Mintzbergs_Ten_Schools_of_Thought_about

Mintzberg’s Ten Schools of Thought about Strategy Formation

Page 1

The Design School

• Model: A process of conception

• Approach: Formulates clear and unique strategies based on matching internal and external situations.

• Basis: Architecture as a metaphor, order, reduced ambiguity.

• Contributions:

  • Useful in relatively stable environments.

  • Supports strong and visionary leadership.

• Limitations:

  • Simplification may distort reality.

  • Bypasses learning; inflexible in fast-changing environments.

  • High risk of resistance from personnel.

• Typical Tools: SWOT Analysis, Ashridge Mission Model.

The Planning School

• Model: A formal process

• Approach: Rigorous steps from analysis to execution of strategy.

• Basis: Urban planning, system theory, cybernetics.

• Contributions:

  • Provides clear direction and enables resource allocation.

  • Facilitates control.

• Limitations:

  • Can become too static.

  • Risks groupthink and difficulty in predicting outcomes.

  • Relies on top management's isolated creation of strategy.

• Typical Tools: Theory of Mechanistic and Organic Systems, Parenting Styles, Levers of Control, Scenario Planning.

The Positioning School

• Model: An analytical process

• Approach: Contextualizes business within its industry and aims to enhance strategic positioning.

• Basis: Industrial organization and military strategy.

• Contributions:

  • Treats strategic management as a science.

  • Provides systematic content for strategy development.

• Limitations:

  • Neglects power dynamics, cultural aspects, social elements.

  • Biased towards large firms.

  • Primarily number-oriented.

• Typical Tools: Competitive Advantage, Five Forces Analysis, Value Chain, BCG Matrix, Game Theory, The Art of War (Sun Tzu).

The Entrepreneurial School

• Model: A visionary process

• Approach: Relies on intuition and experience from charismatic leaders.

• Basis: Economics.

• Contributions:

  • A cohesive vision helps organizations navigate challenges.

  • Deliberate on broad lines but remains flexible in details.

• Limitations:

  • Risk of missing potential developments or dangers due to rigid courses.

  • Identifying the right leader is crucial and challenging.

Page 2

The Cognitive School

• Model: A mental process

• Approach: Analyzes how strategists perceive patterns and process information.

• Basis: Psychology.

• Contributions:

  • Highlights the cognitive process that leads to strategy formation.

  • Stresses creativity in strategy.

• Limitations:

  • Limited practicality beyond conceptual frameworks.

  • Ineffective for broad collective strategy processes.

• Typical Tools: Whole Brain Model, Johari Window, Groupthink, Cognitive Bias, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

The Learning School

• Model: An emergent process

• Approach: Focuses on learning from experiences over time for strategy development.

• Basis: Education and learning theory.

• Contributions:

  • Provides a solution for complexity and unpredictability in strategy formation.

  • Allows for multi-participant learning beyond just leadership.

• Limitations:

  • Potential to result in lack of coherent strategy during crises.

  • Costs associated with learning and not useful in stable conditions.

• Typical Tools: Organisational Learning Framework, Knowledge Management, SECI Model.

The Power School

• Model: A process of negotiation

• Approach: Strategy is developed through negotiation among power holders.

• Basis: Political Science.

• Contributions:

  • Facilitates debate on issues.

  • Can break through obstacles to change.

• Limitations:

  • Involves divisive politics and energy wastage.

  • Overemphasizes the role of power in strategy.

• Typical Tools: Bases of Social Power, Power Distance, Stakeholder Value Perspective, Core Group Theory, Force Field Analysis, Stakeholder Mapping.

The Cultural School

• Model: A collective process

• Approach: Involves various organizational groups in strategy formation.

• Basis: Anthropology.

• Contributions:

  • Emphasizes the role of social processes and values in strategy formation.

  • Helpful in managing resistance to change, especially in mergers.

• Limitations:

  • Can justify the status quo; may lack clear direction.

• Typical Tools: Appreciative Inquiry, Cultural Dimensions, Cultural Intelligence, Ashridge Mission Model.

Page 3

The Environmental School

• Model: A reactive process

• Approach: Strategy is formed in response to external environmental challenges.

• Basis: Biology.

• Contributions:

  • Assigns a key role to the environment in strategy formation.

• Limitations:

  • Often vague and aggregated dimension of environment.

  • Denies strategic choice for organizations; considered unrealistic.

• Typical Tools: Contingency Theory, Situational Leadership.

The Configuration School

• Model: A process of transformation

• Approach: Integrates strategy and organizational structure, evolving over time.

• Basis: Contextual organizational development.

• Contributions:

  • Sees strategy formation as adaptable to context; recognizes the need for stability and occasional transformation.

• Limitations:

  • Configuration descriptions may distort reality.

  • Many interpretations are possible; reality not limited to fixed configurations.

• Typical Tools: Organisational Configurations, Chaos Theory, Catastrophe Theory, Disruptive Innovations.