Emilia Salminen 

Master’s thesis: 
Strategy Implementation from a Microfoundational lens: The Role of 

Middle Managers 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Vaasa 2026 

Johtamisen Yksikkö  
Master’s thesis in Strategic 

Business Development 



2 

VAASAN YLIOPISTO 
Johtamisen Yksikkö 
Tekijä: Emilia Salminen 
Tutkielman nimi:  Strategy Implementation from a Microfoundational lens: The Role 

of Middle Managers 
Tutkinto: Kauppatieteiden maisteri 
Oppiaine: Strategic Business Development  
Työn ohjaaja: Marko Kohtamäki  
Valmistumisvuosi:  2026 Sivumäärä: 57 

TIIVISTELMÄ: 
Strategiatutkimus on kehittynyt merkittävästi viime vuosikymmenien aikana. Kehityksestä hu-
olimatta organisaatiot kamppailevat edelleen strategian toimeenpanon kanssa. Strategiatutki-
mus on pitkälti keskittynyt makrotasolle, mutta viimeaikainen tutkimus on siirtänyt 
painopistettä vähitellen makrotasolta mikrotasolle. Microfoundations -näkökulma tarkastelee 
makro- sekä mikrotason välistä dynamiikkaa ja tutkii näiden kahden tason keskinäistä vuo-
rovaikutusta. Sen avulla voidaan paremmin ymmärtää yksilötason toiminnan vaikutusta 
laajemmassa mittakaavassa. Tarkastelemalla strategian toimeenpanoa organisaatioissa 
mikrotason kautta, kuten yksilöpiirteiden, rutiineiden sekä kommunikaatiotyylien vaikutuksien 
myötä, voidaan löytää yhteyksiä makrotasolle sekä tehdä tärkeitä havaintoja, jotka auttavat 
strategian toimeenpanossa.  
 
Keskijohdolla on merkittävä rooli strategian toimeenpanossa erityisesti suurissa organisaati-
oissa, joissa he toimivat ylimmän johdon sekä operatiivisen tiimin välissä. Heidän toimintansa 
ja kokemustensa ymmärtäminen on siten olennaista strategian toteutuksen onnistumisen ja 
epäonnistumisen tutkinnassa. Tämä tutkimus tarkastelee keskijohdon roolia strategian 
toimeenpanossa, microfoundations -näkökulman kautta. Tutkimus pyrkii syventämään ymmär-
rystä keskijohdon roolista strategian toimeenpanijana sekä selvittämään, minkälaisilla mikrota-
son keinoilla, rutiineilla tai luonteenpiirteillä on tähän vaikutusta. Tutkimuksessa käytetään 
aineistoa, joka on kerätty haastattelemalla eri organisaatioiden keskijohtoa. 
 
Tuloksissa korostuvat keskeiset strategian toimeenpanoon vaikuttavat tekijät, kuten OKR-mal-
lien, empatian sekä viestinnän merkitys. Nämä teemat havainnollistavat mikrotason 
käytäntöjen vaikutusta tiimi- sekä organisaatiotason tuloksiin. Haastatellut keskijohdon edu-
stajat kuvailivat strategian toimeenpanon olevan haastavaa, joka vahvistaa mikrotason 
tutkimuksen merkityksen. Tämä tutkimus osoittaa, että mikrotason tarkastelu tarjoaa hyödyl-
lisiä näkökulmia organisaatiolle sekä keskijohdolle strategian toimeenpanoprosessissa. 
 
 

AVAINSANAT: strategy, microfoundations, strategy implementation, middle manage-
ment 

 
  



3 

UNIVERSITY OF VAASA 
Johtamisen Yksikkö 
Author: Emilia Salminen 
Title of the thesis:  Strategy Implementation from a Microfoundational lens: The Role 

of Middle Managers 
Degree: Master of Science in Economics and Business Administration 
Discipline: Strategic Business Development  
Supervisor: Marko Kohtamäki  
Year: 2026 Pages: 57 

 
ABSTRACT: 
 
Despite the significant developments within the strategy field over the past decades, strategy 
implementation remains a persistent challenge for organizations. Strategy research through-
out the history has focused on macro-level, although recently, the focus has been shifting 
more towards the micro-level. Microfoundations -perspective investigates the dynamics and 
interplay between the macro- and micro-level and provides a useful lens for examining how 
individual actions and interactions shape broader organizational outcomes. Looking at strategy 
execution in organizations from micro-level, such as characteristics, routines and communica-
tion styles, beneficial perceptions can be made, which can be utilized in strategy implementa-
tion.  
 
Middle managers play a critical role in strategy implementation, particularly in large organiza-
tions where they operate between the top management and operational teams. Understand-
ing their actions and experiences is therefore essential for explaining successes and failures in 
strategy execution. This study investigates the role of middle managers through a microfoun-
dational lens, exploring their impact on the strategy implementation process. This research 
aims to deepen the understanding of middle managers’ role as executing the strategy and find 
out which different micro-level actions, routines or characteristics impact on this. Data for the 
study was collected through interviews with middle managers from multiple organizations.  
 
 
The findings highlight key factors influencing strategy implementation, including the role of 
OKR’s, empathy and communication. These themes illustrate how micro-level practises con-
tribute to team- and organization-level outcomes. The interviewed middle managers consist-
ently described strategy implementation as challenging, reinforcing the importance of micro-
level focus. The study suggests that focusing on microfoundations could offer valuable insights 
into improving strategy execution and provide practical implications for organizations seeking 
to strengthen implementation processes. 
 
 

KEYWORDS: strategy, microfoundations, strategy implementation, middle manage-
ment 

 
 
 
 

 



4 

Contents 

1 Introduction 6 

1.1 Motivation for the study 6 

1.2 Research gap 7 

1.3 Aim and research question 8 

1.4 Thesis structure 9 

2 Literature review 10 

2.1 Strategy implementation 10 

2.1.1 Conceptualization of strategy in the thesis 14 

2.2 Microfoundations framework 15 

2.2.1 Bathtub model 19 

2.3 The role of middle managers 21 

2.4 Synthesis 23 

3 Methodology 25 

3.1 Methodological approach 25 

3.2 Data collection 27 

3.2.1 Unit of analysis 27 

3.2.2 Data Collection Method 28 

3.3 Data analysis 30 

3.4 The assessment of the quality of the data 32 

4 Findings 33 

4.1 Strategy implementation 33 

4.1.1 Guiding implementation through goals and structures 34 

4.1.2 Breaking down strategy and setting OKRs 36 

4.2 Middle managers’ communication in strategy implementation 37 



5 

4.3 Middle managers’ engagement at the operational level 40 

4.4 Synthesis 42 

5 Discussion 44 

5.1 Theoretical and managerial implications 49 

5.2 Suggestions for future research 50 

5.3 Limitations 51 

References 52 

Appendices 56 

Interview questions listed 56 

 

 

Figures 
 

Figure 1. Structure of thesis 9 

Figure 2. Bathtub model (Contractor et. al, 2018) 19 

Figure 3 Results in a visual form 43 

 

 

Tables 
 

Table 1. Interviews 29 

Table 2. Data structure 31 

 



6 

1 Introduction 

This study aims to provide more comprehensive understanding on the interplay be-

tween micro- and macro level phenomena in organizations and especially its effect on 

strategy and strategy implementation through microfoundations perspective. This chap-

ter presents the background of the study as well as research questions that the study 

further on aims to provide answers for. Structure of the thesis will also be presented.  

 

1.1 Motivation for the study 

Strategy has been a widely researched topic for decades, yet it remains as an essential 

construct for any company that aims to gather systematic understanding of the direction 

of the company and the means to achieve the targets (Barney, 1991). Instead of focusing 

on large-scale organization view, this study emphasizes the individuals that the strategy 

fundamentally gets implemented through; their actions, interactions and thoughts. The 

focus of the research is born out of the interest between micro- and macro level corre-

lation in an organizational context and the recognition of the vast majority of strategy 

research focusing solely on the macro level (Felin & Foss, 2015). Without questioning 

the necessity of comprehensive macro-level understanding, this study acknowledges 

the close relationship between macro-level and micro-level phenomena and the need 

for micro-level knowledge to properly understand macro-level (Contractor et. al., 2019). 

Hence, in order to comprehend the “big picture”, individuals and micro-level processes 

need to be studied rather than neglected or overlooked. Therefore, the particular focus 

of this study are the individuals and micro-level phenomena.  

 

Creating a strategy may be relatively easy – the challenges and complexity often begin 

along the execution. Estimated percentage of eventually failing strategic initiatives is 

around 50-90%, often due to inadequate skills or resources in the implementation phase 

(Cândido & Santos 2015). As strategy execution consists of individuals executing it, it 

could be assumed that the root causes – whether the implementation has succeeded or 

not - can be found from the individual level. The underlying argument of this study is 



7 

that successful strategy execution is dependent on the people in the organization and 

the individual level should be deeply researched in order to achieve the desired out-

come. As an example of the correlation between the micro and macro level is that indi-

vidual-level behaviours have an impact on organizational outcomes. Emotions and intu-

itions – individual psychological processes – influence how middle managers perceive 

organizations’ actions, which then impacts on the implementation process. This study 

aims to add on the existing research on strategy implementation by using a microfoun-

dational lens. Individual psychological processes are a strong impactor and should not 

be overlooked. Therefore, we need to elaborate our understanding on its impact on 

strategy implementation.  

 

1.2 Research gap 

Regardless of the existing comprehensive research on strategic management a research 

gap in strategy implementation from microfoundations perspective can be identified. 

