Emergent in Strategic Management, Theories, and Strategic Leadership: Implications of Absorptive, Adaptive, and Managerial Manifold Wisdom

The strategic management study has been the fastest-growing field for over twenty years. The strategic management theoretical principles have been systematically posited as the most effective and efficient tools for solving the deprived and pathetic organizational performance issues, which concurrently increases strategic management performance. The strategic management theories cover evaluation, methodologies, and thoughtfulness rationale for a business organization's competitive supremacy and sustainable performance. Despite this, strategic management still experiences insignificant organizational performance on a yearly basis, which is assumed to be the weakness of strategic management theories and deliberately neglected strategic leadership theory as a part of strategic management theories. The present study aims at systematic reviewing and amalgamating the strategic management theories, strategic leadership theories, absorptive capacity, adaptive competency, and managerial manifold wisdom toward efficacious organizational performance. The systematic review of the study literature is built on objectivism and constructivism examinations from highly influential journals. The study was scrutinized for imaginative, bibliographic, methodologic, findings, and conclusions. The study projects that strategic leadership theory absorptive capacity, adaptive competency, and managerial manifold wisdom have the utmost capacity to steer effective strategic management theories and sustainable organizational performance. Recommendation: The study submits that strategic leadership theory is the synergistic combination of agency theory, resource-based theory, contingency theory, human resources-based theory, survival-based theory, profit maximization, and competitive-based theory for effective and efficient strategic management design, implementation, and evaluation in order to improve and win organizational competitive supremacy and sustainable performance. The study introduced strategic leadership theory philosophical principles and


Introduction
Strategic management study is the fastest-growing field and constitutes divergent perceptions based on scholars' thoughts, feelings, and discipline, as observed by John Godfrey Saxe (19th-century US poet), who storied about 12 blind men who surrounded and touched different parts of an elephant based on their specific positions around the elephant; thereafter, they gave descriptions of the elephant depending on their sense perceptions (Mintzberg, 1990;Bell & Rochford, 2016;López et al., 2019;Bindra et al., 2019;Fernández et al., 2019).According to Mintzberg (1998), the research on strategic management points in the same direction by providing efficacious strategy design and implementation to gain a new organizational competitive advantage and sustainable performance (Mintzberg et al., 2020).In assertion, the emergent of strategic management advancement and achievement have superseded other fields within management (McKieruan, 2017).Yet, organizations are facing insignificant performance on a yearly basis, even with laudability theories and consistent neglect of strategic leadership capabilities among the strategic management team.Strategic management theories are interconnected, interlinked, and synergistic, combining toward organizational effectiveness (Raduan et al., 2009;Omari et al., 2011;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Aljawarneh & Al-Omari, 2018;Rustamadji & Omar, 2019;Akyuz & Gursoy, 2020).Apparently, organization effectiveness is an ongoing debate in strategic management, which has posited strategic management theories and leadership witnesses.This study uncovers that during the emergence of strategic management theories, leadership, strategic leadership absorptive ability, adaptive capability, and managerial manifold wisdom were completely neglected in actualizing strategic management performance (Jacobs, 2019).As such, the board of directors and other shareholders are searching for sound strategic leadership to mount top executive strategic management and drive organizational strategic direction, improve competitive superiority, and sustain sustainable performance, which iterates the owner's utmost desire.Therefore, this study aims at systematic reviews of emergent strategic management theories and the introduction of strategic leadership theories that incorporate absorptive, adaptive, and manifold wisdom into strategic management theories efficacies toward effective organizational performance.

