To effectively tackle climate change, the strategic management enterprise needs to fundamentally reinvent itself. In their Point, Bansal, Durand, Kreutzer, Kunisch and McGahan forcefully argue for such a turnaround and outline a ‘new strategy’ paradigm that integrates the constraints of planetary boundaries and Earth systems not as an afterthought, but as the basis of inquiry. This, however, doesn’t come without fierce contestation, as shown by the Counterpoint by Foss and Klein and the further Counterpoint by Davis and DeWitt. As this Point-Counterpoint debate on strategic management and climate change shows, large-scale societal transformation and associated contestation go along important epistemic fault lines that cut through how strategy scholars understand climate change, devise possible solutions, and assume the relationship between theories and reality. In the introduction to the Point-Counterpoint debate, Wickert & Muzio specify these fault lines and connect them to important avenues for future research that expand the strategic management conversation about climate change.
What is the Strategy of Strategy to Tackle Climate Change?
Introduction by Christopher Wickert& Daniel Muzio
Strategy Can No Longer Ignore Planetary Boundaries: A Call for Tackling Strategy’s Ecological Fallacy
Point by Pratima (Tima) Bansal, Rodolphe Durand, Markus Kreutzer, Sven Kunisch & Anita M. McGahan
Do we Need a ‘New Strategy Paradigm’? No
Counterpoint 1 by Nicolai J. Foss & Peter G. Klein
Can Strategy Address the Climate Crisis Without Losing its Essence?
Counterpoint 2 by Gerald F. Davis & Theodore DeWitt
