FULLTEXT01

Strategic Thinking in Crisis
Management:
A Study into how Organisations
Use Strategic Thinking to
Overcome Unusually Demanding
Situations
Marcus Fors Lindeberg, Valon Krasnici
Department of Business Administration

Master's Program in Management
Master’s Thesis in Business Administration I, 15 Credits, Spring 2020
Supervisor: Christopher Nicol
Acknowledgements
First, we would like to express great gratitude to our supervisor Dr. Christopher Nicol for the
useful comments, remarks and engagement through the learning process of this paper. His
support and guidance has made this thesis possible.
We would also like to express appreciation to the nine participants that were interviewed, who
have willingly shared their experiences and knowledge even though time has been a scarce
resource for many during the ongoing pandemic. Their valuable input to the topic of strategic
thinking is an essential part of this study. Additionally, we would like to acknowledge the
valuable input from fellow students as well as their participation in the pilot-interview.
Finally, we would like to thank our respective families and loved ones who have supported us
throughout the entire process, both by keeping us harmonious and providing encouragement in
putting pieces together.
Abstract
Strategy and strategic management have always been on the radar in academia. A few years
back, some scholars studied strategic management further and concluded that the terms strategic
planning and strategic thinking as part of strategic management should be spoken of seperately.
As academia has evolved, few scholars have embraced this. However, there is a clear distinction
between the two terms, where a separation is necessary in order to fully comprehend the
differences between them. In this study, a line between strategic planning and thinking has been
drawn. What was further realised in the first phase of the study is that strategic thinking as an
individual concept lacks integration into crisis management in academia. This presented a
fruitful opportunity to explore the topic. The purpose of this research thereby became to identify
how strategic thinking may occur within organisations, particularly during a crisis. Specifically,
it is the aim to find out how strategic thinking manifests itself in private organisations during
times of crisis. This has been done in a timely manner where the world currently is experiencing
a pandemic caused by the virus Covid-19, which has presented difficulties for organisations all
around the world. The study has chosen to look into private organisations operating in Sweden,
with a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews. Primary data was as a result
gathered based on respondents' own experiences and thoughts regarding strategic thinking as
the concept is of a complex nature. The data gathered was later analysed in a manner where the
connection between strategic thinking and crisis management was looked at. Our findings show
that strategic thinking is manifested in crisis management in different ways, where it was
determined that the manifestation is highly dependent upon an organisation's strategy,
environment in which it operates in and its overall business model. Strategic thinking has
additionally been concluded to manifest differently in terms of opportunities and threats, where
it was found that some respondents used it more for the long-term benefit of the organisations
rather than as a short-term solution to obstacles.
Keywords: Strategic Thinking, Strategic Planning, Crisis Management, Strategy, Capabilities,

Environment, Crisis
Table of contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 0
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................... 1
Table of contents ............................................................................................................................. 2
List of tables ...................................................................................................................................... 3
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Research Problem ............................................................................................................................. 3
1.3 Purpose and Research Question ................................................................................................ 4
2. Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Strategic Thinking ............................................................................................................................. 5
2.1.1 The Linkage between Strategic Thinking and Planning ....................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Components of Strategic Thinking ............................................................................................................. 6
2.1.3 Strategic Thinking in Practice ....................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Managing Strategy ............................................................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 Capabilities ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.2 Environment ................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.3 Crisis Management ........................................................................................................................ 12
2.3.1 Three-Stage-Approach ................................................................................................................................ 13
2.4 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................................... 14
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 15
3.1 Research Approach ....................................................................................................................... 15
3.2 Ontological and Epistemological Standings ....................................................................... 15
3.2.1 Ontological Standpoint ............................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.2 Epistemological Standpoint ....................................................................................................................... 16
3.3 Research Design ............................................................................................................................. 16
3.4 Data Collection ................................................................................................................................ 17
3.4.1 Pilot Interview ................................................................................................................................................ 18
3.4.2 Semi-Structured Interviews ....................................................................................................................... 18
3.4.3 Selection of Respondents ........................................................................................................................... 20
3.5 Description of Respondents ...................................................................................................... 20
3.6 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 21
3.6.1 Subjectivity in Qualitative Studies ........................................................................................................... 22
3.7 Operationalisation .......................................................................................................................... 23
3.8 Quality of the Study ....................................................................................................................... 26
3.9 Societal Implications ..................................................................................................................... 28
3.10 Limitations ...................................................................................................................................... 28
3.11 Chapter summary ......................................................................................................................... 29
4. Findings .............................................................................................................................. 31
4.1 Strategic Thinking .......................................................................................................................... 31
4.2 Managing Strategy ......................................................................................................................... 34
4.2.1 Capabilities ...................................................................................................................................................... 34
4.2.2 Environment ................................................................................................................................................... 36
5. Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 42
5.1 Strategic Thinking .......................................................................................................................... 42
5.2 Managing Strategy ......................................................................................................................... 45
5.2.1 Capabilities ...................................................................................................................................................... 45
5.2.2 Environment ................................................................................................................................................... 46
6. Conclusion and Discussion ................................................................................................... 51
7. Implications of the study ...................................................................................................... 53
7.1 Theoretical Implications ............................................................................................................... 53
7.2 Practical Implications .................................................................................................................... 53
8. Future Research ...................................................................................................................... 54
References ...................................................................................................................................... 55
Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... 61
Appendix 1, interview guide ............................................................................................................... 61
List of tables
Table 1. Description of respondents.………………………………………………………… 21
Table 2. Operationalization………………………………………………………………….. 25
Table 3. The “Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria…………………………………….………………. 27
1. Introduction
This first chapter introduces the research project by giving a brief background to the topic and
its overall context. Here, the research problem and the purpose of the study is presented and
divided into one research question to be dealt with.
1.1 Background
Strategy is argued by Mintzberg (1978, p. 935) to have several different definitions depending
upon which context the concept is found in. There is, however, some consensus regarding the
meaning of the term according to the scholar. Strategy may be broadly defined as “(a) explicit,
(b) developed consciously and purposefully, and (c) made in advance of the specific decisions
to which it applies.” (Mintzberg, 1978 p. 935). Chandler (1962, p. 13), somewhat similar to
Mintzberg, explains that strategy can be seen as identifying long-term goals or objectives,
where resources are allocated accordingly to pursue these goals or objectives. Whereas strategy
often starts as a plan for realising long-term goals, the final outcome or plan may be affected
by unaccounted for events along the way. Mintzberg (1978, p. 935) argues that even though
strategy in itself is created in advance, it can be of two different natures. The first one is when
the initial plan is deployed without any major changes made to it which is seen as an intended
strategy. The second one is when the strategy due to unaccounted for events or decisions forces
the planned strategy to be changed in order to adjust to new circumstances. When this happens,
the strategy is of a realised nature (Mintzberg, 1978 p. 935). Strategy in itself can be considered
a vital part in business administration; Rumelt et al. (1991, p. 6) argues that almost all decisions
made within an organisation strives to fulfill a strategy or strategies currently deployed by said
organisation. Strategy plays a role not only in selecting long-term goals, but also in selecting
for instance products or services to offer, and overall in maintaining a competitive advantage.
Strategy can therefore be seen as a plan executed by an organisation to pursue long-term
interests in order to remain or become competitive on the market in which they are active, often
as a response to the ever-changing environment they find themselves in (Durmaz & Dusun,
2016, p. 38-39).
Even though most of previously brought up research, especially older publications, seem to
mainly focus on strategy and the planning behind or what affects it, (Benito-Ostolaza &
Sanchis-Llopis, 2014, p. 785) explains that not only planning is important to the concept of
strategic management. According to them, strategic management should be divided into two
branches: thinking and planning. Given the importance of this topic, it is surprising that no clear
definition of strategic thinking can be found in business literature. However, many well-known
authors, such as Porter (1998); Ansoff (1965); Mintzberg (1990); and Barney (2000), discuss
the term strategy. On the one hand, they point out that developing a strategy is essential to an
organisation’s success; on the other hand, they do not focus on the thinking that accompanies
the development of a strategy. This is done by various authors, such as Heracleous (1998); Bonn
(2001); and Liedtka (1998), who analyse strategic thinking. As stated above, even though there
is a massive amount of literature focusing on strategy and strategic development, there is little
consensus of what strategic thinking means, whilst the term is widely used.
1
The dissimilarities and relation between strategic planning and strategic thinking is being
addressed ongoingly (Heracleous, 1998). Authors who tackle this topic often use the term
'strategic thinking' when linking to strategic planning. On the other hand, they call 'strategic
thinking' a process of planning that necessarily does not require preparation.
Graetz (2002) compares and creates a line where strategic thinking and strategic planning
separates from each other, referring to the literature above (Liedtka, 1998; Heracleous, 1998;
Porter, 1998; Mintzberg, 1994). She describes strategic planning as rational, methodical,
conventional, narrow and convergent (Graetz, 2002, p. 458). Compared to strategic thinking,
the components of the term are synthetic, divergent, creative, intuitive and innovative (Graetz,
2002, p. 459).
While strategic thinking is a widely used concept, there is yet no absolute definition of the term,
and what specific forms of thinking it entails. According to Mintzberg (2000, p. 110), strategic
thinking in terms of business is a synthesising process in which creativity and intuition plays a
key role in the analysis of critical factors that will determine the long term success of a business.
Closely related to the definition presented by Mintzberg, Heracleous (1998, p. 483) describes
strategic thinking as a cycle of development, differentiation and convergence, suggesting that
strategic thinking will precede the planning aspect and is therefore organic and divergent. Porter
(1998, p. 109) claims that strategic thinking is more of an analytical process. Both authors focus
their attention on different aspects of strategic thinking that correspond to their definition of
strategy, as Heracleous (1998) points out. Looking at recent research of the term, Betz (2016,
p. 113) suggests strategic thinking is all about the process in creating a desirable future, or to
bring about a vision for a future. Agreeing with Betz, Mintzberg (2018, p. 91) says strategic
thinking is about seeing ahead, behind, or through, suggesting that the perception of time
matters looking into the past or future. Liedtka (1998, p. 121) claims that the term strategic
thinking is often related to strategic management or strategic planning. Several scholars
(Mintzberg, 1998; Heracleous, 1998; Graetz, 2002; Liedtka, 1998) differentiate strategic
thinking involving strategic planning and not executing a strategy. Due to the many definitions
available for the concept of strategic thinking, it’s important for the paper that an assessment is
made of the term moving forward. It has therefore been decided to define strategic thinking in
reference to the study as; a synthesising process combining creativity and intuition; the outcome
of a strategic thinking process in businesses provides an integrative and vision-oriented
perspective of the firm (Mintzberg, 1994; Heracleus, 1998; Porter 1998).
Strategic thinking therefore plays a critical role not only to strategy itself, but for managing
strategy in organisations. However, the concept’s base, drawing from the literature presented
so far, is planning and thinking. What seems to be a common denominator, though, is the fact
that many scholars have chosen to focus on the planning part whereas Benito-Ostolaza &
Sanchis-Llopis (2014) discourages underestimating the importance of strategic thinking.
The scholars argue that strategic thinking plays a critical role in creating and keeping
competitive advantages, especially in highly competitive environments (Benito-Ostolaza &
Sanchis-Llopis, 2014, p. 785). Strategic thinking is additionally deemed crucial to organisations
because of its importance in creating and developing ideas into actions that could benefit the
organisation competitively (Benito-Ostolaza & Sanchis-Llopis, 2014, p. 785, 788).
2
1.2 Research Problem
There is no doubt that strategy and all that it represents in terms planning and thinking is an
important aspect in running an organisation (Rumelt et al., 1991, p. 6; Durmaz & Dusun, 2016,
p. 41, 43). However, many strategies fall victim to forces out of organisations’ control, where
the intended strategy has to be changed in order to accommodate the new factors at play
(Mintzberg, 1978 p. 935).
Few changes in the surrounding environment of an organisation affects them as much as crises.
Crises, as explained by Seeger et al. (1998, p. 233-235), can be characterised by their threat to
the organisation, element of surprise, and need for creating a short decision time.
There is evidence in literature that strategy plays an important role in overcoming crises as an
organisation. Whether the core of the problem is self-inflicted or is beyond anything that an
organisation can affect themselves, Ritchie (2004, p. 675) explains that strategy is important all
along the way of a crisis. For instance, a well-formulated strategy may be used to stop crises
from having a large impact, or it may be used to mitigate the damage done to the organisation
if deemed unpreventable. Marra (1998, p. 472) shares a similar view where she explains that
the impact of a crisis depends upon how it is handled by the organisation. A good strategy may
facilitate successful crisis management, whereas a bad strategy is likely to worsen the situation.
Despite the importance of strategy in crisis management Varge & Seville (2011, p. 5622) has
identified four main things that get affected in terms of strategy during these times. First,
whereas strategy as a concept focuses on the long-term objectives of an organisation, crises
may create the need for fast and short-term solutions. Secondly, strategic management normally
relies on having higher control over what goes on in and around the organisation while crises
may lower that control. Third, crises can sometimes be overwhelming to organisations,
affecting them to an extent where strategies are neither formulated nor implemented. Fourth, a
normal setting in strategic management often offers an organisation to take different routes or
pick between several strategies. In a crisis, these options may be severely decreased.
Whereas the view presented by Varge & Seville (2011, p. 5622) point to the assumption that a
crisis creates a difficult environment for strategies to be formed and implemented, crises are
well researched in many areas and situations revolving businesses. However, little information
can be found regarding the impact on and of strategic thinking. Even so, the research tends to
be focused around crisis management, strategic management and strategic planning. Groh
(2014), for instance, studied strategic management out of a financial perspective. In the case of
Varge & Seville (2011), strategic management during times of crisis was looked at from a
perspective of planning with little information regarding strategic thinking and how
organisations use this concept during unusual or trying times. Ritchie (2004) explains in his
study that planning is an important aspect in strategy when it comes to crisis management, but
does not mention strategic thinking.
Many scholars have chosen to look at how crises can be handled by organisations. This has
been done mainly in the form of looking into crisis management, where a connection between
this and strategic planning has been made by several scholars. Despite this, the term strategic
thinking has been left out where no real focus has been placed on the concept, leaving its
potential impact on crisis management unclear. This gap in the literature presents a fruitful
opportunity to look further into how strategic thinking is used in crisis management, considering
3
the fact that strategic management as a concept undoubtedly is well integrated into the current
research. Additionally, given the current ongoing pandemic caused by the virus Covid-19 the
paper is offered an opportunity to conduct the research during a crisis.
Considering that strategic thinking as so far presented combines many concepts into its core,
the term is difficult to definitively define and capture in terms of primary data (Mintzberg, 1994;
Heracleus, 1998; Porter 1998). Whereas a quantitative study could have proven fruitful in terms
of more as well as potentially generalisable data, a qualitative approach allowed for the paper
to study the strategic thinking from respondents' own perceptions and experiences which the
concept demands given its complexity. This, in combination with crisis management, further
appreciated a qualitative approach because of the two concept’s differences and non-existant
research combining the two. It should be noted here, as presented in the purpose, that the
objective of the study is not to define strategic thinking. Instead, it has been defined based on
several scholars’ research regarding the term. For the study, private organisations have been
chosen as the source of primary data. This choice was made considering their emphasis on
revenue and profitability compared to public organisations. This has allowed for the study to
gather information more relevant to the research as a whole, since strategy and strategic
thinking roots in being competitive on the market. The private organisations chosen for this
have not been chosen with any criterias in mind. This was decided upon given the complexity
of researching strategic thinking in an unusual setting, where all industries and sectors are
adjusting to new circumstances in their respective markets because of the pandemic.
1.3 Purpose and Research Question

The purpose of this research is to identify how strategic thinking may occur within
organisations, particularly during a crisis.
The objective is therefore to provide an answer to the overall research problem consisting of
the following question:
● How does strategic thinking manifest itself in private organisations during times of
crisis?
4
2. Literature Review
2.1 Strategic Thinking

Since different ideas and definitions revolve around the concept of strategic thinking, this
section discusses the ones that most literature on the topic deals with. They are mainly based
on the different authors’ view on strategy. This is followed by components of strategic thinking,
decision-making aspects and in-organisational contexts. The entire chapter of strategic thinking
aims to clarify the development of the concept and gives the basis for primary data collection.
The linkage between strategic thinking and planning is also included to further define and
develop upon the terms’ differences.
2.1.1 The Linkage between Strategic Thinking and Planning

