Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management
The article presents the worldview prerequisites for the formation of strategy and the use of strategic management in companies, organizations and institutions. For this there was considered the present structure of the strategy as a product of the subject-object relations in space-time continuum. T...
Збережено в:
| Опубліковано в: : | Економічний вісник Донбасу |
|---|---|
| Дата: | 2015 |
| Автор: | |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | Англійська |
| Опубліковано: |
Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України
2015
|
| Теми: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/109334 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Цитувати: | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management / A.S. Vishnevsky // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2015. — № 4 (42). — С. 146-150. — Бібліогр.: 8 назв. — англ. |
Репозитарії
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| _version_ | 1859706431081545728 |
|---|---|
| author | Vishnevsky, A.S. |
| author_facet | Vishnevsky, A.S. |
| citation_txt | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management / A.S. Vishnevsky // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2015. — № 4 (42). — С. 146-150. — Бібліогр.: 8 назв. — англ. |
| collection | DSpace DC |
| container_title | Економічний вісник Донбасу |
| description | The article presents the worldview prerequisites for the formation of strategy and the use of strategic management in companies, organizations and institutions. For this there was considered the present structure of the strategy as a product of the subject-object relations in space-time continuum. The hypothesis about accordance elements of strategic management with philosophical paradigms was formulated and proved. There were shown the impossibility of the creation of the Strategic Management (in its modern sense) in the era preceding the modernity and were described its formation in the logic of modernity. The adequacy using of current approaches to strategic management in logic of postmodernism was doubted. Because this paradigm involves the revision of the subject-object relationship and displacement from real space to virtual space. In conclusion considers the possibility adaptation of modern strategic management to the logic of postmodernism.
У статті досліджено світоглядні передумови формування стратегії та використання стратегічного управління в компаніях, організаціях та установах. Для цього розглянута сучасна структура стратегії, як продукт суб'єкт-об'єктних відносин в просторово-часовому континуумі. Сформульована і доведена гіпотеза залежності стратегічного управління від світоглядних інтерпретацій його окремих елементів. Продемонстровано неможливість зародження стратегічного управління (в сучасному його розумінні) в епоху, що передувала модерну, і обґрунтовано його формування в межах логіки модерну. Ставиться під сумнів можливість адекватного застосування сучасних підходів до стратегічного управління в рамках подальшого укорінення логіки постмодерну, яка передбачає перегляд суб'єкт-об'єктних відносин та зміщення реального простору в бік віртуального. У заключній частині розглядаються можливості адаптації сучасного стратегічного управління до логіки постмодерну.
В статье исследованы мировоззренческие предпосылки формирования стратегии и использования стратегического управления в компаниях, организациях и учреждениях. Для этого рассмотрена современная структура стратегии, как продукта субъект-объектных отношений в пространственно-временном континууме. Сформулирована и доказана гипотеза зависимости стратегического управления от мировоззренческих интерпретаций его отдельных элементов. Показана невозможность зарождения стратегического управления (в современном его понимании) в эпоху предшествующую модерну и обосновано его формирование в рамках логики модерна. Ставится под сомнение возможность адекватного применение современных подходов к стратегическому управлению в рамках дальнейшего укоренении логики постмодерна, которая предполагает пересмотр субъект-объектных отношений и смещение реального пространства в сторону виртуального. В заключении рассматриваются возможности адаптации современного стратегического управления к логике постмодерна.
|
| first_indexed | 2025-12-01T02:09:15Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
A. S. Vishnevsky
146
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(42), 2015
UDC 338.2:658:140.8
A. S. Vishnevsky,
PhD (Economics),
Institute of Industrial Economics NAS of Ukraine, Kiev
PARADIGMATIC BASICS OF STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
In recent decades, the demand for strategic man-
agement dramatically enhanced. Separate individuals,
households, companies, municipalities, regions, multi-
national companies, government and supranational
structures create your own strategies. For instance, the
international standard ISO 9001 indicated the need for
setting goals of the organization from top management
(5.4.1 of ISO 9001: 2008). According to this standard at
the beginning of 2015 more than 1.1 million companies
has been certified [1]. In fact, strategic management, or
at least some of its elements have become a universal
attribute of management, which leads to the relevance
of the study of this problem, especially in the transition
to a post-industrial society and the postmodern logic.
