Lilla Hortoványi

Strategy Without Templates

Adaptation in Digital Environments

4.1 The Ontological Trap: Strategy as Template-Based Logic

Traditional strategy theory rests on a foundational but rarely interrogated assumption: that the environment exhibits sufficient regularity for success to be rendered into reusable models. Across industrial organization, the resource-based view, and dynamic capabilities, strategy has been built on the premise that patterns of effective action can be identified, abstracted, and applied beyond the specific contexts in which they were first observed (Barney, 1991; Porter, 1980; Teece, 2007). This premise does not always appear as a formal proposition, yet it functions as a background condition that makes these theories intelligible. Without some expectation of continuity in the environment, neither positioning, nor resource valuation, nor capability development could plausibly serve as stable strategic logics.

This assumption gives rise to what can be described as a template-based ontology of strategy. A template, in this sense, is not merely a heuristic or a practical shortcut. It is a deeper conceptual construct: a generalized configuration of activities, resources, and positioning choices that is presumed to retain its effectiveness across contexts. Strategy, under this logic, is less a process of constructing action under uncertainty than a process of recognizing and implementing already validated forms. Past success becomes cognitively portable. It can be translated into positions to occupy, resources to cultivate, capabilities to build, and routines to replicate.

The coherence of this logic depends on a specific understanding of the environment. It presupposes that the structural features of competition are sufficiently stable to make the relationship between action and outcome reproducible. Firms may differ in execution, timing, or resource endowments, but the underlying causal architecture is assumed to persist. Within such a setting, learning can accumulate, benchmarking can provide guidance, and strategic replication can result in performance. Strategy, in this sense, is anchored in the belief that success is not only observable but, to some degree, transferable.

The problem that emerges in digitally mediated environments is not merely that these assumptions become less accurate. It is that the conditions that made them meaningful begin to erode at a structural level. Therefore, the issue is not simply one of degree, but of a different kind. When the environment no longer functions as a stable referential system, the very possibility of template-based reasoning is called into question.

This becomes visible when examining how the major strategic traditions operate under such conditions. Positioning theory assumes that firms can locate themselves within a relatively stable competitive structure and defend that position over time (Porter, 1980). Yet when access, visibility, and interaction are increasingly shaped by platform architectures and algorithmic mediation, the structure within which positions are defined becomes fluid. A firm’s strategic location is no longer determined solely by its own activity configuration, but by a relational order whose rules may shift without warning. Under such circumstances, positioning does not disappear, but it loses the stability required to function as a durable logic of strategic choice.

A similar limitation appears in the resource-based view (RBV). It assumes that firms can evaluate resources according to their contribution to sustained competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). This presupposes that value can be assessed against sufficiently stable criteria and compared across firms. In digitally mediated settings, however, value becomes increasingly situational. It depends on firm-specific data histories, infrastructural fit, algorithmic treatment, and ecosystem location. The issue is not that resources cease to matter, but that their value can no longer be assumed to travel across contexts. A resource that is highly valuable in one configuration may lose significance in another, not because the resource itself has changed, but because the evaluative structure surrounding it has shifted.

Dynamic capabilities theory appears at first sight more robust because it explicitly addresses adaptation under changing conditions. Yet even here, the basic logic still presupposes that firms can sense opportunities, seize them, and reconfigure their resource base in relation to an interpretable environment (Teece, 2007; Teece et al., 1997). This presumes that relevant opportunities can be recognized before action, and that the environment offers sufficiently stable signals to make such recognition meaningful. That presumption weakens when opportunities are not pre-given features of the environment, but emerge through recursive interaction within an evolving system. In such settings, the problem is not simply that sensing becomes harder. It is that the object of sensing becomes unstable.

Across these traditions, strategy is grounded in the expectation that patterns of success can be identified against which performance can be meaningfully compared, and that effective configurations can be transferred across contexts. Digital environments weaken precisely this condition. Table 3 breaks down the dimensions of this shift.

Table 3 From template-based to configurational ontology in strategy

Dimension	Template-based logic	Configurational logic
Nature of environment	External, analyzable structure	Endogenous, recursively produced system
Basis of strategy	Selection and implementation of proven models	Construction of context-specific configurations
Role of past success	Portable guide for future action	Historically embedded, non-transferable outcome
Function of imitation	Convergence toward best practice	Divergence through structural misalignment
Logic of comparison	Benchmarking reveals strategic quality	Comparison obscures configurational differences
Nature of strategic knowledge	Generalizable principles across contexts	Situated understanding within specific configurations
Temporal assumption	Structural continuity enables planning	Structural evolution requires continuous adaptation
Unit of analysis	Firm strategy as discrete choice	Firm-environment configuration as coupled system
Source of competitive advantage	Superior resources, positions, or capabilities	Viable configuration within singular context
Strategic learning mechanism	Accumulation through replication and refinement	Experimentation within path-dependent constraints
Role of planning	Predictive projection of future states	Provisional coordination under uncertainty
Nature of strategic agency	Designer selecting optimal models	Wayfinder navigating evolving terrain
Basis of strategic advice	“What works” across firms	“What is viable” in a specific configuration
Ontological premise	Environment as stable referential structure	Environment as singular, historically constituted context
Stability of environment	Assumed stability allowing patterns to transfer	Continuously reconfigured

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

Note. The shift from template-based to configurational ontology is not a matter of degree but of kind. Template-based logic remains coherent where structures stabilize sufficiently for patterns to transfer. Configurational logic becomes necessary when digitalization, platformization, and algorithmic mediation systematically erode the conditions required for template formation.

The contribution of this section is to make explicit what usually remains implicit: the dominant strategic vocabulary is organized around the possibility of reusable models. Once that possibility weakens, strategy cannot simply be updated by adding more turbulence, more dynamism, or more complexity to existing frameworks.

Tartalomjegyzék

Kiadó: Akadémiai Kiadó

Online megjelenés éve: 2026

ISBN: 978 963 664 204 4

Gazdaság

What happens when understanding comes only after action has already begun?

Traditional strategy rests on the assumption that organizations can understand their environment before deciding how to act. Yet the conditions that once allowed organizations to rely on benchmarking, best practices, and proven strategic templates can no longer be taken for granted. Today, organizations increasingly face situations for which no clear roadmap exists. Established assumptions become less reliable, familiar reference points lose their clarity, and strategic decisions must be made before their consequences can be fully understood.

Strategy Without Templates explores how organizations learn, adapt, and navigate environments in which uncertainty is pervasive and established templates are absent or no longer sufficient. Instead of treating strategy as a process of prediction and planning, the book explores how strategic paths take shape through action, experimentation, adjustment, and learning.

A central insight in the book is that temporary solutions are often necessary. What begins as a practical response to an immediate challenge may gradually shape future possibilities in unexpected ways. Some solutions create new opportunities and sources of advantage. Others become constraints that are difficult to overcome.

Hivatkozás: https://mersz.hu/hortovanyi-strategy-without-templates//

BibTeX EndNote Mendeley Zotero