Since the business literature repeatedly talks about strategic planning, this part intends to
explain the speculation going into strategic planning and gives an overview of the dominating
perspectives of authors on this issue.
Mintzberg (1998, p. 126) and Heracleous (1998, p. 487) claim that analytic thinking abilities is
a common term when speaking about strategic planning. Various authors, including Mintzberg
(1994), explain that strategic planning and strategic thinking should be spoken about
independently. According to Mintzberg, the planning process is not correlated with strategy
directly, nevertheless it embraces an analytic and systematic process, which is useful since
strategies tend to grow over a strategic thinking process (Mintzberg, 1994; Heracleous, 1998;
Liedtka, 1998). On the other hand, Porter (1998, p. 109) discusses strategic thinking as a process
of analytical procedures, such as the well-known five forces model, value chain and diamond
model (Heracleous, 1998, p. 483). Alike to Porter’s view on the topic, Heracleous (1998)
perceives the planning part as a way of encouragement to strategic thinking by providing a
structure to creative thinking processes. Scenario planning method, which examines potential
upcoming situations and appropriate responses to them is a mutual tool between the terms
according to Heracleous (1998, p. 486). This view is supported by Liedtka (1998, p. 124) who
claims that strategic thinking empowers the planning process in organisational aspects,
meanwhile time planning procedures maintain strategy executions.
Of the discussion above, it can be said that diverse interpretations of the thinking going into
strategic management that some authors argue that the terms are two independent procedures
meanwhile others contend that the procedures are supportive of one another. If a situation is
expectable and trustworthy facts are studied, a primarily analytical thinking process,
correspondingly referred to as strategic planning, is achievable. On the other hand, in a complex
and unpredictable environment where the facts given are vague, an exclusively analytical or
logical thinking process is not helpful. Among others, systemic, intuitive and creative thinking
also composes a role. Thus, strategic thinking includes analytical, systemic, intuitive and
creative elements. All system and analytical components are discussed in more detail in the
following chapter.
5
2.1.2 Components of Strategic Thinking
This chapter demonstrates how authors clarify the significant components of strategic thinking,
in what way they stand shaped upon each other and interrelate. From Mintzberg’s (2000, p.
291) point of view, strategic thinking is about the active involvement of a strategic thinker for
example in certain circumstances. The function of a strategic thinker is vital in order to be
“active, involved, connected, committed, alert, stimulated” (Mintzberg, 2000, p. 291).
Moreover, Mintzberg argues that the entire procedure of a strategic thinker syndicates intuition
and creativity which will create a vision and influence the direction towards long-term success
of a business. Additionally, Mintzberg (2000) and Goldman et al. (2017, p. 178) claims that
intuition is a part of strategic thinking. Steptoe-Warren et al. (2011, p. 266) discusses further
that intuition usually is grounded on prior experience, knowledge and competences. Casey &
Goldman (2010) build on this and explain that prior knowledge and experience impacts the
degree of learning where one has a long way of learning meanwhile one another is at the
forefront of learning.
Liedtka (1998, p. 126) presents a model in her study, consisting of five elements relating to
strategic thinking: system perspective, intent-focused, intelligent opportunism, thinking in time,
and hypothesis-driven key dimensions. Moreover, when describing the system perspective in
the model, she bases this upon the concept whereas the strategic thinker stands as a part of a
complex system that is built up during a certain period of time. She also emphasises the
importance of deliberating the inter-relationships of entities when it comes to systems (Liedtka,
1998, p. 126). Linkages, multiple perspectives, and relationships within diverse components
influences the strategic decisions significantly in the process of creating those. Liedtka
moreover points out that it is crucial to consider time, creating relations to the past, present, and
future since all factors compounded over time will have an influence on the formulation and
implementation of the strategy (Liedtka, 1998, p. 128). She ends her study by underlining that
strategic thinking is known as a hypothesis-driven process, where individuals must have the
aptitude to develop and test hypotheses in times where short term decisions are crucial for the
long perspective. The five elements altogether outlined of strategic thinking provide a basis for
a firm’s valuable capabilities and supports planning processes (Liedtka, 1998, p. 128)
Numerous authors contend that strategic thinking is closely related to systems thinking. Senge
(1990, p. 215) approaches systems thinking through uttering the importance of focusing on
fundamental methods that form decisions and activities in systems and refers to enterprises as
an illustration. Bonn (2005, p. 345) supports Senge’s (1990) understanding of systems
perspective in his theory by highlighting the importance of including problem-solving skills
relating to strategic thinking with innovative, visionary and systemic components. Moon (2013,
p. 1703) develops the framework created by Bonn (2005) even further, by declaring that
strategic thinking involves systematic, creative, vision-driven, and market-oriented thinking.
Market oriented-thinking stands vital because of the fact that it tends to provide excellent
marketing performances and sustainable competitive advantages. Lastly, Nuntamanop et al.
(2013, p. 256) claim that the ability to learn is part of strategic thinking
2.1.3 Strategic Thinking in Practice

According to Bonn (2001, p. 65) strategic thinking needs to be viewed from two standpoints,
organisational level and on individual level. When speaking about strategic thinking on an
6
organisational level, it requires one to have the ability to enhance a holistic view and combine
it with a creative approach alongside with a broad long-term goal (Bonn, 2001, p. 65). Although,
the holistic viewpoint goes in the same direction as the system perspective outlaid by Liedtka
(1998) on strategic thinking. At the same time, it helps us comprehend the understanding in
larger aspects of the business's construction of values and relation to its external environment
(Liedtka, 1998; Bonn, 2001). More importantly, a vision is crucial relating into strategic
thinking to utilise effective channels to communicate a compelling vision of the completed plan
to all employees and keep them focused on their contribution to the plan (Bonn 2001, p. 70).
In an organisational context, Bonn (2001, p. 67) describes that strategic thinking is maintained
by systems that support continuous strategic discourses among senior management and
encourages creativity to flow on a personal level. It is vital to relinquish the management team
time to examine their strategy and develop their strategic thinking ability to unravel complicated
issues. By applying this method, it makes it possible for the individual team members to learn
from others, resulting in a way more advanced understanding of the organisational complexity
and at the same time provide opportunities for new talent growth (Bonn, 2001 p. 68). With an
environment that is open where all workers have a fair chance to have their ideas heard, and
give potential strategic input, it opens up for training the brain thinking strategically (Bonn,
2001, p. 69). Employees need to be given enough room to be creative and innovative while
being able to communicate their ideas to the top. The listed theory from Bonn in integrating
employees with the management team is also supported by Kazmi and Naaranoja (2015, p. 51).
They state that they see a shift in recent literature, from only focusing on the top management’s
thinking abilities in a company, to developing strategic thinking skills in employees throughout
hierarchical levels.
Moon (2013, p. 1700) argues that the culture, structure and competences of an organisation
influences strategic thinking abilities of individuals within. Allio (2006, p. 7) agrees with
Moon's statement by stating the substantial influence business culture has on strategic thinking.
This includes managerial emphasis on strategy, reward systems, marketing competency, or
centralisation (Moon, 2013, p. 1702). Moreover, Moon (2013, p. 1705) argues that all
organisational variables such as internal or external impact on diverse ways of thinking. He
differentiates between systematic, creative, vision-driven, and market-oriented thinking, adding
up to strategic thinking.
Looking at strategic thinking from an organisational context, studies and literature have shown
that the components of systemic strategic thinking, more particularly holistic, visionary and
creative thinking seem to be of high importance. Additionally, by focusing on collaboration
between management and employees from all hierarchical levels in strategic decisions can give
the business a significant edge. However, the organisational culture and external environment
influence strategic thinking.
2.2 Managing Strategy

In this section of the chapter, strategy will be introduced to provide the study with a greater
perspective of strategic thinking as well as allow the data gathered to be looked at from
different views. Strategy will be broken down into two categories, internal and external.
These categories both affect how strategies are managed and formed, providing the paper with
7
a deeper understanding of how the ongoing pandemic has affected organisations, and how
strategic thinking has been used to adapt to this.
Durmaz & Dusun (2016, p. 41) emphasises the importance of managing strategy since it can be
seen as a guidance of where an organisation should and is heading. It is further stated by the
authors that without a strategy an organisation’s future becomes unclear, increasing the
possibility of finding themselves in failure (Durmaz & Dusun, 2016, p. 41). Whereas strategy
can be used as a sense of direction for organisations, it should be noted that the formation and
implementation are subjects to variables around them. Furrer & Thomas (2007, p. 21) show that
these variables can be divided into categories of external and internal. The most influential
research done within strategic management has focused on looking into strategy from the
perspectives of for instance environment, competition, capabilities and organisation. All of
these will in some way influence what the better strategy is for an organisation, and how it may
be implemented. A chaotic environment in combination with high levels of competition may
force a niche-strategy, whereas another setting paves way for a different approach.
In other words, strategic management, and therefore strategic thinking, relies on the situation
in which an organisation finds themselves in (Furrer & Thomas, 2007). A strategy must be
formed in compliance with the variables around it, both internal and external, in order to be
successful.
A study that has looked deeper into the connection of capabilities, strategy and environment
has been conducted by Perrott (2008). Perrott (2008, p. 26-27) explains that the alignment of
strategy in relation to internal and external factors influencing an organisation, e.g. capabilities
and environment, is important much like the view presented by Furrer & Thomas (2007). Perrott
(2008, p. 28) further explains that the environment in which an organisation operates in should
be viewed in terms of opportunities and threats, whereas the internal capabilities should be
viewed as strengths and weaknesses. It is also explained by the author that an objective
understanding of the environment is necessary in order to create strategies. Organisations must
therefore firstly look towards the environment to assess the market position they are in or may
pursue, while at the same time make sure that the capabilities at hand within the organisation
are adequate enough to reach the goal.
2.2.1 Capabilities
As part of the internal factors influencing strategy, capabilities have been chosen to develop
upon. Whereas a resource-based view could have been appropriate, this was not deemed
appropriate considering the fact that strategic thinking more so connects to what an
organisation is able to do with their resources. Capabilities have been divided into two
subcategories, talent and innovation. The reasoning for this is because the two are viewed by
scholars as significant to utilise in crises.
Whereas capabilities are important when conducting strategic movements (Perrott, 2008, p. 28)
it is necessary to clearly understand the concept. Johnson et al. (2017, p. 98) describes that
resources and capabilities are terms often interchangeably used. However, resources can be
defined as the assets that an organisation has or can create and capabilities as a term looks more
to what the organisation is able to do with these resources. Capability is therefore an action
driven concept, often looking towards for instance knowledge. (Joyce & Slocum, 2012, p. 183-
8
184) states that capabilities are an important aspect for organisations to continuously consider
and develop, since the capabilities are used to maintain and increase the competitiveness of the
organisation. It is important, however, to understand that capabilities that create competitive
advantages differ from organisation to organisation. While the minimisation of production costs
may be a capability creating competitiveness for one organisation, another may find theirs to
be the strength in their supply chain (Joyce & Slocum, 2012, p. 185). (Joyce & Slocum, 2012,
p. 188) further argues that capabilities within organisations are a product of long-term
investments in different aspects of the business. What can be understood by this is that the
vision, history and earlier strategic decisions of an organisation influences current capabilities.
This is mainly due to the fact that strategic decisions influence and increase knowledge within
certain areas that prove to be advantageous in the future. With this logic applied to a present
perspective, decisions made today will affect the competitive advantages of an organisation’s
capabilities in the future, underlining the effect of strategic decisions on a long-term basis. In
addition to this it is stated by (Gibbons & Henderson, 2012, p. 1361) that organisational
capabilities often are difficult to imitate. This is because capabilities often rely on
communication of task knowledge, further emphasising how capabilities are embedded within
specific organisations’ knowledge, communication, processes and routines.
2.2.1.1 Talent as a Capability

What is argued by Joyce & Slocum (2012, p. 184) is that capabilities in terms of managerial
talent within an organisation often are overlooked, especially in times of crisis. It is the belief
that talent is an important aspect when it comes to implementing and driving strategy since the
middle management often are responsible for operative work. This view is agreed upon by
Akter et al. (2019, p. 531-532), they explain that talent as a capability is an important driver for
organisational performance. What is also stated is that talent mediates other capabilities within
organisations, constituting as a base for organisations to utilise and manage other capabilities
serving as competitive advantages. Afshari & Hadian Nasab (2020, p. 1) have in their study
looked further into how the management of talent promotes organisational learning. They argue,
much like preceding authors, that talent as a capability mediates other organisational
capabilities and is crucial in order to gain a competitive edge in the market. According to
Afshari & Hadian Nasab (2020, p. 2), the modern economy demands skilled employees as
valuable assets to develop as an organisation. Because of this, the need for talent management
has accordingly increased, since it nurtures organisations’ ability to develop talent within.
Talent can as explained by Afshari & Hadian Nasab (2020, p. 3) be seen as the most important
capability for organisations to maintain. This is argued due to the fact that it does not only create
competitiveness, but allows organisations to adapt to the ever-changing environment they
operate in. Allowing for talent within to be developed can also help pursue strategic goals, while
potentially making up for resources not available to organisations.
On top of this, (Joyce & Slocum, 2012, p. 184) state that talent in itself can be used to create
higher customer satisfaction through different scenarios. This may involve a kind conversation,
knowledge that helps a customer in their buying-process or simply that the organisation runs
better with talented employees. This in turn emphasises that talent as a form of capability must
be continuously managed in order for organisations to remain competitive from an internal
perspective. Talent, viewed from the perspective of these scholars directly contradicts the
common theme where talent is one of the first capabilities to decrease in times of crisis (Joyce
& Slocum, 2012, p. 184)
9
2.2.1.2 Innovation as a Capability
Some scholars view innovation as one of the central tools for organisations to create competitive
advantage on the market and deliver value to customers. (Foroudi et al., 2016, p. 4882).
Innovation is also viewed by some to be the building stone of growth for organisations (Foroudi
et al., 2016, p. 4883). Innovation as such can be divided into two categories. The development
of for instance new services, products or technology, or the development of managerial and
market knowledge.
Economic downturns and crises can be seen to have devastating effects due to the uncertainty
related to it. This often results in organisations being more risk-conscious where they invest
less in innovation among other things. (Archibugi et al., 2013, p. 1247). During times of crisis,
specifically during the 2008 financial crisis, Archibugi et al. (2013, p. 1247) state that firms
willing to invest in innovation significantly dropped from 38% to 9%.
Ausloos et al. (2017, p. 486-487) explain that a crisis may interrupt economic activities
deployed by organisations, which often includes innovation. However, the scholars propose this
as a sort of paradox, where it is stated that innovation also functions as a response to the changed
environment while also being a large driver of competitiveness.
Archibugi et al. (2013, p. 1247) explains that while crises often influence organisations and the
economy in a negative manner, it should be noted that those situations also provide
opportunities for organisations ready to take on risk. The scholars argue that the change in
demand, supply and consumer behaviour presents organisations with possibilities to offer new
and or improved services and products. It has also been found by Ausloos et al. (2017, p. 495)
that innovation, in times of crisis, provides organisations with a possibility to keep performance
in a heterogeneous sense.
The difference between which organisations potentially thrive from the opportunities presented
by crisis situations is large. Whereas larger organisations tend to decrease investments in
innovation, smaller organisations often swim against the stream and keep or increase their
investments in innovation during a crisis (Archibugi et al., 2013, p. 1259). It can also be seen
that market strategy largely influences how organisations invest in innovation during times of
crisis. Archibugi et al. (2013, p. 1255) states that organisations more focused on cost-leadership
were less likely to invest in innovation in turbulent environments.
2.2.2 Environment
As mentioned previously, strategy was to be looked at from an internal and external
perspective. Here, environment has been chosen as the external factor.
According to Johnson et al. (2017) the environment in which an organisation operates in can be
assessed and evaluated from different perspectives. Examples of this are the political
environment or economy of a country or market. However, for the purpose of this paper the
environmental factor included in this section is buying behaviour of customers. Behaviour was
found to be the most significant out of the different perspectives not only considering the
management of strategy, but also because of the on-going pandemic which has interfered with
and changed buying behaviour.
Consumer behaviour is diverse and greatly depending upon individual factors (Dinu & Dinu,
2018, p. 289). For instance, personal, psychological, social and cultural factors all influence
how a person behaves in their consumption and spending. As modern times have shifted
consumer behaviour towards being more digitised, it is argued by Dinu & Dinu (2018, p. 289)
10
that one of the major variables to influence consumer behaviour, specifically online, is
motivation. Online stores often offer better prices, have more options and offer a form of
convenience to consumers driving their intention to shop online. Richard et al. (2010, p. 926)
develops on this perspective, claiming that the internet has become an important tool for
organisations to use when delivering information, entertainment and online shopping. As
internet usage continues to grow, so does online information gathering and shopping creating
new patterns of consumer behaviour and needs for organisations to strategically fulfil.
Whereas there are a lot of factors influencing consumer behaviour, it is argued by several
scholars that economic crises are one of the biggest influencers (Hristo, 2011; Kaytaz & Gul,
2014).
Kaytaz & Gul (2014, p. 2702) states that economic crises bring uncertainty to societies. Many
people lose their jobs, forcing them to cut down on their costs and change their way of
consuming. As for the people who still find themselves employed, the uncertainty of whether
their situation will stay the same hinders them from continuing their lifestyle as normal in terms
of consuming. Often, it is the consumables that are not deemed essential or necessary that gets
cut from consumption in difficult times. It is also found in the study conducted by Kaytaz &
Gul (2014, p. 2702) that different generations respond to economic crises in different manners.
While older generations seem to cut down overall on their consumption, there is evidence that
younger generations try to keep their consumption at normal levels.
Trends in consumption have also been identified by Hristo (2011, p. 168-169). He claims that
the economical position in which consumers find themselves in, largely affects their
consumption behaviour in times of crisis. Income was determined to be a significant factor,
where people categorised to having high-income barely changed their patterns or behaviour in
consuming, while people with low income were deemed to be the ones affected the most by an
economic slowdown. This phenomena could perhaps be explained by the fact that consumption
demands disposable income and a sense of security for the future (Kaytaz & Gul, 2014, p.
2703).
A change in consumer behaviour eventually affects organisations for better or worse. As

consumption decreases, companies must find new ways of encouraging consumption. In the
study conducted by Kaytaz & Gul (2014, p. 2702) it was determined that several strategies were
used in order to remain profitable. These strategies mostly included marketing oriented attempts
in targeting audiences more prone to consuming during difficult times, as earlier mentioned is
younger generations while maintaining normal prices. Adaptive strategic market positions were
also implemented.
Despite some organisations trying to maintain their profitability by simply switching strategy
in times of crisis Kaytaz & Gul’s study (2014, p. 2703) shows evidence that many organisations
far from thrive during times of crisis. A large decline in advertising could be seen, especially to
the larger mass in the form of TV-ads. On top of this, many retailers were seen to decrease their
prices in an attempt to decrease their inventory with the selling argument that consumers were
getting good deals.
11
2.3 Crisis Management
To be able to put strategic thinking in a context of crisis management, theories of the latter will
now be presented. The crisis management theory section has been focused on leadership and
the three-stage-approach. Leadership was chosen since it is seen as central in crisis management
literature. The three-staged-approach was deemed contributing considering its different stages
- pre, during and post - providing a connection to strategic thinking.
Crisis management can arise from different situations. Sometimes organisations make mistakes
that upset stakeholders, and sometimes organisations simply have no control over the crisis
affecting them. Such an instance was the financial crisis of 2008, which disrupted the balance
between supply and demand placing many organisations in difficult positions (Gajdzik, 2014,
p. 391). According to Gajdzik (2014, p. 391) strategic management is a tool used by
organisations to enable them to create something at a lower cost than what customers are paying
for it. The same logic can be applied to crisis management, where organisations’ top priorities
often are to remain or become profitable again during crises. Crisis management can be seen as
the management of an unusual situation, where the strategic management of organisations play
a large role in coping with the temporary situation. All decisions made to repair or decrease
damage during extraordinary times can in accordance with Gajdzik (2014, p. 391) be seen as
crisis management. The end goal here is to make sure that the series of events affecting the
organisation does not ultimately put them out of business. In light of crisis management,
organisations must often implement larger changes, many times regarding strategy, in order to
cope with the new market situation, they are facing (Gajdzik, 2014, p. 391). This can be done
in a number of ways, such as a decrease of costs, change of organisational structure, decrease
of investments, and laying off employees etc. (Gajdzik, 2014, p. 393). All of these different
approaches can be categorised as decisions. The depth of the crisis as well as organisations'
reaction to it can be classified in four different ways. Gajdzik (2014, p. 393) There are two
parameters which are assessed from weak to strong and small to big. These are applied to (1)
how large of a threat the external environment (crisis) is to the operation of the organisation
(weak and strong), and (2) the radicality of implemented changes (small or big).
Theories suggest that preparation is an important part of crisis management. Organisations that
have successfully recovered from a crisis have often been well prepared and spent time and
resources on the development and practice of their crisis plan (Ashcroft, 1997, p. 326). In a first
stage, it is important to analyse what threats there are that could harm the organisation. Once
identified, they should be ranked according to their probability of happening and seriousness in
terms of damage. Evaluating the various threats and their seriousness is an important job that
must be done to ensure the well-being of organisations when crises occur. An organisation has
a better chance of managing a crisis well if they plan ahead on how to handle a certain type of
crisis. Another important part is to establish an infrastructure for communication that can be
used in a crisis. The organisation must be able to communicate both internally and externally
with stakeholders during and after a crisis in order to retain one consistent image (Massey &
Larsen, 2006, p. 71-72).
The literature in crisis management has mainly focused on the importance of developing a crisis
management plan. A crisis management plan (CMP) consists of a broad spectrum of thoughtful
processes and steps that predict the complex nature of crises. They are developed in advance to
provide a faster and more effective response during a crisis. A good CMP aims to give more
12
than instructions for communication after a crisis, it also consists of tools and frameworks for
detecting, preventing and preparing for crises (Jaques, 2009, p. 37).
Jaques (2009, p. 38) also argues for the importance of creating a crisis management team
(CMT). The CMT should consist of representatives from all relevant departments within the
organisation. The purpose of the team is to simplify the cooperation between parts of the
organisation and create a clearer division of responsibilities. The development of a CMT and a
CMP represents a proactive approach to crisis management (Jaques, 2009, p. 41).
Crisis management emphasises the importance of communication in a crisis situation. Ashcroft

