This paper takes a critical and evaluative stance toward micro‐activity‐based approaches to understanding strategy. It argues that such approaches bring with them important theoretical and empirical challenges. The paper argues against a tendency to reductionism without equal emphasis to the contextual influences that bound micro‐strategising. Finally, the paper argues for a more international and comparative approach to micro‐strategy studies than has currently been the case.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wilson et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: