Strategy making, novelty and analogical reasoning — commentary on Gavetti, Levinthal, and Rivkin (2005)
评论了Gavetti等人关于类比推理在战略制定中作用的文章，指出在复杂新颖情境下类比推理不一定优于其他模型，并探讨了多种搜索策略结合使用的有效性。
Abstract This commentary responds to and builds upon a recent article about the role of analogical reasoning in strategy making (Gavetti, Levinthal, and Rivkin, 2005). Based on conceptual and formal analysis, the authors state that in complex and novel contexts, analogical reasoning may be superior to two established models: rational choice and local incremental search. I show that given an alternative conceptualization of the strategy‐making context and main models, analogical reasoning is not necessarily superior. Furthermore, in novel and complex contexts, this model and other approaches such as mental experimentation can play a larger role, particularly in inventing effective strategies. I further extend the analysis by considering some boundary conditions in which analogical reasoning and its alternatives best apply, exploring the idea that blending and adapting several search strategies may be more effective than using only one method, such as analogical reasoning, and advancing new directions for empirical research. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.