(1997) defines a number of basic rules for communication with media. She claims that media
can be used as a channel to disseminate the organisation's information. To do this, the
organisation should always be aware of speaking the truth and leave no room for speculation
(Ashcroft, 1997, p. 330).
2.3.1 Three-Stage-Approach
According to Coombs (2015, p. 7), there are different stages when speaking about crisis
management: pre crisis, crisis event, and post crisis. All of those stages make sense to analyse
since each stage can be evaluated differently depending on the viewpoint and importance of
each stage for each organisation.
The starting point in a crisis is when everything is normal, which is viewed as the pre-crisis
stage (Coombs, 2015, p. 11). This stage focuses on the fact that organisations need to be well
prepared in case that a crisis occurs (Coombs, 2015, p. 10; King, 2007, p. 187). What is done
by leaders is the preparation in case a crisis comes, which includes evaluation of past crises
which could pose as potential signs of entering a new one. Throughout this phase, the
organisation also focuses on reducing the levels of risk in relation to the crisis. Additionally,
organisations tend to always want to control the relationship between the organisation and its
stakeholders in case a potential problem occurs, which can be solved quickly without harming
the organisation’s reputation in relation to the crisis. The authors argue that the pre-crisis stage
is crucial to bear in mind since it can prevent or prepare for the actual crisis event coming up
(Coombs, 2015, p. 10-11; King, 2007, p. 187).
Since leadership is a central part in crisis management, effective leadership is necessary during
a crisis. The leader is not only there to get the organisation back to its former state, but to
manage their own skills, abilities and response to the organisation and external stakeholders.
(King, 2007, p. 188) This is of even greater importance considering that employees often find
themselves to be confused during crisis management. Since the organisation is not functioning
properly, it’s important that the leader shows the way and manages the situation through
delegating tasks and inspiration. In light of this, King (2007, p. 188) explains that the visibility
of the leader is to prefer during crisis management. To have them as a face inwards as well as
outwards is a crucial factor in leading the organisation out of trouble. King (2007, p. 188) also
states that the leader’s ability to show empathy towards people hurt by the crisis is an important
factor in managing crises. Employees being overwhelmed or layed off may experience a
difficult time where strong leadership can help mitigate negative feelings. The leadership in
terms of more strategic decisions is also brought up by King (2007, p. 188). The scholar argues
13
that decisions often need to be executed quickly, emphasising the value of a decisive leader
able to promptly implement solutions to the situation.
After the crisis has been dealt with the crisis management should enter a stage of post-crisis
evaluation (King, 2007, p. 189). This stage gives the crisis management team a chance to assess
the effectiveness of decisions made during the crisis. The importance of this stage lies in
analysing whether the response to the crisis could have been better. If so, the organisation either
needs to make changes to develop it further and what needs to be done if a similar crisis should
happen again.
King (2007, p. 189) explains that the evaluation process should be divided into two categories,
performance and impact. The performance indicator should be used to assess the response and
conclude whether it was effective or not. The impact indicator is used to understand how big of
an impact the crisis had to the organisation, whether it regards reputation or sales. The impact
indicator can be used further as tangible evidence in regards to how well the organisation
handled the crisis, and therefore function as a reference for the crisis management plan’s value.
2.4 Chapter Summary

Strategic thinking originates from the concept of strategic management, where both thinking
and planning can be found as branches. Many scholars have chosen to look at these terms
interchangeably. However, in this study a line has been drawn between them and strategic
thinking has been broken down into its components contributing to the concept. Strategic
thinking has also been introduced in a practical perspective, given the theoretical complexity of
the term.
Furthermore, managing strategy was introduced as a section in this chapter. Here, strategy was
argued to be a result of different variables affecting it, both internal and external. From this
point, the internal factor affecting strategy chosen to be included in the literature review was
capabilities. As stated in the beginning of that section, the argument behind this is that
capabilities, more so than many other internal factors, can be strongly connected to strategic
thinking and therefore most appropriate. In this section capabilities were further broken down
into two categories, namely talent and innovation which both are argued by scholars to be of
significance in crises.
Continuing on the section of managing strategy, it was acknowledged that external factors, or
environment, has many factors affecting the organisation and how they chose to form their
strategy. Because this study is conducted during the midst of a pandemic with a sub-focus of
crisis management, the most appropriate factor to include was deemed to be buying behaviour
of consumers as the pandemic has largely disrupted this.
Finally, crisis management was introduced where focus was firstly placed on leadership as this
is one of the core focuses in literature. Second, crisis management was looked at from the three-
stage-approach where pre-, during-, and post-crisis as concepts were introduced. This was
chosen because of the theory’s assumption that crises can not only be handled as a present
problem, but prepared for and evaluated in terms of an organisation's decisions of how it was
handled.
14
3. Methodology
The aim of this chapter is to present and justify the methods used for the research. This is done
by first looking at the overall research approach and its design. The data collection method is
reviewed in order to explain how secondary as well as primary data in form of a text-based
method and remote interviewing contributed to the research project.
3.1 Research Approach

The purpose of this research is to identify how strategic thinking may occur within
organisations, particularly during a crisis. As mentioned in the introduction, a qualitative
approach has been chosen due to strategic thinking being a complex concept. Due to the nature
of the term it is aimed to investigate and allow the respondents to formulate themselves
impartially to generate as much value and information as possible for the study to interpret and
analyse at a later stage. According to Easterby-Smith et al. (2015, p. 82), there are different
ways in which one can approach interviews in the qualitative method, ranging from structured
to unstructured interviews. For the purpose of this study, it was chosen that semi-structured
interviews were to be conducted in order to gather data. It is the aim to construct the major
characteristics of strategic thinking by captivating special components of it into deliberation.
The new construct and consequence of this paper is embodied in a final conclusion whereas it
subsidises an explanation of how strategic thinking can be used in crisis management.
It has been chosen to have a descriptive design for the thesis where the study looks at different
perspectives from the point of view of different people at different points in time due to
contradictory conditions and perceptions. It is acknowledged that strategic thinking can be
perceived differently from one respondent another. Qualitative data has been collected by
interviewing people from different positions in the hierarchy of the respective organisation they
work for, or own. Although quantitative methods can deliver a higher generalisability in the
work and give a wide-ranging report of the potential scenarios, qualitative methods provide
deeper insight in the way people understand and interpret issues (Easterby-Smith et al., 2015,
p. 84) and therefore it was deemed the most appropriate alternative in selection of method.
Since the goal of this study is to contribute to the research of how organisations can, or think
strategically in crisis management a qualitative approach was vital. In summarisation, the
methodology used for the study is based on a triangulation approach in order to point out how
strategic thinking is manifested in crisis management. The primary data was composed from
qualitative methods including text-based- and interviews, combining it with scientific article
data which altogether forms the triangulation (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe & Jackson, 2015, p. 85).
3.2 Ontological and Epistemological Standings

As has been argued, strategic thinking doesn’t have a definitive definition and might even occur
within organisations without people knowing it. Therefore, a qualitative approach is most
appropriate to attempt to make sense of the human elements of the process. This approach is
underpinned by a worldview and a consequent study approach. Because of this, ontology and
epistemology will be addressed in the following sections.
15
3.2.1 Ontological Standpoint
This paper is conducted and should be viewed from the perception that reality is subjective,
which in other words means that it is perceived differently by different individuals from
different perspectives (Berger & Luckmann, 1966, p. 40). Reality is formed from every
individuals’ own perspective in which their behaviour and presence should be seen as a
reflection from how they appear in different circumstances. By this reflection, it can be said
that reality is one subjective perception which is in constant change and goes in line with the
social constructionism perspective. That is, the way each individual is representing oneself is
shaped from the perceptions and consequent actions of actors and keeps changing as time goes
on. The ontological standpoint is by this paper that reality is shaped by human beings, and
through this standpoint, its view of reality is selectively perceived, collectively reshaped and
transferred interpersonally (Berger & Luckmann, 1966, p. 45). Moreover, the interpretivist
approach to the study is that organisations are seen as verbs, in this paper, having no objective
existence in line with them being a social construct and being in a state of emergent flux.
3.2.2 Epistemological Standpoint

The concept of strategic thinking, incorporated with crisis management is seen as a complex
phenomenon which in particular can be taught from different angles. Thus, it can be described
as a human nature law in which it is perceived by people from perspectives including
historically and socially aspects (Berger and Luckmann, 1966, p. 54). Strategic thinking is in
other words the consequence of human choices and the external factors that might affect the
future of a specific situation, in which it lies on the human nature to respond upon. The strategic
thinking process is moreover viewed as an ongoing process in circumstances where the future
is considered as significant. Accordingly, reality can only be understood by interpretation of its
subjective meaning.
3.3 Research Design

The research design as presented below should be considered a reflection and result of the
paper’s purpose and research question and is of an induction design nature (Saunders et al.,
2009, p. 138).
There are many ways in which qualitative studies can be approached in terms of the research
design. Depending on what is intended to be researched as well as other factors such as the
nature of the concept or phenomena set as the core of the research demands the authors to
choose the approach most appropriate to eventually coming to a conclusion whereas the
induction design was considered most applicable.
According to Saunders et al. (2009, p. 140) the three most common ways of approaching the
research design is through exploratory, descriptive and explanatory lenses.
The exploratory method is appropriate when for instance observations of a phenomena have
been made, and further knowledge of the area or phenomena is desired. The exploratory method
seeks to create a hypothesis or theory regarding the area, where the study often can be deemed
as seeking to lay groundwork for future research in the area. Given the characteristics of
16
exploratory approaches, it is easy to assume that the structure of these studies often are limited.
However, whereas this may be the case sometimes, exploratory studies often start out wide in
scope, narrowing down as the study progresses (Saunders et al., 2009, p. 140)
The descriptive approach can be viewed as what comes next after exploratory studies. In order
to gain a better understanding about a subject or phenomena, the descriptive method seeks to
use existing hypotheses or theories to further observe, describe or classify a phenomena. This
is done by for instance applying earlier research to new areas or filling the gaps in the form of
details missing, providing a greater understanding of the subject. (Saunders et al., 2009, p. 140)
Explanatory research can be viewed as contributing to already existing science by filling in

different gaps and gaining a broader understanding of the subject. This is often the case in
quantitative studies, where existing phenomena can be further explained by looking into
different variables affecting them. (Saunders et al., 2009, p. 140-141)
Considering the fact that the subject being researched in this paper could be counted as a new
approach to already well researched subjects, the exploratory approach was considered
advantageous at first. This was mainly due to the fact that it would leave space for eventual
change of path along the way. However, since neither strategic thinking nor crisis management
can be seen as unexplored phenomenon’s, it felt as though the most reasonable choice was to
discard that approach. The explanatory approach was also considered because of its main
characteristics of filling in gaps and gaining a broader understanding of subjects, in this case
strategic thinking in an unexplored context. Despite this, the approach was dismissed because
of its strong association with quantitative methods, limiting its functionality for this paper. The
approach chosen for this research is therefore the descriptive one. Because strategic thinking
and crisis management both are well researched subjects, the descriptive method allows this
paper to gain a better understanding of strategic thinking in a different setting.
3.4 Data Collection

The primary data for this paper has been collected through interviews with people
knowledgeable in the area and able to contribute to the research’s purpose. Further information
about the interviews and how the data has been processed and analysed follows further down.
The data gathered for the background, literature review and methodology almost exclusively
comes from scientific articles. These articles have been found through Umeå University’s
digital library, where high demands on the papers have been made. All of them are peer-
reviewed, to ensure that their statements and contributions to academia are valid and
trustworthy. A mix between older and newer publications have also been made, to gain a better
understanding of the fields investigated as well as to see the progression of them if any major
changes or ideas have been presented. In many cases, especially in the background and literature
review, different articles have been used for covering the same areas to give a comprehensive
view of them. In some cases, books have been used as sources. In the literature review, this has
been done solely to give a short introduction to the subject, to further develop it through the
information given in scientific articles. As for the methodology, a larger ratio of books
compared to articles as sources have been used.
17
3.4.1 Pilot Interview
When conducting interviews, it’s important that both the quantity and the quality of the
respondents’ answers are adequate enough to fulfill the purpose of the study (Majid et al., 2017,
p. 1073). A pilot interview is therefore a good way of making sure that the questions prepared
to be asked to respondents are formulated in a manner to be clearly understood while covering
the different areas intended to be researched. When conducting a pilot interview, the researchers
have the opportunity to receive feedback on the questions they have created, and by that better
them for the actual interviews (Majid et al., 2017, p. 1074). This means that potential issues
regarding language, wording and relevance can be dealt with (Majid et al., 2017, p. 1075).
In light of this, a pilot interview consisting of two participants was conducted. The participants
were unfortunately not people with the same experience or job titles as the people later
interviewed, which is suggested by Majid et al. (2017, p. 1076). This was intended because of
the study’s limited means in terms of time, where all respondents interviewed were of great
importance for providing the study with data. Instead, two students on a first year master’s level
agreed to conduct the pilot interview. The two participants were students of management and
organisation, with a background of business administration with a specialisation in international
marketing as their bachelor’s degree, making them a good fit considering the subject of the
study.
After the pilot study, it was asked of the participants to give feedback regarding the language,
wording and relevance in accordance with Majid et al. (2017, p. 1075). Here, emphasis was put
on relevance. This was done since questions and wording have the opportunity of being further
explained to respondents should any concerns arise. However, to ensure that the quality of the
data gathered was at a high level, input on the questions nature felt to be of higher importance.
The feedback received from the participants was mostly regarding wording, language and
structure. Four of the questions were somewhat put together, where the feedback regarding
these was that they were similar and further information could be gathered by asking follow-up
questions if needed. This means that two questions were removed completely, without
integrating them anywhere else and two others were merged together. Two other questions were
further looked into, as the participants argued the fact that they were too closed for being used
in semi-structured interviews. The wording was changed, allowing the respondents to initiate
in a discussion more based on their own interpretation and experience regarding the areas. The
final question that was changed was so due to insufficient wording. Here, one of the participants
pointed out that the question itself was hard to understand which was agreed upon by the second
one. A change of wording without interfering with the essence of the question was made to
make it clearer and more easily understood. After these changes had been made the participants
took a look at them again to make sure that the changes made were effective and in line with
the feedback earlier received. No questions were acknowledged as non-relevant by the
participants.
3.4.2 Semi-Structured Interviews

According to Bryman & bell (2013, p. 215-218) there are different ways in which one can
approach interviews in the qualitative method, ranging from structured to unstructured
interviews. For the purpose of this study, it was chosen that semi-structured interviews were to
18
be conducted in order to gather data. The reasoning behind this was firstly because of the space
given to the respondent in answering the questions. This approach lets the person being
interviewed interpret the question since it is more loosely formulated and therefore answer it in
a way they see fitting, potentially providing fruitful information that hadn’t been thought about
by the authors. It also provides the interviewers with the possibility of spontaneously going
further into a specific subject should this be found interesting and serving for the purpose of the
study.
The interviews have therefore followed a specific theme, where areas in relation to the
theoretical chapter have been covered. The respondents have had the chance to speak freely
about the subject, and therefore presented their view on the matter. During some occasions
follow-up questions have been asked where it has been deemed necessary or particularly
interesting to gain further knowledge about what has been discussed by the respondent.
Many of the interviews have been conducted over telephone and video calls. There has been a
lot of critique raised against this approach. Bryman & Bell (2013, p. 219-222) explains that
telephone interviews have their pros and cons, but should be avoided if possible. The reasoning
for this is because of the fact that it is hard to interpret the body language or reaction of
somebody on the other side of a phone, among other things.
However, as of the current date the world is in the midst of a pandemic, limiting the possibility
of conducting face-to-face interviews. In light of this, video calls have been the preferred
alternative of interviewing, but telephone interviews have still been conducted with respondents
insisting on them.
The main benefit of having approached the interviews in this manner is that time and money
has been saved considering that the study has limited means to work with in regards of those
variables. Telephone interviews and video calls have not presented themselves only with cons,
though. Due to the limitation of face-to-face interactions, interviews with people geographically
distant as well as people on tight schedules have been conducted providing the study with more
data. However, telephone interviews present the respondent with a greater possibility to end the
interview on a short notice, resulting in lost data (Oltmann, 2016, p. 8). This, among the other
cons presented by the author as well as Bryman & Bell (2013) have been considered.
Despite this study being in English, the interviews were conducted in Swedish. This was done
to ensure that there would be no language barriers in collecting the data from the respondents,
as well as to create a comfortable setting for them since not everybody may be comfortable
speaking English. This has created some difficulties for the interview guide presented under
Appendix 1, where it is acknowledged that an exact translation of the questions cannot be made.
With this in mind, the different concepts discussed during the interviews were explained further
if it was deemed that the Swedish translation did not do the English term justice.
Additionally, the transcriptions were naturally written in Swedish and later translated as the
information was written down under 4. Findings. Whereas this potentially could present a
problem where information is lost or interpreted incorrectly amid translation, it is the belief that
this is not the case for the paper. The authors both speak Swedish as their mother tongue while
having English as a second language where the majority of their university studies have been
conducted in English.
19
3.4.3 Selection of Respondents
In this study the selection of respondents have been done so in a perspective of relevance. In
order to fulfil the study’s purpose, a somewhat careful selection of people and organisations to
interview has been made. The number one priority has been the reliability of the person being
interviewed. In selecting potential respondents the main thing that has been looked at is the
person’s insight in the strategy of the organisation they work for. Here, their position in the
organisation has been looked at as a first step to determine whether they have enough
knowledge regarding the area being studied. It has not mattered whether the person works as a
manager, marketer, strategist etc. as long as they have been deemed to be able to answer the
questions. To further ensure this, the subject was introduced to the respondent at first contact,
giving them an opportunity to either decline or contact other personnel within the organisation
more fitting to conduct the interview.
The interview questions were also sent out beforehand, giving the respondent a chance to gain
a deeper understanding of what the interview was going to be about as well as raise questions
if anything was unclear.
In addition to this, the personal network of the authors has also been used in order to gain access
to people able and willing to conduct an interview. For the sake and quality of the study, the
author Valon Krasnici and respondent Flamur Krasnici are not related to one another as their
surnames are the same which is seen in the table below.
3.5 Description of Respondents
Respondent Organisation Role Experience Number of Industry Interview

at employees length
organisation
1. Karl- Cuviva Customer 6 months 15 Medical / 32

