The strategy-as-practice perspective has attracted a substantial following of scholars interested in developing a better understanding of strategy as ‘something people do’ rather than something that ‘organizations have’ (Jarzabkowski and Spee 2009; Johnson et al. 2007; Vaara and Whittington 2012). Under this banner, researchers have examined issues such as what happens in strategy meetings (Hodgkinson et al. 2006; Jarzabkowski and Seidl 2008; Johnson et al. 2010), how various strategic management tools are used (Abdallah and Langley 2014; Jarzabkowski and Kaplan 2015; Kaplan 2011; Stenfors et al. 2007) and how middle managers can and do contribute to strategy-making (Balogun and Johnson 2004; Mantere 2008; Rouleau 2005). There is also a more critical stream in strategy-as-practice writing that has focused on the discursive practices of strategists (Ezzamel and Willmott 2008; Kornberger and Clegg 2011; Laine and Vaara 2007; Mantere and Vaara 2008). Finally, there have been several attempts to position the SAP perspective with respect to broader currents in theories of practice (Chia and MacKay 2007; Hendry and Seidl 2003; Jarzabkowski 2004; Seidl 2007; Whittington 2006).

This chapter addresses a set of key but deceptively simple questions about this emerging body of work. Where is it heading? Is it, as many of its advocates hope, following a path likely to generate cumulative learning about the practice of strategy that will result in ‘a societal shift towards better everyday strategizing praxis, empowered by more effective practices and a deeper pool of skilled practitioners’ (Whittington 2006: 629)? Indeed, is this ambition even reasonable or desirable? If so, how might it be achieved? More generally, how can progress in the understanding of strategy as practice be achieved in a sub-field whose empirical focus remains rather loosely defined, whose theoretical roots emphasize the situated and the particular and whose corresponding research methods tend to be qualitative and exploratory? Some scholars might consider this question as irrelevant, seeing situated knowledge of particular episodes of strategy practice as sufficient unto themselves for the local insight they offer over and above more traditional models of strategy. I believe that more is needed if the strategy-as-practice perspective is to develop fully and be taken seriously.