Scientometrics Research Journal

Scientometrics Research Journal

Mapping and Analysis of Global Research Trends on Strategizing: A Scientometric Approach

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Ayoub Mohammadian 1
Ali Heidari 2
Mohammad Ali Shahhoseini 3
Mehdi Abdi 4
1 Associate Professor, Department of Information Technology Man-agement, Faculty of Technology and Industrial Management, Col-lege of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Strategy and Business Policy-Making, Faculty of Business Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3 Professor, Department of Strategy and Business Policy-Making, Faculty of Business Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
4 Ph.D. Candidate in Strategic Management, Department of Strategy and Business Policy-Making, Faculty of Business Management, Col-lege of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
10.22070/rsci.2025.20901.1852
Abstract
Purpose: Over the past decades, the concept of strategizing has attracted growing scholarly attention as a distinctive approach within strategic management. Unlike traditional perspectives that view strategy primarily as a rational, top-down planning process led by senior executives, the strategy-as-practice (SaP) perspective emphasizes that strategy is not a static plan but is continuously enacted through the everyday practices, discourses, and interactions of multiple actors both inside and outside organizations. This perspective shifts the analytical focus from strategy as an outcome to strategizing as an ongoing process of activities. Although the literature on strategizing has expanded significantly, most contributions remain qualitative and fragmented, resulting in a limited understanding of the broader thematic dynamics and emerging directions within the field. To address this gap, the present study employs a bibliometric approach to systematically map global research on strategizing published between 1990 and 2024. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the domain, identify influential scholars, and reveal thematic clusters and trends shaping the future of strategizing research.
Methodology: This analysis employs bibliometric techniques using data extracted from the Scopus database for the period 1990–2024. A total of 3,176 documents were analyzed across multiple dimensions, including author productivity, citation impact, temporal evolution, geographical distribution, keyword co-occurrence, trend topic dynamics, and thematic mapping. Descriptive analysis was applied to examine the temporal evolution of publications, the most cited authors, the most influential documents in the field, and the geographical distribution of contributions. Science mapping techniques, including keyword co-occurrence analysis performed with VOSviewer, were employed to identify conceptual clusters and thematic communities. Trend topic analysis using Biblioshiny was performed to capture the temporal dynamics of key themes. Additionally, a thematic map was generated to categorize research themes into four groups—motor, basic, niche, and emerging—based on their centrality and density within the field.
Findings: The results reveal steady growth in strategizing research since the mid-1990s, with a marked acceleration after 2010. Particularly since 2015, the field has expanded into new areas such as openness, innovation, sustainability, and digital transformation, reflecting its increasing breadth and interdisciplinarity. Influential scholars identified include Jarzabkowski, Whittington, and Vaara, while the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Canada stand out as the leading countries in terms of research output. Keyword co-occurrence analysis revealed eight major thematic clusters: (1) Strategic interaction and evolution, (2) Dimensions of strategizing, (3) Theoretical foundations and strategy-as-practice theory, (4) Openness, (5) Innovation and business model, (6) Digital transformation and technological capabilities, (7) Strategy process, and (8) Sustainability. These clusters highlight the intellectual diversity of the field, bridging sociological, interpretive, and technological perspectives. Trend analysis confirmed a clear thematic transition. In earlier phases, the literature was dominated by constructs such as “strategy process,” “capabilities,” and “strategy practices.” In the past decade, however, research has increasingly focused on themes such as “open strategy,” “digital transformation,” “sustainability,” and “artificial intelligence.” This shift underscores the adaptive nature of strategizing, which mirrors the growing complexity of the socio-technical and environmental contexts in which strategy unfolds. The thematic map offered further insights. Strategy-as-practice and strategizing emerged as motor themes—both conceptually mature and central to the field. Sustainability and innovation appeared as basic themes, central but still requiring deeper theoretical elaboration. Topics such as blockchain, value creation, and collaboration were classified as niche and specialized, whereas artificial intelligence, open strategy, and strategic interaction surfaced as emerging themes, not yet fully integrated but holding strong potential for future development.