Recent strategic organization research emphasizes structure, routines and capabilities, 

leaving the core foundation of any organization into shade – individuals (Felin & Foss, 

2005). The significance of nonconscious and emotional processes in strategic manage-

ment should not be neglected, however it seems that these are inadequately considered 

in the field (Hodkinson & Healey, 2009). Looking at organizations from macro-level is 

beneficial, however by shifting the focus on micro-level and individuals – who are actu-

ally making the decisions - we can discover new angles and improve our understanding 

on strategy execution. According to Felin & Foss (2015) emphasizing individual as the 

primary starting point for strategic research is an area lacking research, with potential 

to turn out extremely beneficial. Behind every strategic decision in an organization is an 

individual or a group of individuals – each of which are shaped by personal propensities, 

experiences and demographic factors. These characteristics lead and affect on different 

strategic decisions. Due to only few restrictions in the field, multiple theories around 

microfoundations have emerged.  

 



8 

After having discovered the lacuna for further research on microfoundations, significant 

process has been made. In fact, various researchers have proven micro-level and indi-

vidual actions to be determinative concerning macro-level outcomes. Regardless of the 

increasing research on micro-level and individuals, the need for further research clearly 

remains. The most profound reason to why the vast majority of strategy research have 

a structural perspective over managerial one lies in the elusiveness and difficulty of stud-

ying humans (Duhaime, Stimpert, & Chesley, 2011). Conceptual challenges and difficult 

data partly explain the lack of research in this area (Contractor et al., 2018). It is time-

consuming and difficult to gather micro-level data and examining individual character-

istics requires deep interviews. In addition, bridging the gap between micro- and macro-

level is complex. The topic is intractable to measure due to the complexity of examining 

personal characteristics. Furthermore, acquiring valid data often requires long-term 

data collection. Yet, after the 2000’s, vast development has been seen on the field and 

the growth is expected to continue that path. 

 

1.3 Aim and research question 

As the research gap for micro-level processes in an organization has been presented, 

this study aims to provide insights and contribution on the individuals’ role on strategy 

implementation. Driving successful implementation in organizations requires individu-

als; more specifically, middle managers have a strong role in it as the strategy tends to 

flow down to all levels via middle managers. Therefore, this study presents the research 

problem through middle managers in large organizations. As touched upon earlier, this 

study approaches the problem through using microfoundations perspective as a theo-

retical lens. Inherent for microfoundations perspective is to emphasize and focus on in-

dividuals; their characteristics and interactions. The term will be opened up further on 

in the literature review. The author is interested in finding out how middle managers 

are able to successfully participate in the strategy implementation through a microfoun-

dational lens: are there any recurring patterns or certain characteristics that can be iden-

tified? Thus, the research question is: 

 



9 

What is the role of middle managers in strategy implementation?  

 

Following the research question, the following supporting question has been identified: 

1) How to understand strategy implementation and the role of middle managers 

through the microfoundations framework? 

 

1.4 Thesis structure 

This thesis consists of five chapters. To begin with introduction, the first chapter pre-

sents the motivation for the study and background for the research. Continuing with the 

research gap and research questions identified, the first chapter concludes to presenting 

the structure of the thesis, which “Figure 1” also illustrates. The second chapter presents 

the theoretical background for the study to prepare for the subsequent chapters quali-

tative research. That is followed by methodology of the study and findings. Lastly, the 

discussion ties the research together by combining the findings and theory to relevant 

implications and offering the reader intriguing viewpoints to deepen the understanding 

of the matter and its relevance.  

 

 

 

Figure 1. Structure of thesis 

Motivation for the study and research gap

Literature review

Methodology

Findings

Discussion



10 

2 Literature review 

This literature review acts as a theoretical basis for the subsequent research part of the 

thesis by aiming to determine and analyse the relevant theories and research regarding 

the topic. The literature review begins with presenting strategy implementation and as 

a support for that defines the theory behind strategy and its background. Secondly, this 

chapter will cover the theoretical lens of the study – microfoundations – by defining the 

term and analysing its origins and impact on the field of strategic management. As a 

continuum to microfoundations a widely used bathtub model is introduced to offer 

practical insights and concretism to support the microfoundations framework. Thirdly, 

the literature review provides theory on the role of middle managers. Lastly, the litera-

ture review concludes to a synthesis of strategy and microfoundations to tie the two 

topics together and illustrate the relationship between them.   

 

2.1 Strategy implementation 

Multiple definitions have emerged around strategy implementation. Floyd & Wool-

ridge (1992) define strategy implementation as the managerial interventions aligning 

organizational action with strategic intervention. Tawse and Tabesh (2021) define 

strategy as “dynamic, iterative and complex process” that consists of different actions 

done by employees and managers towards bringing contemplation into life. Hrebiniak 

(2006) conceptualizes strategy into a managerial process in which strategies are trans-

lated into coordinated actions through commitment, coordination and collaboration 

across organizational levels. The strategy unfolds over time through a series of inte-

grated decisions and actions, which often rely greatly on middle managers. Strategy 

implementation is a part of the strategic management process; separate from strategy 

formulation (Hrebiniak, 2006).  

 

Implementing strategy efficiently is essential to an organization's success and it may 

provide a competitive edge for the organization (Tawse & Tabesh, 2021). Strategy im-

plementation refers to consistent ground-level action taken in the organization in 



11 

order to achieve strategic goals set (Whittington et al., 2023, chapter 15.1.) According 

to Bonoma (1984), in order to achieve the intended outcome of the strategy the firm 

must succeed in the implementation (Noble, 1999). As Bonoma (1984) and Cespedes 

(1991) have stated, achieving tremendous success regarding new strategy requires ex-

cellent strategy formulation as well as implementation, meaning that these two are 

strongly connected and have influence on one another (Noble, 1999, p. 132). Nonethe-

less, Noble (1999) argue strategy implementation to be left in the shadow of strategy 

formulation in organizations and research too often and points out the still existing re-

search gap around strategy implementation. Organizations are often strong in planning 

and poor strategy is rarely the challenge. Consistent to Noble’s viewpoint, Tawse & Ta-

besh (2021) have pointed out the lack of conceptual understanding of the strategy im-

plementation process despite of its importance being widely recognized and agreed 

on. Aligned to previous statements, according to Hrebiniak (2006) observation, while 

the strategy formulation is greatly appreciated in research and organizations’ manage-

ment, the execution is continuously receiving inadequate attention. The common sen-

timent over the strategy implementation seems to remain ambiguous throughout the 

decades regardless of its’ equally agreed relevance in the organization’s strategy. In 

addition, implementation takes significantly longer compared to strategy formulation – 

and the time of the implementation process varies greatly between organisations de-

pending on multiple factors, such as the managers, size of organization and the new 

strategy (Hrebiniak, 2006). Implementation also involves significantly more people 

than formulation process, which highlights the need for clear communication and co-

ordination. These factors inherently add challenges related to the process.  

 

Due to strategy’s dynamic nature and variance between organizational contexts one 

might argue that strategy implementation is dependent on the organizational context 

due to its intractable nature cannot be strictly defined. Nevertheless, several frame-

works have been developed to structure and support the implementation  

process by identifying key organizational elements that must be aligned for successful 

execution.   



12 

 

One universally recognized framework is Higgins’ (2005) Aligned 8S Model, which 

builds on McKinsey’s well-established 7S Model, placing explicit emphasis on strategy 

implementation. Aligning with the contemporary organizational practices, the 8S em-

phasizes strategy execution and extends the 7S framework by incorporating measure-

ment of outcomes and performance. In addition, another difference compared to the 

original model is replacement of “skills” with “resources” to be more aligned with the 

contemporary organizational practises. This extended framework, called “The Aligned 

8S Model”, emphasises the importance of alignment between different functions. The 

model includes eight “S”; strategy, structure, systems and processes, leadership style, 

staff, resources, shared values, and strategic performance, each representing one cru-

cial point in order to achieve successful strategy implementation.  

 

To better illustrate the concept of misalignment in strategy, Higgins has created an 

“Unaligned 8S Model”, which depicts the common status and conditions prevailing in 

many organizations. The function of this illustration is to reveal the impact of una-

ligned processes on the strategy implementation. Despite all the “S” having a certain 

direction and goal, in case the directions differ with one another a unified end result is 

impossible to achieve, which leads to partly wasted resources. Thus, defining aligned 

goals according to each “S” is significant in terms of the successful strategy execu-

tion.While the framework highlights the structural and organizational requirements for 

strategy implementation, is limited in providing full insights on how strategy is enacted 

through middle managers and individuals. Strategy implementation is therefore often 

approached from a macro-level perspective. While understanding structural and or-

ganizational conditions is important, such a focus has limitations, which motivate the 

adoption of a microfoundational framework later in the literature review.  

 



13 

 
 

 

Figure 1. Aligned 8S model (Higgins, 2005) 

 

 
 

Figure 2. Unaligned 8S model (Higgins, 2005) 

 



14 

 

2.1.1 Conceptualization of strategy in the thesis 

 
Rather than reviewing all perspectives on strategy – which are many – this section aims 

to clarify how strategy is conceptualized in this thesis in order to support the analysis of 

strategy implementation. This chapter mainly focuses on the strategy conceptualiza-

tions emphasizing action and decision-making, as these are the most relevant for under-

standing strategy implementation in practice.  

 

Mintzberg’s well-established framework of the “five P’s” defines strategy as plan, ploy, 

pattern, position and perspective (Mintzberg et al., 1998). While the framework provides 

valuable conceptualizations on the multidimensional nature of strategy, this thesis ap-

proaches strategy as a pattern. Strategy as a pattern refers to a stream of consistent 

decisions and actions that eventually accumulate into organizational outcomes at the 

collective level. The purpose of this approach is to draw attention to the level of action 

– emerging through behaviors rather than existing as a predefined plan. Hence, looking 

at strategy through “pattern” aligns with studying explicitly strategy implementation.  

