REORIENTATION IN A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT: AN ANALYSIS OF STRATEGIC CHANGE**

Transcription

1 Schmalenbach Business Review Vol. 53 January 2001 pp Jens Leker* REORIENTATION IN A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT: AN ANALYSIS OF STRATEGIC CHANGE** ABSTRACT In this paper I examine the possibility of discovering different types of strategic changes, accordingly accompanied by different manners of corporate performance development. To characterize individual strategic changes, I perform a detailed analysis of the credit files of corporations. The results of the analysis allow me to group the strategic changes into four types. All four types are characterized by marked differences in how they deal with their core competencies. Furthermore, they show different progress in their economic situations. I conclude that an undifferentiated analysis of companies that have undertaken strategic changes leads to an unjustified generalization of the relation between strategic change and corporate performance. JEL-Classification: L10, M10, O33. 1 INTRODUCTION Analyzing the relation between strategic change and corporate performance has already been a topic of research 1. The majority of researchers who have examined the influence of the economic situation on a strategic change 2 have concluded that the likelihood of a strategic change occurring at companies that show unsatisfactory corporate performance is significantly higher than it is at companies that are performing well. Researchers have also determined this likelihood increases with a deterioration of the economic situation. This finding is supported by theories of risk-taking and goal-setting levels 3. However, the studies that analyze the actual results that a strategic change has on corporate performance do not come to any clearly positive findings. We are thus confronted with research results that claim that a strategic change leads to an improvement in corporate performance 4. At the same time, other studies 5 observe * Prof. Dr. Jens Leker, University of Münster, Institute of Business Management, Department of Chemistry and Pharmacy, Steinfurterstraße 111, Münster, T.: , leker@unimuenster.de. ** I would like to thank Sönke Albers, Klaus Brockhoff, Fariborz Damanpour and Jürgen Hauschildt, for discussions and helpful suggestions on earlier drafts of this paper. 1 Ginsberg (1988). 2 See, e.g., Boeker (1989); Chatterjee/Wernerfelt (1991); Hoskisson/Johnson (1992); Virany/Tushman/ Romanelli (1992); Bergh (1996); Sherman (1996); Greve (1998); Parnell (1998). 3 Greve (1998), pp See, e.g., Chatterjee/Wernerfelt (1991); Hill/Hansen (1991); Miller (1991); Havemann (1992); Virany/Tushmann/Romanelli (1992); Bergh (1995); Korn (1995). 5 See, e.g., Mitchell/Shaver/Yeung (1992); Parnell (1994); Li (1995); Anand/Singh (1997); Parnell (1998). sbr 53 (1/2001) 41

2 J. Leker a further deterioration or comparatively inferior development in the strategically altered companies compared to businesses that have maintained a uniform strategic direction. Against this research background, the logical question is whether most of these contradictions could be attributed to lack of differentiation. This is the point at which my research picks up the investigation. I examine whether or not it is correct to view the specific strategic change per se, or whether it is possible to discover different types of strategic changes, accordingly accompanied by different ways of corporate performance development. 2 DIFFERENTIATION OF STRATEGIC DYNAMICS 2.1 DATA To analyze the intended research question here, it is necessary to define strategic change. In my research, I refer to a change as strategic if this change has been specifically announced by the company s management, and if it has also been credibly presented to a third party, in this case to the firm s bank. This precondition leads to the fact that the strategic changes I will analyze can, for the most part, be characterized as radical strategic changes, if we evaluate the extent of the changes on a continuous scale ranging from minor or incremental 6 to radical or fundamental strategic changes 7. This definition shows great similarity to other research that relies on responses from interviews with managers, or on questionnaires filled out by members of top management 8. However, in my paper, I identify the precise articulation of a strategic change by analyzing the credit files of the firm in question. For this reason, self-assessment by the top management is in no way related to or influenced by the aim of my study. The credit files used in my research mainly included documents of general credit correspondence, balance sheets, records of solvency analysis, reports, registers, and records of securities. The detailed credit reports served as a primary source for identifying the framework of a new strategic direction. In this case, I replace the plausibility test for additional confirmation of the top management s self-assessment, which would normally be essential under other research circumstances, with the bank s evaluation found within the credit reports. By analyzing the head office customers of a major German bank, I was able to perform an analysis of all credit committee protocols for the period from November 1, 1993 through November 20, This two-year time span represents the maximum possible prolongation period. Using this procedure, I identified nearly 180 companies whose protocols included indications of a new strategic direction. 6 See Lindblom (1959); Quinn (1980). 7 See Miller/Friesen (1980); Tushmann/Romanelli (1985). 8 See Snow/Hambrick (1980), pp sbr 53 (1/2001)

