Each day materials about various topics that authors think are of interest to their audience are written. It is important to note that various studies may be carried out on one topic but with different authors. Nevertheless, these studies will have different content or mode of bringing out their objectives. Due to differences in the way people approach various issues and numerous methods of research available, various strategies are employed in any study. Moreover, people employ different methods of collecting information about any topic they want to write about. Not only a theoretical framework but also motivation as well as the way evidence is presented differ from one study to another. Focusing on four studies, this paper will try to identify various strategies used in presenting the information.
Let us begin by looking at the paper on why people do good. The author has depicted that while people want to live in a good society, specific reasons as to why they will want to do good are not known. According to the author, there is a gap in existing theory because people have taken two divergent views on the matter. While others believe that intuition is what makes people act correctly, others believe that pursuit of self-interest is the reason why good behavior prevails (Pounds, 2006). However, it has not been depicted why laws still exist to regulate people.
On the same note, the study on strategy, stakeholders, and managerial discretion emphasizes that research has not been dedicated to knowing whether stakeholders’ behavior helps or hinders managerial discretion. Most previous studies have only been limited to studying stakeholders’ behavior as a hindrance to managerial discretion (Philips, Berman, Elms & Johnson-Cramer, 2010). The authors cite various previous studies that were carried out on the topic and pinpoint their weaknesses. This motivation is presented differently from how motivation for the study on why people do good is presented. The authors, therefore, cite the possibility of stakeholders’ behavior having mixed reactions on managerial discretion as to the reason why the study is essential.
However, the study on the theory of the business stems from its argument from the idea that people have not been able to fathom the fact as to why some very good performing firms can fail. In this study, various practical examples of companies that have failed despite being market leaders in the past have been used to depict the importance of the study. According to the author, past studies have never studied that the theory upon which any business was based could be a reason as to why they fail to perform to expectations (Drucker, 1994).
The fourth study we are looking at is the study on strategy and society. This study is built on the principle that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is taken as a cost and a constraint to business rather than an opportunity for firms to enhance their competitive advantage. This is the gap in the literature about CSR that this study seeks to fill. Authors argue that there is a lack of research on how CSR could be used to the advantage of firms (Porter & Kramer, 2006). The authors start by elucidating the importance of CSR to society in a move to indicate the motivation for their study. This approach is more or less similar to that used in the study on strategy, stakeholders, and managerial discretion.
Theoretical frameworks used by these studies have similarities and differences. To begin with, the study on why people do good uses a purely argumentative approach where the author first puts forward two contradicting arguments. He then highlights the weaknesses of each perspective (Pounds, 2006). Lastly, the author concludes that the two approaches have to be combined to arrive at a sound solution to the problem. The same approach is used in the study on strategy and society, where the authors first present arguments that justify CSR. The proponents’ argument of corporate having a moral obligation of cleaning the mess they create as well as the sustainability argument are explained in detail (Porter & Kramer, 2006). Thereafter, the authors advance their argument on why it is important to integrate business and society. This approach is good because it enables readers to be in tandem with authors as they build an argument. Moreover, it enhances the understanding of the audience. The problem with this approach is that it lacks empirical evidence. Nevertheless, the theoretical framework of the two studies differs a bit. This is because the study on strategy and society uses past studies and case studies in its theoretical framework which is not the case with the study on why people do good.
On the other hand, the study on the theory of the business begins by expounding on the constituents of the theory of business and how this theory helps in the prosperity of a firm. Using case studies, the author then explains how a good theory of business can become redundant over time and fail to give the expected results. The study then proposes various solutions to the problem of the non-performing theory of business using prior theory (Drucker, 1994). The same approach is applied in the study of strategy, stakeholders, and managerial discretion where also past studies are cited to increase knowledge of the topic. The study also uses prior theory to suggest further research on the role of managers in affecting their future discretion levels regarding their relationship with stakeholders (Phillips et al., 2010). The case study approach is quite convincing because it gives readers practical information on how the topic influences the day to day activities. Moreover, case studies make the audience more willing to understand the topic because they understand that what is being proposed happens in society. The main drawback is that situations are different and it is difficult to come across the same conclusions in various situations.
An important part of any research work is how evidence is brought forward because this determines what impact it will have on the audience. This is how the author supports his or her argument and it determines whether the study will be influential or not. In the study on why people do good, the author uses everyday live examples to proof of how people use either intuition or self-interest to behave well in society. Reasons why people work hard and wake up early in the morning as well as factors that guide the decision-making process are highlighted (Pounds, 2006).
On the other hand, the study on strategy, stakeholders, and managerial discretion use a case study to depict evidence about the topic. Moreover, the study deploys priori theory to pinpoint what has already been put forward about the topic. A combination of these two approaches is critical because it helps in emphasizing the topic. Similarly, the study on the theory of business uses various case studies to drive its main point home. Each argument has a case study to support it and this enables readers to get information from various scenarios. It is important to note that past studies are also cited as a form of evidence in this study.
After citing various relevant past studies on the topic, the study on strategy and society brings a case study to provide practical evidence. This is meant to give readers information on how beneficial CSR should be to any firm. Arguably, in providing evidence one should use a way that is quite influential. Consequently, it is advisable to combine the priori theory and case studies.
Nonetheless, all strategies employed by various studies are quite good at ensuring that information reaches their audience in a better way. Good research should employ various strategies for supporting its argument and providing information about the topic. Evidence is critical in any study. As a result, efforts should be taken to ensure that the evidence given is well-founded. Moreover, motivation for any study is crucial because it gives readers a taste of what is to be discussed. One must go through past studies on the topic to highlight their shortfalls that have necessitated the study. If there are no gaps in past studies, then there could be no need for any further research. Similarly, since new information will always come up, it is always good to suggest why further research is needed.
References
Drucker, P. F. (1994). The Theory of the Business. Harvard Business Review, 72(5), 95-104.
Phillips, R. A., Berman, S. L., Elms, H. & Johnson-Cramer, M. (2010). Strategy, Stakeholders and Managerial Discretion. Strategic Organization, 8(2), 176-183.
Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
Pounds, W. F. (2006). Why do Good? MIT Sloan Managerial Review, 47(3), 13-17.