![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Notes
1 M. Chen, ‘Sun Tzu’s Strategic Thinking and Contemporary Business’, Business Horizons (Mar.–Apr. 1994) pp.42–8; S.D. Hunt and A. Menon, ‘Metaphors and Competitive Advantage: Evaluating the Use of Metaphors in Theories of Competitive Strategy’, Journal of Business Research 33/2 (Jun. 1995) pp.81–90; P. Kotler and R. Sing, ‘ Marketing Warfare in the 1980s’, Journal of Business Strategy (Winter 1981) pp.30–41; G.A. Michaelson, Winning the Marketing War: A Field Manual for Business Leaders (London: Madison Books 1987); A. Ries and J. Trout, Marketing Warfare (New York: McGraw‐Hill 1986); T.L. Wheelen and J.D. Hunger, Strategic Management and Business Policy, 8th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 2002); G. Johnson and K. Scholes, Exploring Corporate Strategy, 6th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 2002); R.M. Grant, Contemporary Strategy Analysis, 4th ed. (Blackwell: Oxford 2002).
2 Carl von Clausewitz, On War, eds. and trans. M. Howard and P. Paret (Princeton UP 1976); Sun Tzu, The Art of War, trans. S.B. Griffith (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 1971); M. Musashi, A Book of Five Rings, trans. V. Harris (Woodstock, NY: The Overlook Press 1974); Sun Tzu, Sun Tzu: The Art of War, trans. R.D. Sawyer (New York: Barnes & Noble 1994).
3 E.C. Murphy and M. Snell, The Genius of Sitting Bull: Thirteen Heroic Strategies for Today’s Business Leaders (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 1993); W. Roberts, Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun (New York: Warner Books 1987); W.A. Cohen, The Art of the Leader (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 1990); A. Jay, Management and Machiavelli: Discovering a New Science of Management in the Timeless Principles of Statecraft (Oxford: Pfeiffer & Company 1994); G. Morgan, Images of Organisation (London: Sage 1986).
4 P.A. Talbot, ‘Management Organisational History – A Military Lesson’, Journal of European Industrial Training 27/7 (2003) pp.330–40.
5 M. Augier, S.Z. Shariq and M.T. Vendelo, ‘Understanding Context: Its Emergence, Transformation and Role in Tacit Knowledge Sharing’, Journal of Knowledge Management 5/2 (2001) pp.125–36; E.S. Casey, The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History (Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press 1997); F. Erickson and J. Schults, ‘When is a context? Some issues and methods in the analysis of social competence’, in M. Cole, Y. Engestrom and O. Vasquez (eds), Mind, Culture and Activity – Seminal Papers from The Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition (Cambridge: CUP 1997) pp.22–31; N. Rapport, ‘Context as an act of personal externalisation’, in R. Dilley (ed.), The Problem of Context (New York, NY: Berghahn Books 1999) pp.187–211; I. Nonaka, R. Toyama and A. Nagata, ‘A Firm as a Knowledge Creating Entity: A New Perspective on the Theory of the Firm’, Industrial and Corporate Change 9/1 (2000a) pp.1–20.
6 S. Bungay, ‘The Road to Mission Command: The Genesis of a Command Philosophy’, British Army Review No. 137 (Summer 2005) pp.22–9; R.D. Hooker, Maneuver Warfare: An Anthology (Novato, CA: Presidio 1993); P.C. Nutt, Why Business Decisions Fail: Avoiding the Blunders and Traps that Lead to Debacles (San Francisco, CA: Berrett‐Koehler 2002); D. Oetting, Auftragstaktik‐Geschichte und Gegenwart einer Fuhrungskonzeption (Frankfurt: Report Verlag 1993); S. Leistenschneider, Auftragstaktik im preussisch‐deutsches Heer 1871 bis 1914 (Hamburg: Mittler Verlag 2002) pp.46–55; R.A. Thietart and B. Forgues, ‘Chaos Theory and Organisations’, Organisation Science 6/1 (1995) pp.19–31.
7 L. Atwater, ‘The Relative Importance of Situational and Individual Variables in Predicting Leader Behavior’, Group and Organisation Studies 13/3 (1988) pp.290– 310; B. Nooteboom, H. Berger and N. Noorderhaven, ‘Effects of Trust and Governance on Relational Risk’, Academy of Management Journal 40/2 (1997) pp.308–38; M. Dodgson, ‘Learning, Trust, and Technological Collaboration’, Human Relations 46/1 (1993) pp.77–94; W.H. Drath and C.J. Palus, Making Common Sense: Leadership as Meaning‐Making in a Community of Practice (Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership 1994); R. Gulati, ‘Does Familiarity Breed Trust? The Implications of Repeated Ties for Contractual Choice and Alliances’, Academy of Management Journal 38/1 (1995) pp.85–112; B. Grey, ‘Conditions for Facilitating Interorganizational Collaboration’, Human Relations 38 (1985) pp.911–36; M.A. Korsgaard, D.M. Schweiger and H.J. Sapienza, ‘Building Commitment, Attachment, and Trust in Top Management Teams: The Role of Procedural Justice’, Academy of Management Journal 38/1 (Feb. 1995) p.60; D.J. McAllister, ‘Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organisations’, Academy of Management Journal 38/1 (Feb. 1995) pp.24–59; M.H. Roy and S.S. Dugal, ‘Developing Trust: The Importance of Cognitive Flexibility and Co‐operative Context’, Management Decision 36/9 (1998) pp.561–7; T. Saxton, ‘Effects of Partner and Relationship Characteristics on Alliance Outcomes’, Academy of Management Journal 40/1 (1997) pp.443–62.
