MGT 6293 Strategic Management Seminar 3. Each student should be able to formulate ideas that advance
Spring 2005 theory or research in the field.
Instructor: Professor Richard Johnson 4. Each student should be able to communicate, both verbally and in
Office: 206C Adams Hall writing, current knowledge, critical evaluations and new ideas in
Office Hours: W (3:45–5:00) or by appointment strategic management topics developed in this seminar.
Office Phone: (405) 325-5692
Class Time: W (1:00-3:45), 352 Adams Hall Course Format and Evaluation:
Web Page: http://faculty- There will be four major evaluations of student performance : unit
staff.ou.edu/J/Richard.A.Johnson-2/ papers , research proposal/ conceptual paper, participation, and the final
Course Description: exam . Grades will be weighted among these evaluations as follows:
The doctoral seminar in Strategy Management is intended to provide
students with a broad coverage of the literature. It focuses on the Unit papers 20%
foundations and “cutting edge” research on Strategic Management, Research proposal / conceptual paper 35%
focusing mainly on topics of strategy content research (what strategies are
used by firms, and what is their effect on performance) but also Class Preparation and Participation 25%
considering important related research streams of strategy process and Final exam 20%
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 I do not grant “incomplete” grades, except under very unusual
firm (resource-based, knowledge-based), and topics in corporate level circumstances. Therefore, your can expect that your final grade will be
strategy.We will address both theory and empirical analysis. The course determined on the basis of the material that you have handed in by the
begins by reviewing current topics, issues, and controversies in strategic due date.
management research. Course Requirements:
Course Objectives: Unit papers (20%)
Research creativity is a fundamental skill of the successful
This seminar is intended to provide students with a detailed, in depth researcher. As you read the literature, you should always look for
coverage of selected topics in the strategic management literature. research opportunities that would create value to the literature.
Additionally, the seminar will emphasize the following objectives: The purpose of the “thought paper” is to provide you with an
instrument for exploring research gaps in the literature. Thought
1. Each student should develop an understanding of and papers must identify the problems in the current level of
appreciation for the concepts and research in these topic areas. knowledge and seek to resolve inconsistencies or gaps. This
requires further theoretical development and or approaches to
2. Each student should be able to critically review academic and research.
practitioner research and develop constructive reviews of such
research. 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 2. The first draft of the major paper is worth 15% and is
the field. The intent should be to develop a paper that, with
further work and development, could be submitted to a journal or due April 6th. The purpose of the draft is threefold: (1)
for national meeting presentation. Such new knowledge will likely To keep you on track to complete the paper, to allow
challenge the dominant theoretical or empirical approach in some
way. Two unit papers will be required during the semester. other students a chance to critique your work and
provide feedback (peer review), and allow me to review
The topic of the paper should be related to the class topics the paper in the format used by academic journals .
discussed. The intent of the paper will be to prepare a thorough
but concise presentation on a relevant and timely topic related to 3. The final revised version of the paper will be
strategic management. Unit papers should be no longer than five
or six pages of content (exclusive of references, exhibits, tables, due on the last day of class (May 4th by 5:00 P .M.)
figures, and references). The paper should be prepared in the and will be worth 20% of your final grade .
style for the Academy of Management Review or the APA.
Research Proposal/Conceptual paper (35%) Both drafts of this paper should follow the style guide for the
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 Academy of Management Journal. Papers should not exceed
manuscript that could be submitted to the Academy of 25 pages of text ( exclusive of references , exhibits, tables ,
Management Review or the Academy of Management Journal,
respectively, after further revision. Certainly the quality should be figures , and references ).
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 Participa tion (25%)
the topics covered in the seminar. Alternative two is to develop a Article Summaries 5%
major research proposal that would be similar to a dissertation Paper Review 5%
proposal. This proposal would include justification of the research Class participation 15%
question, theoretical background, literature review of research on
the question (including your value added contribution), and
research design to test the question. Article Summaries: For each session, one student will
be the discussion leader. The discussion leader is
The major paper in this course is composed of three parts: responsible for providing article summaries for each article
read for that week. These summaries will be from one to
1. Detailed outline of your idea (2-3 pages) due February two pages (single spaced) in length, typed, and will have
16th. The purpose of this outline is to help you set up the following format:
your research question and decide how to approach the
issues. This allows me to help you determine how to 1. Title of reading: complete title and citation.
proceed. In this paper you should outline your intentions 2. Summarized by: student’s name.
for the larger paper, present the primary variables of 3. Purpose of reading: this section should describe
interest, and explain their relationships. how this reading fits in a broader stream of research, why
it was written, what the fundamental objective of the
reading is, etc. materials . The purpose is to provide a realistic preview of what
4. Theoretical argument: this section should summarize the
theoretical argument of the reading, its basic "comps " will be like.
assumptions, its major propositions, etc.
5. Methodology: this section should briefly summarize the Tentative Schedule:
research methods (if any) used.
