Good Strategy Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters

By R. Rumelt. 2011

364 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6979555432131202691ae8a2b57d5055956a352e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. David J. Teece
2. Christos N. Pitelis
3. Constance E. Helfat
4. Stav Fainshmidt

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. David J. Teece

In Political Science and International Relations

1. David J. Teece

Citations in the corpus

• A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise (2014, neutral): “These three functions constitute what Rumelt (2011) calls the “kernel of strategy”.35 A good strategy will often not appear fully formed, but instead emerge after a period of trial and error (provided the business environment is sufficiently forgiving to allow experimentation).”
• A capability theory of the firm: an economics and (Strategic) management perspective (2019, background): “A strategy can be defined as ‘a coherent set of analyses, concepts, policies, arguments, and actions that respond to a high-stakes challenge’ (Rumelt, 2011, p. 6).”
• Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory (2018, background): “According to Rumelt (2011), a good strategy has (1) prescient diagnoses that identify obstacles, (2) a guiding policy that specifies an approach to overcoming them, and (3) a coherent plan of action that implements the policy.”