The effect of project context and design in terms of strategy implementation in government institutions

Although the range in theory development are positive, the field of strategy implementation still has a number of research questions to solve (Mitchell, 2013, p. 44). Firstly, many theoretical schools have demonstrated some... [ view full abstract ]

Although the range in theory development are positive, the field of strategy implementation still has a number of research questions to solve (Mitchell, 2013, p. 44). Firstly, many theoretical schools have demonstrated some ability to explain strategy implementation; but, as a whole, the results are rather mixed. Even the extensive collective study of the Miles and Snow typology over the past decade has only been able to demonstrate a slight majority of cases that support the theory (Andrews, Boyne & Walker, 2006). Secondly, the discussion of whether generic (organisational consistency or best-practice) approaches of strategy implementation should be preferred over contingent approaches is evolving, but has not been resolved.

Guidance from the strategic management literature leads one into three possible directions when it comes to implementing projects: a generic approach which is either best-practice or repeatedly doing what works (organisational consistency). Or a contingent approach where priority is not determined by the strength of the institution, but by the intensity of the demand (Lawrence & Lorsch 1967; Waldo, 1978; Rainey, 1983; Alford & Hughes, 2008). Five context and design elements are identified for this paper in terms of their possible influence on strategy implementation which are suitable for quantitative analysis.

The paper will aim to determine context and design are associated with strategy implementation, if there is a gap between practice and theory and whether it is possible to detect characteristics of either generic or contingent approaches. Generic or contingent approaches are about the manner in which government institutions intend to implement their strategic plans (which are broken down into projects). The research is about the inherent approach of institutions in terms of the theoretical prescriptions of management tools. The research question is: “are project context and design elements associated with effective strategy implementation for either generic or contingent approaches?

This study will utilise descriptive research to see if the approaches are employed in practice. Moving from theory to analysis requires a well-specified research design that includes an appropriate sample and the transformation of concepts into measureable variables. In this case context and design elements are operationalised as variables which should tell a story about the environmental circumstances and the characteristics surrounding a project.

Possible results can suggest a disconnect between theory and practice within the public strategic management field. The findings may furthermore suggest that it is not possible to say which of these elements are more or less significant.

The analyses should indicate whether contingent approaches of strategy implementation are more associated with implementation than generic ones. These findings may lead to a paradox – how are government institutions thriving in strategy implementation if their practices fly in the face of empirically demonstrated theoretical findings?