3 Strategic Change In-depth analysis of the credit files led to a sample of 65 major corporations, which, according to their own statements and confirmed by the bank, undertook and carried out a strategic change. 2.2 METHOD To characterize the individual changes, I use the concept developed by Hauschildt (1997) 9. I performed a detailed analysis of the credit files of the 65 corporations and extracted the following criteria: 1. The motives cited for the strategic change. 2. The objectives and defining activities surrounding the strategic change. 3. The evaluation of the attending bank branch in terms of the risks of such a strategic change. Table 1 presents the binary coded variables for the each of the above areas: Table 1: Binary variables determining a strategic change typology Motives behind a strategic reorientation: 1. expansion 2. maintaining competitiveness 3. critical situation 4. integration 5. opportunity Objects and defining activities of the strategic change procurement/technology/production: 6. construction 7. reduction 8. shifting to overseas sales sphere: 9. growth 10. reduction 11. globalization organization: 12. inclusion of external third parties 13. change of management 14. owner gives up management 15. distinctive change of organization 16. distinctive reduction of employees Risk evaluation of the bank: 17. high 18. medium 9 See Hauschildt (1997), pp sbr 53 (1/2001) 43

4 J. Leker These 18 variables are the basis for analyzing the degree to which the identified strategic changes share similar characteristics. To develop a typology of strategic change, I perform a hierarchical cluster analysis for binary variables RESULTS The results of the cluster analysis allow me to group the strategic changes that occurred in my sample of 65 corporations into four different types, as follows: Table 2: Typology of strategic change Type 1 Expansionist (n = 20): expanding and active movement into new fields of business with the inclusion of third parties and new management Type 2 Innovator (n = 19): movement to new fields of business by creating new production plants, introducing new technologies and/or innovative products Type 3 Reallocator (n=11): directed towards new purchase markets along with a reduction of old production facilities Type 4 Concentrator (n=15): focused on the main, basic business sectors To determine the number of clusters, I use the values of the fusion coefficients 11. With the large increases in the value of the distance measurements, these values indicate that either a two-cluster solution (Type 1: expansionist/innovator and Type 2: reallocator/concentrator) or a four-cluster solution (as described in Table 2) is appropriate. Considering the goal of my study, I choose the four-cluster solution, which indicates with remarkably smaller coefficients that considerably more homogeneous clusters are being merged, compared to the two-cluster solution. I also use a classification procedure to test the stability of the cluster solution and to identify the most important variables. The classification tree (see Appendix 1) indicates that, using only four variables, it is possible to classify 89% of the companies into the correct cluster-type. These variables indicates whether a change 10 See Norusis/SPSS Inc. (1994), pp ; Bacher (1994), pp ; Backhaus et al. (1990), pp See Norusis/SPSS Inc. (1994), p. 91; Aldenderfer/Blashfield (1984), pp sbr 53 (1/2001)

