Critical Reflection On Behavioral Theory Of Firm †Free Samples

Question: Discuss about the Critical Reflection On Behavioral Theory Of Firm. Answer: The chosen paper proposes an analytical structure to identify the behavioral roots of the performance of the superior (Lechner Gudmundsson, 2014). It the chosen article the behavioral refers to the being about the mental process. These aspects of the behavioral defines the ability of the firm in pursuing and competing the superior opportunities. The analytical structure present in the research paper is used in identifying the mental process that is important to the performance of the firm and reliably manages by the leaders. The key insight of this structure focuses on the cognitive distant as the superior opportunities. However, the paper offers a whole study of the behavioral theory based on the superior opportunities and strategic implementation of the same. The paper presents that the premises of the behavioral theory of superior performance emphasizes looking beyond the boundaries. The paper is focused on the failures of the behavioral aspects that bound the competition for the superior opportunities. Considering this particular logic, the assessment on the failures of the behavioral aspects reveals that the same limit the pursuit of the firms distant opportunities, which are distant (Gavetti et al., 2012). The study further presents implications, which are twofold. The first aspect of the implication refers that the tendency of the superior opportunities are cognitively distant. Secondly, the superior opportunities need to be attainable in terms of being strategically relevant. This implication summarizes the possibility of the development of the behavioral conception of the strategic agency, which refers to the focal challenges to pursue the cognitively distant opportunities. The reason behind this is the strong challenge to manage t he cognitive distant are categorized by common cognitive roots which is defined by the management of the mental association. In addition, the discussed model in the paper addresses processes that are associative in their various manifestations and provide a proper micro foundational basis to the behavioral theory of strategy and the conception related to the agency (Greve, 2013). The superior opportunities for the studies of the behavioral theory of strategy are real as it is hypothesized and the traits, which define the same, are apparent. On the other hand, the discussed model of the mind introduces central process that needs to be characterized more deeply and entirely. In addition, the effort and the emotional element of the associative thought process is not been examined in the paper, which could affect the foresight as well as the persuasion. However, there is lack of the future research in the paper in order to capture the necessary aspects of the associative thinking process in terms of relationship with distant persuasion and foresight (Brandenburger Vinokurova, 2012). Again, connection of micro level insight regarding associative process along with more aggregate evidence and perspective is required to strategize to measure the competency of the leaders in order to avoid behavioral failures. However, the research findings show various drawbacks of the model of the mind as well as the behavioral theory of strategy (Winter, 2012). There are much room for debate as the recommendation of the problems are not provided. References: Brandenburger, A., Vinokurova, N. (2012). Comment on" Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy".Organization Science,23(1), 286-287. Gavetti, G., Greve, H. R., Levinthal, D. A., Ocasio, W. (2012). The behavioral theory of the firm: Assessment and prospects.Academy of Management Annals,6(1), 1-40. Greve, H. R. (2013). Microfoundations of management: Behavioral strategies and levels of rationality in organizational action.The Academy of Management Perspectives,27(2), 103-119. Lechner, C., Gudmundsson, S. V. (2014). Entrepreneurial orientation, firm strategy and small firm performance.International Small Business Journal,32(1), 36-60. Winter, S. G. (2012). Purpose and progress in the theory of strategy: Comments on Gavetti.Organization Science,23(1), 288-297.