Strategic decision-making in a professional service firm

Wilson, P M (2001) Strategic decision-making in a professional service firm. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, Salford, UK.

Abstract

Strategic management research within construction has neglected the professional service firm (PSF). Mintzberg et al.'s (1976) general model of the strategic decision process is applied to the decision to 'restructure' a cost and project management consultancy. The study focuses upon the activities to reach the initial decision to 'restructure' and not the implementation of the decision itself. The research is a pilot study in the first year of a part-time PhD and was carried out in an inductive and ethnographical manner, in order to develop a greater understanding of PSFs for future hypothesis generation and testing within the PhD. Conceptual modelling of the decision is achieved but the model is considered to lack identification of critical implicit activities in the process. It is suggested that the model confuses reaching a decision with implementing a decision and that the identification of the numerous subsequent interrelated decisions becomes difficult. It is also suggested that a top-down strategy within a PSF is not acceptable. The diagnosis of the problem was considered too vague and consequently it became difficult to see what the real driver for change was at all. Future research questions for the development of the PhD are proposed.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: professional service firm; strategic decision-making; pilot study
Index terms: decision-making, decision process, consultancy, conceptual modelling, professional service firm, strategic management, implementation, testing, strategy, project management
Subjects: theoretical framing, decision analysis, management, organization, contractual arrangements, professional practice, project management theory and practice
Topics: Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Risk Management, Project Management
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here