Emergence of Strategic Management
Strategic management offers a modest theoretical framework for establishing knowledge, a standard plan, and a tentative action statement to aid organizational goals and objectives.The exiting archives on the industrialist movement had advanced the firm system and culture, whereby the executive manager derives benefits from the conscious awareness of its undivided support.Scientifically, strategic management has been recognized as a reflection of the executive management team and its managerial characteristics that evaluate the progressive development and daily application of business firms (Sasaka et al., 2015).
With the advancement of modern-day theories, strategic management has been broadly opened to several criticisms in an emerging business firm in a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment.The essence of strategic management is towards continual planning, implementation, and control through adjusting and being conversant with the requirements of the business environment, which underpins the importance of the structural perception of the organization.Nevertheless, the advancement and growth of strategic management theories arrest the constant change in strategic management theory and its application in business organizations (Raduan et al., 2009;Omalaja et al., 2011;Aljawarneh & Al-Omari, 2018;Rustamadji & Omar, 2019;Akyuz & Gursoy, 2020).However, strategic management has been recognized as a foundation that defines organizational advancement, competitive superiority, and sustainability in the business environment (Foss & Stieglitz, 2012;Feizabadi et al., 2019;Xu et al., 2019).This postulates that some organizations attain a certain level of accomplishment, while others are not yet, and some are shut down because of the heterogeneous dynamic nature of the business environment.The previous studies on strategic management are unclear because of the ongoing search to find a lasting solution to the competitive nature of the business firm and sustainable performance.This search has been described as the multidisciplinary nature of strategic management, which posits research as dynamic and complex (Guerras-Martin, 2014;López et al., 2019;Bindra et al., 2019;Fernández et al., 2019).The study further added that the multidisciplinary study consists of economic, sociology, psychology, business, and strategic management theories with divergent backgrounds such as education, perception, approaches, methodology, and interest.In addition, the research on strategic management is tied down to organizational operational tools that emerged from analyzing organizational performance (Guerras-Martin, 2014;Bindra et al., 2019;Fernández et al., 2019).The study of strategic management has been tweeted by Mintzberg (1990) as the perception of 12 blind men about the elephant by John Godfrey Saxe (19th century US poet), where an individual blind man deposited or formed his perception about the elephant based on a mere touching of an elephant.In this article, blind men represent the researcher, elephants symbolize discipline, and touch represents methodology or approaches (Bell & Rochford, 2016).Nevertheless, they are all accurate in their descriptions, but it is daunting to deduce exactly how the elephant looks from individual descriptions and perceptions (Guerras-Martin, 2014;López et al., 2019;Bindra et al., 2019;Fernández et al., 2019).Likewise, strategic management research is portrayed as a fable of blind men, where the individual researcher posits his or her perceptions about strategic management studies based on their background and philosophical perceptions.A better understanding of the strategic management discipline requires the classification of divergent criteria for effective and efficient utilization of competitive advantage and sustainable performance.Some scholars concentrated on the internal influence of business organizations, such as strengths and weaknesses, while others focused on external influences, such as opportunities and threats, because organizational success lies between the internal and external business environments (Guerras-Martin, 2014;Bell & Rochford, 2016).

Emergence of Strategic Management Theories
The strategic management theories are systematic practice, technique, and operational tactics that underpin business organizational goals and objectives, policies, and the designing and marshalling of plans to obtain predetermined intentions with effective disbursement of resources for the implementation of the agreed strategic management decision.Strategic management is the sequential process of designing strategy, implementation, assessment, and adjustment toward the effective accomplishment of organizational plans and policies in the dynamical business environment (Raduan et al., 2009;Omari et al., 2011;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Aljawarneh & Al-Omari, 2018;Rustamadji & Omar, 2019;Akyuz & Gursoy, 2020).The chart below elucidates the predominance of strategic management theories as underpinned by scholars and subsequently explains theories such as agency theory, contingency theory, resource-based theory, human resource-based theory, survival-based theory, profit maximization, and competitive-based theory of firms (Raduan et al., 2009;Omari et al., 2011;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Aljawarneh & Al-Omari, 2018;Rustamadji & Omar, 2019;Akyuz & Gursoy, 2020).

