Noda & Bower (1996), Strategic Management Journal

Strategy making as iterated processes of resource allocation

Firms facing similar new-business opportunities ended up with different commitments: early results raised or lowered middle managers' enthusiasm and top managers' confidence in them, and repeated funding rounds escalated or wound down the bet.

Parts of the Loop it informs

Start it close to the workSupports Review, then hold stillSupports

Read the original paper

Summary written by Unfrozen from the published abstract, then checked twice by independent AI reviewers against the source. Loop coding is exploratory and AI-assisted, pending human verification. Spot an error? Email info@unfreeze.us and it gets fixed.

Questions this study helps answer

What the research saysHow long should a change settle before the next one?What the research saysWhy do changes stall after launch?

Related studies

Starke et al. (2011)At a small manufacturer, most of a transformation happened after its champion CEO left and an unsupportive former CEO returned, with supervisors, staff and new systems filling the leadership gap.Binci et al. (2016)At an Italian power utility's change program, top-down direction and a middle-manager change team's shared leadership worked together in every phase, with the balance between them shifting as the project's needs changed.Logan & Ganster (2007)At a large trucking company, a randomized empowerment program raised unit managers' sense of control only where they felt their own bosses backed them, and it also lifted their units' measured performance.Huy (2011)In a three-year case at a large tech firm, executives treating strategy as a purely task-focused job unintentionally stirred middle managers' group identities around tenure and language; the resulting emotions saw managers, even ones executives promoted, back or quietly brush off an initiative.