Strategy making by hybrid organizations: The case of the port authority Larissa van der Lugt a, ⁎, Michaël Dooms b , Francesco Parola c a Department of Regional, Transport and Port Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands b Department of Business, Unit Management and Strategy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium c Department of Business Studies, University of Naples “Parthenope”, Naples, Italy abstract article info Article history: Received 30 November 2012 Received in revised form 6 June 2013 Accepted 22 June 2013 Available online xxxx Keywords: Port authority Strategy research Hybrid organization Shared value Due to dynamic competition, the gain of autonomy through port devolution and the resulting evolution to- wards accountability in diverse fields of performance, port authorities (PAs) evolve from landlords that are strongly embedded in the public domain to more autonomous acting organizations with stronger require- ments for ‘business like’ performance. This evolution implies a stronger need for proper strategic analysis and subsequent strategy formulation, evaluation and implementation. Based on the main current strategic challenges that PAs face, we define and position the PA as an organization combining both public and private values and analyze the validity of the lenses of different theoretical perspectives from strategy and public management research for its stra- tegic analysis. We argue that the strategic challenges' PAs face in their current operating environment, also reflect the evo- lution in strategic management thinking, whereby more actor-related attributes are added to the various re- search frameworks, loosening the traditional strict conditions of profit maximization, rationality and transparency and whereby more integrated concepts like co-evolution and network theory gain importance. We also conclude that PAs as shared value organizations are interesting domains for academic research based in the strategy domain, as to strengthen the analytical base that is available for research into the strategy of organizations. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Over the last decades, the strategic view/perspective of the port authority (PA) has been approached from different analytical lenses. In fact, management discipline areas such as strategic management, human resources management (HRM), environmental management and information and knowledge management appeared in the picture of port research, having an important influence on theory transfer and application (Woo, Pettit, Kwak, & Beresford, 2011). There seemingly is an increasing need to apply theories, concepts and research models used in business and management related disciplines to capture the more complicated and behavioral aspects of PAs such as collaboration, integration, internationalization, network management and cluster management. PAs are the entities that have the responsibility for the development and management of seaports. Over the last two to three decades PAs have undergone a reform from rather task oriented organizations to more autonomous and commercially acting organiza- tions (Brooks & Cullinane, 2007; Debrie, Lavaud-Letilleul, & Parola, 2013; Ng & Pallis, 2010). PAs are increasingly accountable for their performance both from the economic, financial and societal perspective (Verhoeven, 2010). Combined with changes in the port's environment, such as increased competition, changing customers' requirements and environmental pressures, this reform has forced the PAs to reconsider their role and position and to develop strategies for their futures. PAs are facing strategic decisions on investments within their port areas, within their foreland and hinterland and on their strategic positioning and acting towards the private companies located in the port. As a result, strategic thinking has gained a stronger foothold within PA manage- ment. This evolution is demonstrated by a quick scan of the annual reports from 2000 to 2011 from a major PA in Europe, Port of Rotterdam NV. Assuming that corporate communication reflects firm behavior (Cahoon, 2007; Pando, Araujo, & Maqueda, 2005; Parola, Satta, Penco, & Profumo, 2013), the number of times that the words “strategy” and “strategic” are explicitly mentioned between 2000 and 2011 has increased substantially over this period. It starts from zero in 2000 and increases sharply after 2008 up to around 40 times for each of the two words in the annual report of 2011. Although there have been quite some studies discussing the strategies of PAs (Baltazar & Brooks, 2007; Bichou and Gray, 2005; Chlomoudis & Pallis, 2004; Comtois & Slack, 2003; Cullinan and Song, 2002; De Langen, 2004, 2008; Goss, 1990; Haugstetter & Cahoon, 2010; Heaver, Meersman, & Van de Voorde, 2001; Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (2013) xxx–xxx ⁎ Corresponding author at: Erasmus University Rotterdam, Department of Regional, Transport and Port Economics, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 104081410. E-mail address: vanderlugt@ese.eur.nl (L. van der Lugt). RTBM-00108; No of Pages 11 2210-5395/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2013.06.005 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Research in Transportation Business & Management Please cite this article as: van der Lugt, L., et al., Strategy making by hybrid organizations: The case of the port authority, Research in Transportation Business & Management (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2013.06.005