8 K. Fisher, Leading Self‐Directed Work Teams: A Guide to Developing New Team Leadership Skills (New York: McGraw‐Hill 1993); M. Horner, ‘Leadership Theory: Past Present and Future’, Team Performance Management 3/4 (1997) pp.270–87; R.E. Quinn, ‘The Best of HBR – The High Performance Organization, “Moments of Greatness: Entering the Fundamental State of Leadership”’, Harvard Business Review (July–August 2005) pp.75–83.
9 According to the British Army’s field publication, Volume 2, mission command is:
The Army’s philosophy of command is described in BMD (British Military Doctrine) and has three enduring tenets: timely decision‐making, the importance of understanding a superior commander’s intention, and, by applying this to one’s own actions, a clear responsibility to fulfil that intention. The underlying requirement is the fundamental responsibility to act (or, in certain circumstances, to decide not to act) within the framework of the commander’s intentions. Together, this requires a style of command which promotes decentralized command, freedom and speed of action, and initiative.
Mission Command meets this requirement and is thus a central pillar of the Army’s doctrine. It has the following key elements:
Mission Command is designed to promote a robust system of command and to achieve unity of effort at all levels; it is dependent on decentralization. Historically, this approach has proved to be the most appropriate to contend with the demands, uncertainties, and frictions of command in war. It requires the development of trust and mutual understanding between commanders and subordinates throughout the chain of command, and timely and effective decision‐making, together with initiative (a quality of a commander) at all levels: the key is to get inside the enemy’s decision–action cycle (Army Doctrine Publication, Volume 2 Command, Army Code No. 71584, April 1995).
10 ‘a state of mind bent on shattering the enemy morally and physically by paralysing and confounding him, by avoiding his strength, by quickly and aggressively exploiting his vulnerabilities, and by striking him in a way that will hurt him most.’ Hooker, Maneuver Warfare (note 6); W.S. Lind, Maneuver Warfare Handbook (Boulder, CO: Westview Press 1985); R.J. Pech and G. Duren, ‘Manoeuvre Warfare: A New Military Paradigm for Business Decision Making’, Management Decision 41/2 (2003) pp.168–79; Martino and Clemons Santamaria, The Marine Corps Way: Using Manoeuvre Warfare to Lead a Winning Organization (New York: McGraw‐Hill 2004); Spartacus, ‘Directive Control or Control of Direction?’, British Army Review No. 101 (August 1992) pp.51–4; Bungay, ‘The Road to Mission Command’ (note 6).
11 Thietart and Forgues, ‘Chaos Theory and Organisations’ (note 6) pp.19–31.
12 Leistenschneider, Auftragstaktik im preussisch‐deutsches Heer 1871 bis 1914 (note 6) pp.46–55.
13 M.J. Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science – Discovering Order in a Chaotic World (San Francisco, CA: Berrett‐Koehler Publishers, Inc. 1999).
14 S.L. Brown and K.M. Eisenhardt, Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos (Boston: Harvard Business Press 1998) p.4.
15 Ibid., p.4.
16 H. Mintzberg, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning (Pearson Education Limited 2000) p.25.
17 Roy and Dugal, ‘Developing Trust: The Importance of Cognitive Flexibility and Co‐operative Context’ (note 7) pp.561–7.
18 Atwater, ‘The Relative Importance of Situational and Individual Variables in Predicting Leader Behavior’, pp.290–310; Dodgson (note 7); Gulati, ‘Does Familiarity Breed Trust?’ (note 7); Korsgaard, Schweiger and Sapienza, ‘Building Commitment, Attachment, and Trust in Top Management Teams’(note 7); McAllister, ‘Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organisations’(note 7); Nooteboom, Berger and Noorderhaven, ‘Effects of Trust and Governance on Relational Risk’; Saxton, ‘Effects of Partner and Relationship Characteristics on Alliance Outcomes’ (note 7); R.N. Osborn and J. Hagedoorn, ‘The Institutionalization and Evolutionary Dynamics of Interorganizational Alliances and Networks’. Academy of Management Journal 40/2 (Apr. 1997) pp.261–78; D. Tjosvold, ‘Making a Technological Innovation Work: Collaboration to Solve Problems’, Human Relations 43/11 (1990) pp.1117–31.