In the scholarly literature strategic management is considered to be “the conduct of drafting, implementing and evaluating cross-functional decisions that will enable an organization to achieve its long-term objectives” (David, 1989, p. 4). In the construction industry, as in any other industry, strategic management is viewed as an ongoing process that involves evaluation of competition, company capabilities and goal setting. As in many scholarly fields there are different modes of applying this process. There are different schools of thought who assess the criteria by whom we design and implement this process. Two of these schools of thought are the cognitive school and the environmental school.
Since the beginning of the 1980’s many scholars of psychology showed interest in the origin of actions and strategies of the people. This trend continues even today. Their theoretical hypothesis was that these strategies for actions were designed and developed in people’s mind as frames, models, or maps. Thus, it was of crucial importance to understand what we could about those mental processes (Freeman & Hannan, 1989). If we can understand the cognitive processes of the human mind then we can understand how they imagine their home, or office, or any other space, how they would like to be constructed and why. This way a construction firm would know what projects to put forward as they will receive positive feedback from the consumers. Thus, the role of a construction company is simple according to this theory, just get to know customers’ needs and desires, along with how they like them to be fulfilled, and deliver them what they want.
But there is another school of strategic management which disagrees with those principles. Certainly we can deliver people what they desire but what about the demands of the environment? Should we damage the environment if people’s desires require so? For example, should a construction company put forward and develop projects that cut down forests and pollute rivers to create a tourist village for tourism? The environmental school is based on the principle that decisions should be made in accordance with the environment. That includes both the natural and social environment. One of its pillars is the “contingency theory”, that “considers what responses are expected of organizations that face particular environmental conditions, and “population ecology”, that claim severe limits to strategic choice” (Simon & March, 1988, p. 5). Put this way this can be in conflict with the ideas supported from the previous mentioned school. Of course this may not always be the case. There is no a priori conflict between these schools. There exists the possibility that people’s cognitive projections and their desires coincide to be environmentally friendly. This is a joining point for these schools and in this case they would operate under a joined strategy (Lamb, 1984). Nevertheless, it should be mentioned that history has demonstrated that generally these two schools have been adversary to each other. People have tended to desire constructions which many times have harmed the environment in a way or another.
But this situation can change. Nowadays environmental health is one of the most discussed topics around the globe. Maybe it is the time when these two schools will come together and people’s cognitive perceptions will be to have constructions which are environmentally friendly. Plenty of words can be said, but maybe in another paper.
Reference
David, F. 1989. Strategic Management. Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company.
Freeman, J & Hannan, M. 1989. Organizational Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lamb, R. 1984. Competitive strategic management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Simon, H. & March, J. 1988. Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.