Science-based approaches to strategic management
were laid down in the second half of the twentieth cen-
tury [2, 239]. This theme is actively studied by famous
scientists, among them R. Ackoff, I. Ansoff, H.
Mintzberg, Porter, P. Krugman. As result, over the past
half century, number of schools that have specific dif-
ferences and characteristics were formed [3].
However, there remain a number of unanswered
questions. Why strategic management, as a science-
based discipline and a common practice, haven't arisen
in the past? For instance, in ancient times or times of the
Enlightenment when the logic of positivism became
common rule in all life areas. How belief in God or the
perception of space and time influenced the formation
of strategic management? Thus, there is available, the
unresolved problem of the influence on the formation of
world outlook paradigm of strategic management and its
further development in the framework of the postmod-
ern and the transition to a postindustrial society logic.
The purpose of the article is to show the influence
of modernist paradigm on the formation of strategic
management and the possibility of changing it according
to the logic of postmodernism. The strategy in this paper
is defined according to the logic of modernity, as "de-
scribed way of converting existing reality in long term
target reality" [4, p.39].
The modern structure of the strategy is almost can-
onized, and includes the following elements: mission,
vision, values, strategic goals and plans of the imple-
mentation goals, implementation risks. Standardization
experts say: "despite the fact that none of these standards
are say on the mandatory formation of the mission, the
vision (of the future) and the strategic plan of the organ-
ization, the majority of companies ... are de-
veloping these documents" [5, p.198]. Thus, it can be
argued that the development of the mission, vision and
strategic plan is not a special case for some large com-
panies, and it is massive activity.
The mission is the ontological element of strategy.
It gives answer for the question, “What for (why) is the
organization exist?"
The vision and goals reflect the space-time side. It
gives answer for the question, “Where is organization
plan to be in the future?" The risks of the strategy de-
pend on goals and reflect measure of deviation from
them.
Values characterize the ethical component of the
strategy. It gives answer for the question, “What are the
moral and ethical conditions correspond to the organi-
zation's mission and goals?”
The subject of strategy is organization which im-
plementing the strategy. Strategist is a subject of strat-
egy formation.
The object of strategy is internal and external envi-
ronments of organization.
Epistemological component manifested at the
stage of the strategy, and characterizes interaction strat-
egist with environment.
Therefore, any strategy can be presented in the on-
tological-epistemological and spatiotemporal context
according to premodern, modern and postmodern para-
digms. It’s allowed evaluate the strategy formation
through the interpretation of categories such as subject,
object, space, time and their relationship. It should be
noted that these paradigms cannot fully considered in-
dependently from each other. The premodern and post-
modern are comprehended according to logic of moder-
nity. But each of paradigms can be associated with a cer-
tain type of society, geographical and time bounds (Ta-
ble 1) [6, p.26].
As shown in table 1, the formation of strategic
management be located on border of transformation hu-
man civilization. And 9 from 13 classification types
point to this. Each type of society has own philosophical
paradigm.
A common set of markers that characterize the par-
adigm in the context of strategic management elements
and the factors influencing them, is given in table 2.
Within the logic of premodern era (Indian reli-
gions) object is identical to the subject and his cognition
through analysis is not provided. For instance identity of
the object and the subject can be shown as the possibility
of transformation of man into a tree or a deity. It does
not involve any physical activities and physical effort on
the part of the subject, but only his contemplation. As a
result, creation a strategy in the ontological-epistemo-
logical context doesn't have sense.
A. S. Vishnevsky
147
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(42), 2015
Table 1
Social stages in the history of human civilization *
Chronology
B.C. A.D.
