Dialectical Inquiry in Strategic Planning: A Case of Premature Acceptance

Abstract

Evidence from several field studies supports the claim that dialectical inquiry aids strategic decision making. This evidence is not conclusive, however, and findings from other studies have indicated that a devil's advocate approach may be superior. A fundamental difference between the two is that dialectical inquiry requires specification of an alternative course of action. It is possible that the benefits of strategic assumptions analysis can be realized without this specification—i.e., through a devil's advocate approach.