Strategic Thinking in Crisis Management: a Study Into How Organisations Use Strategic Thinking to Overcome Unusually Demanding Situations

Home , Crisis management

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 4.3 Crisis Management ...... 38 5. Analysis ...... 42

5.1 Strategic Thinking ...... 42 5.2 Managing Strategy ...... 45 5.2.1 Capabilities ...... 45 5.2.2 Environment ...... 46 5.3 Crisis Management ...... 48 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.

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).

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

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?

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.

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

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

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-

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)

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)

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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 timely context. ● Morally 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

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 to discuss. A strong link can be ● Meaningfully 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

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.

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.

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).

4.1 Strategic Thinking 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.

“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.

‘’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.

4.2 Managing Strategy 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

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-

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

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.

4.3 Crisis Management 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.

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

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.

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.

5. Analysis

5.1 Strategic Thinking 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.

‘’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,

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)

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 Managing Strategy

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.

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.

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

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.

5.3 Crisis Management 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,

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

(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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

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?

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?

Business Administration SE-901 87 Umeå www.usbe.umu.se