| Abstract: | Prior academic research attests to both positive and negative effects of involvement on the process of developing strategy. On the one hand, it has been argued that involvement strengthens shared vision, increases rationality and improves adaptiveness in strategy-making. On the other hand, involvement is said to lead to intense political behaviour, increased cultural inertia and more constraints in the strategy process. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relative importance of these effects. In a survey of over 6,000 managers, we find that their reported levels of involvement are positively associated with perceptions of strategy development processes that are more rational, more focused by a shared vision, and more adaptive. In addition, involvement is negatively associated with statements describing the process as top-down, influenced by politics and slowed by internal culture. Moreover, those who are more involved tend to see business and non-business constraints as less important in determining strategy. We argue that these associations between involvement and desirable features of strategy process are important because perceptions are the basis of managerial behaviour. Thus, managers who are more involved in strategy not only see the process in a more favourable light but also act in ways that make the process more effective. The main implication of these findings is that for most organisations increasing involvement improves the strategy process. |
