research attention.