Conclusion: Overall, the findings indicate that strategizing research has matured into a consolidated academic domain, yet it is undergoing profound transformation. The increasing prominence of themes such as sustainability, open strategy, digital transformation, and artificial intelligence suggests that strategizing is expanding beyond the organizational level to encompass broader business ecosystems. This development represents a paradigmatic shift from intra-organizational strategizing to ecosystem-level strategizing, where diverse actors—firms, policymakers, consumers, and technology providers—jointly co-create strategic outcomes. This study contributes to the literature by presenting one of the first systematic bibliometric analyses dedicated exclusively to strategizing. It consolidates a fragmented body of research into a coherent knowledge map, highlights influential works and contributors, and identifies conceptual gaps that warrant further exploration. For practitioners, the findings underscore the urgency of adopting open, digitally enabled, and sustainability-oriented approaches to strategizing. Scholars highlight promising research avenues, particularly in understanding strategizing at the ecosystem level, integrating digital technologies into strategic practices, and embedding sustainability imperatives into strategizing processes.
Keywords
Bibliometric
Strategizing
Strategy as Practice (SaP)
Thematic map
Co-occurrence
Subjects
احمدی، ح.، و عصاره، ف. (1396). مروری بر کارکردهای تحلیل هم‌واژگانی. مطالعات کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات، 28(1)، 145-125. https://nastinfo.nlai.ir/article_1132.html
بتولی، ز.، ناخدا، م.، فهیمی‌فر، س.، و فهیم‌نیا، ف. (1399). ترسیم نقشه‌ موضوعی مقالات حوزۀ بازی در کتابخانه‌ها در اسکوپوس. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 6(1)، 21-40. https://doi.org/10.22070/RSCI.2018.642
حسینی، ا.، غائبی، ا.، و برادر، ر. (1400). کتاب‌سنجی و نگاشت هم‌رخدادی واژگان در حوزه داده‌های پیوندی. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 7(1)، 91-116. https://doi.org/10.22070/RSCI.2020.4904.1333
حیدری، ع.، و والی‌پور، ع.(1396). پژوهش‏های مدیریت استراتژیک در ایران: مروری بر آثار انتشاریافته در نشریه‎های علمی ـ پژوهشی داخلی طی سال‏های 1380 تا 1393. مدیریت بازرگانی، 9(1)، 83-102.
    https://doi.org/10.22059/jibm.2017.62319
رمضانی، ه.، علیپور حافظی، م.، و مؤمنی، ع. (1393). نقشه‌های علمی: فنون و روش‌ها. ترویج علم، 5(1)، 53-84.
    https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.22519033.1393.5.1.4.1
زندی ‌روان، ن.، داورپناه، م.، و فتاحی، ر. ا. (1395). مروری بر رسم نقشۀ‌ علم و روش‌شناسی آن. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 2(1)، 76-57. https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2016.469
فهیمی‌فر، س.، و مؤمن‌زاده، ا. ح. (1404). گذار از امنیت اطلاعات به هوش مصنوعی: تحلیل روندهای پژوهشی در امنیت سایبری صنعت بانکداری با رویکرد علم‌سنجی. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 11(2)، 299-326.
    https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2025.20186.1790
نوروزی چاکلی، س.، و موسوی خانقاه، الف. (1405). تحلیل ساختار دانشی، تکامل موضوعی و جهت‌گیری‌های آینده و نوظهور در پژوهش‌های طراحی رابط کاربری برای هوش مصنوعی توضیح‌پذیر (XAI) در داشبوردهای تصمیم‌گیری: مطالعه‌ای علم‌سنجی. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، ۱۲(۲)، ۲۳۵- ۲۶۸.
    https://rsci.shahed.ac.ir/article_5073.html?lang=en
هدایت‌فر، م.، و محمدیان، ا. (1403). نگاشت نقشه پژوهشی و تحلیل رخداد هم‌واژگانی زیست‌بوم دیجیتال با رویکرد مدیریتی در پایگاه استنادی وب ‌آو ساینس. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، 10(2)، 23-44.
    https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2024.18929.1724
Ahmadi, H., & Osareh, F. (2017). Co-word analysis concept, definition and application. Librarianship and Information Organization Studies, 28(1), 125-145.
      https://nastinfo.nlai.ir/article_1132.html [In Persian].
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007  
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, hig-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377-386. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019
Batooli, Z., Nakhoda, M., Fahimifar, S., & Fahimnia, F. (2020). Subject map of "Game in libraries" articles in the Scopus database. Scientometrics Research Journal, 6(1), 21-40.
      https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2018.642 [In Persian].
