MGT 6293 Strategic Management SeminarSpring 2005

Instructor: Professor Richard Johnson Office: 206C Adams HallOffice Hours: W (3:45–5:00) or by appointmentOffice Phone: (405) 325-5692Class Time: W (1:00-3:45), 352 Adams HallE-mail: rajohnson@ou.edu Web Page:

http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/J/Richard.A.Johnson-2/

Course Description:

The doctoral seminar in Strategy Management is intended to provide students with a broad coverage of the literature. It focuses on the foundations and “cutting edge” research on Strategic Management, focusing mainly on topics of strategy content research (what strategies are used by firms, and what is their effect on performance) but also considering important related research streams of strategy process and implementation. It will offer an advanced-level coverage on traditional topics of strategy formulation that may not be covered in other seminars, such as business-level strategy and competitive strategy, theories of the firm (resource-based, knowledge-based), and topics in corporate level strategy.We will address both theory and empirical analysis. The course begins by reviewing current topics, issues, and controversies in strategic management research.

Course Objectives:

This seminar is intended to provide students with a detailed, in depth coverage of selected topics in the strategic management literature. Additionally, the seminar will emphasize the following objectives:

1. Each student should develop an understanding of and appreciation for the concepts and research in these topic areas.

2. Each student should be able to critically review academic and practitioner research and develop constructive reviews of such research.

3. Each student should be able to formulate ideas that advance theory or research in the field.

4. Each student should be able to communicate, both verbally and in writing, current knowledge, critical evaluations and new ideas in strategic management topics developed in this seminar.

Course Format and Evaluation:

There will be four major evaluations of student performance: unit papers, research proposal/conceptual paper, participation, and the final exam. Grades will be weighted among these evaluations as follows:

Unit papers 20%Research proposal/conceptual paper 35%Class Preparation and Participation 25%Final exam 20%

I do not grant “incomplete” grades, except under very unusual circumstances. Therefore, your can expect that your final grade will be determined on the basis of the material that you have handed in by the due date.

Course Requirements:

Unit papers (20%)Research creativity is a fundamental skill of the successful researcher. As you read the literature, you should always look for research opportunities that would create value to the literature. The purpose of the “thought paper” is to provide you with an instrument for exploring research gaps in the literature. Thought papers must identify the problems in the current level of knowledge and seek to resolve inconsistencies or gaps. This requires further theoretical development and or approaches to research.

1

The topic chosen should be briefly reviewed; relevant literature referenced and should add something to the existing literature. In other words, the paper should go beyond what currently exists in the field. The intent should be to develop a paper that, with further work and development, could be submitted to a journal or for national meeting presentation. Such new knowledge will likely challenge the dominant theoretical or empirical approach in some way. Two unit papers will be required during the semester.

The topic of the paper should be related to the class topics discussed. The intent of the paper will be to prepare a thorough but concise presentation on a relevant and timely topic related to strategic management. Unit papers should be no longer than five or six pages of content (exclusive of references, exhibits, tables, figures, and references). The paper should be prepared in the style for the Academy of Management Review or the APA.

Research Proposal/Conceptual paper (35%)A major paper is due at the end of the semester that can take two forms. One alternative is to write a conceptual or empirical manuscript that could be submitted to the Academy of Management Review or the Academy of Management Journal, respectively, after further revision. Certainly the quality should be adequate to send to a national meeting. This is not just a term paper, but rather a quality manuscript that has been substantially refined. This paper must be original work and also be relevant to the topics covered in the seminar. Alternative two is to develop a major research proposal that would be similar to a dissertation proposal. This proposal would include justification of the research question, theoretical background, literature review of research on the question (including your value added contribution), and research design to test the question.

The major paper in this course is composed of three parts:

1. Detailed outline of your idea (2-3 pages) due February 16th. The purpose of this outline is to help you set up your research question and decide how to approach the issues. This allows me to help you determine how to proceed. In this paper you should outline your intentions

for the larger paper, present the primary variables of interest, and explain their relationships.

2. The first draft of the major paper is worth 15% and is due April 6th. The purpose of the draft is threefold: (1) To keep you on track to complete the paper, to allow other students a chance to critique your work and provide feedback (peer review), and allow me to review the paper in the format used by academic journals.

3. The final revised version of the paper will be due on the last day of class (May 4th by 5:00 P.M.) and will be worth 20% of your final grade.