5 Strategic Change was accompanied by an expansion-motive, whether production was shifted to overseas, whether there was a reduction in the sales sphere, and whether new production plants were built. I conclude that the four-cluster solution can group the identified strategic changes in an appropiate way, and that it can, therefore, be used for a differentiated analysis of the relation between performance and strategic change. The simplified descriptions show that in their market-oriented activities, the four different strategic change types range from external expansion to the adoption of new directions internally, from stabilizing changes aimed at new purchase markets to a distinct focus on reduction 12. All four types are characterized by marked differences in how they deal with their core competencies 13. The expansionist wants to buy and integrate new core competencies, but the innovator tries to build up and establish new core competencies on his own. The reallocator wants to transfer core competencies to lower wage countries, but the concentrator tries to focus on the core competencies already established. There is a partial restriction on comparing these empirically derived types of strategic change with established typologies of strategic types 14. In particular, it is important to note that a typology of strategic types differs considerably from a typology of strategic change types in the subject of investigation and underlying data sets. While the former characterizes the existing strategy at a given moment, the latter typifies the process surrounding a change in strategic direction. For this reason, identification of the overall strategies depends on a classification within an existing typology or on an empirical analysis of strategic elements 15. Instead, the identification of strategic changes must rely on concepts and empirical data that can be the basis for evaluating the scope and the direction of the change in strategic course. Consequently, a different typology-pattern emerges 16. However, it could be productive to compare the intended change-induced strategic position with an existing strategy typology 17. Drawing primarily on Miles and Snows strategy types 18, I can roughly characterize the intended strategic position of the expansionist as that of an analyzer, or, in the words of Damanpour/Chaganti, as an innovative diversifier 19. However, the innovator might be closer to the characteristics of a prospector. Similar to a defender in the Miles/Snow typology, the concentrator chooses to focus on his main business. The reallocator also moves into a defender position, but somewhat more actively. Nevertheless, I note that my empirically derived 12 See Leker (2000). 13 See Prahalad/Hamel (1990); Javidan (1998), pp See Miles/Snow (1978); Porter (1980). 15 See Brockhoff/Chakrabarti (1988), pp ; Brockhoff (1990), pp ; Conant/Mokwa/ Varadarajan (1990); Brockhoff/Leker (1998). 16 See Ginsberg (1988). 17 See Damanpour/Chaganti (1990), pp ; Hambrick (1983). 18 See Miles/Snow (1978). 19 See Damanpour/Chaganti (1990), p sbr 53 (1/2001) 45

6 J. Leker typology of strategic change is strongly influenced by certain dynamic aspects 20 that are not delineated in traditional typologies of strategic types. Making things yet more complicated, I also note that my credit files analysis lends support to Snow/Hambrick, who state that: Managers, however, typically do not think of their organizations as being Defenders, Prospectors, Analyzers, or Reactors. Instead, they may think of their organizations strategies as resulting from concerns about being biggest, best, first, lowest priced, highest quality, and so forth 21. In the light of traditional typologies of strategic types, I refrain from further and even more subjective interpretations of strategic change corporations. The next step is to investigate whether these identified types present a uniform picture of their economic situation during the introduction of the new strategy, or whether I will discover significant differences here. 3 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RELATION BETWEEN PERFORMANCE AND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRATEGIC CHANGE In this paper, I define performance by the results of the annual balance sheets 22. However, these shortcomings must be viewed in the relative sense, since nearly all comparable studies also use balance sheets or even more critical success evaluations in analyzing a firm s economic situation. For an initial evaluation of the differences between the published and actual performance, I use, along with return on equity (ROE), a shareholder-oriented financial ratio 23. In addition, I also build a multivariate latent success variable that reflects the change rates of the registered capital profit, the fully paid-in capital profit, turnover profit, and operating profit. I track these change rates for the period beginning two-years-prior to and ending two-years-after the strategic change. These two latent change rates of success are a comprehensive approach for evaluating company success. This approach is not influenced by either univariate measurement effects or the effects caused by level differences. First, I study a graphic comparison between the financial ratios of the corporations that undergo a strategic change versus those of a reference group. The reference group is comprised of an aggregate of approximately 18,000 companies, differentiated by industry and year of balance sheet by the Federal Bank in its November issues (Deutsche Bundesbank 90 97). I then proceed to more closely analyze the individual characteristics of the four empirically derived types of strategic changes. Due to the small number of corporations available for each type, I use only robust methods of analysis, those which examine the predominant tendency. I apply the Mann Whitney U-test for my 20 See Brockhoff (1996), pp See Snow/Hambrick (1980), p See Hauschildt (1996), pp. 1 14; Küting/Weber (1997), pp ; Leker (1993), pp See Chaganti/Damanpour (1991), p. 484; Samuels/Brayshaw/Craner (1995), pp sbr 53 (1/2001)

