On the risk of studying practices in isolation: Linking what, who, and how in strategy research
批评了将实践作为孤立现象研究的趋势，指出Bromiley和Rau的“基于实践的战略观”忽视了谁参与实践以及如何执行实践，可能导致绩效差异的错误归因，并提出了一个整合的实践视角。
This article challenges the recent focus on practices as stand-alone phenomena, as exemplified by the so-called “Practice-Based View of Strategy” proposed by Bromiley and Rau. While the goal of “Practice-Based View of Strategy” points to the potential for standard practices to generate performance differentials (in contrast to the resource-based view), it marginalizes well-known insights from practice theory more widely. In particular, by limiting its focus to practices, that is, “what” practices are used, it underplays the implications of “who” is engaged in the practices and “how” the practices are carried out. In examining practices in isolation, the “Practice-Based View of Strategy” carries the serious risk of misattributing performance differentials. In this article, we offer an integrative practice perspective on strategy and performance that should aid scholars in generating more precise and contextually sensitive theories about the enactment and impact of practices as well as about critical factors shaping differences in practice outcomes.