 

Approaching strategy as a pattern does not exclude the intentional plan behind it. In 

fact, despite the emergent nature of the definition of “pattern” there probably are de-

liberate characteristics as well. Strategies can be roughly distributed into two categories: 

deliberate intentions and emergent outcomes, and in most cases, strategy is a combina-

tion of both (Mintzberg, 2008). Deliberate refers to a strategy that is realized just as 

intended, whereas emergent for one that evolves throughout the process and is not 

realized the same as it was intended. (Mintzberg, H., 2008). Business environments tend 

to change rapidly, and issues may arise unexpectedly, and therefore new strategies 

emerge as a response for that (Duhaime, Stimpert, & Chesley, 2011). A deliberate strat-

egy refers to an environment that is fairly predictable. However, today’s world often 

offers rather unpredictable circumstances and predicting might not be too easy. 

 



15 

Contemporary strategy research further emphasizes the dynamic nature and the con-

tinuous pursuit of competitive advantage. Vuorinen (2013) argues that strategy is in-

creasingly involving continuous adaptation and emergent elements rather than tradi-

tionally executing fixed long-term plans. Accordingly, Porter (1991) highlights the need 

for firms to remain dynamic and continuously seek new opportunities in order to sustain 

competitive advantage. These perspectives reinforce the view of strategy as an evolving 

process shaped by ongoing decisions and adaptive approach rather than a static fixed 

plan.  

 

This thesis conceptualizes strategy as a dynamic combination of deliberate intention and 

emergent adaptation that unfold through patterns of decisions and actions over time. 

This understanding provides a suitable foundation for examining strategy implementa-

tion as a process and prepares the ground for the subsequent introduction of the micro-

foundational perspective, which focuses on how such patterns arise from individual-

level actions and interactions within organizations.  

 

2.2 Microfoundations framework 

To achieve more profound understanding of macro-level phenomena and decisions in 

organizations, the focus should be shifted from macro to micro-level (Felin & al., 2015, 

p. 575). Aiming to comprehend the correlation between individual-level and organiza-

tional-level factors, microfoundations seeks to broaden the other existing micro re-

search by examining individuals in macro contexts (Felin & al., 2015, p. 600). Microfoun-

dations can be defined as a collection of heuristics for formulating theories and theory-

based empiricism that looks for causal explanations for firm-level characteristics and 

strategies based on the unique behaviours, interactions, and tendencies of organisa-

tional members (Contractor & al., 2019). It is rather a movement or perspective than a 

theory, which provides valuable heuristics for macro management and can be used in 

making strategic decisions as well as comprehending the previous ones made (Felin & 

al., 2015, p. 618). According to Contractor & al. (2019, p. 4) the aim of microfoundations 

literature is “connecting the thinking and backgrounds of individual managers with 



16 

strategic decisions their firm makes”. Despite the growing number of research in the 

field of microfoundations, a consensus in defining the term is still missing (Barney, Felin, 

2013). Nonetheless, the core of any microfoundational discussion is addressing the link 

between micro- and macro-levels (Barney & Felin, 2013). The following citation 

ingeniously summarizes the underlying purpose and benefit of analyzing 

microfoundations and the micro- and macro-level relationship: 

 

“The call for microfoundations is a methodological point about the power of looking at 

lower-level constituent units when explaining higher levels of analysis (Barney & Felin, 

2013)”. 

 

Micro- and macro-level are strongly interlinked. As many dependent variables and or-

ganizational capabilities are often looked at from macro-perspective, microfoundations 

can offer valuable insights and a shift of focus leading to improved performance in many 

ways (Molina-Azorin, 2014). Delving into the subject of individual interactions, examples 

of concretise outcomes microfoundations can explain are predicting competitive ad-

vantage over operational performance of a company or heterogeneity in social out-

comes (Felin & al., 2015, p. 600). Despite of acknowledging the importance of profound 

comprehension on macro-level functions in an organization, Molina-Azorin (2014) 

advocates that individual micro-level actions affect the macro-level outcomes and firm 

performance. After all, macro-level decisions fundamentally consitute from individual-

level actions and there are various characteristics that may affect on decision-making, 

such as emotions, perceptions and personal experiences (Molina-Azorin, 2014, p.104). 

As Foss (2011) points out, a firm’s certain capability originally results from compex 

micro-level actions and interactions that eventually lead to macro-level capability that 

the organization can then benefit from. Individuals not only have influence on firm 

performance and capabilites, but the organization as a whole and the collective 

behaviour of it (Molina-Azorin, 2014). Thus, every firm should notice the micro-level ef-

fect on the organization, where the key to superior performance on macro-level often 

lies as well. 



17 

 

The roots of microfoundations movement in economics have arisen in the early 1960’s 

(Foss, 2011). The conversation around micro and macro theories had been continuing 

and causing tension in different scientific orientations, such as sociology and economics, 

for a long period of time, and as a result, microfoundations perspective originated. For 

reference, social sciences have been debating for a hundred years on whether individu-

als or social collectives should be emphasized (Felin & Foss, 2015, p. 579). According to 

Felin & Foss (2015, p. 597), microfoundational work has been increasing rapidly in terms 

of emphasizing its importance and the vast growing amount of research published 

around the movement. Thus, despite of its origins tracing back to 1960’s, the movement 

is somewhat recent and there is still room for further work. Although microfoundations 

perspective is relatively new and has only taken off in research during the last decades, 

the roots of the perspective go way back. On 18th and 19th century humans began to 

look for explanation from individuals for certain occurrences (Contractor et al., 2018). 

Considering that, one could argue that the relatively late foundation of microfounda-

tions perspective and emphasis on individual-level in organizations is bizarre.  

 

Regardless of an increasing interest in microfoundations especially from 2010 and 

onwards, the movement has faced a share of critisism. Barney and Felin (2013) define a 

few misconceptions around microfoundations in the article “What are 

microfoundations?”. Microfoundations have received critique of sharing too many 

similarities with other micro disciplines in the strategy field, such as organizational 

behaviour. Other causes for criticism have been similar concepts to other fields applied 

to macro level and microfoundations debilitating structure on macro-level, leading to 

questioning the whole usefulness of microfoundations (Felin & Foss, 2015, p. 607). 

Barney and Felin (2013) deny the interpretation about microfoundations solely focusing 

on individuals, and instead emphasize the necessity to include the interactions and the 

organizational context in order to achieve a comprehensive approach to 

microfoundations.  

 



18 

To get a stronger grasp on why microfoundations matter and differ from other micro 

disciplines, linkages between microfoundations and micro disciplines have to be looked 

at. Microfoundations shares many similarities with micro disciplines, however their 

focus differs despite of the adjacent topics (Felin & Foss, 2015, p. 600). Instead of aiming 

to mimic the theories in micro researh – the core of microfoundations is to add on to 

existing research by taking it further and broadening the area of micro research by 

linking micro to macro instead of remaining solely on micro-level (Felin & Foss, p. 600). 

Later on the author will delve into “The Coleman Bathtub” in chapter 2.4., which further 

discusses about the distinctions between micro research and microfoundations. 

 

Microfoundations offer a causal explanation for the emergence, development, and con-

tribution of strategic resources and competencies to company performance. Instead of 

approaching microfoundations on solely abstract level, scholars have increasingly exam-

ined them within the context of resource-based theory (RBV) (Foss, 2011). The resource-

based view (RBV) explains differences in firm performance by focusing on firm-specific 

resources and capabilities that are valuable and rare (Barney et al., 1991). In this per-

spective, competitive advantage arises not primarily from industry structure but from 

internal resource heterogeneity across firms. The field of strategic management re-

search has frequently relied on RBV, since it provides a powerful explanation for why 

some firms outperform others (Foss, 2011). Barney et al. (1991) argue that since its de-

velopment, RBV has become one of the most dominant theoretical frameworks for un-

derstanding organizational dynamics and competitive advantage. Despite its macro-

level focus on firm resources, RBV has increasingly moved toward incorporating micro-

foundational explanations, that connect individual actions and interactions with organ-

izational outcomes. Progress in strategic management research requires greater atten-

tion to micro-level processes underlying firm performance (Barney et al., 1991).  

 

 



19 

2.2.1 Bathtub model 

For illustrating the concept of microfoundations and offering structure to the move-

ment, James Coleman has developed a bathtub model or the “Coleman boat” (Felin & 

Foss, 2015, p. 590). The model aims to differentiate micro and macro level – individual 

and organization - from each other, providing a general illustration of correlation be-

tween micro and macro factors through a layered structure (Felin & Foss, 2015, p. 590). 

The model has faced criticism due to its simpleness and it has been criticised for being 

blunt. Nonetheless, another angle to look at the model is through its flexibility, which 

makes it feasible for different contexts as it does not set rigorous rubrics nor limits for 

usage (Contractor & al. (2019, p. 9).  

 

 

 

Figure 2. Bathtub model (Contractor et. al, 2018) 

 

Contractor et. al (2018) walk the reader through the different arrows of the Coleman 

boat in the article “Viewing global strategy through a microfoundations lens”. As the 

fundamental aim of microfoundations lies in discovering causal explanations for macro-

level phenomena in firms from employees and their predilections and actions, Coleman 

boat is dyadic in terms of including two levels: micro and macro. The model consists of 

four arrows illustrating causal flow among micro- and macro-levels and leading to dif-

ferent meanings and representations each, which will be presented next.   



20 

 

To begin from the overview, according to Contractor et al. (2018), the nodes in the mid-

dle of arrows have two meanings: for macro-level they illustrate different phenomena 

and for micro-level behaviours and actions. Depicting macro factors such as institutions, 

the first arrow reflects how the macro level factors have a hold over individuals and 

power of shaping their natural propensities. The second arrow represents how the pre-

vailing conditions of individuals - that partly originate from arrow one – determine the 

enthusiasm and will the individuals preserve. Consequently, this effects on the actions 

the individual takes. Hence, the second arrow represents micro-micro relationship. 

Based on the second arrow and individual actions, different outcomes arise which is the 

key to arrow three. Micro-level actions lead to macro-level (described in the model as 

“social”) outcomes, as the third arrow presents. Lastly, the fourth arrow is known to be 

reviewed only after a considerate investigation of the other arrows at first. Alone it does 

not offer anything but shallow explanations due to its bypassing of micro-level factors. 