Johan success elderly care minutes
Palmgren manager (technology
)
2. Anonymous Territoria 8 years 16,000+ Anonymous 40

Anonymous lsales minutes
manager
3. Flamur Serneke AB Construct 3 years 1000+ Constructio 38

Krasnici ion- n minutes
engineer
20
4. Fredrik Lunar Bank Head of 3 months, 150 Banking 44
Engholm fraud respectively minutes
2 years at
Danske Bank
before
working at
Lunar
5. Benjamin KPMG Manager 3 years 1700+ Consulting 42

Henriksson minutes
6. Sverker Ikano Bostad Head of 7 years 500+ Constructio 36

Andreasson strategy n minutes
7. Niklas Prisjakt/Price CFO 1 year 100+ Information 34

Hermansson Runner minutes
8. Anonymous Product 4 ½ years 425 Sports 47

Anonymous category equipment minutes
manager
9. Anonymous Owner & 20 years 72 Selling 29

Anonymous CEO motorcycles minutes
, motorcycle
parts &
maintenanc
e
Table 1. Description of respondents
3.6 Data Analysis

According to Hsieh & Shannon (2005) there are three ways in which content analysis in
qualitative research can be approached: conventional, directed and summative content analysis.
It is argued by the scholars that it’s important for researchers to understand the different
approaches’ benefits and what kind of research they individually fit. Hsieh & Shannon (2005,
p. 1286) argues that the research problem, purpose and design as well as earlier research in the
area determines which approach is most fruitful for carrying out the study. For instance, the
directed content analysis is argued to be most effective for analysing qualitative data when
research about a problem or phenomena is deemed incomplete, and therefore needs fulfillment
of details (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005, p. 1281). The summative approach is closely related to
21
quantitative research, where the analysis aims to understand how specific words or variables
occur in different contexts. The qualitative emphasis in this case comes from further analysis
in terms of a latent approach which refers to further exploration of interpretation (Hsieh &
Shannon, 2005, p. 1283).
The final one, conventional content analysis, fits studies where the purpose is mainly to describe
a phenomenon, where a descriptive research design often is used. Hsieh & Shannon (2005, p.
1279) explains that the conventional approach is appropriate when existing research in the area
is limited. The analysis itself can be grounded in several approaches in terms of its structure.
These are impressionistic, intuitive, interpretive, systematic and strict, giving the researcher
room to address the issue of analysis in a manner they think is appropriate for their specific
study.
For this paper, it has been chosen to approach the analysis of data in a conventional manner as
explained by Hsieh & Shannon (2005, p. 1279-1281). The primary data gathered from
interviews have been analysed where keywords have been sought for as a foundation of the
analysis. These keywords were later used to not only structure and analyse different areas
separately but also to further explore the similarities and differences between the respondents
and their organisations, to gain an understanding of strategic thinking as a concept in crisis
management from different perspectives. This allowed for the paper to gain a broader
understanding of the concepts' presence in these different settings, where implications of
possible further research were gained as well. Rather than looking at the data from a intuitionist
perspective as somewhat suggested by Hsieh & Shannon (2005, p. 1279), the analysis was
instead carried out with respect to possible complications regarding subjectivity in qualitative
research while remaining low in structure. This allowed for the analysis to be carried out in an
efficient way considering the fact that the subject is existingly loosely researched. The low
structure paved way for approaching the data in a way that was seen fit to fulfill the purpose
and answer the research question of the paper.
3.6.1 Subjectivity in Qualitative Studies

Bumbuc (2016, p. 420) argues that the qualitative method of researching, whether it be focus
groups, group interviews or other types of interviews are questionable in regards to their
findings because of potential subjectivity. According to the scholar, it is not only the researcher
that can fall victim to this, but also the respondent. As some subjects can be hard to talk about
for some people, the research can therefore be difficult to conduct. Further argued by Bumbuc
(2016, p. 420) is that qualitative research is questionable in regards to the fact that theory and
models can be changed to make the answers fit the paper. Additionally, the scholar underlines
that the person collecting the data also is the one who interprets and analyses the data which
potentially opens up possibilities of subjectivity. Whereas the information from respondents
could be subjective, the researcher has an obligation to objectively look at the data gathered in
order to arrive in credible conclusions.
In this paper, large emphasis has been put on objectivity. It is acknowledged, in line with
Bumbuc (2016), that objectivity simply cannot be fully fulfilled in qualitative studies. In order
to increase transparency and decrease subjectivity, measures have been taken as presented
below.
22
Quotes from the transcriptions of the interviews can be found in the empirical data presented in
chapter four. The documents from where this information has been copied have been strictly
transcribed word for word from the recorded interviews and notes have been made where the
respondent changed their tone. Here, non-verbal body language would have been appropriate
to address as well. However, due to the fact that most interviews were conducted by telephone
and video calls this was not possible with the exception of one interview that was conducted
face-to-face.
Furthermore, to decrease the subjective interpretation of the data collected, empirical material
as well as analysis were held off for a few days after the interviews were conducted. This was
done to let the feelings and initial impressions from the interview cool down, to be able to more
objectively look at the transcript to see what was said and in what manner.
Regarding the area researched, it is the belief that the subject shouldn’t be considered a sensitive
one to discuss in an interview from the respondents perspective. Even so, the respondents were
given the possibility of remaining completely anonymous in the study, providing them with the
opportunity of sharing information without this leaking to potential competition.
3.7 Operationalisation
In order to provide answers to the research question, interview questions have been constructed
based on previous research in the chosen subject areas. The purpose with an operationalisation
according to Lynham (2002, p. 226) is to create a bridge between theory and practice. The
theory is investigated and confirmed in the environment where the problem, the phenomenon
or the question arises. Operationalisation aims to preview how actions should be carried out for
the concepts to which the research refers to (Bryman & Bell 2013, p. 90). It is relevant and
interesting to consider the operationalisation which shows how the researchers will proceed
(Bryman & Bell 2013, p. 90). In short, operationalisation demonstrates the conversion from
research to actual and concrete data. It is intended to confirm the relationship between the
questions and in theory, the theoretical framework must be transformed into indicators.
According to Barriball & White (1994, p. 330) the interview guide has an underlying purpose
for each question which is what has been used as a standpoint when formulating the questions.
This mediates the different interpretations that individuals can do. The starting point is to avoid
the problem the wording of the answers can have, where the question can be adapted and
adjusted according to individual respondent without losing their meaning and connection to the
theory (Barriball & White, 1994, p. 329). Therefore, the interview questions in the interview
guide was designed along the most prominent areas that the paper intends to research.
Bryman and Bell (2013, p. 161) claims that operationalisations can not be evaluated in a fair
way since they mention that there is no flawless way of creating one. But looking at the standard
of creating one, there are always major theoretical concepts which are then followed by clear
definitions as seen in the table below. Thereafter, the table presents a part where empirical value
is added and this explanation can be seen as a deliberation of what value the theoretical concept
intends to provide the paper with and to which extent. This is then finalised with the last section
of the table which relates to which question the previous information and definitions are relating
to. The interview guide can be found in Appendix 1.
23
Theoretical part Summarisation of concept Empirical value Question
Strategic thinking Strategic thinking is per this Strategic thinking can be Q1-Q2
paper viewed as a synthesising perceived in different ways,
process combining creativity and this helps gain an
and intuition; the outcome of a understanding of how one
strategic thinking process in apply the subject to his or her
businesses provides an advantage depending on the
integrative and vision-oriented circumstances, and the scale of
perspective of the firm the organisation
(Mintzberg, 1994; Heracleus,
1998; Porter 1998)
Components of The components of strategic Different components of Q1-Q2

Strategic thinking thinking can be separated and strategic thinking are more
stand shaped upon each other applicable and crucial
depending on the depending on the
circumstances which creates circumstances such as the size
possibilities for interrelating of the organisation and the
upon each other (Mintzberg, consequences of the decisions
2000, p. 291) yet to be made
Strategy Strategy is widely affected by By looking into how the Q3-Q7

both the abilities of an strategy of organisations has
organisation as well as their changed by the pandemic, a
surrounding environment broader perspective of crisis
(Furrer & Thomas, 2007, p. 21; management and strategic
Perrott, 2008, p. 26-27) thinking is gained
Capabilities An organisation’s capabilities Capabilities are argued to be of Q3-Q5

should be viewed as their importance in driving strategy
intangible assets (Gibbons & and competitiveness.
Henderson, 2012, p. 1361), Capabilities are important
allowing them to utilise their when conducting strategic
resources to gain a competitive movements (Perrott, 2008, p.
advantage 28; Joyce & Slocum, 2012, p.
183-184). Organisations’
utilisation of theirs are an
important indicator of how
their crisis management has
been used in regards to
24
strategic thinking
Environment The environment in which an The response in how Q6-Q7

organisation operates can be organisations currently deal
looked at from different with the potential change in
perspectives (Johnson et al., consumer behaviour directly
2017). In this paper, buying relates to how strategic
behaviour has been the thinking can be used in crisis
component looked at. The situations through adjusting to
buying behaviour of current environment and
consumers affects how utilising capabilities
organisations can remain
competitive in a market
through their strategy (Kaytaz
& Gul, 2014, p. 2702-2703)
Crisis management Crisis management is a widely Crisis management is often Q8-Q13

used concept not only used by organisations to regain
academically, but also revenue and profits. In the case
practically in situations of this pandemic, crisis
potentially harmful to management could prove itself
organisations. For the majority an important tool to use. The
of the existing research, crisis use of crisis management also
management is looked at from directly relates to the purpose
an internal perspective where of the study, where
strategic thinking hasn’t been organisations’ use of crisis
explored (Gajdzik, 2014, p. management is necessary
391). (Gajdzik, 2014, p. 391).
Table 2. Operationalisation
25
3.8 Quality of the Study
Most commonly, the quality of a research is assessed by taking the criteria validity and
reliability into account (Bryman & Bell, 2015, p. 396). However, the two criteria highly focus
on measurement, which “is not a major preoccupation among qualitative researchers”
(Bryman & Bell, 2015, p. 400). Thus, the quality of this study is assessed by looking at criterias
presented by Tracy’s (2010, p. 840) formula as Lincoln & Guba (1994, p. 94) suggest.
Criteria for quality (end goal) Various means, practices and How it was achieved
methods, through which to
achieve
The topic of the research is The study is considered a

● Relevant worthy topic because of the
● Timely new approach to strategic
● Significant thinking in relation to crisis
1. Worthy Topic ● Interesting management. It has been done
in a timely manner where the
world currently is facing a
pandemic which has forced
many organisations into a crisis
situation
The study uses sufficient, The study aims to look at

abundant, appropriate, and strategic thinking from a new
complex perspective as well as using
● Theoretical constructs crisis management in an
2. Rich Rigour ● Data and time in the interesting context in terms of
field Sample(s) the ongoing pandemic. The
● Context(s) data collection and analysis has
● Data collection and aspired to be transparent,
analysis processes where the chosen interviews
arguably are appropriate due to
the nature of the study
The study is characterised by The methodology has been

● Self-reflexivity about clear on how the study has
subjective values, been conducted. Furthermore
biases, and inclinations transparency regarding the
3. Sincerity of the researchers respondents have been
● Transparency about the emphasised with respect to
methods and those who wished to stay
challenges anonymous. Additionally,
subjectivity has been addressed
The research is marked by Clarifications of terms and

● Thick description, purpose of the interview were
concrete detail, made before the start of the
explication of tacit interview in order to ensure that
(non textual) the participant is understanding
knowledge, and the questions properly. Both
showing rather than primary and secondary data are
26
telling used and direct quotes from a
4 . Credibility ● Triangulation or variety of respondents and
crystallization secondary sources will be used
● Multivocality within the empirical chapter
● Member reflections which ensures credibility
through transparency
The research influences, Strong efforts have been placed

affects, or moves particular on trying to present empirical
readers or a variety of results in a way that is
audiences through evocative, elegant and for the
5. Resonance ● Aesthetic, evocative sake of being aesthetic, fonts
representation and layouts have been
● Naturalistic considered in a proper way
generalisations
● Transferable findings
The research provides a This study has made a

significant contribution significant contribution in the
strategic management field,
● Conceptually/theoretic where strategic thinking has
6. Significant ally been placed in a different and
contribution ●
●
Practically
Morally
timely context.
Methodologically, the paper
● Methodologically has chosen a suiting approach
● Heuristically to fulfill the purpose.
Consequently, the paper is
deemed to have contributed in
a heuristically sense where
further exploration of the
subject is proposed based on
the conclusion
The research considers This study was ethical and full

details of the ethical
● Procedural ethics (such considerations have been
as human subjects) provided by having the
● Situational and permission of quoting,
culturally specific recording and having the
ethics possibility of being anonymous
7. Ethical ● Relational ethics in the study. Moreover, this
● Exiting ethics (leaving paper was submitted to
the scene and sharing respondents in order to check
the research) that they are supportive of what
has been quoted and narrated
27
The study The study accomplishes the
● Achieves what it goal of fulfilling the purpose,
purports to be about however, information not
● Uses methods and sought out to be used was
procedures that fits its found and deemed interesting
8. Meaningful stated goals
● Meaningfully
to discuss. A strong link can be
found between all the chapters
Coherence interconnects literature, of the study, where the
research questions/foci, methodology has been an
findings, and appropriate approach
interpretations with
each other
Table 3. The “Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research” and how they are
achieved (Tracy, 2010, p. 840)
3.9 Societal Implications

As this paper has looked into how strategic thinking is manifested in crisis management, several
societal implications can be found.
As the pandemic caused by Covid-19 has disrupted the global economy and put millions of
people out of jobs, many organisations are suffering. Their difficulties in managing their current
business in the state that the market is could possibly be solved through effective crisis
management and strategic thinking. To be able to find a way as a business to continue being a
part of society by changing strategy or applying strategic thinking to the ongoing operations
does not only benefit organisations themselves. It is also of value to employees, and therefore
society as a whole which in turn contributes to the global economy.
As for the economy, it can be argued that this crisis will lead to a financial crisis, further
damaging organisations and society. The conclusions drawn in this thesis is of value in this
sense as strategic thinking, albeit not focused on in this study, can be argued to be of value for
organisations’ survival in crisis situations.
Finally, the findings suggest that utilisation of an organisation's capabilities is an important
aspect to business continuity emphasising this paper's importance to crisis management.
3.10 Limitations
This section discourses potential limitations that convey the above deliberated methods used,
data collection, analysis, participant selection and question design. To retrieve qualitative data
a text-based method and semi-structured interviews were used, in which participants were
separated. Limitations faced within this process is the impact of previous knowledge about the
subject and the experience of the participants within the subject. Concerning the population of
the study, the networks of the authors were used within social media with hopes of getting
senior managers from different types of organisations within diverse industries as a way of
perceiving a broad perception as possible. In setting up the marketing for getting in touch with
senior managers, there were clear guidelines of who belonged to the target audience. A perfect
respondent was for instance a market manager, manager in other areas, etc. However, the most
28
important thing was that the individual had a significant insight into the company's strategy,
especially if this has changed due to the ongoing crisis or previous ones.
A potential limitation of the study could be that convenience sampling was used as a method
for gathering participants where these two different networks were used to gather participants
both for the pilot-interview as well as the actual interviews. Additionally, no differentiation
within the pool of participants in terms of their academic background was made. Instead, it was
chosen to identify them based on their insights in the area and how their organisations have
operated in regards to that area. Preferably, these participants themselves have made the
decisions maximising their knowledge relevant to the study.
Furthermore, other limitations were identified in the design of questions for both methods, the
text-based and the interview approaches. The questions for the text-based aimed to not be too
leading in a certain direction due to the fact that it was desired to receive as broad and free
answers as possible. However, it was vital to secure a balanced way when handing the
instructions, since during the interviews it was experienced that a need for direction was needed
for the participants to get them into thinking about the issue faced. Another limitation with the
paper was not having direct face-to-face contact due to the current pandemic and geographic
distance of some participants. The use of remote interviews might have limited the depth of
answers. In addition, the interview questions included the components of strategic thinking
from the strategic thinking literature review, which can be interpreted as a complex subject.
Definitions for each component were given in the best way possible, however, it is impossible
to assure that the participants of the paper comprehended them to a desirable level. Thus, this
concern perhaps has unluckily affected the quality or comparability of the responses. Finally,
no tests where the abilities of thinking strategically were done, even though it was considered
during the first phases of the paper. It is realised that the participants might not be able to assess
their own abilities correctly. This was kept in mind when analysing their answers.
3.11 Chapter summary

In summarisation, the methodology used for the study is based on a triangulation approach in
order to point out how strategic thinking is manifested in crisis management. The primary data
was composed from qualitative methods including text-based- and interviews, combining it
with scientific article data which altogether forms the triangulation.
The study takes a descriptive approach where semi-structured interviews were chosen to collect
primary data. Before these happened, a pilot-interview was conducted to ensure the quality of
the questions. Respondents were chosen based on a network-approach where contacts were
reached out to in order to set up interviews with relevant respondents. They, as well as their
organisations, are described to give the reader an understanding of where the data is coming
from. Information regarding specific respondents have been withheld upon request of remaining
anonymous.
The data gathered has been analysed in a conventional manner allowing for an open approach.
Subjectivity regarding the interpretation as well as analysis of the data has been acknowledged,
together with potential problems due to the English-Swedish translation of interview questions.
29
The operationalisation was created to give the reader a greater understanding of how the
questions have been created, how they connect to the literature review and how they were
deemed to be of empirical value.
The quality of the study has been further looked into and used as a base for developing the paper
in different areas such as trustworthiness.
30
4. Findings
This chapter is divided into three parts. A separation between the different concepts has been
made in order to create a coherence of structure throughout the study and excel the
understanding of the results for the reader. The empirical results will be a standpoint for what
is analysed in the next chapter. The upcoming chapter presents the outcomes of the empirical
material retrieved by various respondents' thoughts and perceptions of the questions asked in
the interviews. Following strategic thinking, results of how strategy is executed in the
organisations with a transition into crisis management is presented.
In order to allow for a flow and specificness, the participants will be addressed as e.g. R1
(respondent number 1).

