Discovering the basic strategic orientation of big space agencies

Abstract The aim of this paper is to identify the basic strategic orientations of some of the world's main space agencies. This study focuses on the Brazilian, French, European, Japanese, Indian and Russian agencies. Basic strategic orientations indicate the real space exploration objectives of large countries. This is useful because there are some ambiguous areas in the formal strategic documents published by these agencies. The results highlight the common objectives of the agencies studied, which is to have an important role in international political leadership even considering the specific objectives related to the economic and social contexts of the individual countries.

[1]  C. Argyris.  Reasoning, learning, and action : individual and organizational , 1982 .

[2]  S. Dawson,et al.  Understanding strategic decision making in the context of international space activities , 1996 .

[3]  C. Prahalad,et al.  To revitalize corporate performance, we need a whole new model of strategy. Strategic intent. , 1989, Harvard business review.

[4]  Shawn L. Berman,et al.  Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? The Relationship Between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm Financial Performance , 1999 .

[5]  S. Davolio,et al.  Is the ‘peaceful use’ of outer space being ruled out? , 2003 .

[6]  E. H. Bowman.  Strategy, Annual Reports, and Alchemy , 1978 .

[7]  Gianfranco Minati,et al.  Systemics of Emergence: Research and Development , 2006 .

[8]  Robert W. Backoff,et al.  The Dynamics of Strategy in Public Organizations , 1987 .

[9]  A. Nosella,et al.  Management and organizational models of the European Space Agencies: the results of an empirical study , 2004 .

[10]  Edoardo Mollona,et al.  Dynamics of Strategy: A Feedback Approach to Corporate Strategy-Making , 2006 .

[11]  Gerald J. Miller,et al.  Handbook of strategic management , 2000 .

[12]  Arnoldo C. Hax,et al.  Strategic Management: An Integrative Perspective , 1984 .

[13]  A. Lebeau.  Space: The routes of the future , 2008 .

[14]  R. Grant.  Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications , 1991 .

[15]  Henry R Hertzfeld.  Measuring the Economic Returns from Successful NASA Life Sciences Technology Transfers , 2002, The Journal of technology transfer.

[16]  Alfred Dupont Chandler,et al.  战略与结构 : 美国工商企业成长的若干篇章=strategy and structure : chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise , 1962 .

[17]  Myrna P. Mandell,et al.  A New Public-Sector-Based Model of Strategic Management for Cities , 1990 .

[18]  M.Y.S. Prasad.  Technical and legal issues surrounding space debris—India's position in the UN , 2005 .

[19]  H. Rainey,et al.  Goal Ambiguity in U.S. Federal Agencies , 2005 .

[20]  Sally Davenport,et al.  Circuits of Power in Practice: Strategic Ambiguity as Delegation of Authority , 2005 .

[21]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .

[22]  Jeff Frooman.  Stakeholder Influence Strategies , 1999 .

[23]  K. Peattie,et al.  Strategic planning: Its role in organizational politics , 1993 .

[24]  P. Cohendet,et al.  Technological Transfers from the European Space Programs: A Dynamic View and Comparison with Other R&D Projects , 2002, Journal of Technology Transfer.

[25]  A. Nosella,et al.  Assessing science parks' performances: directions from selected Italian case studies , 2006 .

[26]  Lyudmila Pankova.  Transfer of Space Technologies Past and Present: The Russian Case , 2002, The Journal of technology transfer.

[27]  R. Grant.  Contemporary Strategy Analysis , 2005 .