Therefore, all the arrows should be contemplated in order for it to derive to fully uncov-

ering the causality and understanding the phenomena. 

 

As the Coleman bathtub model is malleable and leaves room for versatile utilization, 

Contractor & al. (2019, p. 9) suggest an alternative for acquiring more depth into the 

analysis by vertically arranging the bathtubs on top of one another. In that case, each 

bathtub has its own level or purpose to represent, such as a team or an individual. Trying 

out different alternatives for the bathtub model creates new perspectives for the issue.  

For the purposes of this research the Bathtub model can function as an illustrator 

between the two levels – micro and macro – and add concreteness to the research 

problem through sheding light on the interaction between these levels. Applied to this 

study and understanding strategy implementation through the bathtub model the 

pattern could be applied as the following: first arrow represents formal 

structures/decisions in the organization from macro to micro -level. Second arrow 

visualizes micro-micro interaction, such as reacting and interacting between one 

another. The third arrow presents the micro-macro phenomenon as micro-level 



21 

interactions as a result for a decision for example, turn into macro-level outcomes such 

as organization-level resistance or satisfaction on the decision. Finally, the outcome and 

results modify and shape the organization as a whole. 

 

2.3 The role of middle managers 

Middle managers occupy a role that is positioned between the seniors and leadership 

and junior or other employees, which allows them to coordinate between different lev-

els (Harding et al. 2014). A middle manager’s role in organization is impactful, as their 

position enables them to contribute to decision-making and hence, they effect on lower-

level employees and influence organization culture through their actions (Contractor & 

al., 2019). According to Mintzberg’s definition (1989) middle managers hold 

responsibility over a particular business unit and are positioned in below the top 

management and above the first-level management – which defines them as middle 

managers. This study focuses on large companies that have similar organizational 

structure which clearly includes the level of middle management. 

 

Middle managers role has evolved throughout the history as they have not traditionally 

been involved in the strategy process (Floyd & Wooldrigde, 1992). However, over past 

decades a shift has occurred and middle manager’s role has evolved to influence 

strategy implementation as well as defining strategy. They are implementing the 

strategy through communication, coordination and interpretation (Huy, 2001). The 

position in the middle is beneficial as it enables capturing the context of strategy as well 

as the effects and requirements from each level. Especially in large organizations 

strategy gets implemented through middle managers; they are familiar with different 

organizational structures and are able to take consistent action towards new ways of 

working while maintaining a harmony in the organization (Huy, 2001). Due to possessing 

wide knowledge of organizational processes and core values middle manager’s 

contribution is highly impactful in strategy work (Huy, 2001). Additionally, Floyd and 

Lane (2000) conceptualize middle managers strategic roles as championing, facilitating, 

synthesizing and implementing. Through these roles, middle managers translate 



22 

strategic information into operational level and action while simultaneously navigating 

information to top-level management. From the perspective of microfoundations 

middle managers are important, since they hold a critical role in linking individual actions 

to organizational-level strategic outcomes (Floyd & Lane, 2000). The underlying 

consensus between different authors on the topic sets in to middle managers operating 

in an irreplaceable position, possessing strategically necessary information from below 

and above them. The strategically unique position occupied by middle managers allows 

them to gather a comprehensive understanding of the company’s operations and drive 

the strategy implementation forward.  

 

Previous studies have discovered evidence for middle managers enhancing flexibility in 

organizations and facilitating adaptability of new principles and strategic initiatives 

(Floyd & Wooldrigde, 1992). Huy (2001) emphasizes middle managers’ emotional 

capabilites, which are highly influential as enableres for strategic change. Middle 

managers’ often have aquired the skill of maintaining stability in organization while 

simultaneously promoting change. In addition, they are familiar with operational 

processes which in turn allows them to recognize emergent issues when they arise or 

alternatively new opportunities (Mintzberg, 2008).   

 

Regardless of the increased amount of research on the level of middle managers during 

past decades the need for further research on the topic of middle managers effect on 

strategic implementation still exists. Delving into micro-level and mechanisms that 

middle managers use for influening strategy implementation in practice is less explored, 

however have a lot of potential for exploring.  

 

  

 

 

 



23 

2.4 Synthesis  

 
Strategy and microfoundations are strongly intertwined, as strategic outcomes ulti-

mately emerge from the actions, decisions and interactions of individuals within organ-

izations. While strategy research has traditionally focused on organizational-level struc-

tures, the microfoundations perspective emphasizes the fundamental impact of individ-

uals and their knowledge, capabilities and behaviours (Felin & Foss, 2015). Therefore, as 

understanding strategy requires attention to strategic intent and objectives, the micro-

level must be focused on to understand how strategy unfolds in practise and is sus-

tained. Therefore, strategy implementation is a converging point between strategy and 

microfoundations. Despite of being the process of execution of predined plans, strategy 

implementation is a process in which strategic intentions are translated into action by 

organizational members (Floyd & Woolridge, 1992). From the perspective of microfoun-

dations, strategy implementation is dependent on how individuals coordinate and real-

ize strategic tasks in their everyday work, which eventually leads to micro-level actions 

accumulating into implementation outcomes in an organizational level (Barney & Felin, 

2013).  

 

From a strategic management perspective, the fundamental goal of strategy is to 

achieve and sustain competitive advantage (Foss, 2015). Similarly to strategic manage-

ment, one of microfoundations perspective’s core concepts is in achieving competitive 

advantage in an organization through managers’ decisions. (Molina-Azorin, 2014, p. 

104). Microfoundations contribute to this objective by explaining how competitive ad-

vantage arises through individual-level actions, decisions and skills that eventually shape 

organizational capabilities (Molina-Azorin, 2014). Despite of management not having 

control over individuals and their characteristics such as personal traits, strategic out-

comes can be influenced through hiring, role design and allocation of responsibilities 

(Foss, 2011). Thus, they can align the personnel with the strategy of a company and 

aquire the competences they are looking for. This illustrates the importance and power 

of microfoundations in strategic management. Hence, by integrating microfoundations 



24 

into strategic management research the understanding on the correlation between in-

dividual actions and organizational outcomes can be expanded (Barney et al., 2011). 

Thus, microfoundations perspective benefit strategic management by providing insight 

into how strategies can be executed through micro-level mechanisms.  

 

The integration of microfoundations into strategic management research reflects a 

broader shift in the field. In the early strategy research rational and analytical models 

were emphasized, as one major milestone in the field of strategic management was Por-

ter’s positioning approach from the 1980’s (Porter, 1996). It was widely used and shaped 

strategic thinking for years. However, there was a slow realization of the approach not 

fully explaining the differences in firm performances. In order to comprehend the 

knowledge, capabilities and proficiency prevailing in the organization – which directly 

correlate with strategy – individuals must be understood on a deeper level (Felin & Foss, 

2015, p.442). Thus, it led to attention shift from outside perspective to inside the firm, 

which then caused the increased popularity of resource-based theory and further on the 

rise of microfoundations perspective as well (Foss, 2011). Recently, psychological per-

spectives have increasingly been incorporated to explaining strategic decision-making 

and organizational performance (Hodkinson & Healey, 2011). The shift has occurred 

through evolution in the field, partly due to limitations of macro-level approaches in 

explaining variations in firm performance (Porter, 1996). Microfoundations and micro-

level research can fill in the deficiency of comprehensive understanding of the causal 

relationship between individuals and strategy. Based on the research around the per-

spective, it seems to be warranted for organizations to embed the aim to increase indi-

vidual understanding for achieving a positive trajectory that can improve the perfor-

mance. Therefore, an organization that seeks multilevel performance increasement and 

deeper understanding of the underlying elements affecting to the outcome, might ben-

efit from shifting the focus to micro-level. 

 

 

 



25 

3 Methodology 

This chapter will define the methodology chosen for conducting the empirical research 

of the study. The purpose of this research is to foster the perception of the role of middle 

managers in strategy implementation and review the role in particular by using the mi-

crofoundations framework. This chapter of methodology will first present the method-

ological approach, and the research philosophy utilized. Following that, data collection 

method will be introduced, and the scope of the study outlined. Lastly, the chapter will 

tie the methodology section together by covering the data analysis methods used to 

conduct the analysis and the credibility of research.  

 

3.1 Methodological approach 

This research utilizes a qualitative research method for acquiring understanding about 

the interplay between micro and macro level in organizations - microfoundations and 

strategy implementation – from the perspective of middle managers. Qualitative re-

search method is based on non-numeric data that consists of open responses or ques-

tionnaires (Saunders et al., 2019). The method is excellent for a topic which is layered 

and cannot be measured or investigated in numbers. Qualitative research method has 

been chosen for the study as is suitable for researching complex phenomena that relate 

to experiences and words. Qualitative research’s characteristics include a scope for so-

cial phenomena that require in-depth investigation by conducting narrative data from 

observations, interviews or documents (Saunders et al., 2019). This research seeks an-

swers for questions that are subjective for the participant and therefore require a re-

search method that allows for in-depth exploration of personal experiences, 

perceptions, and interpretations. This approach ensures that the data captures not only 

the participants’ explicit responses but also the nuances, reasoning, and patterns 

underlying their actions, which is essential for understanding how middle managers 

implement strategy in practice. 

 

 



26 

Qualitative research method can be categorized into two distinct approaches: inductive 

and deductive (Saunders et al., 2019). Deductive approach refers to working from a hy-

pothesis of theory towards gathering data and testing the hypothesis. On the contrary, 

inductive approach implies to a reverse order; data is collected first and followed by 

presenting a theory that has emerged according to the data collected (Saunders et al., 

2019). This study is utilizing an abductive approach, which is a hybrid model of the pre-

vious two introduced. Abductive approach allows the researcher to alternate between 

theory and empirical insights (Dubois & Gadde, 2002). As the aim for the research is to 

gather new knowledge and understand links and similarities between theory and re-

search rather than simply testing an existing theory or building one solely from the data 

collected, abductive approach is the most reasonable choice for a profound analysis (Du-

bois & Gadde, 2002).  