7 Strategic Change comparison of unrelated samples. I use the Wilcoxon test for pair differences to test the related samples 24. Finally, I analyze the differences in the latent change rate of success for the four types of strategic change for the two research periods (two-years-before and twoyears-after the strategic change) using a simple panel analysis and Lisrelstatistics 25. Appendix 2 shows the correlation matrix, which I calculate on the basis of Pearson product moment, polychoric, and polyserial correlations. I use the program Prelis, which makes evident the general tendencies. This approach allows me to differentiate between the overall economic trend and the specific patterns of performance development for the individual types of strategic change. 3.1 ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE: CHANGE CORPORATIONS COMPARED TO NO-CHANGE CORPORATIONS When I compare the development of ROE for all 65 corporations with that of the reference group, it becomes apparent that the situation described at the beginning of this study holds true for this sample. Figure 1: Return on equity (ROE) 24 See SPSS Inc. (1997), pp ; Zöfel (1988), pp See Jöreskog/Sörbom (1988); Jöreskog/Sörbom (1995); Förster et al. (1984), pp sbr 53 (1/2001) 47

8 J. Leker First, the return on equity of the corporations that have undertaken a strategic change in the year t of the study period is considerably lower than that of the reference group. Second, I notice a clear and significantly high deterioration in ROE in the years prior to the change, although the profitability of shareholders investments is slightly improved following the strategic change. I also note that the reference group undergoes a moderate reduction in ROE during the first four years of my research period. This indicates that the whole industry was confronted with a difficult turn in the market during the research period. Next, I determine whether profit development progresses along the lines defined in my analysis, i.e., in terms of the four types from our typology of strategic change. 3.2 ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE: DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRATEGIC CHANGE Table 3: Description of different groups of strategic change: Return on equity Table 3 clearly indicates that the profit development among these four types is marked by noticeable and significant differences. For instance, the type 1 expansionist develops contrary to the common tendency, in that here the overall ROE is at a high level and increases as the year of change approaches. Therefore, the ROE is significantly higher at the time of the change than it is for the other three types. 48 sbr 53 (1/2001)

9 Strategic Change However, after the change has taken place, we find that the profit actually deteriorates and cannot even be entirely recovered in the second year following the change. Again, this finding is contrary to the general trend in companies with a strategic change, and at the same time the result corresponds with the profit development of the reference group. For this reason and at this point in the change process, there is no longer a significant difference between type 1 and the other types. Type 2, innovator, and type 4, concentrator, show a significant decrease in profits in the period prior to change, and, with their dramatic and in both cases outstanding development, make the most distinctive impression from an aggregate viewpoint. In addition, only these two types show a clear increase in post-change profits. However, an increasing focus on Type 4 s main areas of business does not appear to be of a lasting nature. Type 3, reallocator corporations, those firms for which strategic changes are characterized by entry into new purchase markets and the removal of production to low wage countries, exhibit yet another form of profit development. For these companies we see a continued decrease in profits, beginning in the year before the change and extending beyond the change itself. Only in the final year of the research period could this development be brought to a halt and an increase in ROE be achieved. 3.3 ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE-DYNAMICS: DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRATEGIC CHANGE The correlation matrix in Appendix 2 indicates that within the same research period, the correlations between the different change rates of success are all on a high level. On the other hand, for the two different research periods, the correlations between the change rates of success are all negative and often on a high level. Therefore, at this stage I can conclude that a change in strategy is often accompanied by a change in performance. This conclusion is for the most part independent of the performance variable. If I closely examine the correlations between the change rates of success and the binary coded variables for the different types of strategic change, I discover remarkable differences: The correlations range from 0.36 to These differences reflect the conclusions of the descriptive analysis in 3.2. To obtain a clearer picture of the performance dynamics accompanying a particular type of strategic change, I use lisrel to create a latent success variable for the research period two-years-before and two-years-after the strategic change for every corporation. These two variables and the assignment of the strategic change type provide the basis for the model illustrated in Figure 2. I calculate this model for each strategic change type separately. The results appear in Table 4. Even if interpreted cautiously due to the relatively small sample size, these results support the conclusions drawn in the descriptive analysis. sbr 53 (1/2001) 49

