LEARNING TO PLAN AND PLANNING TO LEARN: RESOLVING THE PLANNING SCHOOL/LEARNING SCHOOL DEBATE

摘要

This paper resovles the long-standing debate between the two dominant process schools in strategy. Analysis of the planning practices of 656 firms shows that formal planning and incrementalism both form part of `good' strategic planning, especially in unstble environments. Environment neither moderates the need for formal planning nor the direction of the planning/perfromance relationship, but does moderate firm planning capabilities and planning flexibility. In unstable environments planning capabilities are far better developed and formal plans more amenable to change. The planning/performance relationship is, however, moderated by planning duration: at least four years of formal planning are requried before external performance associations are noted.