 

Defining a research philosophy is important as it describes the nature of the research 

and affects the data collection as well as analyzation (Saunders et al., 2019). This study 

employs an interpretative research philosophy. Interpretivism emphasizes the sociality 

and variation present in humans, which leaves room for elasticity and subjectivity in 

comparison to researching objects that are easily measured. The difficultness – and rich-

ness – in interpretivism lies in gathering complex data that cannot be measured as easily 

as numbers or objects but offer deeper insights from different persons’ experiential 

viewpoint. Interpretivism requires an empathetic approach from the researcher; recog-

nizing the variance and uniqueness of one’s experiences. The philosophy of interpre-

tivism stems from phenomenology and symbolic interactionism. The first one relates to 

how humans understand the ambient world around us. The latter represents a view-

point from which humans continuously interpret other’s actions and interactions that 

eventually lead to basing or adjusting own interactions accordingly.  

 

 



27 

3.2 Data collection  

This chapter outlines the selected research context and explains the chosen data 

collection method, including details of the interviews of the participants from whom 

data were gathered. It aims to justify the chosen field for the study and the relevance 

and suitability of contacted interviewees for the study.   

 
3.2.1 Unit of analysis 

 
The data collection of this study is conducted through interviews from a selected field; 

IT and software industry. The particular field was chosen since it’s highly relevant in the 

age of artificial intelligence (AI) and rapidly evolving technology. Interviewing middle 

managers from this field gives valuable data for identifying characteristics and ways of 

working in growing companies that face the need for skilled strategy implementation 

and navigating in tight competition. Successful companies in the field have most likely 

adapted efficient habits and acquired valuable knowledge regarding strategy implemen-

tation and navigating between the top- and bottom level as a middle manager. Due to 

the relevance and future potential of the field it is valuable to gain further understanding 

of how the middle management operates withing the evolving field and demanding ob-

jectives.  

 

Defining a specific field is crucial in order to preserve a focused scope, allowing the 

research to explore the chosen topic in depth and generate detailed, context-specific 

insights. Five middle managers from the field of IT- and software industry were selected 

for a semi-structured interview with open-ended questions. To gather variance for the 

research, each interviewee represents a different company within the same industry, in 

the scale of large organizations. The five companies the interviewees work at employ 

over 250 employees and therefore are defined as large. This size has been chosen due 

to the need of researching the posisiton of middle managers, and large companies are 

typically structured and hold such level. All five interviewees occupy a role between the 

top management and operational level and have a team to lead, and therefore are 



28 

responsible for implementing the strategy to their team. This ensures the convenience 

and reliability of the research scope as each of the participants are operating withing 

the same industry in a comparable role.  

 

3.2.2 Data Collection Method  

As the purpose of this research is to gather new knowledge through empirical, subjective 

experiences and viewpoints the chosen data collection method is semi-structured inter-

views. It is a discussion-like form of interview in which the researcher prepares a struc-

tured list of questions to ask from the interviewee relating to the theoretical and organ-

izational context (Saunders et al. 2019). Semi-structured interviews are often used in 

qualitative research for their ability to follow a conversational flow despite of being 

planned and structured (Saunders et al. 2019. This form allows the interviewee to bring 

out new perspectives and experiences regarding the topic even if they are not strictly 

asked about – which fosters the richness of the conversation.   

 
In this study the interviews are thematic, meaning that they evolve around a specific 

theme and structured topics in order to discover different nuances around participants’ 

experiences and behaviors (Braun & Clark, 2022). Thematic interviews are commonly 

used in qualitative research, as they are optimal for identifying, analysing, and reporting 

patterns or themes within qualitative data. By focusing on predefined themes while 

remaining open to new directions of conversation in addition to expected ones the 

researcher is able to capture the depth and complexity of participants’ experiences 

(Braun & Clark, 2022). This approach supports in elaborating a fruitful conversation with 

the interviewees that covers the essential themes and relations between 

microfoundations and strategy implementation, leaving room for their own words and 

thoughs which is cruical for the depth of the research.  

 
To ensure fitting the qualifications and the scope of the research potential interviewees 

were first contacted through phone calls after defining companies within the scope. Af-

ter discussing about the interview on phone and agreeing on a date they were sent the 

structure of the interview. The purpose of sending the interview structure before was 



29 

to establish enhanced conditions for a rich conversation during interviews, as they were 

able to familiarize themselves with the questions beforehand and therefore provided 

deep and profound answers. Each interview was recorded with the permission of the 

interviewee to ensure the further analyzation of the interview. All five interviews were 

held on Microsoft Teams during December 2025. Due to approaching of Christmas - one 

of the busiest times of the year - the reserved time per one interview was 30 minutes. 

Defining the length beforehand allowed the researcher to interview the relevant firms 

in the industry that were seen to be most beneficial for the study, as longer length would 

have cut down great options due to the busy season and tight calendars. Nonetheless, 

due to sending the structure beforehand and communicating the timeline clearly in the 

beginning, in all the interviews enough time was had to discuss the relevant questions, 

and the time frame also allowed asking specified questions when needed. The interview 

questions can be found from Appendix 1. All the interviews were transcripted after the 

interview by reviewing the video and writing text accordingly.  

 

Table 1. Interviews 

Interviewee: Date of the interview : Length of the interview : 

Middle manager 1 10.12.2025 29 min 

Middle manager 2 15.12.2025 28 min 

Middle manager 3 17.12.2025 28 min 

Middle manager 4 17.12.2025 32 min 

Middle manager 5 22.12.2025 29 min 

 

Further in the findings section the interviewees will be referred as “MM1” or “MM2” to 

avoid the repetition of term middle manager. 

 

 

 

 



30 

3.3 Data analysis 

The study utilizes the Gioia method to ensure qualitative and structured data analysis 

(Gioia et al., 2013). To create a fundamental reliable analysis of qualitative data, it is 

important to follow a structure. By using Gioia method for data analysis, the validity of 

the findings and relevant presenting of the findings is ensured. The Gioia method is 

based on the assumption that the employees of the organization are “knowledgeable 

agents”, meaning that the interviewees are employees of organizations that are skilled 

in their area of expertise and know what they are aiming to do, and therefore they are 

qualified to participate in the research with explaining their thoughts and actions (Gi-

oia, 2013). In addition, the method assumes that the researcher is qualified and knowl-

edgeable to conduct the research and recognize the patterns, concepts and results 

from data. 

 

The Gioia method suggests creating a data structure for dividing the key findings into 

similar groups to help with understanding the concepts emerging from the study (Mag-

nani & Gioia, 2023). First, the data derived is divided into two groups: 1st-order infor-

mation-based group and 2nd-order research-based understandings. The underlying 

benefit of this dividing method is ensuring the reliability of the research and con-

sistency in findings – this method precludes the researchers to draw own conclusions 

from data before systematic analysis of it. In addition, this approach allows reviewing 

the data from multiple perspectives and acknowledge emerging themes and surprising 

elements as well.  

 

The figure 2 represents the data structure created with the Gioia method. The data 

structure is visualized in a left-right format, beginning with the 1st-order categories, 

which then are illustrated through second-order themes and finally concluding to aggre-

gate dimensions on the right.  

 



31 

Table 2. Data structure 



32 

 

3.4 The assessment of the quality of the data 

Reliability of research is an essential part which aims to ensure the findings are and re-

main expressed truthfully based on data (Saunders et. al., 2019). The reliability of the 

research can be surveyed through different perspectives; occasion, observer bias and 

transparency.  

 

According to Saunders et al. (2019), choosing Friday or Monday might distort the results 

due to natural motivation and concentration that may vary throughout the week.  

In this research, the dates for the interviews arranged were mainly agreed for the middle 

of the week, such as Tuesday or Wednesday – to ensure as “neutral” conditions within 

the week as possible. To reduce the risk for observer bias, the anonymity of each partic-

ipant was held throughout the process, which allowed the interviewees to answer nat-

urally, therefore preserving the credibility of the study. Another mean to enhance the 

credibility of the research was to record all the interviews. To ensure the efficiency of 

each interview, the interviewees were asked to familiarize themselves with the ques-

tions before. However, they were not requested to craft any answers before the inter-

view. To maintain the reliability and prepare for the further steps in the research, all the 

interviews were littered. 



33 

4 Findings  

This chapter presents the findings of the research. The subsequent findings sections 

are aligned with the themes in literature review and structured through the data con-

structed with Gioia method, aiming to ensure a coherent flow to the analysis and 

structure of the thesis. Firstly, the findings sections will present findings around the 

topic of strategy implementation. Secondly, the author will delve into middle manag-

ers’ communication and lastly, explain findings that strongly relate to middle managers 

engagement at the operational level. The aim of the research is to gather deeper un-

derstanding of the role middle managers occupy and look at it from microfoundational 

perspective. All the findings presented in this chapter are derived from the data gath-

ered from interviews and presented aligning with the data structure created with the 

Gioia method.  This chapter establishes the foundation for the fifth chapter, discussion, 

which delves deeper into the findings and aims to connect them with the theory and 

literature and provide suggestions for future research.  

 
 
4.1 Strategy implementation 

This chapter presents the findings on strategy implementation, specifically focusing on 

middle managerial actions and means to guide the implementation. A few of the inter-

view questions revolved around strategy implementation and the different means mid-

dle managers may use when aiming for a seamless implementation. The aim of the 

questions was to gather data that could be used to understand how middle managers 

approach and view strategy implementation and most importantly – how they manage 

to implement it down to their team, and if there are factors that facilitate or compli-

cate the process.  