Both drafts of this paper should follow the style guide for the Academy of Management Journal. Papers should not exceed 25 pages of text (exclusive of references, exhibits, tables, figures, and references).

Participation (25%)Article Summaries 5%Paper Review 5%Class participation 15%

Article Summaries: For each session, one student will be the discussion leader. The discussion leader is responsible for providing article summaries for each article read for that week. These summaries will be from one to two pages (single spaced) in length, typed, and will have the following format:

1. Title of reading: complete title and citation.2. Summarized by: student’s name.

3. Purpose of reading: this section should describe how this reading fits in a broader stream of research, why it was written, what the fundamental objective of the reading is, etc.

4. Theoretical argument: this section should summarize the theoretical argument of the reading, its basic

2

assumptions, its major propositions, etc.5. Methodology: this section should briefly summarize the

research methods (if any) used.6. Results and conclusions: this section should summarize

any empirical results, any theoretical conclusions, implications of the reading, etc.

Paper Review: When student first drafts of the research paper are turned in, each student will be required to provide a journal “like” review of one paper. Two copies of this review will be turned to me (one of which will be given to the student). These reviews should be developmental and suggest solutions to problems you identify as opposed to just a list of criticisms.

Class Participation: Student participation is critical and an important part of the evaluation of performance. Participation will be based on student preparedness and internalization of concepts as evidenced by in-class discussion.

Final Exam (20%)The final exam will cover material discussed during the semester. Exam questions will be similar to those that may be included on doctoral comprehensive exams. This exam will be conducted without access to notes, books, articles or other materials. The purpose is to provide a realistic preview of what "comps" will be like.

Tentative Schedule: Date Topic

1/19 W Introduction to Course

Primary Theoretical Lenses I

New Perspectives (Theoretical Lenses II)

Measuring Performance

Environment, Strategy, Structure and PerformanceOutline of Research Proposal Due

2/23 W No Class (Work on research papers)

3/2 W Strategic Leadership

Corporate GovernanceFirst Unit Paper Due

3/16 W Spring Break (No Class)

3/23 W Strategic Decision Making Models

3/30 W Business Level Strategies and Competitive Dynamics

4/6 W Corporate StrategyFirst Draft of Paper Due

Mergers & Acquisitions

4/20 W Cooperative Strategies

4/27 W Corporate RestructuringSecond Unit Paper Due

5/4 W Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation Final Paper Due

Final Exam During Finals Week

3

1/19 Introduction to Course

Discussion of the syllabus

Discussion of strategy and the boundaries of strategy

1/26 Primary Theoretical Lenses

Contemporary Theories:

Hoskisson, R., Hitt, M. Wan, W. & Yiu, D. 1999. Swings of a pendulum: Contemporary theory and research in strategic management. Journal of Management, 25: 417-456.

S-C-P Model of the Environment:

McWilliams, A. & Smart, D. 1993. Efficiency v. Structure-conduct-performance: Implications for strategy research and practice, Journal of Management 19(1): 63-78.

Porter, M. 1981. The contributions of industrial organization to strategic management, Academy of Management Review, 6: 609-620.

Chicago I/O Models:

Datta, Deepak K. and Narayanan, V. K. 1989. A Meta-Analytic Review of the Concentration-Performance Relationship: Aggregating

Findings in Strategic Management. Journal of Management. Vol. 15, No. 3, 469-483.

Transaction Cost Economics:

Barney, J.B. 1990. The debate between traditional management theory and organizational economics: Substantive differences or intergroup conflict? Academy of Management Review, 15: 382-393.

Williamson, O.E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press, pp. 15-42.

Agency Theory:

Eisenhardt, K. 1989. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14: 57-74.

Fama, E.F. & Jensen, M.C. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301-325.

4

2/2 New Perspectives (Theoretical Lenses II)

Resource-Based View:

Barney, J.B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17: 99-120.

Peteraf, M. 1993. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view, Strategic Management Journal, 14:179-191.

Dynamic Capabilities:

Eisenhardt, K. M. & Martin, J. A. 2000, Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 1105-1121.

Knowledge-Based View:

Grant, R.M. 1996. “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17(Winter Special Issue): 109-122.

Zahra, S.A. & George, G. 2002. “Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27: 185-203.

Real Options Perspective:

McGrath, R.G. 1999. Falling forward: Real options reasoning and

entrepreneurial failure. Academy of Management Review, 24: 13-30.