2.5 M 8000 3500 500 0 500 1500 1750 1914 ▼1970 2000 +
Traditional Society Modern Society
Postmodern
Society
Pro-Industrial Society
Industrial
Society
Postindustrial
Society
Primitive Society Agricultural Society
Industrial
Society
Knowledge
Society
Primitive Society Agricultural Society
Industrial
Society
Information
Society
Primitive Society Agricultural Society
Industrial
Society
Network Society
Primitive Society Agricultural Society
Industrial
Society
Ecological
Society
Primitive Society Agricultural Society
Industrial
Society
Risk Society
G&H**
Society
Horticultural
Society
Agrarian
Society
Agricultural
Society
Industrial Society
G&H
Society
Horticultural
Society
Pastoral
Society
Agricultural
Society
Industrial Society
G&H
Society
Pastoral
Society
Agrarian
Society
Traditional Civili-
zation Society
Industrial Society
Primitive Society
Slavery
Society
Feudalism
Society
Capitalism
Society
Socialism
(Communism) Society
G&H So-
ciety
Horticultural
Society
Pastoral
Society
Agricultural
Society
Capitalism Society
Postcapitalism
Society
G&H So-
ciety
Horticultural
Society
Pastoral
Society
Agricultural
Society
Industrial
Society
Postindustrial
Society
* The table is based on sources [6]
** G&H – gathering and hunting
▼ – time formation of strategic management from 1950’s to 1960’s.
Given the cyclical and closure of the time impossi-
ble the formation of goals to achieve them in the future,
because the future as such in our usual (linear) under-
standing is not existing. It can be assumed that such a
worldview initially appear due to the agrarian basis of
the economy, when the whole life is subject to changing
of seasons, and you can easily argue that a generation
later everything will be as before. Accordingly, the for-
mation of a strategic plan for the long term is absurd,
and impossible manage development of organization
taking into account the strategic perspective.
As part of the creationism logic God determines
ontological essence of any organization. Forming their
own unique missions by companies, organizations and
institutions would be seen as heresy against God. So
these attempts could not have a mass character. How-
ever, it should be noted that it is theoretically possible
formation of mission in the context of God's purposes.
Accordingly, the subject-object relationship in the de-
velopment and implementation of the strategy is pos-
sible only with the direct "participation" of God. Direct
implementation of the strategy is impossible.
In the understanding of "time" category is inter-
rupted circular closure. Time takes the form of a vector
that defines the movement from the "creation" by God
to the time of "Last Judgment". The organization cannot
deviate from this direction. The general vector of devel-
opment for the organization is set by God. So "vision"
of the future destined outside the organization.
Therefore, the formation of the strategy and using
"management by objects" does not fit creationist logic.
Only the transition to the modern era creates the
conditions for the formation and mass use of strategic
management. Industrial society subjugates agricultural
and secularization leads to the alienation of God func-
tions in the direction of individuals and organizations.
Ontological monopoly of God is destroyed. Physicists
have proved that creation of World begins from the "Big
Bang." Objective reality is perceived as reality without
God and subject can cognize it directly.
A. S. Vishnevsky
148
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(42), 2015
Table 2
Key features of philosophical paradigms for the formation of a strategy *
Paradigm
Premodern (In-
dian religions)
Premodern (Abra-
hamic religions;
Creationism)
Modern Postmodern
Type of society Prehistoric, agrarian Agrarian Industrial
Postindustrial,
knowledge, risk
Entity
(ontological aspect)
From
nonexistence
From God
From the "Big
Bang"
Not defined (cannot be
determined)
Object
A copy with inter-
nal original
A copy with exter-
nal original
Original
A copy without origi-
nal
Subject
Inseparable from
the existence
Aimed at cognition
of God
The individual as
"epistemological
Robinson»
The existence of the
"subject" and "object"
is called into question.
Only the text and con-
text exist.
The subject-object
relationship
(Epistemological
aspect)
The subject is iden-
tical to the object
The subject recog-
nizes the object
through God
The subject rec-
ognizes the object
directly
Time Cyclically
Linear (from the
creation to the "Last
Judgment")
Linear, continu-
ous, irreversible
Nonlinear, set of trajec-
tories, reversible
Space
Live (each item cor-
responds to the
"spirit")
Make alive by God
Dead (mechanis-
tic model)
Virtual (can be con-
structed)
* The table is based on sources [6] and the author's own development.
The "arrow time" goes to infinity because offensive
"Last Judgment" is replaced by "the heat death of the
universe" and is postponed indefinitely in the distant fu-
ture.
This is a set of philosophical presuppositions cre-
ates conditions for the formation of strategic manage-
ment. The realization of this possibility has been started
at the period of the emergence postmodern logic, or
watching from the other side at the time of "sunset" of
the modernity logic. A lot of organizations are finding
the strength to predict and program their future only
when the modern paradigm is completely covered by a
retrospective glance. At the same time functioning of so-
cio-economic system is becoming fully understandable
not only in theory (mechanistic Newtonian), but in prac-
tices of management at the micro and macro levels.