6. Results and conclusions: this section should summarize Date Topic
any empirical results, any theoretical conclusions,
implications of the reading, etc. 1/19 W Introduction to Course
Pap er Revi ew : When student first drafts of the Primary Theoretical Lenses I
research paper are turned in, each student will be New Perspectives (Theoretical Lenses II)
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 Environment, Strategy, Structure and Performance
Outline of Research Proposal Due
should be developmental and suggest solutions to
problems you identify as opposed to just a list of 2/23 W No Class (Work on research papers)
criticisms . 3/2 W Strategic Leadership
Clas s Participation : Student participation is critical First Unit Paper Due
and an important part of the evaluation of performance .
3/16 W Spring Break (No Class)
Participation will be based on student preparedness and
internalization of concepts as evidenced by in-class 3/23 W Strategic Decision Making Models
discussion . 3/30 W Business Level Strategies and Competitive Dynamics
4/6 W Corporate Strategy
Final Exam (20%) First Draft of Paper Due
The final exam will cover material discussed during the
Mergers & Acquisitions
semester . Exam questions will be similar to those that may be
included on doctoral comprehensive exams . This exam will be 4/20 W Cooperative Strategies
conducted without access to notes , books , articles or other 4/27 W Corporate Restructuring
Second Unit Paper Due
McWilliams, A. & Smart, D. 1993. Efficiency v. Structure-conduct-
5/4 W Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation performance: Implications for strategy research and practice,
Final Paper Due 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.
Final Exam During Finals Week
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:
Williamson, O.E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York:
1/19 Introduction to Course Free Press, pp. 15-42.
Discussion of the syllabus Agency Theory:
Discussion of strategy and the boundaries of strategy 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.
1/26 Primary Theoretical Lenses
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:
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:
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:
2/2 New Perspectives (Theoretical Lenses II)
Starmer, C. 1999. Experimental economics: hard science or wasteful
Resource-Based View: tinkering? The Economic Journal, 109: F5-f15.
Barney, J.B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Thaler, R.H. 1999. The end of behavioral finance. Financial Analysts
Journal of Management, 17: 99-120. Journal, November/December: 12-17.
Peteraf, M. 1993. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-
based view, Strategic Management Journal, 14:179-191.
Eisenhardt, K. M. & Martin, J. A. 2000, Dynamic capabilities: What are
they? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 1105-1121.
Grant, R.M. 1996. “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm”.
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17(Winter Special Issue):
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:
McGahan, A.M. & Porter, M.E. 2003. The emergence and sustainability of
2/9 Measuring Performance abnormal profits. Strategic Organization, 1: 79-108.
Performance Measures: Yeoh, P.-L., Roth, K. 1999. An empirical analysis of sustained advantage
in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry: Impact of resources and
Dess, G. & R. Robinson 1984. Measuring organizational performance in capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 637-655.
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:
Cameron , K. 1986. Effectiveness as paradox: Consensus and conflict
in conceptions of organizational effectiveness . Management
Science , 32(1): 539-553.
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
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 :
Environmental vs. Firm Effects:
McGahan, A. M. & Porter, M.E. 1997. How much does industry matter,
really? Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue 18:
2/16 Environment, Strategy, Structure and
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.
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:
Vera, D. & Crossan, M. 2004. Strategic Leadership and Organizational
Learning. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29: 222-240.
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
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.
Davis, J., Schoorman, F. & Donaldson, L. 1997. Toward a stewardship
theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22:
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:
3/9 Corporate Governance Westphal, J. 1999. Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and
performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Academy of
Management Journal, 42: 7-25.
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
Westphal, J. & Zajac, E. 1994. Substance and symbolism in CEO’s long-
Quarterly, 39: 313-335.
term incentive plans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39:
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.
Hoskisson, R.E., Hitt, M.A., Johnson, R.A., Grossman, W. 2002,
Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional ownership
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:
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.
action irreversibility. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3),
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:
3/30 Business Level Strategies and Competitive
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.
Chen, M.J., & MacMillan, I.C., 1992. Nonresponse and delayed response
to competitive moves: The roles of competitor dependence and
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.
4/6 Corporate Strategy Robins, J. & Wiersema, M.F. 1995. “A Resource-Based Approach to the
Multibusiness Firm: Empirical Analysis of Portfolio
Strategy, Structure and Control: Interrelationships and Corporate Financial Performance”. Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 16: 277-299.
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.
Argyres, N. 1996. Evidence on the role of firm capabilities in vertical
integration decisions, Strategic Management Journal. 17(2):
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:
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.
4/13 Mergers and 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:
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.
Jemison, D.B. and Sitkin, S.B. 1986. Corporate acquisitions: A process
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,
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.
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.
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
4/27 Corporate Restructuring the life-cycle of management buy-outs. Strategic Management
Journal, 15: 215-227.
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:
Diversification Discount Literature:
Comment, R., & Jarrell, G.A. 1995. Corporate focus and stock returns.
Journal of Financial Economics, 37: 67-87.
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.
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,
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.