Organizational Learning Perspective:

Hitt, M., Dacin, M.T., Levitas, E., Arregle, J.-L. & Borza, A. 2000. Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 449-467.

Psychological and Behavioral Economics:

Starmer, C. 1999. Experimental economics: hard science or wasteful tinkering? The Economic Journal, 109: F5-f15.

Thaler, R.H. 1999. The end of behavioral finance. Financial Analysts Journal, November/December: 12-17.

5

2/9 Measuring Performance

Performance Measures:

Dess, G. & R. Robinson 1984. Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5: 265-273.

Bettis, R. 1983. Modern financial theory, corporate strategy, and public policy: Three conundrums. Academy of Management Review, 8: 406-415.

Cameron, K. 1986. Effectiveness as paradox: Consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Management Science, 32(1): 539-553.

McGuire, J.B., Sundgren, A. & Schneeweis, T. 1988. Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 854-872.

Venkatraman, N. & Ramanujam, V. 1986. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11: 801-814.

Predictors of Performance:

Capon, N., Farley, J.U., Hoenig, S. 1990. Determinants of financial performance: A meta-analysis. Management Science, 36: 1143-1159.

McGahan, A.M. & Porter, M.E. 2003. The emergence and sustainability of abnormal profits. Strategic Organization, 1: 79-108.

Yeoh, P.-L., Roth, K. 1999. An empirical analysis of sustained advantage in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry: Impact of resources and capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 637-655.

6

2/16 Environment, Strategy, Structure and Performance

Environment, Strategy and Structure:

Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W.H., & Huber, G.P. 2001. Organizational Actions in Response to Threats and Opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44: 937-955.

Hawawini, G., Subramanian, V., & Verdin, P. 2003. Is Performance Driven by Industry- or Firm-Specific Factors? A New Look at the Evidence. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24: 1-16.

Jones, G.R. and Hill, C.W.L. 1988. Transaction cost analysis of strategy-structure choice. Strategic Management Journal, 9: 159-172.

Venkatraman, N. 1989. The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14: 423-444.

Co-Evolution of Firms and Environments:

Helfat, C.E. & Raubitschek, R.S. 2000, Product sequencing: Co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strategic Management Journal, 21:961-979.

Song, M., Calantone, R.J. & Di Benedetto, C.A. 2002, Competitive forces and strategic choice decisions: An experimental investigation in the United States and Japan. Strategic Management Journal, 23 : 969-978

Environmental vs. Firm Effects:

McGahan, A. M. & Porter, M.E. 1997. How much does industry matter, really? Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue 18: 15-30.

7

2/23 No Class

3/2 Strategic Leadership

Carpenter, M.A. & Fredrickson, J.W. 2001. Top Management Teams, Global Strategic Posture, and the Moderating Role of Uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44: 533-545.

Castanias, R.P. & Helfat, C.E. 2001. The Managerial Rents Model: Theory and Empirical Analysis. Journal of Management, Vol. 27: 661-678.

Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D., Mayer, R.C., & Tan, H.H. 2000. The Trusted General Manager and Business Unit Performance: Empirical Evidence of a Competitive Advantage. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21: 563-576.

Hayward, M.L.A., Rindova, V.P., & Pollock, T.G. 2004. Believing One’s Own Press: The Causes and Consequences of CEO Celebrity. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25: 637-653.

Jensen, M. & Zajac, E.J. 2004. Corporate Elites and Corporate Strategy: How Demographic Preferences and Structural Position Shape the Scope of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25: 507-524.

Vera, D. & Crossan, M. 2004. Strategic Leadership and Organizational Learning. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29: 222-240.

8

3/9 Corporate Governance

Equity Ownership:

Beatty, R. & Zajac, E. 1994. Top management incentives, monitoring and risk-bearing: A study of executive compensation, ownership and board structure in initial public offerings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 313-335.

Board Composition:

Dalton, D., Daily, C. Ellstrand, A. & Johnson, J. 1998. Meta-analytic review of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 269-290.

Institutional Investors:

Hoskisson, R.E., Hitt, M.A., Johnson, R.A., Grossman, W. 2002, Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 697- 716.

Market for Corporate Control:

Walsh, J.P., & Seward, J.K. 1990. On the efficiency of internal and external corporate control mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 15: 421-458.

Stewardship Theory:

Davis, J., Schoorman, F. & Donaldson, L. 1997. Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22: 20-47.