The chronological gap between the appearance of
the basic ideas of the modern era and the emergence of
industrial society is at least 100 years, and if you count
from the time of early modern ("New Time") is about
250 years old. Thus, it is difficult to predict how the
logic of constructing postmodern translates into eco-
nomic life in the future. It is already clear that it will be
quite difficult to implement the theoretical basis of post-
modern in strategic management. High complexity of
the mission formation arises because of the ontological
specificity of the postmodern. The uncertainty of the
subject and the object makes it impossible to conduct a
classical strategic analysis, formulation and implemen-
tation strategy. Features of the definition of the space-
time continuum, as a virtual space with a variety of tra-
jectories and the reversible time, are blocking formation
of the vision and strategic objectives of the organization.
However, given that the practical transition to the
logic of modernity cannot fully take place. So in the
foreseeable future the transitional forms will be domi-
nate and we can only suppose some of trends in strategic
management.
Lack of opportunity to formation mission in the
postmodern logic, cannot be regarded as an insurmount-
able obstacle to the further use of strategic management
in practice. However given the role of the mission as the
main tool of motivation of the personnel from it is not
necessary to give up. Here it is advisable to apply the
classical logic of Descartes: "I think therefore I am" (7,
p.317], and uncover the ontological role of the organi-
zation through epistemological activity. We can make
universal purpose of the organization like changing or
formation virtual space and discourse, and the "vision"
as the direction of these changes.
Virtual space could be constructed by strategist in
much more greater scale than the real space. Therefore,
initially the organization should not be reflect environ-
ment, it must form it to achieve success. This is corre-
sponds with the concept of "blue ocean" [8]. Only pos-
sibilities for the formation these "blue oceans" is much
more because of fundamentally new market niches. For-
mation of discourse in global scale lifts restrictions from
"weak" starting position of the subject of the strategy,
and creates preconditions for overcoming the strengths
of competitors. Thus, the subject (organization) during
realization of strategy not aimed on specific object
A. S. Vishnevsky
149
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(42), 2015
(users of strategy), but in aimed on the formation dis-
course, which also changes the potential object (con-
sumers and other interested parties) and the subject itself
(the organization).
Summing up the results can be demonstrated that
only a modern logic allows generate full strategy in the
usual form for business (table 3).
Table 3
The possibility of formation of strategy in the context of the logic of world view paradigms
Element strategy of the
organization
Paradigm
Premodern (In-
dian religions)
Premodern (Abra-
hamic religions;
Creationism)
Modern Postmodern
Mission (unique) – + / – + ?
Values + / – + / – + +
Vision and goals – + / – + +/-
Within the framework of other paradigms, such a
possibility does not exist in a variety of ways. At the
same time the least adapted to the use of strategic man-
agement is considered logic Indian religions. Strategic
management in the logic of creationism is theoretically
possible, provided the will of God is in each of the ele-
ments of the strategy. Postmodern, remaining largely the
unknown with a positive point of view, contains both
obvious limitations for the implementation of strategic
management as well as the potential for its improve-
ment.
Conclusions
1. Strategic management is a phenomenon of mo-
dernity that emerged in the sunset of its existence, which
corresponds to the beginning of the postmodern logic
formation. Organizations are able to use the holistic so-
cio-economic picture of the world for forecasting and
programming of its development.
2. Formation of strategic management in a primi-
tive and agrarian society according to premodern logic
cannot be due to differences in the ontological, episte-
mological and space-time perception of the world in
comparison with modernity.
3. Transition to post-industrial society and the logic
of postmodern forms the background for the change of
strategic management. First of all, such a change will be
implemented by changing the understanding of the cat-
egory of "space" (in the direction of its virtualization)
and the perception of the subject-object relationship of
the organization and the external environment. You can
predict the further transformation aspirations of the or-
ganization from "meeting client needs" to their for-
mation through changes in common discourse.