Bencherki, N., Sergi, V., Cooren, F., & Vásquez, C. (2021). How strategy comes to matter: Strategizing as the communicative materialization of matters of concern. Strategic Organization, 19(4), 608-635. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127019890380
Bolland, E. J. (2020). Strategizing: New Thinking About Strategy, Planning, and Management. Emerald Group Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781789736977
Bromiley, P., & Rau, D. (2014). Towards a practice‐based view of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 35(8), 1249-1256. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2238
Brown, A. D., & Thompson, E. R. (2013). A narrative approach to strategy-as-practice. Business History, 55(7), 1143-1167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2013.838031
Brown, T., Park, A., & Pitt, L. (2020). A 60-year bibliographic review of the Journal of Advertising Research: Perspectives on trends in authorship, influences, and research impact. Journal of Advertising Research, 60(4), 353-360. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-2020-028
Burgelman, R. A., Floyd, S. W., Laamanen, T., Mantere, S., Vaara, E., & Whittington, R. (2018). Strategy processes and practices: Dialogues and intersections. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 531-558. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2741
Cardoso, A. L. J. (2015). Analysis of publications about strategy as practice: A mapping of the field by means of bibliometric and sociometric studies. REBRAE, 8(2), 118-137.
      https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=pt-BR&user=ZwI_v90AAAAJ&citation_for_view=ZwI_v90AAAAJ:UebtZRa9Y70C
Chia, R., & Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 27(5), 635-655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606064102
Chia, R., & MacKay, B. (2007). Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: Discovering strategy in the logic of practice. Human Relations, 60(1), 217-242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707075291
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146-166.
      https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Etrati, S. A., Etrati, S. M., & Noroozi Chakoli, S., Haj Seyyed Javadi, H. (2025, December). Security challenges in large language models across the data life cycle: A cryptography-aware comprehensive review [Conference presentation]. 10th International Conference on Combinations, Cryptography, Computer Science and Computation (10th I4C), Iran. Retrieved May 15, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18063049
Fahimifar, S., & Momenzadeh, A. (2025). From information security to artificial intelligence: A scientometrics analysis of research trends in cybersecurity within the banking industry. Scientometrics Research Journal, 11(2), 299-326.
      https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2025.20186.1790 [In Persian].
Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 154-177.
      https://doi.org/10.2307/259268
Gaviria-Marin, M., Merigó, J. M., & Baier-Fuentes, H. (2019). Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 140, 194-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.006
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. (2010). Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511777882
Hallinger, P., & Kovačević, J. (2021). Science mapping the knowledge base in educational leadership and management: A longitudinal bibliometric analysis, 1960 to 2018. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(1), 5-30.
      https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143219859002
Hedayatfar, M., & Mohammadian, A. (2024). Mapping the scientific map and analyzing the co-occusrrence of the concept of the digital ecosystem with a management approach on the web of science. Scientometrics Research Journal, 10(2), 23-44.
      https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2024.18929.1724 [In Persian].
Heidari, A., & Valipour, A. (2017). Strategic management research in Iran: An overview of published works in domestic scientific journals during 2002 to 2015. Journal of Business Management, 9(1), 83-102. https://doi.org/10.22059/jibm.2017.62319 [In Persian].
Hengst, I. A., Jarzabkowski, P., Hoegl, M., & Muethel, M. (2020). Toward a process theory of making sustainability strategies legitimate in action. Academy of Management Journal, 63(1), 246-271. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0960
Hoseinzadeh Shahri, M., Khodabandelou, R., & Moshkdanian, F. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of open strategy: a new concept in strategic management. Interdisciplinary Journal of Management Studies (IJMS), 12(3), 363-377.
      https://doi.org/10.22059/ijms.2019.240800.672803
Hosseini, E., Ghaebi, A., & Baradar, R. (2021). Bibliometrics and mapping of co-words in the field of linked data. Scientometrics Research Journal, 7(1), 91-116.
      https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2020.4904.1333 [In Persian].
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategic practices: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 23-55.
      https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.t01-1-00003
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529-560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840604040675
Jarzabkowski, P. (2005). Strategy as Practice: An Activity Based Approach. SAGE Publications Ltd,. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446215777
Jarzabkowski, P. (2008). Shaping strategy as a structuration process. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 621-650. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.33664922
Jarzabkowski, P., & Paul Spee, A. (2009). Strategy‐as‐practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(1), 69-95.
      https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00250.x
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. (2007). Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707075703
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. K., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. (2025). Two decades of revolutionizing strategy research: How strategy-as-practice illuminates the complex, dynamic and consequential ways of doing strategy. Academy of Management Collections, 4(2), 55-76.
      https://doi.org/10.5465/amc.2023.0005
Jarzabkowski, P., Seidl, D., & Balogun, J. (2022). From germination to propagation: Two decades of Strategy-as-Practice research and potential future directions. Human Relations, 75(8), 1533-1559. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221089473
Johnson, G., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity‐based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 3-22.