Resource Dependence Theory:

Hillman, A. & Dalziel, T. In Press. Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource-dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review.

Social Network Theory:

Westphal, J. 1999. Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 7-25.

Institutional Theory:

Westphal, J. & Zajac, E. 1994. Substance and symbolism in CEO’s long-term incentive plans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 367-390.

9

3/16 Spring Break

3/23 Strategic Decision Making:

Dean, J. & Sharfman. M. 1996. Does decision process matter? A study of strategic decision-making effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 368-396.

Eisenhardt, K. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments, Academy of Management Journal, 32: 543-576.

Jackson, S.E. & Dutton, J.E. 1988. Discerning threats and opportunities, Administrative Science Quarterly, 33: 370-387.

Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47: 262-291.

Miller, C.C., Burke, L.M. & Glick, W.H. 1998. Cognitive diversity among upper-echelon executives: Implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 39- 58.

Thomas, J., Clark, S., & Gioia, D. 1993. Strategic sensemaking and organizational performance: Linkages among scanning, interpretation, action and outcomes, Academy of Management

Journal, 36: 239-270.

Wiseman, R.M. & Gomez-Mejia, L.R. 1998. A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 23: 133-153.

10

3/30 Business Level Strategies and Competitive Dynamics

Business Level Strategies:

Campbell-Hunt, C. 2000. What have we learned about generic competitive strategy? A meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 127-154.

Hill, C.W.L. 1988. Differentiation versus low cost or differentiation and low cost, Academy of Management Review, 13: 401-412.

Rotemberg, J.J., & Saloner, G. 1994. Benefits of narrow business strategies. American Economic Review, 84: 1330-1349.

Zajac, E. and S. Shortell. 1989) "Changing generic strategies: likelihood, directions, and performance implications," Strategic Management Journal, 10: 413-430.

Competitive Rivalry:

Chen, M.J., & MacMillan, I.C., 1992. Nonresponse and delayed response to competitive moves: The roles of competitor dependence and

action irreversibility. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 539-570.

Chen, M-J. & Hambrick, D. 1995. Speed, stealth and selective attack: How small firms differ from large firms in competitive behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 453-482.

Gimeno, J. & Woo, C.Y. 1996. Hypercompetition in a multimarket environment: The role of strategic similarity and multimarket contact in competitive de-escalation. Organization Science, 7: 322-341.

11

4/6 Corporate Strategy

Strategy, Structure and Control:

Hill, C.W.L. and Hoskisson, R.E. 1987. Strategy and structure in the multiproduct firm, Academy of Management Review, 12: 331-341.

Hill, C.W.L., Hitt, M.A., & Hoskisson, R.E. 1992. Cooperative versus competitive structures in related and unrelated diversified firms. Organization Science, 3: 501-521.

Hoskisson, R.E., Hill, C.W.L. & Kim, H. 1993. The Multidivisional structure: Organizational fossil or source of value? Journal of Management 19: 269-298.

Vertical Integration:

Argyres, N. 1996. Evidence on the role of firm capabilities in vertical integration decisions, Strategic Management Journal. 17(2): 129-150.

Mahoney, J.T. 1992. The choice of organizational form: Vertical financial ownership versus other methods of vertical integration. Strategic

Management Journal, 13: 559-584.

Corporate Diversification Strategies:

Markides, C. & Williamson, P. 1994. Related diversification, core competencies and corporate performance. Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue, 15: 149-165.

Palich, L. E., Cardinal, L. B., & Miller, C. C. 2000. Curvilinearity in the diversification-performance linkage: An examination of over three decades of research. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 155-174.

Prahalad, C.K. & Bettis, R. 1986. The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7: 485-501.

Robins, J. & Wiersema, M.F. 1995. “A Resource-Based Approach to the Multibusiness Firm: Empirical Analysis of Portfolio Interrelationships and Corporate Financial Performance”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16: 277-299.

12

4/13 Mergers and Acquisitions

Acquisitions:

Capron, L. & Pistre, N. 2002. When Do Acquirers Earn Abnormal Returns. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23: 781-794.

Coff, R.W. 2002. Human Capital, Shared Expertise, and the Likelihood of Impasse in Corporate Acquisitions. Journal of Management, 28: 107-128.

Haleblian, J. & Finkelstein, S. 1999, The influence of organizational acquisition experience on acquisition performance: A behavioral perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 29-56.

