If you aren't Talking about Practices, Don't Call it a Practice-Based View: Rejoinder to Bromiley and Rau

In this debate about the value of introducing a supposed “practice-based view of strategy,” we respond to Bromiley and Rau’s defense of their approach. Coming from a background of two decades of research on strategy-as-practice, we focus on two major concerns about their initiative. The first is that the very use of the term “practice” would seem to obfuscate more than elucidate, especially given their definition of “practice” which strongly deviates from that already established in the social sciences generally. The second is that, by applying the term “practice” to strategy specifically, it becomes incumbent upon Bromiley and Rau to engage with and build upon the extensive practice-related strategy research that has gone before them.