References
1. The ISO Survey of Management System Stand-
ard Certifications – 2014 [Electronic resource]. – Mode
of access: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_survey_execu-
tive-summary.pdf?v2014. 2. Ушакова О.А. Развитие
стратегического планирования в мировой и россий-
ской практике / О.А. Ушаков // Вестник ОГУ. – 2014.
№6 (167). 3. Минцберг Г. Школы стратегий. Стра-
тегическое сафари: экскурсия по дебрям стратегий
менеджмента / Г. Минцберг, Б. Альстранд, Дж. Лам-
пель. – М., 2013. 4. Вишневский А.С. Стратегиче-
ское планирование: экстравертная и интровертная
установки стратега / А.С. Вишневский // Вестник
экономической науки Украины. – 2015. – № 1(28).
5. Мищенко С.В. Разработка миссии, видения, по-
литики в области качества, целей и стратегических
планов при внедрении системы менеджмента каче-
ства в организации / С.В. Мищенко, Н.П. Пучков,
С.В. Пономарев // Вестник ТГТУ. – 2005. – Т. 11. –
№ 1Б. 6. China Modernization Report Outlook (2001-
2010) (English Edition) Kindle Edition He Chuanqi. –
Peking: Peking University Press. – 400 р. 7. Декарт Р.
Сочинения в 2 т. / Р. Декарт. – М, 1989. – Т. 1. 8. Чан
Ким У. Стратегия голубого океана: Как создать сво-
бодную рыночную нишу и перестать бояться конку-
рентов / У. Чан Ким, Р. Моборн. – М., 2005.
Вишневський О. С. Парадигмальні основи
стратегічного управління
У статті досліджено світоглядні передумови
формування стратегії та використання стратегічного
управління в компаніях, організаціях та установах.
Для цього розглянута сучасна структура стратегії,
як продукт суб'єкт-об'єктних відносин в просто-
рово-часовому континуумі. Сформульована і дове-
дена гіпотеза залежності стратегічного управлін-
ня від світоглядних інтерпретацій його окремих
елементів. Продемонстровано неможливість заро-
дження стратегічного управління (в сучасному його
розумінні) в епоху, що передувала модерну, і об-
ґрунтовано його формування в межах логіки мо-
A. S. Vishnevsky
150
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(42), 2015
дерну. Ставиться під сумнів можливість адекват-
ного застосування сучасних підходів до стратегіч-
ного управління в рамках подальшого укорінення
логіки постмодерну, яка передбачає перегляд
суб'єкт-об'єктних відносин та зміщення реального
простору в бік віртуального. У заключній частині
розглядаються можливості адаптації сучасного
стратегічного управління до логіки постмодерну.
Ключові слова: філософія стратегування, стра-
тегія, стратегічне планування, стратегічне управ-
ління, модерн, премодерн, постмодерн.
Вишневский А. С. Парадигмальные основы
стратегического управления
В статье исследованы мировоззренческие пред-
посылки формирования стратегии и использования
стратегического управления в компаниях, организа-
циях и учреждениях. Для этого рассмотрена совре-
менная структура стратегии, как продукта субъект-
объектных отношений в пространственно-времен-
ном континууме. Сформулирована и доказана гипо-
теза зависимости стратегического управления от
мировоззренческих интерпретаций его отдельных
элементов. Показана невозможность зарождения
стратегического управления (в современном его по-
нимании) в эпоху предшествующую модерну и
обосновано его формирование в рамках логики мо-
дерна. Ставится под сомнение возможность адекват-
ного применение современных подходов к стратеги-
ческому управлению в рамках дальнейшего укоре-
нении логики постмодерна, которая предполагает
пересмотр субъект-объектных отношений и смеще-
ние реального пространства в сторону виртуаль-
ного. В заключении рассматриваются возможности
адаптации современного стратегического управле-
ния к логике постмодерна.
Ключевые слова: философия стратегирования,
стратегия, стратегическое планирование, стратеги-
ческое управление, модерн, премодерн, постмодерн.
Vishnevsky A. S. Paradigmatic Basics of Strate-
gic Management
The article presents the worldview prerequisites for
the formation of strategy and the use of strategic man-
agement in companies, organizations and institutions.
