STRATEGY, ECONOMICS, AND PORTER,MICHAEL

This article links up with recent discussions of the strategy/economic s nexus. In contrast to most of the proponents and opponents of econom ics in strategy thinking, a balanced pluralist perspective is adopted. According to this, a discipline should strike a balance between the g eneration of new theoretical alternatives and the selection among them . Applying this general idea, I argue that the strategy field is too p luralistic, and that the unfortunate consequences of excessive plurali sm and eclecticism may be remedied by economics playing a larger role in the conversation of strategy researchers. This does not necessarily mean standard neoclassical economics or new industrial organization e conomics; evolutionary economis, for example, is a serious contender, too. The evolution of Michael Porter's thinking is used as a case for demonstrating some of the advantages and some of the dangers of econom icsin the strategy field, and for illustrating points about eclecticis m and pluralism.