Hayward, M.L.A. & Hambrick, D.C. 1997. Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisitions: Evidence of CEO hubris. Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 103-127.

Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., & Harrison, J.S. Mergers and Acquisitions: A

Value Creating or Value Destroying Strategy? Handbook of Strategic Management, 384-408.

Post-Merger Integration:

Jemison, D.B. and Sitkin, S.B. 1986. Corporate acquisitions: A process perspective. Academy of Management Review, 11: 145-163.

Larsson, R. and S. Finkelstein. 1999. Integrating strategic, organizational, and human resource perspectives on mergers and acquisitions: A case study of synergy realization, Organization Science,10: 1-26.

13

4/20 Cooperative Strategies

Dyer, J.H. & Singh, H. 1998. The relational review: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23: 660-679.

Inkpen, A.C. Strategic Alliances. Handbook of Strategic Management, 409-432.

Johnson, J.P., Korsgaard, M.A., & Sapienza, H.J. 2002. Perceived Fairness, Decision Control, and Commitment in International Joint Venture Management Teams. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23: 1141-1160.

Khanna, T., Gulati, R. & Nohria, N. 1998. The dynamics of learning alliances: Competition, Cooperation and relative scope. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 193-210.

Park, S.H. & Russo, M.V. 1996. When competiton eclipses cooperation: An event history analysis of joint venture failure. Management Science, 42: 875-890.

Rothaermel, F.T. 2001, Incumbant's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strategic

Management Journal, 22: 687-699.

Sakakibasra, M. 2002. Formation of R&D consortia: Industry and firm effects. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 1033-1050.

14

4/27 Corporate Restructuring

Downscoping:

Bergh, D.D. & Lawless, M.A. 1998. Portfolio restructuring and limits to hierarchical governance: The effects of environmental uncertainty and diversification strategy. Organization Science, 9: 87-102.

Capron, L., Mitchell, W., Swaminathan, A. 2001, Asset divestiture following horizontal acquisitions: A dynamic view. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 817-844.

Hoskisson, R. E. & Johnson, R. A. 1992. Corporate restructuring and strategic change: The effect on diversification and R&D intensity. Strategic Management Journal, 13: 625-634.

Hoskisson, R.E., Johnson, R.A. & Moesel, D.D. 1994. Corporate divestiture intensity in restructuring firms: Effects of governance, strategy, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1207-1251.

Diversification Discount Literature:

Comment, R., & Jarrell, G.A. 1995. Corporate focus and stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 37: 67-87.

Restructuring Mode:

Bergh, D.D. & Johnson, R.A., How firms restructure: the choice between spin-offs and sell-offs and the effects on market valuation. Working paper, Purdue University.

Leveraged Buyouts:

Phan, P.H., & Hill, C.W.L. 1995. Organizational restructuring and economic performance in leveraged buyouts: An ex post study. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 704-739.

Wright, M., Robbie, K., Thompson, S. & Starkey, K. 1994. Longevity and the life-cycle of management buy-outs. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 215-227.

15

5/4 Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Ahuja, G. & Lampert, C.M. 2001. Entrepreneurship in the Large Corporation: A Longitudinal Study of How Established Firms Create Breakthrough Inventions. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22: 521-543.

Barringer, B.R. & Bluedorn, A.C. 1999, The relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 421-444.

Hitt, M.A., Hoskisson, R.E., Ireland, R. D., & Harrison, J.S. 1991. Effects of acqusitions on R&D inputs and outputs, Academy of Management Journal, 34: 693-706.

Hitt, M.A. Hoskisson, R.E. Johnson, R.A. & Moesel, D.D. 1996. The market for corporate control and firm innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1084-1119.

Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., Camp, S.M., & Sexton, D.L. 2001. Strategic Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Strategies for Wealth Creation. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22: 479-491.

McGrath, R.G. & Nerkar, A. 2004. Real Options Reasoning and a New Look at the R&D Investment Strategies of Pharmaceutical Firms. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25: 1-21.

Venkataraman, S. & Sarasvathy, S.D. Strategy and Entrepreneurship: Outlines of an Untold Story. Handbook of Strategic Management, 650-668.

Zahra, S.A., Ireland, R.D., & Hitt, M.A. 2000. International Expansion by New Venture Firms: International Diversity, Mode of Market Entry, Technological Learning, and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43: 925-950.

16