For this there was considered the present structure of the
strategy as a product of the subject-object relations in
space-time continuum. The hypothesis about accord-
ance elements of strategic management with philosoph-
ical paradigms was formulated and proved. There were
shown the impossibility of the creation of the Strategic
Management (in its modern sense) in the era preceding
the modernity and were described its formation in the
logic of modernity. The adequacy using of current ap-
proaches to strategic management in logic of postmod-
ernism was doubted. Because this paradigm involves the
revision of the subject-object relationship and displace-
ment from real space to virtual space. In conclusion con-
siders the possibility adaptation of modern strategic
management to the logic of postmodernism.
Keywords: philosophy of strategizing, strategy,
strategic planning, strategic management, modern, pre-
modern, postmodern.
Received by the editors: 27.08.2015
and final form 28.12.2015
|
| id | nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-109334 |
| institution | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| issn | 1817-3772 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-12-01T02:09:15Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publisher | Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | Vishnevsky, A.S. 2016-11-24T17:44:42Z 2016-11-24T17:44:42Z 2015 Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management / A.S. Vishnevsky // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2015. — № 4 (42). — С. 146-150. — Бібліогр.: 8 назв. — англ. 1817-3772 https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/109334 338.2:658:140.8 The article presents the worldview prerequisites for the formation of strategy and the use of strategic management in companies, organizations and institutions. For this there was considered the present structure of the strategy as a product of the subject-object relations in space-time continuum. The hypothesis about accordance elements of strategic management with philosophical paradigms was formulated and proved. There were shown the impossibility of the creation of the Strategic Management (in its modern sense) in the era preceding the modernity and were described its formation in the logic of modernity. The adequacy using of current approaches to strategic management in logic of postmodernism was doubted. Because this paradigm involves the revision of the subject-object relationship and displacement from real space to virtual space. In conclusion considers the possibility adaptation of modern strategic management to the logic of postmodernism. У статті досліджено світоглядні передумови формування стратегії та використання стратегічного управління в компаніях, організаціях та установах. Для цього розглянута сучасна структура стратегії, як продукт суб'єкт-об'єктних відносин в просторово-часовому континуумі. Сформульована і доведена гіпотеза залежності стратегічного управління від світоглядних інтерпретацій його окремих елементів. Продемонстровано неможливість зародження стратегічного управління (в сучасному його розумінні) в епоху, що передувала модерну, і обґрунтовано його формування в межах логіки модерну. Ставиться під сумнів можливість адекватного застосування сучасних підходів до стратегічного управління в рамках подальшого укорінення логіки постмодерну, яка передбачає перегляд суб'єкт-об'єктних відносин та зміщення реального простору в бік віртуального. У заключній частині розглядаються можливості адаптації сучасного стратегічного управління до логіки постмодерну. В статье исследованы мировоззренческие предпосылки формирования стратегии и использования стратегического управления в компаниях, организациях и учреждениях. Для этого рассмотрена современная структура стратегии, как продукта субъект-объектных отношений в пространственно-временном континууме. Сформулирована и доказана гипотеза зависимости стратегического управления от мировоззренческих интерпретаций его отдельных элементов. Показана невозможность зарождения стратегического управления (в современном его понимании) в эпоху предшествующую модерну и обосновано его формирование в рамках логики модерна. Ставится под сомнение возможность адекватного применение современных подходов к стратегическому управлению в рамках дальнейшего укоренении логики постмодерна, которая предполагает пересмотр субъект-объектных отношений и смещение реального пространства в сторону виртуального. В заключении рассматриваются возможности адаптации современного стратегического управления к логике постмодерна. en Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України Економічний вісник Донбасу Management Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management Парадигмальні основи стратегічного управління Парадигмальные основы стратегического управления Article published earlier |
| spellingShingle | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management Vishnevsky, A.S. Management |
| title | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management |
| title_alt | Парадигмальні основи стратегічного управління Парадигмальные основы стратегического управления |
| title_full | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management |
| title_fullStr | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management |
| title_full_unstemmed | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management |
| title_short | Paradigmatic Basics of Strategic Management |
| title_sort | paradigmatic basics of strategic management |
| topic | Management |
| topic_facet | Management |
| url | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/109334 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT vishnevskyas paradigmaticbasicsofstrategicmanagement AT vishnevskyas paradigmalʹníosnovistrategíčnogoupravlínnâ AT vishnevskyas paradigmalʹnyeosnovystrategičeskogoupravleniâ |