      https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.t01-2-00002
Kaplan, S. (2008). Framing contests: Strategy making under uncertainty. Organization Science, 19(5), 729-752. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0340
Kearney, A., Harrington, D., & Kelliher, F. (2019). Strategizing in the micro firm: A ‘strategy as practice’ framework. Industry and Higher Education, 33(1), 6-17.
      https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422218816232
Kohtamäki, M., Whittington, R., Vaara, E., & Rabetino, R. (2022). Making connections: Harnessing the diversity of strategy‐as‐practice research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(2), 210-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12274
Li, Q., & Jarzabkowski, P. (2025). Reinstating the radical: Trajectory, debates, and proposals for strategy as practice. Journal of Business Research, 187, 115055.
      https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115055
Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. A. (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250060306
Nicolini, D. (2009). Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connections. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1391-1418.
      https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609349875
Noroozi Chakoli, A., Noroozi Chakoli, S., & Chehrenegar, L. (2023, September 27-29). Is there relationship between cultural-economic indicators and the scientific status of countries? Analysis of Western and Central Asian countries using a neural network algorithm [Conference Paper Preprint]. 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI, ENID 2023), Leiden, Netherlands.
      https://doi.org/10.55835/644280742de665ded8bb1068
Noroozi Chakoli, S., & Mousavi Khaneghah, E. (2026). Analysis of the knowledge structure, thematic evolution, and emerging and future research directions in user interface design for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in Decision-Making Dashboards: A scientometric study. Scientometrics Research Journal, 12(2), 235-268.
      https://rsci.shahed.ac.ir/article_5073.html?lang=en [In Persian].
Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 63-92.
      https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.7.1.63
Panda, D., & Bhardwaj, R. (2025). Towards an understanding of strategy-as-systemic practice (SASP): A system-theoretic view of strategy-as-practice. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 34(2), 462-480. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-01-2025-5133
Prahalad, C. K., & Bettis, R. A. (1986). The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(6), 485-501.
      https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250070602
Prashantham, S., & Healey, M. P. (2022). Strategy as practice research: Reflections on its rationale, approach, and contributions, Journal of Management Studes, 59(8), e1-e17.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12862
Ramezani, H., Alipour-Hafezi, M., & Momeni, E. (2014). Scientific maps: Methods and techniques. Popularization of Science, 5(1), 53-84.
      https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.22519033.1393.5.1.4.1 [In Persian].
Rodríguez-Soler, R., Uribe-Toril, J., & Valenciano, J. D. P. (2020). Worldwide trends in the scientific production on rural depopulation, a Bibliometric analysis using Bibliometrix R-tool Land Use Policy, 97, 104787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104787
Rossi, E., Perito, B. Z., & Lavarda, R. A. B. (2020). Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: A narrative literature review. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia, 19(2), 125-142.
      https://periodicos.uninove.br/riae/article/download/16985/8396
Rouleau, L. (2013). Strategy-as-practice research at a crossroads. M@n@gement, 16(5), 574-592. https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.165.0574
Schau, H. J., Muñiz Jr, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009). How brand community practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 30-51. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30
Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies, 35(10), 1407-1421.
      https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840614541886
Seidl, D., Ma, S., & Splitter, V. (2024). What makes activities strategic: Toward a new framework for strategy‐as‐practice research. Strategic Management Journal, 45(12), 2395-2419. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3668
Tang, L., & Zhang, C. A. (2023). Global research on international students’ intercultural adaptation in a foreign context: A visualized bibliometric analysis of the scientific landscape. SAGE Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231218849
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7%3C509::AID-SMJ882%3E3.0.CO;2-Z
Vaara, E., & Whittington, R. (2012). Strategy-as-practice: Taking social practices seriously. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 285-336.
      https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2012.672039
Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349.
      https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731-735.
      https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(96)00068-4
Whittington, R. (2003). The work of strategizing and organizing: For a practice perspective. Strategic Organization, 1(1), 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1177/147612700311006
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613-634. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606064101
Williamson, O. E. (1991). Strategizing, economizing, and economic organization. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S2), 75-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250121007
Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(1), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)00004-E
Zandi Ravan, N., Davarpanah, M., & Fattahi, R. (2016). Review of science map visualization and its methodology. Scientometrics Research Journal, 2(1), 57-76.
      https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2016.469 [In Persian].
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472.
      https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629