R1 explains that strategy to him is something that is made up in advance and should be followed
throughout as a plan to achieve the goals of a business. Strategic thinking was described by him
as something that was used partly in strategy formulation and achievement, where strategic
thinking was thought of as something that helped accomplish milestones in the overall strategy.
Strategic thinking was also referred to as being like driving a car, where one has to keep focus
not only on what oneself is doing but also pay attention both forward and backwards in terms
of surroundings.
“As you do when you drive a car, you need strategic thinking because you don’t know what’s
happening ahead or further behind you” - R1
After explaining how strategic thinking was defined and viewed as in this paper, R1 was asked
to elaborate on how it from that standpoint occured practically in the organisation that he works
in. It was said that strategic thinking didn’t always occur, and it mostly depended on the person
you were looking at. But in regards to the areas or specific situations that it did occur, or at least
was explained to be of benefit, was when applications were made on the service Cuviva offers
to their customers. R1 said that because of the customers’ different needs, changes in how their
service is presented to be of value had to be made depending on the situation which was deemed
as strategic thinking. Even though the product is essentially the same, it can be adapted to fulfill
the demands of the consumer because of the flexibility in the platform they are offering.
“So it’s about creating applications of how one can use our services depending on what type
of customer that is going to use the solutions” - R1
According to R2, strategy is a detailed plan which has been thoroughly worked on and
something you stick to as long as that strategy remains relevant to the organisation. In relation
to this, strategic thinking was seen as something that was used in an early phase of formulating
an actual strategy. R2 also stated that strategic thinking was used practically in his organisation
as of right now when the actual strategy planned by the organisation was continuously changed
and improved depending on the given conditions in the market environment. Here, strategic
thinking was specifically used in trying to stick as close to the original strategy as possible while
at the same time adjusting to the crisis.
31
“We have always had a strategy which has been designed carefully and how we are supposed
to work. A very detailed five-year plan but that has been largely changed lately and here we
have had to use strategic thinking in terms of how we best adjust ourselves in this time to
come close to our [original] strategy” - R2
Regarding the first interpretation of strategy and strategic thinking, R5 mentioned that he was
confident that analytic thinking abilities is a common term when speaking about strategic
thinking since it is all about planning the work in forward, which brought him into the topic of
what strategic planning is. Moreover, he said that there was no clear way, sort of right or wrong
way of thinking in strategic terms since it is taught on every individual's ability of thinking
strategically. Instead strategic thinking could be linked with thinking outside the box, where it
is all about having an creative approach but that it also could depend on the circumstances. This
was referred to when speaking of crisis, where times are uncertain, R3 is confident that thinking
in creative ways when speaking about strategy is vital. ‘’You have to be creative in finding ways
forward and if you just look back for a second or are arrogant, especially in times of crisis, it
will fireback hard on you and your organisation’’ - R3. Moreover, speaking of the linkage
between strategic thinking and strategic planning, R4 confesses that strategic thinking is the
vital ability to excel before starting to include the planning aspect of it into the equation.
‘’It is closely connected to the planning process also, but I think the thinking part in terms of
strategy out-works planning since it requires a sharper mind for doing it properly’’ - R3
When asking follow up questions of the interpretation of strategic thinking, R6 touched upon
abilities such as that strategic thinking abilities help business managers review policy issues,
perform long term planning, set goals and determine priorities, and to identify potential risks
and opportunities.
R6 separated strategy and strategic thinking in a way that strategy was all about finding ways
to reach the overall goals for the organisation. The strategic thinking part is all about the work
during the process of reaching those goals and relating to the internal and external conditions,
challenges and opportunities. The process of mapping those out stands for a load of strategic
thinking meanwhile a strategy is the overall goal that is set from the start of a project. There
was a clear distinction in describing those terms specifically for themselves and he claims that
it is partially difficult to comprehend the difference between strategy and strategic thinking if
you do not work with it each and every day as he does. Additionally, R6 claims that the way
strategy is approached in his field of work is that scenario-analyses and risk analysis are the
first step in thinking strategically, and then re-strategising is done by consequence-thinking. An
example that he drew was how the building of new houses or apartments can be done in other
ways depending on external factors, such as a crisis. The way of working is also a way of
thinking strategically, for instance. R6 stated that one should think about what should be more
prioritised in order to strive for the highest rate of success and efficiency of the organisation
itself. He also discussed the mistakes made by many senior leaders where he notices that they
often make the mistake to get to step two in processes before they have fully finished the first
step and in that way create confusion and lack of efficiency. However, that is still something
R6 understands comes from developing strategic thinking skills which takes time and many
failures before comprehending it fully. R6 is clear in his point when speaking of strategic
thinking of what determines the process, and says that there are two factors that keep creative
thinking alive when strategising and that is potential challenges and opportunities.
32
‘’How me and my team think in strategic terms can always be related with two components,
and that is always by looking at potential possibilities and opportunities for the organisation
given any situation, and from there, the strategic thinking, and the strategic work starts to
develop.’’ - R6
R7 insists that strategy is an ongoing process and remains relevant in any type of situation. He
explains that thinking of strategy as a concept or trying to think strategically is way more
complex than it seems to look like. In his work as a head of financials, he says that strategy is
a part of everything he does and is usually broken down into questions such as where the
organisation is today, what the goal is and how they are going to reach it. In that way, the
strategic work and thinking upon reaching those stands for the rest of the process. This way of
perceiving strategy and strategic thinking in particular is similar to how R6 perceives it.
Additionally, R7 says it is crucial to always have a vision in mind and work towards a goal,
since strategy would not be a strategy in particular if these two components are not followed
through when thinking in strategic terms. Regarding the question of how strategic thinking
occurs in practice in the organisation, R7 claims that thinking strategically is not only the
management’s responsibility. In his organisation, they are actively working with passing down
the skills of thinking strategy to the employees below them, since it contributes to their
development and in the same way enables the organisation to widen the strategic thinking
abilities.
‘’We want everybody to be at the same level of thinking, even though the majority of the
strategy lies on the management team. We are working on pushing down strategic thinking
abilities as far below them as possible, because it widens the competence and creates a
meaningful work environment for our employees’’ - R7
R8 explains that his role demands him to think strategically in everything he does. This is
because of the fact that as a product category manager he works approximately between one
and two years ahead of time. He thinks, though, that strategic thinking is something that is not
occuring enough considering the industry they operate in and the type of work they do. Many
of the employees in the organisation are demanded to think strategically and ahead of time.
Despite this, it was discussed that employees are bad at managing their time or simply take their
time to think strategically. When asked specifically what strategic thinking is to him, the answer
was that strategic thinking can be integrated in almost everything one does, to make sure that
the task at hand serves a future purpose.
R9 states that strategic thinking in relation to strategy is something he sees as similar, but
strategic thinking is something that is not written in stone as opposed to how strategies
sometimes are. Strategic thinking is according to the respondent used when doing anything in
an organisation, it could be planning your day to make it more efficient or to tackle tasks with
efficiency. When asked what he thought the main component of strategic thinking is the answer
was that it’s a skill you either possess or don’t. Practically in his organisation, strategic thinking
mainly comes from him and the manager right below him. They are the ones formulating
strategies and how things should be run, if this isn’t for some reason delegated further down.
33
Following the presentation of the outcomes on how strategic thinking is interpreted and how it
occurs in practice, the upcoming section presents the results of the role capabilities and work
environment has on the organisation and the strategies executed for different organisations
operating in various industries.
4.2.1 Capabilities
Speaking of Cuviva’s core capabilities when interviewing R1, it was made clear that from his
perspective the main capability driving the organisation forward was the employees working in
sales. This was not particularly because of them being extraordinary in what they are doing, but
simply because of the nature of the organisation. To provide a solution while being in the growth
face as an organisation, it was explained by R1 that the people driving the sales were most
important. It was acknowledged that other employees were important as well but from the view
of the organisation currently with a finished product, sales was the driving force keeping the
organisation going.
In terms of innovation as a capability, R1 said that it was something that had been focused on
during the pandemic. The organisation as a whole has since the outbreak put more effort into
developing their product and service, as opposed to how they were working before it. This was
argued to be done because of the fact that they are active in the medical instrument industry,
and therefore could better determine what is being needed right now and how that can be
integrated into their product. However, this was not seen entirely as a solution to the situation
the organisation currently is facing. Even though their offers are better suited now for the market
demand, R1 said that the problem rooted in the buyers not being able to make larger decisions
during these times which created difficulties. However, despite this R1 was confident that the
development of the product and service today would be of benefit for them long into the future.
“What happens is that our product, after this has toned down, will be more relevant” - R1
When asked about the core capabilities of the organisation that R2 works at, the answer was
that it was that they aren’t reliant on any other party regarding the technology in their products.
Since the products are made in-house, they remain in full control except for things that currently
can’t be accounted for such as transportation. This capability was seen to be something of value
for the future, since a lot of the upcoming products were already developed and therefore
somewhat ready to hit the market when they are planned to.
Since technology in their products are important according to R2, innovation was something
that was seen as vital. However, because of the organisation's international presence, it has seen
some difficulties in its operation in other countries which has led to loss of revenue and as a
result of that cut-downs have been made on innovation. Here, the strategy has had to be revised
in order to prioritise out of the given situation.
In regards to talent as a capability, this was not seen as something that was a driving force in
the organisation. While thought of as the heart of the operations, R2 argued that even though
some people of course deliver great results it makes a smaller difference considering the size of
the organisation. The size has also led to there being well developed processes within that
received more emphasis of importance from R2. However, it was noted that leaders were seen
34
to be most vital in terms of talent right now as they are supposed to lead the group during these
difficult times.
It was also said by R2 that the talent in the Swedish division was not being taken advantage of
as much as it could be. He explained that a lot of competence was found in the Swedish division,
and that this specific one is the best in the organisational group which is why he thought the
strengths could be of advantage for the whole organisation.
“[...] there is a lot of competence which is seated in Sweden. So there we should be able to do
it better. Use our strengths in Sweden since it is that division which performs best. It can
always be better” - R2
R5 discusses innovation as a capability from a collective approach and mentions the importance
of creating a systematic system for innovation since it is not enough with the culture where
every idea is welcome. People need to not just hear that ideas are welcome from everyone and
everywhere, that rule breaking and risk taking are encouraged, or that ideas are allowed to fail
without incurring punishment. They need to experience these things every day. That is when
the innovation part becomes tangible enough to guide patterns of behaviour across the entire
organisation.
‘’Building a deep innovation capability requires a systemic approach, I believe. It requires

the company to patiently assemble the components I just talked about, and sort of putting the
necessary drivers in place so that your innovation system within the organisation becomes
sustainable. Because in the end, you want to achieve a sustainable innovation system and not
temporary only.’’ - R5
R3 who operates from another industry has almost the same view on innovation and the
importance of being first with an idea which can give the organisation the first-mover advantage
even though it is usually easy being copied by others.
‘’I believe that innovation can be equated with solving problems that arise. Being able to see
the big picture and as I said in the first question. We are striving to be as innovative as
possible and our houses would not be possible if we did not manage to be innovative because
of the fact that in today's generation, everything is about who is first, the first-mover
advantage so to say, but it is also easy to be copied. But we try to be as specialised as
possible and identifying new trends which drives the customers in our favour’’ - R3
R7 explains that innovation is an important aspect of their business, considering the fast moving
industry. Here, the respondents put emphasis on being able to innovate not only because of the
competition in the market, but also because of the possible entry of new competition. There’s
always a risk of new entrants coming in with new solutions or lower prices which can be a
threat to the business.
Another important aspect regarding the innovation in the organisation was to satisfy the
customers. According to the respondent, this has become increasingly important as the phase
of e-commerce has increased because of the pandemic.
When asked about the core capabilities of the organisation, R8 described the outer sales force
to be the main capability. It was noted that this wasn’t because of their sales or the revenue that
they brought upon the organisation, but because of their face out and the relationship-
35
management that they were handling in their role. It was said that relationships with the
different customers as well as other partners making the business go around was nurtured
carefully. When discussing this R8 further developed his answer and said that despite this, it’s
also significantly important that the relation and service-level can be backed up by products
that are of value. Without this sort of chain-like operation, R8 claimed that the organisation
would not do so well.
“So there the service-level is number one but the relation and service-level are in turn backed
up by products that are sufficient enough” - R8
Innovation was also seen to be of importance to R8. As a leader in their industry, the quality of
their products must hold a certain level. The innovation is made in-house, but due to Covid-19
the production has taken a hit which has forced the organisation to prioritise differently. Here,
innovation has been pushed back and focus has instead been placed on making sure that the
production is sufficient enough to cover the demand.
The main capabilities thought of as core capabilities by R9 was their experience as well as
knowledge in the field they operate in. Because they are a smaller organisation and have been
around for some time, the respondent explained that many customers were recurrent ones. The
fact that the organisation was doing almost everything from selling spare parts to maintenance
was seen as an advantage.
In terms of talent as a capability, R9 described that it was very important in his industry and to
his organisation that the right employees were working there. This was exemplified by a
customer coming in to buy a motorcycle or spare parts. They expect the employees to be
service-minded and competent enough in their job that they can be of help whatever their desire
may be. This was especially emphasised in regards to the maintenance and workshop
department, where R9 argued that a job not well done will eventually damage the trust the
customer has in their competence. Many of the customers they receive there are also motorcycle
enthusiasts, which according to the respondent often can do much of the work themselves but
they simply don’t find the time and therefore hand the work to them.
“A customer coming in to buy a motorcycle expects the salesperson to know his stuff” - R9
When asked about innovation as a capability, R9 explained that this wasn’t something that he
really thought about. He stated that there isn’t much to the business besides running it smoothly
and having the right mindset and products to make customers happy. But as digitalisation has
grown over the years they have started to look further into selling digitally through their website
which has been of advantage during these times when many customers are at home and don’t
necessarily want to come in to buy things.
Strategically, as of now, the capabilities thought of to not be utilised enough in the organisation
was the employees. R9 explains that he wishes they could be of more value but that it doesn’t
work since there aren't as many customers visiting the stores right now.
4.2.2 Environment
Regarding R1’s customers, the change in behaviour has been large. As Cuviva sells their
products to public organisations, it is stated by R1 that they have entered a state of preparation
for what is to come. Currently, their focus has switched from their everyday business and effort
36
is instead put on handling the pandemic both from a short-term perspective. He repeats himself
of his earlier statement where he is confident that even though this has put a hold on their sales
right now, this behaviour will not last forever and when it stops their sales will most likely
increase as opposed to before the pandemic. It was also noted that not only sales would increase
to specific or already existing customer-base, but that new customers would be gained as well.
R2 explains that the sales have gone down because of the pandemic. This was not because of
the intentions or behaviour of consumers, however. The organisation closely follows customer
behaviour and measures digital activity which could be seen to have changed just a little bit
since the outbreak. According to R2, the customers were still showing normal levels of interest
in their products and services. Problems were created, though, because of the fact that the
business model promotes physical contact and high service-level through that which simply
can’t be done right now. The respondent explained that they were trying to adjust to the
circumstances as much as possible through the use of video calls and other technological
solutions. Despite this, he said that it is not as fruitful to use this approach in the industry or for
the organisation.
R7 confesses humbly that the ongoing pandemic has led to great advantages and traffic on their
website. The average customer has become much more sensitive to prices and their business
model is built up for the sake of helping customers pay the lowest price as possible for a specific
product or service. R7 and his organisation see a great opportunity of accelerating the business
forward now as they have never seen before, since the company is quite new already but has
enormous potential on having a seat with the other giant-players in their field of industry. In
their case, the competitors are based on international grounds.
‘’The e-commerce is at a point where I think it would have been in three years, but due to the
crisis, it has rapped up the speed radically and we see that 3 years became 3 weeks instead.
We are humbly thankful for the opportunities it has created for us and we see a great
opportunity of accelerating our business in a pace that has never been done before, thanks to
the behaviour of the customers which is a result of the crisis. Strategic thinking abilities in
launching a strategy for the upcoming years will be more important than ever for us’’ - R7
It was hard for R8 to describe a difference in buying behaviour in the industry. He said that
stores have had difficulties in keeping up their sales, but from a perspective from R8’s
organisation this has not made so much of a difference. Sales of 2020 have dropped, but not in
any significant amount. This is because they work so far ahead in time, so the results of the
pandemic will show clearer in the future. Since the equipment that they sell are season-
dependent, R8 anticipated that there is a possibility that they will not be so affected after all if
the pandemic soon diminishes. However, because of the production issues the organisation may
be short of supply to fill this demand.
“[...] if the season starts up in august september the demand for next year will be as big [as
usual]” - R8
In terms of buying behaviour, R9 claims he has seen mild change. As mentioned earlier less
customers are visiting the store but the respondent claims that the other parts of the business
are basically running as usual. What was stated to be the most significant change of behaviour
is that not as many new motorcycles have been sold during the spring as the previous years.
37
When asked about if there was a specific team or person handling the crisis management in the
organisation, R1 said that there was no dedicated division or formality regarding who was
responsible. There was neither any documents available to the employees regarding guidelines
or responses to potential crises that could affect the organisation. This was argued to be because
of their smaller size. However, it was made clear that the CEO of the company was the person
handling these kinds of things.
When discussing the planning part regarding the fact that the pandemic was globally known
before it hit Sweden, R1 was asked if this was something that was utilised by the CEO or anyone
else at the organisation to prepare for a worst case scenario. The answer was that yes, he
believed that they were somewhat early with planning for the pandemic to reach them and their
home market. This was argued to be mainly due to them being in contact with the medical
industry in Italy because of employees there, which had allowed for them to see what was
happening there. Another reason was because of the nature in their business which argued by
R1 gave them a larger insight in what was happening.
“I would say that halfway through march we were already in crisis mode. But that’s because
we have doctors whom are employed by us that write articles to the social authority regarding
advice and guidelines so we have a lot of knowledge about what is happening” - R1
Strategic thinking was something that R1 thought had been integrated into the crisis
management of Cuviva. He explained that strategic thinking in relation to Covid-19 had been a
process. Because of the fact that they as well as nobody else knows exactly where or how this
ends, preparation has been made by the capabilities and information they have access to. It was
further emphasised that getting new customers and driving sales in times like this was seen as
important because of Cuviva’s reliment on venture capital. Because of their situation of being
in a growing-phase, they are not stable enough to lose out too much on revenue for periods of
time like some industries currently are doing.
R2 explains that, at least in the Swedish division, there is no specific department or specific
person that handles crises. However, there are always a selected group of people that can be
turned towards in different types of crises or situations. For instance, during the pandemic
different project groups and teams have been created to tackle the situation from different
perspectives of the organisation (HR, strategy etc.). It is clear to the respondent that these teams
are necessary for the organisation in times like this.
In preparation for a potential outbreak of Covid-19 in Sweden, the organisation looked towards
divisions geographically closer to the outbreak that suffered it before it came to Sweden. Here,
information was passed on and best practices were developed and passed forward to other
countries of operation.
Crisis management plans have also been made in the event of economic slowdown or other
reasons as to why revenue could potentially drop significantly for the organisation in the future.
Here, it is noted by the respondent that they tend to talk about these scenarios as little as possible
because it sort of makes them anticipate it more. Clear plans have been made where several
scenarios are included and what the organisation and specific departments and divisions are
supposed to do.
38
In light of evaluating crisis management responses to Covid-19, R2 explains that it is closely
related to what was said regarding the environment analysis they continuously make. Here, the
response is evaluated from a perspective of firstly keeping everybody in and out of the
organisation safe and following restrictions and guidelines of the government and authorities.
The different implementations made to keep the operations as close to normal as possible are
also evaluated through researching what customers think of the different things done by the
organisation.
“Evaluation-wise we very much think that we have made the right decisions based on what we
have done, we have done different strategic stuff in everything from packaging to pricing to
reach a volume we desire” - R2
It is the hope of R2 that the strategic decisions made in today's environment will be of benefit
for the future. He says that the decisions made today often reflect where the organisation wants
to be in the future, and therefore is closely related to thinking long-term when dealing with the
crisis. However, it is noted that this is not an easy task since the environment and information
regarding Covid-19 continuously changes which also forces the organisation to change the
strategy in one way or another.
In all of this it is clear to the respondent that the senior management of the organisational group
has taken a leadership role in informing and delegating tasks to different divisions and
countries. Weekly video calls and presentations are conducted where for instance comparisons
between divisions are made to create an environment of learning from each other to come out
of this as a better group.
When asked about the plans for business continuity when a crisis hits, R3 made it clear that
there was one formula that was vital in order to keep operating at the same pace - cutting costs
and increasing revenue. He mentioned that in an ongoing pandemic, the formula was more
important than ever, since operating at the same pace can not be done if they can not use the
resources available as they do in less challenging times.
‘’There is no meaning in strategising if you do not think about the formula, I am talking about
business now. This formula is especially important in crisis times, where you see
organisations take the easier but hard part to sack their employees since it is a load of costs
of having them paid every single day, instead we have to find other ways of cutting costs
because our employees is the most important asset for the company’’ - R3
Additionally, the concept of strategic thinking is always integrated in any department, R3