10 J. Leker Figure 2: Performance dynamics for different types of strategic change The expansionist exhibits a performance development before the strategic change which is remarkable and significantly better than those of the other types of strategic changes. However, due to the strategic change, this over-performance comes to a halt and is followed by a negative performance development in the research period that covers the two-years-after the strategic change. In contrast, the change in performance of the innovator is not significantly influenced by the specific type of strategic change. The deterioration of performance discussed in the descriptive analysis is thus due to the competitive environment and overall deterioration of the economic situation. Furthermore, the reallocator and the concentrator types both stand out in my analysis because of their significant performance deterioration in the two-yearsbefore the strategic change. In both types, a further deterioration is hindered by the strategic change. Therefore, both of these types show a positive performance development in the research period two-years-after the strategic change. 50 sbr 53 (1/2001)

11 Strategic Change Table 4: Results of the analysis for each strategic change type 4 SUMMARY By coordinating the results of a comparative analysis of the balance sheets, I conclude that an undifferentiated analysis of companies that have undertaken strategic changes leads to an unjustified generalization of the object of analysis. The typology introduced here four empirically derived types of strategic change reveals different forms of the progression of economic situation, each influenced by respective change types. In terms of advice to management, it becomes apparent that a reorientation in a competitive environment that has been accompanied by a deterioration of performance is an appropiate way to overcome performance problems and return to a satisfactory economic situation. On the other hand, I note that strategic change is a resource-consuming process: Companies should be wary of allowing change to become a nearly constant state. sbr 53 (1/2001) 51

12 J. Leker APPENDIX Appendix 1: Classification tree for the empirically derived typology of strategic changes 52 sbr 53 (1/2001)

13 Strategic Change Appendix 2: Prelis-Correlationsmatrix for performance measures and strategic change types sbr 53 (1/2001) 53

14 J. Leker REFERENCES Aldenderfer, Mark S./Blashfield, Roger K. (1984), Cluster Analysis, Sage University Paper. Anand, Jaideep/Singh, Harbir (1997), Asset Redeployment, Acquisitions and Corporate Strategy in Declining Industries, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, pp Bacher, Johann (1994), Clusteranalyse: anwendungsorientierte Einführung. Backhaus, Klaus/Erichson, Bernd/Plinke, Wulff/Weiber, Rolf (1990), Multivariate Analysemethoden: eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung, 6th edition. Bergh, Donald D. (1995), Size and Relatedness of Units Sold: An Agency Theory and Resource-based Perspective, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, pp Boeker, Warren (1989), Strategic Change: The Effects of Founding and History, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp Brockhoff, Klaus (1990), Funktionsbereichsstrategien, Wettbewerbsvorteile und Bewertungskriterien, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Vol. 60, pp Brockhoff, Klaus (1996), Technology Management in the Company of the Future, in: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 8, pp Brockhoff, Klaus/Chakrabarti, Alok K. (1988), R&D/Marketing Linkage and Innovation Strategy: Some West German Experience, in: IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 35, pp Brockhoff, Klaus/Leker, Jens (1998), Zur Identifikation von Unternehmensstrategien, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Vol. 68, pp Chaganti, Rajeswararao/Damanpour, Fariborz (1991), Institutional Ownership, Capital Structure, and Firm Performance, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp Chatterjee, Sayan/Wernerfelt, Birger (1991), The Link Between Resources and Type of Diversification: Theory and Evidence, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp Conant, Jeffrey S./Mokwa, Michael P./Varadarajan, P. Rajan (1990), Strategic Types, Distinctive Marketing Competencies and Organziational Performance: A Multiple Measures Based Study, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, pp Damanpour, Fariborz/Chaganti, Rajeswararao (1990), Configurations in Public Organizations: An Empirical Study of Strategy-Structure Alignments in Public Libraries, in: Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 6, pp Förster, Friedrich/Fritz, Wolfgang/Silberer, Günter/Raffée, Hans (1984), Der LISREL-Ansatz der Kausalanalyse und seine Bedeutung für die Marketing-Forschung, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Vol. 54, pp Gannon, Martin J./Smith, Ken G./Grimm, Curtis (1992), An Organizational Information-Processing Profile of First Movers, in: Journal of Business Research, Vol. 25, pp Ginsberg, Ari (1988), Measuring and Modelling Changes in Strategy: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Directions, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9, pp Greve, Heinrich R. (1998), Performance, Aspirations, and Risky Organizational Change, in: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 43, pp Hambrick, Donald C. (1983), Some Tests of the Effectiveness and Functional Attributes of Miles and Snow s Strategic Types, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 26, pp Hauschildt, Jürgen (1996), Erfolgs-, Finanz- und Bilanzanalyse, 3rd edition. Hauschildt, Jürgen (1997), Innovationsmanagement, 2nd edition. Havemann, Heather A. (1992), Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Organizational Change and Performance under Conditions of Fundamental Environmental Transformation, in: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37, pp Hill, Charles W./Hansen, Gary S. (1991), A Longitudinal Study of the Cause and Consequences of Changes in Diversification in the U. S. Pharmaceutical Industry , in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp Hoskisson, Robert O./Johnson, Richard A. (1992), Corporate Restructuring and Strategic Change: The Effect on Diversification Strategy and R&D Intensity, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, pp Javidan, Mansour (1998), Core Competence: What Does it Mean in Practise?, in: Long Range Planing, Vol. 31, pp sbr 53 (1/2001)