 

  



34 

 

4.1.1 Guiding implementation through goals and structures 

 
The interviewees were asked how they see their role as a middle manager regarding to 

strategy implementation. All the interviewees recognized not only the strategic im-

portance the role holds but also the challenge of being pressured from two directions 

due to operating between the top and bottom level. Strategy implementation was de-

scribed as one of the core tasks to include the position of middle manager.   

 

MM 3: “Implementing strategy is our principal task.” 

 
All the interviewees agreed on that implementing strategy to team-level can be chal-

lenging at least from time to time. When asked about how difficult implementing strat-

egy to team is, the responses varied depending on the nature on new strategy. The 

consensus was that the further the new strategy seems to land from operational level 

and each persons’ work and targets, the trickier it is to implement. And vice versa, if 

strategy feels highly relevant for the individual and one’s work, implementation can be 

relatively easy.   

 

MM 5: “It depends on how relatable the strategy is. If the North Star is really clear and 

everyone agrees that this is a really good direction we're going in, then it's really easy 

to break it down.” 

 

Middle managers act as translators of the strategy – they make it make sense to their 

team. The level of difficultness varies, however all the middle managers leaned to-

wards the conclusion that in most cases, strategy implementation is challenging.   

 

MM 4: “If the sharpest point of the strategy doesn't hit the team's work right now, then 

it can often raise questions about whether we're a bit on the sidelines here and why 

we're here. It's probably more challenging if there are big policies that go beyond our 

own work in a certain way.” 



35 

 

Implementing strategy can become a real challenge in case the new strategy doesn’t 

seem to benefit or rely on the team’s work. It requires reflecting from the middle 

manager to understand the direction the organization is headed towards and be aware 

of what it requires from the team.  

 

MM5: “It's really challenging sometimes. But even in those challenging situations I 

come back to the question if what we did was the right thing. And if I think it is, then I 

want to believe that this will still be rewarded. But then if I see that we haven't done 

enough, then of course you realize that you yourself have failed and haven't been able 

to lead that work.” 

 

As middle managers are in the position to implement the strategy made by top man-

agement, it requires patience and different means to ensure it gets involved in daily 

work while top management might already be on new challenges.  

 

MM 1: “One of the most difficult aspects of strategy is that it is being made by top 

management and by the time it is published, they have been thinking about it for six 

months and have moved on to thinking about the next challenges and new things.” 

 

Strategy implementation also requires prioritizing; the more information there is, the 

more carefully middle managers should prioritize what areas to focus on. One middle 

manager described that in order to support strategy implementation, prioritizing and 

filtering matters is important. Being able to see the most valuable matters and empha-

size those to team keeps the focus on track.  

 

MM 5: “I feel that if I went into it and just wanted to vomit up everything that's hap-

pening and being done at the moment without filtering anything, the team wouldn't 

see the forest for the trees.” 

 



36 

One of the key things that became emphasized in all the interviews was collaboration 

with the team. All the middle managers valued their teams and were ready to take on 

tasks on the operational level and help in solving challenges whenever needed. Devel-

oping team spirit and a collective mindset to work towards goals are highly valued 

within the middle managers interviewed. In addition, respect, staying humble and not 

seeing oneself as too big of a leader to handle operational tasks and operating on 

team-level was described to increase and build trust.  

 

MM 5: “I want to get to know them, understand their strengths and support them 

where needed. I don't see myself as too big a leader in anything, I just do what needs to 

be done. I believe that this creates trust and the feeling that we work together as a 

team.” 

 

4.1.2 Breaking down strategy and setting OKRs  

When asked about the concrete means of implementing strategy, a specific theme was 

raised by all the interviewees: breaking down the strategy and defining objectives and 

key results (OKRs). This way the middle managers are able to translate the strategy 

coming from the top level to the operational day-to-day level for the team. The key in 

strategy implementation was described to lie specifically in breaking the strategy down 

to small enough pieces. The interviewees also agreed on that OKRs and measuring is 

one way for ensuring that the strategy stays relevant in daily work. Tracking perfor-

mance brings clarity not only to middle managers but the team and individuals as well. 

The middle managers emphasized the importance data-driven leadership, arguing that 

improvement requires systematic measurement and insight into performance.  

 

MM 1: “The team also hopes for it, it brings evidence and transparency so that every-

one knows where we are going and how it is going. If this is not the case, it is difficult 

to monitor whether we are moving towards the strategy, and it is difficult to take 

“ownership” of the new strategy and way of operating.” 

 



37 

MM2: “You get what you measure, and things happen according to what you meas-

ure.” 

 

Measuring and setting targets is a core principle in implementing strategy and signifi-

cantly helps to keep track on what has been and hasn’t been done. In addition, con-

sistent measuring allows to identify the situations when targets can be raised or modi-

fied and notice whether they are realistic or not. 

 

 

4.2 Middle managers’ communication in strategy implementation 

 
Excellent communication is a great mean to effectively and systematically bring strat-

egy down to a team-level from top management. On the contrary, lack of communica-

tion may even lead to failing strategy implementation. As middle managers occupy a 

unique role between the top management and team, communication is one of their 

greatest assets in implementing the strategy. Nevertheless, communication is not nec-

essarily easy, which is exactly why it needs to be looked into more. The interviewees 

were asked about their style of communication as they operate in the middle level. 

The responses were largely similar valuing transparency and openness, with a couple 

of more niche viewpoints. They believe everything that can be said should be and the 

communication should always remain transparent. As another important aspect, the 

middle managers raised the importance of repetition; the role of middle manager of-

ten allows the person to familiarize themselves with new information before it can be 

communicated onwards. While the middle manager might hold a belief that the mat-

ter is clear, it is possible that the team is only starting to understand it. Therefore, rep-

etition holds power and most of matters become deeply understood solely after re-

peated and revisited multiple times. Similarly, ensuring the strategy is really under-

stood is important. In addition, the importance of multichannel communication was 

raised. All in all – communicating in person and through digital channels create the 

conditions for delivered and understood message.  



38 

 

MM 3: “If it's difficult, it's a matter of faith, you have to talk like Runeberg about what 

this means and create that belief that this is because of this - and I don't think it helps 

that it's done in one channel, and communication has to be done repeatedly.” 

 
Despite of communicating to the team, middle managers also communicate up to top 

management. They hold a crucial position in terms of being able to word experiences 

and aspects from operational level to top level, which can be highly valuable in under-

standing the employees better.  

 
MM 1: “At the same time, changes usually always cause some kind of fear, and if there 

are any genuine concerns, I will express them in a way that senior management can un-

derstand.” 

 
In addition, team-specific approach was highlighted from a couple middle managers. 

When implementing strategy down to team, you need to get the “buy-in” from them – 

to get them actually motivated and onboard in order to get the desired results. Middle 

managers have the strength to personally get to know the team members and there-

fore tailor the message in a suitable way for them.  

 

MM 4: “Senior management can't do it; they don't know how to implement it for each 

team. Knowing the team is really important to find your own angles. The same story 

can have many angles and sides, and you just have to find the right angle for that 

team.” 

 

Similarly, couple of middle managers agreed on that it is their responsibility to com-

municate even small matters down for the team in order to give them time to process 

upcoming changes, before the changes are properly announced. However, one middle 

manager emphasized the importance of filtering information to avoid overwhelming 

the team, as presented in the previous chapter.  

 



39 

Consistent with the following citation of Middle Manager 1, all the managers valued 

that the strategy touches the individual and they are able to understand the reasoning 

behind it. However, middle managers are responsible for offering them this under-

standing through communication and their wording. Being able to word the strategy in 

other terms is translating it from top to down. Interestingly, sense of meaningfulness 

was also raised, but only from one interviewee. This middle manager values highly tai-

loring the objectives individually within the team. In case every team member doesn’t 

feel strongly connected with their work, it starts to challenge self-organized teams. In 

addition, three middle managers brought up empathy as significant approach in man-

aging a team.  

 

MM 1: “When you think about strategic communication, success is when you communi-

cate the strategy, and every person is able to find themselves in that new strategy and 

say what the change is and what we are doing now.” 

 

One building block in communication is regular feedback. All the interviewees raised 

giving feedback regularly crucial for development. However, the feedback can be given 

in many ways; and it is up to the middle manager to understand which approach suits 

the best to the receiver. Throughout the interviews respecting the team members be-

came evident. As presented in the following citations, the expectations regarding ways 

of communication are often gone through in the hiring process already, which facili-

tates the work of middle managers later on.  

 

MM 2: “It's good to be honest and it's important to take into account the situations 

and circumstances in how you package the message, so that the message is productive 

for the recipient and not, for example, a discouraging message”. 

 

Consistently within all the interviews, the managers value positive and motivational 

approach and see one of their key objectives the succeeding and developing of the 



40 

team members. Embracing positivity and raising successes foster the culture of trans-

parency and openness that all of the respondents’ firms aim to hold.    

 

MM 5: “In team meetings, I don't embarrass anyone publicly, but instead bring up posi-

tive things about everyone, praise them, or do something positive. If I need to give con-

structive feedback, I usually give it after the situation is over, between the two of us. I 

try to give that all the time.” 

 
 
4.3 Middle managers’ engagement at the operational level 

Throughout all the interviews, it became evident that the middle managers value their 

team high and see supporting and being available for them invaluable. A couple inter-

viewees emphasized that they perceive offering conditions for employees to release 

their full potential as one of their main goals. This can be done in many ways; middle 

managers’ strong presence at the operational level is where everything starts.  

 

MM 5: “I'm pretty much there hands-on supporting them. Some need it more and some 

less. I'm always available for whatever they need. When I'm with them, I'm always pre-

sent, I don't multitask.” 