explains. However, when times get harder and an external crisis hits, for instance the ongoing
pandemic, it forces the management team to come together with the sharpest strategic thinking
abilities. This, in order to try and overcome the most significant dangers that stand for the short-
term perspective before heading into how to strategise for the future long term perspective.
According to R3 there is no point in focusing on the long term perspective when a crisis hits
before dealing with the potential short-term danger that arises, since it is about primarily
surviving and re-strategising to come out stronger from the crisis as a secondary objective.
R6 goes in the same direction when speaking about crisis management when a sudden crisis
arises. R6 makes it clear when speaking of crisis management, that when evaluating the current
crisis, they map out on what effects it can have on the long term strategy which spans over
39
several years such as a five year strategy execution plan. To increase the control of the crisis,
R6 mentions the importance of monitoring trends through collaboration with different
companies. For their part, a major player that has possible resources to identify these is IKEA
in which R6’s organisation stands in close collaboration with. R4 shares the same way of
thinking but instead mentions that the different departments always try to be available for one
another when in need of help. Moreover, R6 shared a strategy method used for the current
pandemic which is that a team is created between the companies to start an exploratory work
that almost aligns with innovation, but with an extraordinary focus on addressing potential
threats or opportunities that the crisis might create. In that way, strategic thinking becomes a
vital part of the work and forces the brains in the team to always be creative and re-strategise
accordingly to the ongoing external factors that affect the businesses. Questioning themselves
and their current processes, business-model and products is a fundamental part in thinking
strategically.
‘’I would not say that in times like this, where we stand for a crisis, that we work from our
strategies. Instead, strategy has turned out being crisis management primarily but that still
forces us to re-strategise and identify possible threats or opportunities that arises for the sake
of the crisis’’ - R6
R8 explains that there is no specifically chosen division or person that handles crises. It is rather
the manager of the department that the crisis affects. In this case, most crisis management has
been focused on HR and the well being of the employees. Less crisis management has been
placed on for instance sales, where these decisions aren’t viewed as crisis management. Instead,
each division and department are free to act in a way that they see fit where business is still
handled as usual from the given situation.
R8 says that there are no specific guidelines regarding potential crises, but that this is handled
mainly by the senior management in America.
In regards to evaluating different decisions during these times R8 explained that they hadn’t
gotten to that phase yet because of the so far small effect Covid-19 has had on sales. It is noted
that different scenarios are constantly brought up and changed now as the situation develops
and new information is available.
In regards to leadership in the crisis management deployed by the organisation, R8 explains

that the restrictions the division here in Sweden has is based on what happens in America. The
senior management is looking out for the well being of the employees as its number one priority,
and even though the restrictions here in Sweden legally are softer the regulations are centralised
from the main office in America.
When asked how the CEO is responding to the ongoing crisis, R4 is open and clear with the
experience of the CEOs’ behaviour so far. R4 claims that the CEO of the company has a broad
portfolio of competence and his curriculum includes previous crisis management experience
which stand as an advantage for him in dealing with the ongoing crisis. The leadership feels
great so far and in that sense keeps the departments calm. Moreover, R4 confesses that with an
environment that is open where all workers have a fair chance to have their ideas heard and
give potential strategic input, opens up for training the brain in strategic terms and in that way
sort of including everyone on larger scales. The management team is tackling the crisis in a
systematic way and that is much because of our CEOs experience and competence. Every
organisation needs someone to look up to when times get strange and uncertain, R4 claims.
40
In terms of dedicated departments or people R9 explains that there are no formalities regarding
that matter. It is mainly himself that looks into these kinds of things, but considering the size of
the crisis the head of marketing and him are working closely together to prepare for the future.
The plan for business continuity in terms of the current situation is mainly to drive revenue as
good as it can possibly be done. Here, R9 and the head of marketing have looked to put more
effort into the website as well as service/maintenance parts of the organisation since these are
the ones performing the best right now. Measures have also been taken to ensure that both the
employees and customers are safe when having their motorcycles maintained, where they are
disinfected coming in and going out while at the same time following guidelines regarding
social distancing.
“The plan is basically to do what we can do looking at the situation in terms of driving sales
and continuing as a business” - R9
R9 continues and explains that it’s hard to strategically implement and evaluate solutions in
these times. He compares this to an economic crisis where the main problem would be to
financially survive as an organisation. While he acknowledges that this could be the same case
for many organisations out there, the things they have to focus on are explained as more
complicated compared to simply seeing a loss in sales. Adjustments have to be made all around
the organisation, while at the same time making sure that these adjustments don’t affect the
normal operations and if they do how to solve it.
Strategic thinking is said to be central in the solutions and adjustments implemented in the
operation right now. R9 states that nobody knows exactly how long this will continue, and that
is something that he has to prepare for to make sure that the business can continue despite this.
Solutions implemented today must be viable in the long-term to not jeopardise the future of the
business.
41
5. Analysis
Without a clear understanding of precisely what strategic thinking is or what it describes, it
cannot be assessed properly. What can be said overall, is that strategic thinking is a complex
subject to put into practice, and this perception of the subject is commonly shared by all 9
participants altogether. Relating to crisis management was also an issue, but since the ongoing
pandemic at this time of writing is actual, there was a connection between strategic thinking
and crisis management. From each interview that was conducted, there was a slim but confident
knowledge of how one can think strategically in different circumstances. Additionally, what
can be drawn into the table of what was common by all the participants together, was that
strategic thinking was always done with a clear vision in mind, in both short- and long term
perspectives. Moreover, the participants altogether said that there was no clear way, sort of right
or wrong way of thinking in strategic terms. In other words, it is said that the individual itself
is a lifelong learner in which the knowledge montesines over time, as stated above. When
reviewing the literature, it can be seen that Nuntamanop et al. (2013, p. 256) claim that the
ability to learn is part of strategic thinking. Similarly, Casey & Goldman (2010) explain that
prior knowledge and experience impacts the degree of learning where one has a long way of
learning meanwhile one another is at the forefront of learning. When linking strategic thinking
to previous experiences it goes in line with Steptoe-Warren et al. (2011) that leaders make good
use of their experience when thinking in strategic terms, or is about to make a strategic decision.
For instance, R3 and R5 state that the experience is a great asset when it comes to strategic
decisions, and emphasise the weight of using it as much as possible but still remain presence
and challenge themselves to think outside the box. Conversely, merely relying on prior
experience is yet condemned since it can lead to biased decisions, where the concept of strategic
thinking falls into the shadow of the actual decision based on strategy.
When speaking about abilities connected to strategic thinking, there was a shared formula of
what abilities are involved in it. In the respondents’ point of view when asking follow up
questions of the interpretation of strategic thinking, the majority speaked upon abilities such as
those that help business managers review policy issues, perform long term planning, set goals
and determine priorities, and identify potential risks and opportunities. It was found interesting
and surprising since the information gathered was dissimilar to the model of strategic thinking
constructed by Liedtka (1998, p. 126). The model consists of five elements relating to strategic
thinking: system perspective, intent-focused, intelligent opportunism, thinking in time, and
hypothesis-driven key dimensions. However, connections to two of the components can be
seen, where many of the respondents arguably see strategic thinking as intent-focused and
thinking in time.
Goal-oriented and visionary thinking were found to be essential to strategic thinking in the
literature review (Mintzberg, 1994; Moon, 2013; Nuntamanop, Kauranen & Igel 2013; Bonn,
2005). Bonn (2005) is confident when speaking of strategy that strategic thinking involves
problem-solving with a vision, which connects and supports answers from the participants.
42
‘’You have to be creative in finding ways forward and if you just look back for a second or
being arrogant, especially in times of crisis, it will fireback hard on you and your
organisation.’’ - R3.
This interpretation of strategic thinking is deemed to be of high value since it relates to the real-
life perception of the subject and is supported by Heracleous (1998) as well, in which he sees
planning as a support to strategic thinking by providing a structure to creative thinking
processes.
The majority of the participants found it difficult to separate strategic thinking from strategic
planning, they experienced that strategic thinking was not possible without including a planning
because of the slim difference of the terms. The majority felt that the linkage was clear between
strategic thinking and strategic planning. R2 states that strategic thinking encompasses a plan
of action. ‘’[…] we have a strategy which has been designed carefully and how we are supposed
to work with strategy with a clear end-goal in mind” - R2. Throughout the planning processes,
evaluating time is vital as it might impact the set-up of a realistic goal. Time invested, and time
needed should be taken into consideration when thinking strategically according to R5 and R6.
Similarly to what is found in the literature, a connection is seen between the statement to the
literature, in particular Liedtka (1998) who claims that time needs to be well thought of when
making strategic decisions.
In speaking of time, more than half of the respondents discuss the setting of long-term and
short-term objectives and goals. R3 specifies that thinking of the future, in other words futuristic
mind-set, is vital to reach long-term visions while stating that long-term planning is important
for reaching future goals. Crisis management can therefore be seen as an issue and a factor that
is delaying the primary objectives since it is usually not included in the short- or long term
visions, but crucial in dealing with. It is seen here that the respondents include planning in
strategic thinking when speaking of the visions, in which it is interpreted as they perceive
planning as part of strategic thinking. The answer is in line with the reviewed literature, where
components such as analytical, conceptual, systematic and critical thinking is encompassed in
the strategic thinking process. Several authors refer to this as strategic planning, but when
looking at frameworks consisting of strategic thinking, it shows that it is in line with analytical
thinking (Liedtka, 1998; Heracleous, 1998; Porter, 1998; Mintzberg, 1994).
Another aspect that six respondents mention is the involvement of action steps evaluated. R5
contends that actions are applied based on prioritisation on what remains to be done within a
certain project or moment. Comparing the answer with R6, he confesses that when having
diverse options, it habitually leads to certain actions. R4 goes in the direction when speaking
about long- and short term goals that objectives need to be broken down into smaller achievable
tasks. It is interpreted and referred to as a structured approach when having a clear goal in mind
and dealing with the matter by breaking it down into smaller ones. Moreover, this is related
with systematic thinking, and can be found within the strategic thinking components (Porter,
1998, p. 109).
What can be seen in the empirical findings in terms of systems thinking based on experience,
practice and gut feeling is that it is a subtle way of making decisions when relating to strategic
thinking. Gut feeling is another term for intuition, thus referring to intuitive thinking.
According to R4, strategic thinking includes the process of viewing the business as casual,
43
which he then relates to having prior experience. Moreover, using the experience from past
projects (R6), doing research on similar situations that belong to the past is mentioned.
Additionally, in line with doing research on similar situations, R3 phrases the topic by
“listening to the gut feeling from previous years’’. When speaking of intuition, in situations
where strategic decisions are made, is supported in the reviewed literature. Mintzberg (2000)
and Goldman et al. (2017, p. 178) claims that intuition is a part of strategic thinking. It is also
found that intuition usually is grounded on prior experience, knowledge and competences
(Steptoe-Warren et al., 2011 p. 266), which can be seen and agreed from the respondents of the
study. Additionally, R2 states practical thinking involved in the strategic decisions, need to be
focused on while predicting and aiming for a change in the upcoming future that relates to the
strategy set from the start. This clarifies that practicality relates to intuition and adaptable
thinking, from the argument by R2 listed above.
What is linked to the statements above is the empirical findings from R5 in which he confesses
that he would not use the gut for a decision “a decision made by the gut feeling is a poor
decision”. Instead, he argues for merging it with a logical and structured approach. Reviewing
the literature from Goldman et al. (2017), a glimpse of linkage regarding what has been said by
R5 can be seen. For instance, the scholars contend that intuition is part of strategic thinking.
Moreover, they make it clear for the readers that they can not confirm whether intuition has a
positive effect. When speaking of intuition, R5 says that intuitive thinking still remains to be
done with a logical and structured approach in order to be evaluated as a great ability. This is
backed up by Heracleous (1998) where he mentions that intuitive thinking makes more sense
when including a logical approach to it.
In terms of strategic decisions, the results show that the majority of the respondents prefer being
involved in a team or at least having others to ask for advice before the decision is being made.
Hence, it was interpreted as teamwork to be of importance in strategic decision-making which
was often referred to when speaking of the ongoing pandemic and the decisions being made on
a regular basis. When reviewing Bonns’ (2001) study, strategic thinking occurs on different
levels in an organisation, which is why it can be argued that effective team communication is
essential to comprehend the complete method. It is also related to Bonn’s (2001) way of
describing systems thinking since learning from others is part of systems thinking, which
R3,R4,R5,R6 and R7 made clear when asked. R3 emphasises teamwork by mentioning that an
overall picture of the problem is the first step. Thereafter, once the elements of the problem are
identified, involving a team is the best way to approach the problem for the highest rate of
success in solving it. This was especially mentioned at this moment when an ongoing crisis
requires numerous sharp minds.
The majority of respondents seem to value diverse analyses and assessments in which it is
interpreted that it is a significant part of strategic thinking. When captivating external influences
and factors into account it is said by two of the respondents, R4 and R7, that it could impact the
situation and should be viewed as vital. Furthermore, diverse methods to organise accessible
information are mentioned, such as the analysis including strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats (R3 & R5). Another analysis mentioned was consequence-analysis (R5). R5
additionally emphases on detecting strengths and weaknesses of the company in an early stage
as possible, in order to “avoid scenarios where our weaknesses would make us most
vulnerable”. Reviewing the literature, there is a significant connection with analytical and
systematic thinking components. In detail, Porter (1998), alongside with Heracleous (1998)
44
support the argument that analytical thinking is part of strategic thinking. The literature review
shows that methods where strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats are relevant when
speaking of internal factors that might affect the strategic thinking process which is underlined
by Furrer & Thomas (2007, p. 21) where they discuss these variables by dividing them in
categories of external and internal.
5.2.1 Capabilities
In accordance with Joyce & Slocum (2012, p. 185), what was viewed as core capabilities
between the respondents and their respective organisations differed. Whereas for instance both
R1 and R2 said that employees are an important part of their organisations, their fulfillment of
the organisation's goals and competitive advantages was not the same. What can also be seen is
that both R8 and R9 talks about employees in an indirect sense, where the essence of their
business whether it be service quality or considering sales personnel relies on being sure that
the employees can do their job.
Another finding is that the employees seen as most vital to the organisation differed between
the respondents. Whereas for example R1 and R9 mentioned the sales people to be of
importance, R8 placed emphasis on the employees making sure that the sales personnel could
perform their task while still discussing the importance of sales personnel as the “face” of the
organisation. This is in line with Joyce & Slocum (2012, p. 184), where it is stated that talent
within organisations often are the driver of other capabilities, and therefore serving as a driver
for firm performance. In the case of R8, it can be argued that the capability to manage their
product portfolio directly connects to the utilisation of sales as a capability. This was not the
case for the other respondents. However, an interesting find can be made in R2’s discussion
regarding talent. In his statement it is mentioned that he believes there to be a lot of talent and
knowledge within the Swedish division which was not utilised by other divisions in the
organisation. In addition to this, it was also mentioned that the Swedish division was the one
performing the best which argues for the fact that the organisation could benefit from utilising
this capability in different manner than they currently are.
Putting this in relation to crisis management, it was not mentioned by any respondent that talent
as a capability was the sole driver in strategically overcoming the pandemic as a crisis. It was
made clear by all of the respondents that talent played a critical role in ensuring their business’
success. Even though crises weren’t particularly or directly mentioned in this context, the
information from the different respondents suggests otherwise. As it was explained by R1,
talent in the form of sales personnel was currently looked towards even more so because of the
organisations’ state of growth. R2 stated that the processes within the organisation often ensured
that employees made the right decisions, suggesting that capability in terms of leadership or
management was of importance. This relates to Joyce & Slocum (2012, p. 184) argument that
managerial talent often is overlooked in times of crisis, where it can be discussed whether R2’s
organisation benefits from the managerial efforts of implementing solid processes. However,
this can’t be completely related to crisis management as it was implied that these processes
were in place before the pandemic.
45
A difference between the respondents’ view on talent as a capability can be identified. Despite
this, it is clear that talent as a capability is deemed important to organisations, but perhaps tends
to be overlooked. Some respondents, for instance R1 and R8, feel that the employees in their
organisations are the drivers. R1 particularly expressed this for the current situation being,
connecting their management of talent to their crisis management.
It can be seen from the findings that many of the respondents regarded innovation as a key
aspect to their business in accordance with Foroudi et al. (2016, p. 4882). This was more so
when crisis was brought up as a variable, where for instance R1 explained that the ongoing
pandemic had made them more innovative than before. R2, R4 and R7’s statements of
technology as a central aspect in their products and services placed emphasis on innovation as
well. Even though innovation was seen as a core capability by R8 as well, R2 and R8’s
statement of the current state of it showed that it was not used as a driver in times of crisis as
proposed by Archibugi et al. (2013, p. 1247). The scholar states that times of crisis may propose
as an opportunity for organisations to innovate in order to remain or become more competitive.
However, it is also stated by them that crises often slow down innovation rates. Whereas this
could be implied to be the case of R2 and R8, the respondents explained that they were still
open to innovation but because of the circumstances simply couldn’t do it because of other
parties not being able to fulfill their tasks.
Here, it can be seen that no respondents stated that they wanted to decrease their rate of
innovation but did so because they had no other choice. As mentioned, R1 claimed that the
innovation rate had gone up because they saw an opportunity in the market which were of
benefit to them. Because of this, it can be argued that the smaller organisations were more keen
to innovate in these times, but perhaps because of different reasons than proposed by Archibugi
et al. (2013, p. 1259).
5.2.2 Environment
In analysing the findings from respondents from the perspective of the environment as
presented in the literature review, it can be viewed that several major differences have occurred
for the different organisations. Additionally, differences in areas not covered in the literature
review have been found. These have been considered significant and also contributing to the
analysis, and hence included later on.
Dinu & Dinu (2018, p. 289) argues that consumer behaviour has become more modern, where
digital consumption has become more common. Here, it is stated that motivation poses as a key
factor for consumers in determining their behaviour. Richard et al. (2010, p. 926) further
explains that as the usage of the internet continues to increase, information gathering and
shopping are creating new patterns of consumer behaviour.
In perspective of the respondents' answers in this area, it can be seen that online activity has
played a large role in many of them. R1, R2, R7 as well as R8 explains that a lot of their activity
has shifted to online. This has not only accounted for sales, but in other areas as well to make
sure the business can continue to operate. The specific cases where the internet is used as a
driver for business continuity during the pandemic can be found in the organisations represented
by R1, R2, R4 and R7. R1 states that all of his sales were now conducted online. The same was
explained by R2, whereas in R7’s case the business relies entirely on internet usage.
46
The most notable change has also been recognised in R7’s business. The respondent explained
that the development of the industry they are active in has sped up significantly. The expected
growth three years ahead of time was introduced in three weeks according to the respondent. It
was furthermore stated that this has brought upon strategic challenges for the organisation,
where strategic thinking will come to play a crucial role in capturing this opportunity for the
organisation as stated by Richard et al. (2010, p. 926). It should not go unmentioned as well
that this relates to the organisation's capabilities. Ausloos et al. (1027, p. 486-487) states that
crises and economic slowdowns often hurt innovation, but innovation can also be used to seize
opportunities in these kinds of situations. This can be seen in the findings regarding R7, where
innovation and strategic thinking will be determinants whether R7’s organisation can turn this
crisis into something of value.
It can also be discussed whether the findings of Kaytaz & Gul (2014, p. 2702) have anything to
do with R7’s increase in business. In their study, it is stated that different generations respond
to economic crises in different manners, where younger generations tend to keep their spending
at a normal level. Unfortunately, this study doesn’t have enough information regarding R7’s
target group to be analysing it from this perspective. Despite this, it’s an interesting aspect that
should be brought up since it can be somewhat assumed that e-commerce is used more by some
generations than others.
In regards to the claims made by Hristo (2011, p. 168-169) that economical positions in terms
of income largely affects their spending in times of crisis, it can be discussed once again from
the perspective of R7 if this has had any effect on their business. As the service offered by the
organisation provides customers with the possibility of comparing prices on products, it can be
argued that consumers’ uncertainty about the future motivates them to shop as cheaply as
possible.
Kaytaz & Gul (2014, p. 2702) argues that organisations must find new ways of encouraging
consumption when it decreases. This finding can be directly connected to the case of R1. As
they work in the medical industry, they have found an opportunity to adjust to the current
market conditions and what is sought-after because of the pandemic. As mentioned earlier, R1
has not yet seen an increase in sales for the organisation, but is confident that this will soon
turn around as the sector realises the benefit of their solutions in the medical field. Here, it can
be argued that a change of strategy from a market perspective has been made to continue to
grow as an organisation. Whereas it can be argued that this is also the case for R7, it is
deemed that no real market oriented changes has been made to adjust to the new market
conditions so far. As for the other respondents, R2’s organisation can be seen to simply
continue their business best as possible from the current conditions provided where no real
encouragement of consumption from the perspective presented by Kaytaz & Gul (2014, p.
2702). The same can be said for R8, where they are heavily reliant on future factors affecting
their business. In the case of R9, potential focus in the business model may come to be
changed because of the events unfolding as a result of the crisis.
As mentioned in the beginning of this chapter in the analysis, similarities and differences
between the different respondents regarding factors not brought up in the literature review were
to be presented. What has been identified here is that different respondents’ organisations could
have seen a difference in consumer behaviour because of their industry and business model.
As can be seen in the findings, R1 has found a strategic way of dealing with the pandemic where
their products and solutions are of strategic benefit to overcome difficulties related to the crisis
47
itself. In other words, their business has been more resistant to the pandemic simply because of
the industry they work in in combination with their offerings as an organisation. The same can
be argued to be the case for R7. In the case of R2, their business model is formed to benefit
from physical contact, a high level of interaction and service-level. Since this opportunity no
longer exists for them to utilise, strategic thinking could be viewed to be limited for them in
regards to creating opportunities for the organisation. R5 can also be seen to be facing
difficulties since his organisation’s business model relies on physical contact.
As R7’s industry is dependent on internet-usage, they have seen an increase instead of a
decrease in traffic and business while R8 much like R2 and R5 is somewhat dependent on
service-level and physical interaction.
Hence, different industries can be argued to be affected differently because of the pandemic.
What is even more interesting, though, is that some business models seem to be more resistant
to the change in consumer behaviour that different markets are currently seeing.