15 Strategic Change Jöreskog, Karl G./Sörbom, Dag (1988), PRELIS A Program for Multivariate Data Screening and Data Summarization. A Preprocessor for LISREL. Jöreskog, Karl G./Sörbom, Dag (1995), LISREL 8 Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Korn, Helaine Jill (1995), Change in Corporate Strategy among High-performing Organizations. Küting, Karlheinz/Weber, Claus-Peter (1997), Die Bilanzanalyse: Lehrbuch zur Beurteilung von Einzelund Konzernabschlüssen, 3rd edition. Leker, Jens (1993), Fraktionierende Frühdiagnose von Unternehmenskrisen: Bilanzanalysen in unterschiedlichen Krisenstadien. Leker, Jens (2000), Die Neuausrichtung der Unternehmensstrategie. Li, Jiatao (1995), Foreign Entry and Survival: Effects of Strategic Choices on Performance in International Markets, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, pp Lindblom, Charles E. (1959), The Science of Muddling Through, in: Public Administration Review, Vol. 19, pp Miles, Raymond E./Snow, Charles C. (1978), Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process. Miller, Danny (1991), Stale in the Saddle: CEO Tenure and the Match Between Organization and Environment, in: Management Science, Vol. 37, pp Miller, Danny/Friesen, Peter H. (1980), Momentum and Revolution in Organizational Adaption, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23, pp Mitchell, Will/Shaver, J. Myles/Yeung, Bernard (1992), Getting There in a Global Industry: Impacts on Performance of Changing International Presence, in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, pp Norusis, Marija J./SPSS Inc. (1994), SPSS Professional Statistics 6.1. Parnell, John A. (1994), Consistency versus Flexibility: Does Strategic Change Really Improve Performance?, in: American Business Review, Vol. 12, pp Parnell, John A. (1998), Performance s Influence on Strategic Change: A Longitudinal Assessment, in: Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 14, pp Porter, Michael E. (1980), Competitive Strategy, Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. Prahalad, C. K./Hamel, Gary (1990), The Core Competence of the Corporation, in: Harvard Business Review, pp Quinn, James Brian (1980), Strategic Change: Logical Incrementalism. Samuels, John M./Brayshaw, Robin E./Craner, John M. (1995), Financial Statement Analysis in Europe. Sherman, Hugh Deforest (1995), Determinants of the Extent of Corporate Change and the Speed of Reorientation. Snow, Charles C./Hambrick, Donald C. (1980), Measuring Organizational Strategies: Some Theoretical and Methodological Problems, in: Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5, 1980, pp SPSS Inc. (1997), SPSS Base 7.5 für Windows Benutzerhandbuch. Tushman, Michael L./Romanelli, Elaine (1985), Organizational Evolution: A Metamorphosis Model of Convergence and Reorientation, in: Research in Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp Virany, Beverly/Tushman, Michael L./Romanelli, Elaine (1992), Executive Succession and Organization Outcomes in Turbulent Environments: An Organization Learning Approach, in: Organization Science, Vol. 3, pp Webb, Janette/Dawson, Patrick (1991), Measure for Measure: Strategic Change in an Electronic Instruments Corporation, in: Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 28, pp Zöfel, Peter (1988), Statistik in der Praxis. sbr 53 (1/2001) 55