 

Building trust was highlighted in all the interviews. Trust is built through day-to-day ac-

tions and collaboration. One middle manager encapsulated trust to be a byproduct of 

showing empathy. Honesty and empathy were raised by almost all middle managers 

interviewed. In addition, being friendly and trying to see the person as they are beyond 

the positions and work environment was mentioned. However, finding the potential of 

the employee, being able to excite them and guide them, are characteristics of a suc-

cessful middle manager. One middle manager described trust as a given from the start, 

which enables building transparent and long-term relationship, which often carries fur-

ther compared to one in which the employee has to prove themselves continuously. 

The latter may can decrease the motivation and lead to weaker trust over time. None-

theless, building trust is a core foundation when aiming for a long-term cooperation.  



41 

 

MM 2: “Trust comes as a given. Of course, you can lose that trust, but I think that every 

time someone new comes along, that trust comes as a gift and you don't have to earn 

it, it's there.” 

 

Another key theme raised by middle managers interviewed was encouraging taking 

ownership and giving responsibility. Three of the middle managers strongly stated that 

they are more than happy to give as much responsibility for the employee as they would 

like to take.  

 

MM 5: “You must be able to know the customer base pretty well. I have learned to ap-

preciate that intuition more and that I am strongly involved in what the team members 

do. I get a lot more information from that than if I just stared at some numbers.” 

 

Close engagement with the operational level allows the middle managers to understand 

the phenomena that is happening in the market and the customers significantly better. 

They are responsible for interpreting the information and ensure the right prisonizations 

are made. In addition, they are evaluating whether the team should be sticking to a plan 

or change direction; and all this information is found from the operational level.   

 

Regular team meetings and 1-to-1’s was discussed and almost everyone brought up the 

importance of them not only from performance point of view but also from the aspect 

of leadership and collaboration. In addition, one middle manager emphasized the im-

portance of deeper discussion with the employees regarding their work, its meaningful-

ness and ways to contribute to strategy. This facilitates middle managers’ understanding 

of operational level and the prevailing conditions there.  

 

MM 4: “If we are talking about the big picture and direction, how do team members see 

their own work contributing to the achievement of strategic goals? This question is al-

ways discussed with team members. 



42 

 

4.4 Synthesis 

This synthesis chapter aims to tie together the key findings of the research, based on 

the previous chapter. The synthesis provides a foundation for the subsequent discus-

sion chapter, which interprets these findings on a deeper level. The findings presented 

illustrate middle managers see strategy implementation as a continuous, micro-level 

process. Middle managers describe strategy implementation as unfolding through a 

combination of structure managerial practices, ongoing communication and close en-

gagement and collaboration at the operational level. Across all the interviews, middle 

managers describe strategy implementation as one of their core responsibilities, em-

phasizing the need to translate abstract strategic intentions into concrete, relatable ac-

tions for their teams.  

 

Consistent within all the interviews, the middle managers guide strategy implementa-

tion through mechanisms such as goal setting, OKRs and performance management, 

which enhance clarity and transparency between teams and individuals. These mecha-

nisms are a great mean for enabling the translation of strategy to the level of everyday 

work and support prioritization in highly competitive environments. Simultaneously, 

the effectiveness of these mechanisms depends heavily on how they are communi-

cated and interpreted within teams. 

  

Middle managers described communication as a critical enabler of strategy implemen-

tation. Middle managers occupy a role which requires them to act as translators and 

intermediaries between different organizational levels while ensuring that strategic 

messages are not only delivered but also understood. Transparency, repetition, tai-

lored messaging and regular feedback are used to create shared understanding and 

commitment. In addition to communicating downward, middle managers also com-

municate upward, articulating operational-level concerns and experiences in a for that 

senior management can understand. 

 



43 

The findings highlight the importance of middle managers’ engagement at the opera-

tional level. Close involvement in day-to-day work, availability, empathy and building 

trust enable middle managers to understand operational level phenomena and work, 

support employees and encourage ownership and responsibility. The hands-on en-

gagement at the operational level allows middle managers to continuously assess and 

impact on whether strategic plans remain relevant and to adjust actions when neces-

sary.  

 

 

 
 

Figure 3 Results in a visual form 

Strategy 
implementation:

Continuous micro-
level process

Communication as 
enabler:
Repetition

Tailored messaging
Regular feedback

Upward & downward 
communication
Transparency

Operational 
engagement:

Empathy and availability
Trust-building

Encouraging ownership

Translate strategy 
through structural 

practices:
Goal setting and OKRs

Clarify priorities
Performance 
management



44 

5 Discussion 

 
This discussion chapter of the thesis aims to provide answers to the research questions 

presented in the very beginning of the thesis; “What is the role of middle managers in 

strategy implementation?” Following the research question, a supporting question was 

defined as “How to understand strategy implementation and the role of middle manag-

ers through the microfoundations framework? The purpose of this discussion chapter is 

to interpret how the empirical findings presented in the previous chapter contribute to 

a deeper understanding of strategy implementation through microfoundational lens.  

This research extends the existing literature on strategy implementation and microfoun-

dations, in particular through discussing the middle managers’ role in it from microfoun-

dational perspective. Deepening the understanding of middle managers’ position and 

their impact facilitates organizations’ strategy implementation processes and strength-

ens the likelihood of successfully implementing a new strategy.  

 

The main research question was explored through a pattern of questions revolving 

around the role of middle managers, communication and strategy implementation. 

Firstly, when the interviewees described how they see their role, the answers were 

consistent and emphasized the strategic position middle managers hold. They operate 

in a unique position between the top management and operational level, which allows 

them to translate down the strategy to understandable actions. Vice versa, it is benefi-

cial for the company to have the level of middle management, as they are able to bring 

the experiences and views of operational level to top management – information that 

the management would not receive otherwise. This supports the view of strategy im-

plementation as a continuous managerial process rather than a discrete execution 

phase (Tawse & Tabesh, 2021). 

 

The findings show a similar pattern within the mindset of middle managers. They all 

emphasized openness, transparency and empathy. This indicates that individual charac-

teristics play a significant role in the strategy process. The findings support the previous 



45 

research with showing that middle manager’s emotional intelligence – demonstrating 

intuition and empathy in work – foster collaboration and transparency in work. Accord-

ing to the results, empathetic middle managers experience meaningful relationships 

within their team and have a sense of being able to support and help them adequately.  

Therefore, findings suggest that empathetic middle managers are better positioned to 

translate strategic objectives into team-level action. Middle managers had received 

feedback from their teams that flexibility and understanding from their leaders is highly 

valued – qualities that stem from empathy. When teams are led with empathy, the team 

members are likely to preserve their motivation leading to delivering better results. In 

addition, transparency was highly valued and respecting team members. Aiming to pro-

vide all necessary information and being genuinely interested in them was raised within 

the interviews. From a microfoundational perspective, these findings highlight how in-

dividual level propensities shape collective outcomes. Strategy implementation does not 

occur solely through formal structures or plans; it is enacted through everyday interper-

sonal interactions. The emotional and relational capabilities middle managers possess 

function as micro-level mechanisms influencing how strategy becomes interpreted and 

executed within teams.  

 

The findings indicate that middle managers play a pivotal role in guiding strategy im-

plementation through goal setting, performance metrics (OKR’s) and structured fol-

low-up practices. This aligns with prior research emphasizing that strategy implemen-

tation depends on managerial coordination and the translation of strategic intent into 

operational level objectives (Floyd & Woolridge, 1992). From a microfoundational per-

spective, these results illustrate how micro-level managerial actions generate macro-

level outcomes. Actives such as defining goals, monitoring performance and prioritiz-

ing tasks collectively shape organizational execution and give concretism to strategy. 

Consistent theme across all the interviews was the strong belief in performance meas-

urement. Middle managers described the use of OKRs as prerequisite in guiding strat-

egy execution. From microfoundational perspective, setting OKRs translates to linking 

abstract strategic objectives to micro-level actions, to bring strategy down into 



46 

everyday operations. OKRs function as a practical mechanism for approaching strategy 

as actionable targets, aligning with employee competences and organizational priori-

ties.  While the importance of structured performance systems has been recognized in 

prior research, the present findings reinforce their significance from a microfounda-

tional perspective. Aligning with the view of Whittington et al. (2023), the findings indi-

cate that the success of strategy implementation depends on how well the strategic 

goals are managed to embed into daily operational practices. 

 

The findings underline the importance of communication as a central mechanism ena-

bling strategy implementation. Floyd & Woolridge (1992) emphasize the communicative 

role of middle managers in translating strategic intent. The findings of this study refine 

this view by demonstrating that communication is not merely downward transmission 

but a continuous, two-directional process between top management and operational 

teams – coordinated by middle managers. They act as intermediaries that both interpret 

strategy for their teams and mediate operational feedback upward, thereby shaping 

how strategy is understood and enacted across organizational levels.  

 

The findings support the view of strategy implementation as a continuous managerial 

process rather than a discrete execution phase (Tawse & Tabesh, 2021). As presented in 

the findings, middle managers are strongly linked with their team and actively guiding 

implementation through OKRs while fostering a culture of openness, communication 

and transparency. Across interviews, participants emphasized the importance of work-

ing closely with their team and maintaining proximity with them. This aligns with the 

process-oriented perspectives on strategy, which conceptualize implementation as an 

ongoing pattern of managerial actions. From a microfoundational standpoint, strategy 

emerges through repeated interactions, routines and everyday leadership practices. 

Therefore, the results suggest that successful implementation depends less on formal 

plans and more on continuous enactment of strategy through collaboration and shared 

understanding.  

 



47 

In addition, the position middle managers occupy enables them to drive strategy exe-

cution by ensuring operational alignment. This supports Higgins’ (2005) Aligned 8S 

Model, which emphasizes the importance of consistency across organizational func-

tions. The findings indicate that middle managers play a critical role in translating 

alignment into practice through communication, transparency and coordinating tar-

gets. Profound alignment forms through consistent managerial actions. From a micro-

foundational perspective, these actions demonstrate how alignment emerges from re-

peated micro-level practices. By clarifying goals, reinforcing priorities and coordinating 

team activities, middle managers contribute to maintaining the strategic coherence 

throughout the organization. Consisent with Higgins’ (2005) framework, the results in-

dicate that clear goals and performance indicators help with sustaining strategic focus 

in complex organizational environments.  