Even though all of the respondents can be identified to have no crisis management departments
or teams in place for situations like the ongoing pandemic, many of them can be seen to have
implemented specific project teams because of this crisis. For instance, R1 explains that the
CEO of the organisations mainly handles the crisis management and argues this to be because
of the size of the organisation. R2 who works for a larger international organisation also claimed
that no crisis management team is existent in the organisation. However, specific project groups
have been created to deal with the crisis from different perspectives such as strategy which
aligns with the statements made by Jaques (2009, p. 38).
As stated by Gajdzik (2014, p. 391) all decisions made to repair or decrease damage during
extraordinary times can be seen as crisis management. Looking at the respondents’ answers
from this perspective, it is clear that crisis management is present in the majority of
organisations interviewed.
The way that crisis management is deployed in the organisations differ, though. For instance,
R1 explains that focus currently is on making sure that they survive this first period of market
change, to later come out stronger as an organisation. The same process of thought can be found
in R3, where long-term strategic movements are deemed to be of no use in the current situation.
Instead, R3 claims that short-term solutions must be implemented as of right now in order for
the organisation to be able to strategically think for the long-term.
Further, it is stated by Gajdzik (2013, p. 391) that organisations must often implement larger
changes, many times regarding strategy, in order to cope with the new market situation they are
facing. This perspective in crisis management becomes significantly interesting, considering
the emphasis on market situation. What has already been established in the analysis is that the
different organisations interviewed have been facing different kinds of change in the market
they operate in. For many of the respondents, a change in strategy has been apparent as a crisis
management response to the pandemic. As stated by R2, changes in pricing and packaging has
been made as a response to the crisis. What differs this answer from for instance R3, is that R2
put a large emphasis on the strategic thinking implemented in decisions today should be of
benefit for the organisation in the long term.
Change of strategies can also be identified in other respondents’ answers where strategic
thinking is deemed to play a role. R9 explains that because of the change in buying behaviour,
48
specifically customers being more prone to use their services rather than buying their products,
strategic thinking has led to the organisation potentially switching their main focus to
maintenance and service offering. R6 makes an interesting claim where he states that his
organisation currently deploys a project team which looks for opportunities and threats in the
market. It is acknowledged by the respondent that strategic thinking is a vital part of this, and
that the current strategy is continuously questioned alongside the business model. This can be
viewed both as short- and long-term perspectives of strategic thinking and crisis management.
Gajdzik (2014, p. 393) also states that coping with crises can result in not only a change in
strategy, but a change of organisational structure, decrease of investments, and laying off
employees. Only decrease of investments were mentioned by the respondents interviewed,
where this often was due to the fact that they simply had no other choice because of other parties
involved in the process such as in the case of R8. In R2’s situation, decrease of investment
relied heavily on the fact that it couldn’t be a priority as of right now.
Differences between the interviewed organisations have been found regarding the view
presented by Gajdzik (2014, p. 393), where the scholar explains that organisations fall into
different categorisations regarding a crisis impact on them as well as their response to it. As
stated earlier, it has been argued that the pandemic in the form of a crisis has affected the
interviewed organisations differently. As a result, different approaches as well as radicality of
implemented changes has been identified between the different organisations.
R1 can be seen to explain that the organisation he represents doesn’t implement larger changes
but rather a change of focus as a response to the crisis. It is also stated by the respondent that
the pandemic is not projected to be negatively affecting the organisation from a long-term
perspective. As for R2, larger and many changes have been identified, in correlation to the fact
that their business model heavily relies on service-level and physical interaction with
customers. The same can be said for R8, who despite this claims that the pandemic is yet to
affect their business. Somewhat in line with R8, R7 states that the crisis has increased their
workload over every department and whether the effect can be evaluated as a potential change
over the company or business continuity as usual is still yet to come.
According to Coombs (2015, p. 7), crisis management can be divided into three different stages
and what has been possible to get out of the respondents is empirical material out of the two
first stages which is the pre-crisis and the event-crisis stage. The empirical data shows that none
of the organisations which the respondents belong to work actively with crises such as the
ongoing pandemic in prior to the crisis-event. Instead, the types of crisis that are actively
worked with are those crises that can happen inside the organisation, such as fire and other
relevant crises that can create an uncertain working environment. What is worth mentioning, is
that several organisations started to prepare for the crisis, but not in line with the reviewed
literature. Different results can be found in the theories where a significant connection can not
be seen accordingly with the pre-crisis event. Coombos (2015, p. 10) claims that the starting
point, the pre-crisis event, is the time where leaders continually work with the preparation of a
possible crisis. No answers could be identified where the respondents claim that evaluation of
previous crises are done in this stage, such as potential signs in order to prepare for an upcoming
one. Instead, this is done in the next stage of a crisis, crisis-event. What can be interpreted as a
way of preparation, that goes in line with the literature reviewed is the claims made by R1, R2,
and R3. R3 insists that the relation to the stakeholders is important to think of during the work
since when a crisis occurs it can destroy the relationship depending on the effect it has. Kings
49
(2007, p. 187) mention that this way of thinking is a clear sign that the organisation aims to
control the relationship between them and the stakeholders, at any costs. Moreover, there is a
slim connection to additional literature regarding the importance of always bearing a potential
crisis in mind during the pre-crisis stage. R5 states that the management, since it is a newly
started company, always thinks of different scenarios including worst-case ones when creating
strategies in forward. This also includes crises which have in some or another way affected their
strategy initially. The same can be said for R2, who states that different scenarios have been
acknowledged moving into the future.
The crisis-event stage which is the stage where a crisis is present and ongoing, has been the
crucial challenge dealing with and also where the information gathered has been of highest
value for this paper. The majority of the respondents emphasise the importance of having great
leadership when times get tough, in order to have someone that can secure the direction and
future of the organisation. It was also deemed important that the organisation can allocate their
resources in the best way possible, such as ‘’evaluating skills and prioritise on what needs to
be done first.’’ - R5. Moreover, R3 mentioned, as said before, that the response to the
stakeholders is of high importance in the work they do in which he makes it clear that it is vital
that ‘’[...] every organisation needs someone to look up to when times get strange and
uncertain.’’ When reviewing the literature, King (2007, p. 188) emphasises the importance of
leadership in times of crisis. Further, R4 states that only resetting the organisation into its former
state is not enough. Instead, leadership is about ensuring that the company is operating at the
highest success rate as possible, and for that, allocating resources accordingly to the available
abilities is crucial.
What R7 and R4 both has in common is that they strongly emphasise the importance of a leader
that is decisive and has the ability of executing strategic decisions quickly ‘’[...] times of crisis,
every little thing matter and when a decision is taken, there is no time of re-thinking, instead
the decision must be executed sooner rather than later.’’ - R7. In the middle of a crisis, a
decisive leader is highly valued (King, 2007, p. 188).
For the post-crisis stage where the crisis is largely over, where the organisations have had a
chance for recovery, it has been difficult to gather empirical material about how the
organisations work actively with the post-crisis event. Especially when reviewing the literature
since in the writing moment, we are in an impending crisis. What instead was able to be gathered
from the respondents is how they have compared the previous crises and hypotheses about how
they think the recovery will look for the company compared to this crisis - Covid-19. In the
empirical material, a glimpse of this can be seen in which R2 confesses that every decision
taken by the management team is being evaluated on an ongoing basis, in order to review it for
future potential scenarios.
50
6. Conclusion and Discussion
The study’s methodology has allowed for it to capture the essence of strategic thinking in the
context of experiences and discussions, which has led to the following conclusion. It should be
noted once again that strategic thinking as a term is difficult to definitively define, and has in
this paper been viewed as a synthesising process combining creativity and intuition; the
outcome of a strategic thinking process in business provides an integrative and vision-oriented
perspective of the firm.
As the purpose of this paper is to identify how strategic thinking may occur within
organisations, particularly during a crisis, a qualitative approach was chosen with the ambition
to answer the research question:
How does strategic thinking manifest itself in private organisations during times of crisis?
Strategic thinking has shown to be manifested in the crisis management of all organisations
interviewed. However, there is a large difference between how strategic thinking is integrated
into the crisis response which has been concluded to be for a number of different reasons which
is to be discussed.
Some respondents view crisis management, and therefore the strategic thinking directly related
to it, differently. Whereas some of the respondents clearly show that strategic thinking is used
in relation to getting the organisation in the direction that it should be going after the pandemic,
others show that strategic thinking is more used in making short-term decisions. Some
organisations, such as R1 and R2 can be seen to strategically manage their crisis response in
order to fulfill their organisations long-term goals. Contrary to this, the organisation represented
by R3 sees strategic thinking more as a tool to overcome short-term obstacles that hinder them
from focusing on the long-term.
It can also be seen that strategic thinking manifests differently in the organisations interviewed
because of the environment they operate in. Whereas strategic thinking has been used in a crisis
management response to the pandemic by the organisations that currently are facing more
severe difficulties, others have seen potential opportunities and even increase in revenue
because of the crisis. Strategic thinking has therefore been manifested in different manners
depending on industry, and more importantly, the individual organisations operations. Business
models that frame the use of physical contact and high service levels for instance, as can be
found in the organisations represented by R2, R5, R8 and R9 - have all used strategic thinking
differently compared to R1 and R7. The former mentioned have had to use strategic thinking
specifically as a crisis management response. The latter, however, can be seen to use strategic
thinking more in a sense where they are presented with an opportunity rather than a threat,
where decisions are made to fulfill new needs in the market.
It can furthermore be concluded that capabilities in the form of talent and innovation are seen
as important aspects in relation to strategic thinking and crisis management. However, many
times these have not been utilised fully in order to overcome the crisis, often because of reasons
out of the organisations hands. R2, R4 and R7 can be seen to state that technology is a central
aspect to the organisation, yet only R7 can be seen to utilise innovation as a capability during
times of crisis. Once again it should be discussed whether this derives from the business models
of the different organisations, where R7 could have had a better opportunity to utilise their
technology when the crisis hit. Nevertheless it is clear that innovation as a capability has helped
51
nurture R7’s and potentially R1’s organisations to turn this crisis into something positive for
their businesses.
Strategies in themselves have been largely changed for many of the respondents’ organisations.
Here, it is clear that the crisis has led to strategic thinking being a part in evaluating the current
business and responding to the changes in the market to continue as a profitable organisation.
R9 can be seen to have some thoughts of changing the emphasis of his business. In R2’s case,
the main strategy is attempted to be followed but new strategies supporting the old one are
continuously evaluated to make sure that they are sufficient enough for the time being. In the
case of R1, the strategy has changed from operating as a business in a state of growth to
surviving loss of sales that hopefully recovers after the crisis is over.
Strategic thinking is an important part for organisations in their crisis management. It manifests
differently, which is largely dependent upon earlier strategy conducted, business model,
industry and core capabilities that the organisation possesses.
52
7. Implications of the study
7.1 Theoretical Implications

