Looking for theories in strategy studies

This paper focuses on the need for critical reflection on the theoretical/methodological characterization of that broad area of research referred to here as "strategy studies". The aim is to point out some of the features of this field that distinguish it from other scientific ambits (in particular from prevailing approaches in economics and organizational theory). The thesis I shall seek to demonstrate is that two main limitations can be identified in the evolution of thinking on this subject: the strong prescriptive vein and the so-called "rationalism". The first calls for a revision in terms of descriptive theories of what is usually put in normative/prescriptive terms. From the analysis of the pivotal concept of the field -- strategy -- the underlying conception of the firm as a unique entity emerges as the most important theoretical contribution common to strategy studies. The second certainly calls for a closer examination and a deeper discussion of methodological issues. Rather than "rationalism", what emerges is a curious methodological contradiction in this field: intentionalism -- or "constructivist rationalism" -- in representing organizational processes (the dynamics of decision-making), applied to a conception which is in itself to a large extent evolutionary.