 

From a microfoundational perspective, the findings illustrate how individual managerial 

behaviors aggregate into organization-level strategy implementation outcomes (Felin & 

Foss, 2015). In line with this perspective, the findings show that middle managers aim 

for a strong presence at the operational level and invest time in getting to know their 

team members on an individual basis. These practices highlight how strategy implemen-

tation is shaped through micro-level interactions rather than solely through formal 

structures or plans. The findings further suggest that the effectiveness of feedback as a 

managerial practice depends on the ability of middle managers to adapt their commu-

nication to the needs of individual team members. This supports prior research empha-

sizing that managerial judgment and discretion play a central role in translating strategic 

intentions into action (Floyd & Lane, 2000). By tailoring feedback to individual personal-

ities and preferences, middle managers increase the likelihood that feedback is per-

ceived as motivating and constructive, thereby supporting learning and performance 

improvement. Some may prefer a softer approach while the other thrives from getting 

strong, direct feedback. These findings highlight the importance of individual-level dif-

ferences – such as personality, preferences, and emotional responses – in shaping how 

managerial actions are received and enacted. Rather than applying general 



48 

communication practices, middle managers benefit from adjusting their approach based 

on personal knowledge of their team members. This illustrates how strategy implemen-

tation emerges through situated, context-dependent managerial behavior. This rein-

forces the view that organization-level outcomes are not the result of standardized pro-

cesses alone but are built through individualized interactions that accumulate over time 

(Barney & Felin, 2013). 

 

Aligning with the previous research of Molina-Azorin (2014) and Foss (2011), the find-

ings suggest that individual micro-level actions contribute meaningfully to macro-level 

organizational outcomes and performance. The findings of this research indicate that 

especially middle managers have a significant role in terms of influencing their team. As 

stated, individuals have a great impact on the performance, and middle managers have 

influence over multiple individuals, which the team consists of. Therefore, their role can 

be seen highly relevant and influential in terms of affecting the direction of an organiza-

tion and its operations. As presented in the findings, the middle managers were aware 

of the influence and strategic positioning that is included in their occupied role. From a 

microfoundational perspective, this reinforces the view that firm-level performance is 

partly built through accumulated individual actions. The results suggets that attention 

to microfoundational processes can strengthen strategy implementation. This may in-

fluence positively on competitive advantage of a firm as well, although this research 

cannot directly state that.  

 

 

To better interpret the findings, the position of middle managers can be reviewed 

through the bathtub model (Contractor et al., 2018). In this framework, the role middle 

managers are occupying corresponds to the nodes of the bathtub model between the 

first and second arrows and between the second and third arrows, which represent in-

dividual actions. In this context, these actions are middle managers’ everyday manage-

rial behaviors. According to the bathtub model, individual actions lead to social out-

comes, which can be interpreted here as team-level outcomes, that subsequently 



49 

translate into organization-level outcomes. Therefore, from microfoundational perspec-

tive, middle managers role is undeniably impactful from the aspect of whole organiza-

tions outcome and results. As an addition, they are in a position to shape not only the 

culture of an organization, but also the processes and actions taken within, since their 

position enables seamless communication for two directions: top and down. Analyzed 

through microfoundational perspective, the model helps to illustrate the significance 

middle manager’s position. Their actions serve as a bridge that converts individual ac-

tions into organization-level outcomes, while enabling two-way communication be-

tween the top and the team. This allows middle managers to shape not only team prac-

tices, but also organization culture, processes and patterns, that influence overall per-

formance.   

 
 

5.1 Theoretical and managerial implications 

Following the discussion chapter and deeper analysis of the results derived, this chapter 

aims to provide theoretical and managerial implications that can be drawn from this 

research.  

 

After reviewing the theory and findings, a clear managerial implication for companies 

would be to further shift attention to micro-level and individual decision-making, moti-

vation and challenges. According to theory in microfoundations especially multinational 

firms and global strategy would benefit from this emphasis (Contractor et al., 2018), 

however this can be applied to an organization of any size. Valuing and understanding 

the cause of macro-level outcomes comes down to focusing on micro-level phenomena 

and individual decision-making as well as teams. The findings show that the interviewed 

middle managers often find strategy implementation challenging. Therefore, by utilizing 

microfoundational perspective more actively organizations could further understand 

the different means middle managers can actualize to improve the process of strategy 

implementation.  



50 

 

A key managerial implication concerns the structured use of OKRs as a performance 

management tool. While OKRs are already widely adopted in many organizations, the 

findings highlight that their effectiveness depends on consistent follow-up and active 

managerial engagement. Setting goals alone is insufficient; middle managers benefit 

from continuously monitoring progress and maintaining awareness of their team’s pace 

and capacity. The results also underline the importance of communication and transpar-

ency as core managerial capabilities. Effective strategy implementation requires not 

only clear targets but also an environment in which expectations, feedback, and priori-

ties are openly discussed. A practical implication is therefore the need to invest in de-

veloping middle managers’ communication and interpersonal skills. Strengthening these 

skills could improve alignment, motivation and ultimately organizational performance. 

 

 

5.2 Suggestions for future research 

Various opportunities for further research can be identified from this study. The field 

of microfoundations is clearly under researched, despite of the significant increase in 

research over the past decades seen within the field (Felin & Foss, 2015). However, the 

research gap for the topic still exists and micro-level should be further investigated and 

linked to macro-level in organizations. The research could be continued also from the 

perspective of team members; this research is centralized to the middle managers’ 

tools and ways to operate between the team and upper management – to include the 

team members view to the research would further enrich the results found and 

strengthen the key findings. Another interesting research idea would be to compare 

the performance of different companies, in which one of them clearly places emphasis 

on microfoundational perspective in strategy and when training middle managers and 

the other significantly less. One research proposal would be to conduct a case study 

within one organization to investigate the emphasis of microfoundations perspective 

and the effect on outcomes. Another theme to investigate further could be empathy in 

leadership and organizations.  



51 

 
 
5.3 Limitations 

This research faces certain limitations that must be recognized to understand the relia-

bility of the research. One prominent limitation relates to the size of the sample of 

data gathered. To gather wider and more reliable results, more interviewees could be 

contacted. In addition, it can be stated that another limitation of the research is length 

of the interviews; all of them lasted approximately 30 minutes – by holding longer in-

terviews richer data may be collected. However, the interviews were prepared well to 

ensure efficient use of time. Nonetheless, by interviewing for a longer period one 

could gather more unexpected data that could turn out very beneficial in the study. In 

addition, the sample size of firms used in this research are from the IT and software in-

dustry but different organizations. To broaden the scope and increase variance to in-

sights, different fields could be incorporated. Worth mentioning is additionally the 

complex topic of the research that is difficult to measure. Personal experiences and 

viewpoints are always subjective, which should be taken into consideration. Therefore, 

gathering more data would enhance the reliability of the research.  

 

Generative AI tools (ChatGPT, OpenAI) were used in the thesis to check grammar in 

writing and to brainstorm topics. AI was used solely for these purposes. All interpreta-

tions, analysis and conclusions remain the author’s own responsibility and are inde-

pendently reviewed for accuracy. 



52 

References 

Porter ME, Lee TH. Why strategy matters now. N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 30;372(18):1681-

4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1502419. PMID: 25923546.’ 

 

Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Jour-

nal, 12(S2), 95-117. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250121008 

 

Mintzberg, H. (2008). Tracking strategies: Toward a general theory. Oxford University 

Press. 

 

Eldring, J. (2009). Porter´s (1980) generic strategies, performance and risk : An empirical 

investigation with german data. Diplomica Verlag. 

 

Foss, N. J. (2011). Why micro-foundations for resource-based theory are needed and 

what they may look like. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1413-

1428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310390218 

 

Felin, T., & Foss, N. J. (2005). Strategic organization: A field in search of micro-founda-

tions. Strategic Organization, 3(4), 441-

455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127005055796 

 

Hodgkinson, G. P., & Healey, M. P. (2011). Psychological foundations of dynamic capa-

bilities: Reflexion and reflection in strategic management. Strategic Management Jour-

nal, 32(12), 1500–1516. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.964 

 

Duhaime, I. M., Stimpert, L., & Chesley, J. (2011). Strategic thinking : Today's business 

imperative. Taylor & Francis Group. 

 

Whittington, R., Regnér, P., Angwin, D., Johnson, G., & Scholes, K. (Eds.). (2023). Explor-

ing strategy: Text & cases. Pearson Education 

https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250121008
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310390218
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127005055796


53 

M.E. Porter, ‘What is strategy?’, Harvard Business Review, November–December 1996, 

p. 60. 

 

Azaddin, S. K. (2023). Contesting Mintzberg's five Ps for strategy: it is time for a product 

recall. Journal of Strategy and Management, 16(1), 112-127. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-12-2021-0243 

 

Vuorinen, T. (2013). Strategiakirja: 20 työkalua. Talentum. 

 

Contractor, F., Foss, N. J., Kundu, S., & Lahiri, S. (2019). Viewing global strategy through 

a microfoundations lens. Global Strategy Journal, 9(1), 3–

18. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1329 

 

Noble, C. H. (1999). The eclectic roots of strategy implementation research. Journal of 

Business Research, 45(2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00231-2 

 

Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2014). Microfoundations of strategic management: Toward micro-

macro research in the resource-based theory. Business Research Quarterly, 17(2), 102–

114. https://doi-org.proxy.uwasa.fi/10.1016/j.brq.2014.01.001 

 

Barney, J. B., Ketchen, D. J., Wright, M., & Foss, N. J. (2010). Invited Editorial: Why Micro-

Foundations for Resource-Based Theory Are Needed and What They May Look Like. 

Journal of Management, 37(5), 1413-1428. 

https://d