ABSTRACT
The conclusion summarizes the main findings of the book concerning the microfoundations of planning. It focuses on each style’s internal dynamics and how each style helps to constitute a different relationship of a group and its environment. While the style of thinking small helps a group to achieve partial environmental independence and thereby fortify it against failures, the style of being critical produces feedback from the environment through strategic adaptation. This strategic adaptation, however, has limits if a group’s goals are not achieved. The style of thinking big relies on expansion into a group’s environment. In order to think big, there needs to be growth: A growing group incorporates more members, a growing coalition incorporates more groups, and a successful campaign changes the attitudes of people concerning nuclear power. Yet a group that thinks big risks failure if the environment remains unresponsive to the group’s efforts toward expansion.
