Strategic Flexibility: A Review of the Literature

• Published date: 01 January 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12111
• Date: 01 January 2018
• Author: Danilo Brozovic

International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 20, 3–31 (2018)

DOI: 10.1111/ijmr.12111

Strategic Flexibility: A Review

of the Literature

Danilo Brozovic

Stockholm University, Stockholm Business School, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

Corresponding author email: dbr@sbs.su.se

Previous literature reviews of strategic flexibility have a number of shortcomings:

they lack a specific focus in the field, provide an excessive definitional focus or lack a

clear empirical overview of research in the field. To overcome these shortcomings, this

paper aims to systematically analyse the literature on strategic flexibilityby identifying

its main characteristics, linking the different aspects together in a new conceptual

framework, and considering the means to measure it. This comprehensive analytical

model analyses various aspects of strategic flexibility in the relevant literature (156

contributions). Thus, the systematic and critical approach of this paper offers a

novel perspective in understanding strategic flexibility, and contributes to the field by

providing a consolidation of the literature and indicating futureresearch avenues.

Introduction

As modern society is characterized by irregularity,in-

creased levels of complexity and uncertainty, and re-

duced levels of predictability (Nowotny et al. 2001),

it is necessary for the actors in the marketplace to

develop the ability to navigate complex business en-

vironments. Therefore, strategic flexibility,defined as

the ability to handle change (Wright and Snell 1998;

Zhou and Wu 2010), has emerged as a crucial orga-

nizational requirement in order for actors to thrive

in such environments (Li et al. 2008; Hamlin et al.

2012). Specifically, strategicflexibility allows for the

creation and performance of strategic options that re-

spond to or lead a change (Combe et al. 2012; Sanchez

1995). In the business world, for instance, Deloitte

has been a known advocate of strategic flexibility

in many industries (e.g. see Raynor n.d.). Similarly,

corporations, such as Apple, define and implement

strategies to exploit emerging opportunities, thereby

staying ahead of the competition in a visionary and

flexible manner (Chaston 2012, pp. 141–142).

Academic interest in this topic has been rising

continuously (Combe 2012), both theoretically and

empirically, resulting in an increase in the number of

publications (see Figure 1). However, the existing

literature appears relatively broad, delineating defi-

nitions of strategic flexibility (Roberts and Stockport

2009), suggesting its different forms (Combe and

Greenley 2004; Evans 1991) and studying its

interaction with niches (Hamlin et al. 2012), quality

management (Escrig-Tena et al. 2011) and networks

(Mason and Mouzas 2012), for instance. In an

attempt to consolidate the scope of the field, several

literature reviews and overviewshave been published

recently (Combe 2012; de Haan et al. 2011; De Toni

and Tonchia 1998; Roberts and Stockport 2009;

Saleh et al. 2009).

However, these reviews have a number of short-

comings. For example, some are concerned primar-

ily with definitional issues; they revisit the existing

definitions and create new and more encompassing

definitions (Roberts and Stockport 2009). Other re-

views compare and connect strategic flexibility to

other types of flexibilities (De Toniand Tonchia 1998;

Saleh et al. 2009) or relate it to similar theoretical con-

cepts, such as robustness, adaptability and resilience

(de Haan et al. 2011). Although encompassing and

multidimensional, these reviews lack a specific fo-

cus on strategic flexibility. In addition, few of the

aforementioned reviews have offered an overview of

the empirical research in strategic flexibility; thus,

C2016 British Academy of Management and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Publishedby John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington

Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA

4D. Brozovic

0 10203040506070

1978-1990

1991-2000

2001-2010

2011-2015

Figure 1. Distribution of identified contributions accordingto year

of publication

they have seldom suggested possible approaches to

measurement or indicated underused methodological

approaches.

The latest overview of strategic flexibility was

presented by Combe (2012). The overview presents

existing miscomprehensions and unresolved issues

within the field and proposes several possibilities for

future research. Although the overview is undoubt-

edly a valuablecontribution, there is still a need for an

alternative, systematic and more comprehensive re-

view that illuminates unaddressed issues and reaches

beyond the position of an editorial viewpoint.

Consequently, additional theoretical studies about

the concept of strategic flexibility are necessary to

bring further consolidation to the field. The lack of

consolidation and of common definitions in a sci-

entific field may cause academic findings to reach

business reality more slowly (Schutjens and Wever

2000). This type of situation currently prevails within

the scope of the strategic flexibility literature, which

could create significant problems in the field (Singh

et al. 2013b). One accepted definition and a set of

classifications are, therefore, necessary requirements

for further theoretical and empirical analyses (Honjo

2000; Schutjens and Wever 2000). This paper con-

tributes consolidation and comprehensiveness to the

literature on strategic flexibility.

More precisely, the purpose of this paper is to sys-

tematically analyse the literature in the field of strate-

gic flexibility by identifying its main characteristics,

linking the different aspects using a comprehensive

analytical model and considering the means to mea-

sure it. In doing so, this paper adopts a theoretical

analysis model, developedfrom a meta-review of sev-

eral other reviews (Anderson et al. 1989; Barrales-

Molina et al. 2014; Croom et al. 2000; Edvardsson

et al. 2005; Golden and Powell 2000; Hutzschen-

reuter and Israel 2009; Nordin and Kowalkowski

2010; Shepherd and Rudd 2014). The model, con-

sequently, consists of different aspects of strategic

flexibility, offers an extensive overview of the field

and serves as an analytical tool.

This paper is, in essence, constructed around

the aspects of strategic flexibility identified by the

meta-review. First, the scope and coverage of the

literature review are explained; the relevant literature

is identified; and an overview of the identified

contributions, according to the research approach,

is offered. Next, the analytical model is developed.

The model presupposes that changes in the business

environment trigger strategic flexibility, initiating

firms to act. Furthermore, the model presupposes

that various factors at a firm’s disposal can enable the

actions of firms or represent barriers to strategic flex-

ibility. The meta-review also recognizes the process

of strategic flexibility and identifies the outcomes

of strategic flexibility, after which, accordingly,

follows an overview of approaches to measuring

strategic flexibility. Finally, a discussion is offered,

with an emphasis on the interactions between the

dimensions, the triggers, the enablers, the barriers,

the process and the outcomes of strategic flexibility.

Thus, the analytical framework will be reframed to

form a suitable starting point for future empirical

research. It will indicate, for example, how different

combinations of triggers, dimensions, enablers,

barriers, processes and outcomes are related and

which combinations are more suitable in different

situations (see Nordin and Kowalkowski 2010). The

paper concludes with suggestions for future research.

Scope and coverage of the literature

review

Identification of relevant literature

The first step in the review was identifying the rele-

vant literature on strategic flexibility. Several schol-

arly databases (Business Source Premier, Elsevier

(Scopus), Emerald, Google Scholar and Wiley) were

searched using the key phrase ‘strategic flexibility’

in titles, keywords and abstracts. The articles that

mentioned strategic flexibility but did not deal with

it specifically were not considered. Then, the ref-

erence lists of the identified papers were scanned

to identify other relevant articles, leading to an ex-

pansion of the list of articles. It was presumed that

the articles identified by this expansion represented

C2016 British Academy of Management and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.