Agency Theory
Agency theory is among the predominant strategic management theories in today's business environment, which engineer peaceful co-existence between the principal and agent relationship because it constitutes the beginning of economic activities.Agency theory avails understanding and utilization of the robust opportunity that exists between the principal and agent relationship, which negates problems and disagreements because of opportunistic nature, self-interest, risk sharing, choice, structural function, absorption, and information dissemination among the parties (Yu & To, 2011;Fayezi et al., 2012).Besides, agency theory is widely accepted in divergent fields such as economics, finance, entrepreneurship, marketing, strategic management, corporate governance, and political science (Berle & Means, 2009;Madison et al., 2016;Fourcade & Khurana, 2017;Payne & Petrenko, 2019;Cheffins, 2018;Payne & Petrenko, 2019).However, agency theory can be traced back to its roots in developmental economics research (Ross, 2014;Őnday, 2016;Mazouz & Zhao, 2019;Mitnick, 2019).Whereas, the scholars have linked agency theory to technical and business operational failure (Berle & Means, 2009;Cheffins, 2018;Anand, 2019;Gilson & Gordon, 2019;Backus, 2019) 2019;Dierksmeier, 2020).Furthermore, it is acknowledged that the principal expects the agent to manage the huge sum employed in the business venture and advance the strategic direction of the investors.
Unfortunately, the agent prioritizes self-interest before considering the principal and its strategic direction.Information dissemination and expertize skills and experience between the principal and agent propel the principal to entrust and delegate strategic decision-making and steering strategic management of a company in a good business atmosphere, while principals assume the apex responsibility of monitoring, instituting governance, and checking agent opportunistic behavior (Rashid, 2015;Pepper & Gore, 2015;Kimmerle, 2019;Shan, 2019;Tripathi, 2019;Chari et al., 2019;Dierksmeier, 2020;Amis et al., 2020).
The empirical and scientific evidence posits agency theory as a modern theory in the field of corporate governance and configurations (Drover et al., 2014;Woodman, 2017;Panda & Leepsa, 2017;Panda et al., 2018).Therefore, agency theory retains theoretical classic debate and hypothetical perception over a period.

Resource-Based Theory
In quest of a competitive edge in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment, strategic management archives declare and recognize the resource-based theory of the firm as a theory of competitive advantage and sustainable performance (Porter & Kramer, 2019;Rockwell, 2019;Singtanasarn, 2019;Mackey & Barney, 2019;Barney et al., 2021;Barney, 2021).The explicit deems it as the basic source of the outstanding performance, which demands unrelenting effort to sustain a competitive edge, as widely posited by scholars in field strategic management research (Dorobantu et al., 2017;Collins, 2021;Schauerte et al., 2021).
The resource-based theory has been recognized as the basic source/pivotal of competitive edge and supreme sustainable total summed of strategic management performance (Maximova, 2015;Droli, 2019;Mackey & Barney, 2019;Dionysus & Arifin, 2020;Barney et al., 2021;Barney, 2021).Notwithstanding, the resource-based theory posits the philosophies that organization sources of competitive advantage are within internal resources as opposed to the perception of external environment factors.In essence, it X-rays business external environmental determinants such as opportunity, threat, and application of organizational distinct resources and capabilities to utilize or overcome (Lucas & Kirillova, 2011;Mishra et al., 2014Mishra et al., , 2016)).
The resource-based theory postulates that certain resources that an organization possesses have the potential to actualize a competitive edge and sustainable performance in a dynamic and complex business environment (Zubac et al., 2012;Vivas-López, 2013;Nwachukwu & Chladkova, 2019).The resource-based theory underpins the idea that resources are heterogeneously distributed steadily across functional departments within an organization for proactive success (Kraaijenbrink et al., 2010;Seddon, 2014;Hitt et al., 2016).The organization's resource capabilities are seen as those of an organization's citizens (human resources), financial resources, physical asset/structure resources, and technology resources because company resources are limited either homogenously or flexibly in nature.Therefore, to obtain a competitive edge, organizational resources are characterized by values that are rare, effortless to duplicate, and non-substitutable.The organization is said to achieve a competitive edge when they develop and implement a strategy that supersedes or goes beyond competitors' intellectuality in the heterogeneous and cannot mimic it (Porter, 2011;Adnan et al., 2018;Sony, 2019;Mackey & Barney, 2019;Barney et al., 2021;Barney, 2021).

Human Resource-Based Theory
The human resource-based theory holds the philosophy of the human resource or organizational citizen as pertinent in firm strategy design and implementation, with the extension that implicit and explicit motivation, organizational politics, and cultures are the ideal desire of an individual workforce to win a competitive edge and sustainable performance (Koch & de Kok, 1999;Black & Lynch, 2001;Lynch, 2006Lynch, , 2012)).
In addition, the human-based theory reiterates the importance of the human capital component in the preparation and design of strategy and the general accomplishment of the organization.The theory embraces the perception that the foundation of an organization's competitive superiority depends on its sophisticated, expertized, and proficient employees, which cannot be duplicated by other competitors in the heterogeneous marketplace (Titus & Adiza, 2019).

