Science, Strategy and War The Strategic Theory of ... - Boekje Pienter

model of theory posited by the natural sciences, strategic theory then may in some peopleseyes not deserve that label at all, and really these theories are more sets of propositions,hypotheses and models. In any case, this proves that not only making strategy is difficult, butthat strategic theorizing is equally challenging, even daunting. The activities of a strategictheorist can perhaps be likened to the one who attempts to build a house on the muddy bankof a fast flowing river. The patch constantly changes form, depth, substance and location dueto the turbulence of the river. Moreover, it shifts and deforms because of the constructionactivities. The very fact that one places a stone so as to construct a foundation alters theenvironment. So those who attempt to write a strategic theory, general or partial, should notbe judged too hard if their theories do not live up to high standards of the “hard” sciences interms of comprehensiveness, consistence, range of applicability and predictability.How strategic theory develops: formative factorsSources of inspiration and for understandingStrategic theory takes it inspiration from many sources. Mintzberg’s observation concerningstrategic management literature that ‘all kinds of fields make important contributions to ourunderstanding of the strategy process’ is equally relevant for military strategy. In addition tofields such as psychology on human cognition, political science on public policy making,military history on strategies in conflict, he illustrates how biology can be insightful (theanalogy of adaptation of species for examining positioning strategies) and how quantummechanics and chaos theory may provide insight into how organizations change 112 .Elsewhere he shows how schools in strategic management theory are informed by specificdisciplines such as systems theory, cybernetics, anthropology and economics 113 . The appliednature of strategic management requires a multidimensional view, incorporating diversecomplexities, rationalities and strategies. Certainly there is a danger of becoming too eclecticin an integrative effort, but the whole strategy field is multiparadigmatic by nature, as oneauthor notes 114 . And this tendency to borrow from other disciplines has accelerated 115 . Thisis in line with modern social theory. As one sociologist remarks,Contemporary social theory is notable for drawing on extra-disciplinary resources…externalintellectual influences have become priceless sources of theoretical innovations 116 .This also applies to strategic theory. As Quincy Wright stated long ago, the discipline [of thetheory of war or the art of war] extends into science, history, and philosophy as well aspractice. Insights for explanation and the formulation of advice may be sought in sociology,psychology, political science, economics, history, international law. All may assist in ‘building112 Mintzberg et al, pp.8-9.113 Quoted in Volberda, p.7.114 Regner, in Volberda, p.45.115 J.-C. Spender, ‘Business Policy and Strategy as a Professional Field’, in Volberda, p.39.116 Todd Stillman, ‘Introduction: Metatheorizing Contemporary Social Theorists’, in George Ritzer,The Blackwell Companion to Major Contemporary Social Theorists (Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2003), pp.4-5. See for a similar position also A. van Braam, Filosofie van de Bestuurswetenschappen (College Uitgevers,Amersfoort, 1992), in particular pp.39, 53-59, where he asserts that fields such as management theoryand public administration theory are eclectic and multidisciplinary and should aspire no more than toestablish itself firmely as an integrative science, with an ideal to become interdisciplinary.31