This study has put strategic thinking in a context of crisis management, relating to the ongoing
pandemic caused by the virus Covid-19. From the conclusions drawn, theoretical implications
regarding the area are as follows.
As strategic thinking plays an important role for both the short- and long-term crisis
management of organisations, it should be viewed as a process which has the potential to affect
any part of business activity. This builds on several studies (Mintzberg, 1994; Heracleous, 1998;
Liedtka, 1998) where it is mentioned by all scholars that strategic thinking is a process that
tends to grow over time, especially in challenging circumstances. Moreover, the study
contributes to the literature where it is shown that strategic planning works as a way of
encouragement to strategic thinking by providing a structure to creative thinking processes
which is also acknowledged by Porter (1998, p. 109) and Heracleus (1998, p. 483).
This study has further shown the importance of distinguishing the difference between strategic
thinking and planning as has been suggested by Mintzberg (1994). He argues that strategic
thinking and strategic planning should be spoken of separately since they are not correlated
with strategy directly when combining them. Further contributions can be found when speaking
of the scenario planning method which examines potential upcoming situations and appropriate
responses to them. This is a shared process between the terms strategic thinking- and planning
according to Heracleous (1998, p. 486), in which the study has shown that organisations operate
after a scenario planning method. It is noted that this is supported by Liedtka (1998, p. 124)
who claims that strategic thinking empowers the planning process in organisational aspects,
meanwhile time-planning procedures maintain strategy executions which is related to the fact
that strategic thinking manifests itself differently in crisis management.
The information gathered and concluded in the study should be viewed as a contributing piece
to the existing academia of strategic thinking, where it now has been further explored in a
different and timely manner. Additionally, the field of crisis management has been contributed
to by applying a new way of looking at the theories that make up the concept.
7.2 Practical Implications

Strategic thinking can be viewed as a building stone to creating and implementing strategies
across an organisation. Whereas strategic thinking happens in the moment, the effects of
implemented strategies will perhaps not be shown for years. Therefore, it has been decided that
no managerial implications can be made as a result of the conclusion in this study. This can be
seen as somewhat of a limitation. However, it has been deemed not to be viewed as one
considering the focus of the study which has led to several theoretical implications instead.
Despite this, managerial implications can be researched further down the line when
organisations have realised the results of their acting in this crisis.
53
8. Future Research
This paper focuses on strategic thinking in relation to crisis management. The study has been
based on the relevant strategic thinking parameters that have been concretised as an effect of
crisis management so far. The paper has mainly focused on strategic thinking in crisis
management in an ongoing-sense with a sub-focus on the pre-crisis stage. This presents an
opportunity for future research to look further into strategic thinking in crisis management from
a post-crisis perspective. That is, when the crisis has occurred, given that it is possible to identify
different stages of the crisis. As more organisations now potentially will be prepared in a sense
that they were not for this crisis, research may be conducted once again regarding strategic
thinking and crisis management, but from the perspective of a pre-crisis stage. This would allow
for future research to gather more data regarding organisations preparations for a new, potential
pandemic or similar crisis. Additionally, this presents opportunities to look further into how
this crisis has affected the crisis management of organisations.
Additionally, as this study’s respondents exclusively belong to private organisations, research

regarding public organisations would be interesting to compare to this study to find similarities
and differences.
Finally, further research is suggested in the area where select industries are studied, as this paper
has shown significant differences between organisations, industries and business models.
For the sake of the topic, it would be of high value to see whether answers would differ and if
so how when using a different methodology than this paper has done. As semi-structured
interviews have been used, the possibility of addressing the subject with a different form of
interviewing could be appropriate. What would also be interesting is to conduct it with a
quantitative methodology where the respondents' particular words are linked to each other.
From there, comparisons to the results of this study can be made which perhaps could lead to
more generalizable results.
54
References
Afshari, L., & Hadian Nasab, A. (2020). Enhancing organizational learning capability through
managing talent: mediation effect of intellectual capital. Human Resource Development
International, 1–17.
doi: 10.1080/13678868.2020.1727239
Akter, S., Wamba, F. S., Barrett, M., & Biswas, K. (2019). How talent capability can shape
service analytics capability in the big data environment? Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(6),
521-539.
doi: 10.1080/0965254X.2018.1442364
Allio, R. J. (2006). Strategic Thinking: The Ten Big Ideas. Strategy & Leadership, 34(4), 4-
13.
doi: 10.1108/10878570610676837
Ansoff, H. I. (1965). Corporate Strategy: An Analytic Approach to business Policy for Growth
and Expansion. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Archibugi, D., Filippetti, A., & Frenz, M. (2013). The impact of the economic crisis on
innovation: Evidence from Europe. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(7),
1247-1260.
doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.05.005
Ashcroft, L. S. (1997). Crisis management - public relations. Journal of Managerial

Psychology, 12(5), 325–332.
doi: 10.1108/02683949710183522
Ausloos, M., Bartolacci, F., Castellano, N. G., & Cerqueti, R. (2017). Exploring how innovation
strategies at time of crisis influence performance: a cluster analysis perspective. Technology
Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(4), 484–497.
doi: 10.1080/09537325.2017.1337889
Barney, J. B. (2000). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Economics Meets
Sociology in Strategic Management, 203–227.
doi: 10.1016/s0742-3322(00)17018-4
Barriball, L. K., & While, A. (1994). Collecting data using a semistructured interview: a
discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(2), 328- 335
Benito-Ostolaza, J. M., & Sanchis-Llopis, J. A. (2014). Training strategic thinking:

Experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 785–789.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.11.045
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality – A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge. Penguin books: London.
55
Betz, F. (2016). Strategic thinking: A Comprehensive Guide. 1st ed. Howard House, Wagon
Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Bonn, I. (2001). Developing Strategic Thinking as a Core Competency. Management Decision,

39(1), 63-71.
doi: 10.1108/eum0000000005408
Bonn, I. (2005). Improving Strategic Thinking: a Multilevel Approach. Leadership &

Organization Development Journal, 26(5), 336-354.
doi: 10.1108/01437730510607844
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2013). Företagsekonomiska forskningsmetoder. 2nd ed. Stockholm:
Liber AB
Bumbuc, Ş. (2016). About Subjectivity in Qualitative Data Interpretation. International

Conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION, 22(2), 419–424.
doi: 10.1515/kbo-2016-0072
Casey, A., & Goldman, E. (2010). Enhancing The Ability to Think Strategically: a Learning
Model. Management Learning, 41(2), 167-185.
doi: 10.1177/1350507609355497
Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and structure: chapters in the history of the industrial
enterprise. New York: New York Anchor books.
Coombs, W. T. (2015). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding.

Los Angeles: Sage Publications
Dinu, G., & Dinu, L. (2018). The Influence of Social Groups on Consumer Behaviour Online
in the Resita City Population. Economic Sciences Series, 18(1), 289-292.
https://doaj.org/article/e4983d14146e45afade500bfd940fdc8
Durmaz, Y., & Düşün, D. Z. (2016). Importance of Strategic Management in Business. Expert
Journal of Business and Management 4(1), 38-45.
http://business.expertjournals.com/23446781-405/
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. (2015). Management and Business research.
SAGE Publications: London
Faulkner, B. (2001). Towards a framework for tourism disaster management. Tourism

Management, 22(2), 135-147.
doi: 10.1016/s0261-5177(00)00048-0
Foroudi, P., Jin, Z., Gupta, S., Melewar, T. C., & Foroudi, M. M. (2016). Influence of
innovation capability and customer experience on reputation and loyalty. Journal of Business
Research, 69(11), 4882–4889.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.047
56
Furrer, O., Thomas, H., & Goussevskaia, A. (2007). The Structure and Evolution of the
Strategic Management Field: A Content Analysis of 26 Years of Strategic Management
Research. International Journal of Management Reviews. 10, 1-23.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00217.x.
Gajdzik, B. (2014). Crisis management in metallurgical enterprises. Metalurgija, 53(3), 391-

394.
https://doaj.org/article/007795ff8f5244b8a29360944093c69b
Gibbons, R., & Henderson, R. (2012). Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities.
Organisation Science, 23(5), 1350–1364.
doi: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0715
Goldman, E., Schlumpf, K., & Scott, A. (2017). Combining Practice and Theory to Assess
Strategic Thinking. Journal of Strategy and Management, 10(4), 488-504.
doi: 10.1108/JSMA-02-2017-0012
Graetz, F. (2002). Strategic Thinking versus Strategic Planning: Towards Understanding the
Complementarities, Management Decision, 40(5), 456-462,
doi: 10.1108/00251740210430434
Groh, M. (2014). Strategic management in times of crisis. St. Louis: Federal Reserve Bank of
St:Louis.
Heracleous, L. (1998). Strategic Thinking or Strategic Planning? Long Range Planning, 31(3),
481-487.
doi: 10.1016/s0024-6301(98)80015-0
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687
Jaques, T. (2009). Issue management as a post-crisis discipline: identifying and responding to

issue impacts beyond the crisis. Journal of Public Affairs, 9(1), 35–44.
doi: 10.1002/pa.310
Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Scholes, K., Angwin, D., & Regnér, P. (2017). Exploring
strategy. 11th ed. Harlow: Pearson.
Joyce, F. W., & Slocum, W. J. (2012). Top management talent, strategic capabilities, and firm
performance. Organizational Dynamics, 41(3), 183-193.
doi: 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2012.03.001
Katrandjiev, H. (2011). Typology of consumer behaviour in times of economic crisis: A

segmentation study from Bulgaria. Marketing, 42(3), 161–170.
doi: 10.5937/markt1103161k
57
Kaytaz, M., & Gul, M. C. (2014). Consumer response to economic crisis and lessons for
marketers: The Turkish experience. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2701–2706.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.019
Kazmi, S. A. Z., & Naaranoja, M. (2015). Cultivating Strategic Thinking in Organizational

Leaders by Designing Supportive Work Environment!. Procedia - Social and Behavioural
Sciences, 181, 43–52.
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.864
King, G. (2007). Narcissism and Effective Crisis Management: A Review of Potential Problems
and Pitfalls. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 15(4), 183–193.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2007.00523.x
Liedtka, J. (1998). Strategic Thinking: Can it be taught? Long Range Planning, 31(1), 120-129.
doi: 10.1016/S0024-6301(97)00098-8
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, California: Sage.
Lynham, S. A. (2002). The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied

Disciplines. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 221–241.
doi: 10.1177/15222302004003002
Majid, M. A. A., Othman, M., Mohamad, S. F., Lim, S. A. H., & Yusof, A. (2017). Piloting for
Interviews in Qualitative Research: Operationalization and Lessons Learnt. International
Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(4), 1073-1081.
doi: 10.6007/ijarbss/v7-i4/2916
Marra, F. (1998). Crisis communication plans: Poor predictors of excellent crisis public
relations. Public Relations Review, 24(4), 461-474.
doi: 10.1016/s0363-8111(99)80111-8
Massey, J. E., & Larsen, J. P. (2006). Crisis Management in Real Time. Journal of Promotion
Management, 12(3-4), 63–97.
doi: 10.1300/j057v12n03_06
Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in Strategy Formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934–948.

doi: 10.1287/mnsc.24.9.934.
Mintzberg, H. (1990). The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic
management. Strategic Management Journal, 11(3), 171–195.
doi: 10.1002/smj.4250110302
Mintzberg, H. (2000). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. London: Pearson Education
Limited.
Mintzberg, H. (2018). Strategic Thinking as “Seeing”. London: Pearson Education Limited. E-

book.
58
Moon, B. (2013). Antecedents and Outcomes of Strategic Thinking. Journal of Business
Review, 66(10), 1698-1708.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.11.006
Nuntamanop, P., Kauranen, I., & Igel, B. (2013). A New Model of Strategic Thinking
Competency. Journal of Strategy and Management, 6(3), 242-264
doi: 10.1108/JSMA-10-2012-0052
Oltmann, S, M. (2016). Qualitative Interviews: A Methodological Discussion of the Interviewer

and Respondent Contexts. Qualitative Social Research, 17(2), Art. 15.
doi: 10.17169/fqs-17.2.2551
Perrott, B. E. (2008). Managing Strategy in Turbulent Environments. Journal of General

Management, 33(3), 21–30.
doi: 10.1177/030630700803300302
Porter, M. (1998). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors:
With A New Introduction. New York: Free Press.
Richard, M. O., Chebat, J. C., Yang, Z., & Putrevu, S. (2010). A proposed model of online
consumer behaviour: Assessing the role of gender. Journal of Business Research, 63(9-10),
926–934.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.02.027
Ritchie, B. W. (2004). Chaos, crises and disasters: a strategic approach to crisis management in
the tourism industry. Tourism Management, 25(6), 669–683.
doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2003.09.004
Rumelt, R. P., Schendel, D., & Teece, D. J. (1991). Strategic management and economics.
Strategic Management Journal, 12(S2), 5–29.
doi: 10.1002/smj.4250121003
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. 5th
Edition. Harlow: Pearson Education
Seeger, M. W., Sellnow, T. L., & Ulmer, R. R. (1998). Communication, Organization, and
Crisis. Annals of the International Communication Association, 21(1), 231–276.
doi: 10.1080/23808985.1998.11678952
Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.
New York: Doubleday/Currency.
Steptoe-Warren, G., Howat, D., & Hume, I. (2011). Strategic Thinking and Decision Making:
Literature review. Journal of Strategy and Management, 4(3), 250-283.
doi: 10.1108/17554251111152261
59
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative
Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851.
doi: 10.1177/1077800410383121
Tsoukas, H (1999) – “David and Goliath in the Risk Society: Making Sense of the Conflict
between Shell and Greenpeace in the North Sea.” Organisation articles, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 499-
528.
Vargo, J., & Seville, E. (2011). Crisis strategic planning for SMEs: finding the silver lining.
International Journal of Production Research, 49(18), 5619–5635.
doi: 10.1080/00207543.2011.563902
60
Appendices
Appendix 1, interview guide
A short introduction of the interviewer followed by questions whether the participant had
understood everything that was sent to them prior the interview
General questions concerning the participant’s role in the organisation

Name
Organisation
Position (hierarchy and decision making processes)
Length of employment in current company
Desire whether to be anonymous in the study
Acknowledgement whether everything was understood in the interview guide that was sent to
the participant, and if so, if anything needed to be clarified before starting
Questions
Q1 - What’s your interpretation of strategy and strategic thinking?
Q2 - How does strategic thinking practically occur in your organisation?
Q3 - What do you consider your organisation’s core capabilities to be?
Q4 - How do you view talent as a capability in terms of employees?
Q5 - How do you view innovation as a capability?
Q6 - How has the utilisation of your capabilities been affected by the ongoing pandemic?
Q7 - How have you noticed a change in buying behaviour as a result of the ongoing
pandemic?
Q8 - Is there any department that is operating with crisis in particular, such as a crisis
management team?
Q9 - What are your organisations’ plans for business continuity when a crisis hits, such as the
ongoing pandemic?
Q10 - How effective would the management team be in the event of a potential or sudden
crisis?
Q11 - What is the initial response to a potential crisis, and how do you evaluate whether it has
to be taken as a threat for the future of the businesses?
61
Q12 - How is strategic thinking integrated into your crisis management response? /How do
you view strategic thinking in relation to crisis management from your organisation’s
perspective
Q13 - How well is the CEO responding to the current crisis based on the strategic plannings
and execution of the competence of thinking strategically?
62
Business Administration SE-901 87 Umeå www.usbe.umu.se

FULLTEXT01

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FULLTEXT01

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic Thinking in Crisis

Marcus Fors Lindeberg, Valon Krasnici

Department of Business Administration

Keywords: Strategic Thinking, Strategic Planning, Crisis Management, Strategy, Capabilities,

1.3 Purpose and Research Question

2.1 Strategic Thinking

2.1.1 The Linkage between Strategic Thinking and Planning

2.1.3 Strategic Thinking in Practice

2.2 Managing Strategy

2.2.1.1 Talent as a Capability

A change in consumer behaviour eventually affects organisations for better or worse. As

Crisis management emphasises the importance of communication in a crisis situation. Ashcroft

2.4 Chapter Summary

3.1 Research Approach

3.2 Ontological and Epistemological Standings

3.2.2 Epistemological Standpoint

3.3 Research Design

Explanatory research can be viewed as contributing to already existing science by filling in

3.4 Data Collection

3.4.2 Semi-Structured Interviews

3.5 Description of Respondents

Respondent Organisation Role Experience Number of Industry Interview

1. Karl- Cuviva Customer 6 months 15 Medical / 32

2. Anonymous Territoria 8 years 16,000+ Anonymous 40

3. Flamur Serneke AB Construct 3 years 1000+ Constructio 38

5. Benjamin KPMG Manager 3 years 1700+ Consulting 42

6. Sverker Ikano Bostad Head of 7 years 500+ Constructio 36

7. Niklas Prisjakt/Price CFO 1 year 100+ Information 34

8. Anonymous Product 4 ½ years 425 Sports 47

9. Anonymous Owner & 20 years 72 Selling 29

3.6 Data Analysis

3.6.1 Subjectivity in Qualitative Studies

Components of The components of strategic Different components of Q1-Q2

Strategy Strategy is widely affected by By looking into how the Q3-Q7

Capabilities An organisation’s capabilities Capabilities are argued to be of Q3-Q5

Environment The environment in which an The response in how Q6-Q7

Crisis management Crisis management is a widely Crisis management is often Q8-Q13

The topic of the research is The study is considered a

The study uses sufficient, The study aims to look at

The study is characterised by The methodology has been

The research is marked by Clarifications of terms and

The research influences, Strong efforts have been placed

The research provides a This study has made a

The research considers This study was ethical and full

3.9 Societal Implications

3.11 Chapter summary

4.1 Strategic Thinking

‘’Building a deep innovation capability requires a systemic approach, I believe. It requires

Additionally, the concept of strategic thinking is always integrated in any department, R3

In regards to leadership in the crisis management deployed by the organisation, R8 explains

5.2 Managing Strategy

5.3 Crisis Management

7.1 Theoretical Implications

7.2 Practical Implications

Additionally, as this study’s respondents exclusively belong to private organisations, research

Ashcroft, L. S. (1997). Crisis management - public relations. Journal of Managerial

Benito-Ostolaza, J. M., & Sanchis-Llopis, J. A. (2014). Training strategic thinking:

Bonn, I. (2001). Developing Strategic Thinking as a Core Competency. Management Decision,

Bonn, I. (2005). Improving Strategic Thinking: a Multilevel Approach. Leadership &

Bumbuc, Ş. (2016). About Subjectivity in Qualitative Data Interpretation. International

Coombs, W. T. (2015). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding.

Faulkner, B. (2001). Towards a framework for tourism disaster management. Tourism

Gajdzik, B. (2014). Crisis management in metallurgical enterprises. Metalurgija, 53(3), 391-