Transformation from a centrally planned economy to a market economy in 1989 created new challenges for the enterprises in Poland. Free market brought economic liberty, but also the need to take responsibility for the business’ impact on the environment. The last 20 years have brought intensive development of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Polish conditions: The institutional context supporting CSR has improved and so did the implementation of the CSR by the business. Intensive growth of CSR practices demands a reflection on the effectiveness of the implementation. This study’s contribution is a comprehensive diagnosis of CSR maturity of the enterprises in Poland using a conceptual CSR maturity model. The model is comprised of three perspectives: CSR process maturity, CSR formal maturity and CSR developmental maturity. CSR practices of 93 listed companies from nine industries were studied in 2016–2017. A qualitative content analysis of the enterprises websites was used as the method of study. The main finding was that the level of CSR practices of the enterprises in Poland is still rather low. Forty-seven percent of the enterprises implement incidental CSR, 30% tactical CSR and 23% apply strategic CSR. CSR maturity level is company size- and industry-dependent.

The aim of the research was to examine the relationship between two phenomena: sustainability of strategic management practices and market effectiveness of enterprises. Major research questions to which answers were sought were: Is there a correlation between the level of sustainability of strategic management practices and market effectiveness of enterprises? What is the relationship between market effectiveness and various manifestations of sustainability of strategic management: participation in strategy formulation, flexibility of strategic management process, stakeholder oriented mission statements, values and goals? The research conducted on a sample of 150 Polish enterprises showed a significant positive correlation between the level of sustainability of strategic management practices and market effectiveness of enterprise.

Objective: To present a multidimensional scale for identifying strategic thinkers and profiling strategists.Research Design & Methods: The multi-method approach used included a systematic literature review, qualitative studies (biographical and IDI’s), and quantitative research (a survey).Findings: First, the systematic literature review conceptualised and operationalised a multi-dimensional construct of strategic thinking. Second, biographic studies confirmed and illustrated the differences in five dimensions of strategic thinking, which had been identified in the interviews. Finally, the scale of strategic thinking was validated through a survey.Implications / Recommendations: The research presented on identifying differences in strategic thinking and the types of strategic thinkers confirmed a multidimensional construct of strategic thinking and finally validated a measurement scale. The scale of strategic thinking makes it possible to develop the profiles and typology of strategic thinkers.Contribution: The research results contribute to the development of strategic management theory. The five-dimensional scale of strategic thinking, which reveals the differences in strategic thinking, integrates other concepts used to conceptualise and measure strategic thinking.

Jednym z trudniejszych wyzwań stojących przed strategami w czasach dużej zmienności i niepewności jest umiejętność podejmowania decyzji w warunkach paradoksów – gdy możliwe do zastosowania rozwiązania wydają się ze sobą sprzeczne, a jednocześnie żadnego z nich nie można porzucić. Celem artykułu jest identyfikacja kluczowych paradoksów w zarządzaniu strategicznym, przybliżenie ich genezy, przejawów i następstw. Dobór paradoksów nastąpił w oparciu o model napięć organizacyjnych, zaadaptowany do kontekstu zarządzania strategicznego. Na bazie krytycznego przeglądu literatury, wśród najważniejszych paradoksów obecnych w zarządzaniu strategicznym przyjęto następujące pary: krótki vs długi horyzont, indywidualizm vs kolektywizm, konkurencja vs współpraca, eksploracja vs eksploatacja oraz cele finansowe vs cele CSR.

Aim: To identify gender differences in strategic thinking profiles using an original five-dimensional scale based on: the approach to change, the approach to the competitive environment, the information processing style, the level of participation and the level of flexibility. Methodology: Data from 184 Polish top managers and company owners were collected using a CAWI technique and analysed through PROFIT (Property Fitting) analysis. Results: The results reveal distinct strategic thinking profiles: women are more exploratory, relational and intuitive, whilst men are more analytical, competitive, and emergent. Women prefer an individualistic style during strategy formulation and a collective style during implementation, whereas men favour collaborative idea generation but top-down execution. Implications and recommendations: The findings suggest that gender diversity in top management teams broadens strategic perspectives and increases organisational resilience in diverse environmental conditions. One of the future research directions is to include representatives of different cultures. Another direction in future research is to use PROFIT analysis to identify differences in other variables, such as respondents' age and field of education, to understand the antecedents of strategic thinking. Originality/value: This study's contribution is to show gender diversity as a key to developing top teams with a broader perspective and more opportunities to build an effective strategy, and to use the PROFIT analysis which is not adequately popularised in management science.