Profit-Maximizing and Competition-Based Theory.
The profit-maximizing and competition-based theory of the firm was originally drawn from the industrial organization perspective that business firm central goals and objectives are profit maximization for advancement and sustainable competitive edge above its competitors in the heterogeneous business environment.Industrial organizations posit the philosophy that the external business environment is a pertinent determinant of actualizing a sustainable competitive edge and positioning a business firm, while utilizing strategic management sequential theory for effective and efficient evaluation or assessment of the intensive nature of competition in heterogeneous industries (Porter, 1981;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Muogbo, 2013;Titus & Adiza, 2019).However, this theory gains a proactive and thoughtful audience from Alfred Marshall, who launched a book on Principles of Economics published in 1890 (Jafa et al., 2010;Al Suwaidi, 2018).In support of the assertion, the theorist continues to acknowledge wide contributions from strategic management, among other concepts (Leon, 2015;Jennings Jr., 2016).The theory maintains the economic philosophy that underpins business organizations to pertinently maximize profit in proportion to their marginal input (cost) and marginal output (revenue).This theory was adopted in the study by Chandler (1989) that an organization is on the quest to accomplish strategic goals through an average profit and, more particularly, through translating its resources into goods and services in order to maximize a return on investment for both shareholders and stakeholders (Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Lazonick, 2016).
In this respect, the survival of the firm depends on profit maximization and reinvestment in the business to generate future profit and reinforce firm resources; if not, the firm will eventually shut down.Besides, in the early 1960s, the theory gained more acceptance through a book publication by Friedman (1962) that sparked attention and deliberation in the field of corporate social responsibility.In addition, in the 1970s, an official proclamation iterated that in an open market, a free organization, and a private property scheme, strategic management is the workforce of the possessors of the business.Duty, obligation, and responsibility are assigned to respective employees, while the employer expects accountability and stewardship.That responsibility is to conduct business following their desires, which are generally the basic rules of society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom.This declaration stipulates maximization as the only prime goal and objective of the business organization (Tengku, 2010;Jafa et al., 2010;Bowen, 2013;Lazonick, 2016;de Bettignies et al., 2020).Therefore, the theory was incorporated into the strategic management study with the fundamental perception that strategies will be primarily driven (but not exclusively) by the objective of maximizing the organization's profitability in the long run with the ultimate purpose of developing a sustainable competitive advantage over the competitor (Tesfay, 2016;Gioko & Njuguna, 2019).

Contingency Theory
Contingency theory has been accepted as one of the main theories in the strategic management archives, with the preconception that business organizations have an open system based on structural ranking and evaluation (Banalieva & Sarathy, 2011;Afridi, 2013;Adebisi et al., 2018).This fundamental philosophy of contingency theory postulates that there is no single dimension or direction for consolidating or organizing activities to reap bumper outcomes.A single direction of performing an act may be unequal or ineffective pending the circumstances (Zelt et al., 2019;Cornelis et al., 2019).However, the hypothetical perception of contingency theory has an encompassing strategy with a rationale established in business policy and an exemplified strategy change.Firm resources are the cornerstone and proportional to external environmental influence (Donaldson & Luo, 2014;Smith et al., 2019;Bindra et al., 2019;Jayawarna & Dissanayake, 2019).The scholars underpin a previous universal establishment or tradition of strategic decision-making, which furnishes every business organization with any amount of resources acquired or possessed against the dynamic environmental determinants (Hambrick, 1980;Porter, 2008;Cleaves, 2018;Siska, 2018;Abatecola & Cristofaro, 2018;Hambrick & Wowak, 2021).Moreover, contingency theory of the firm was introduced into a strategic management study with the proposition that two organizations that adopted the same techniques, methodologies, approaches, and strategies in their respective strategic management may not actualize the same result because an organization's successful outcome depends on the divergent situational construct that constitutes the internal capabilities of the firm and external environmental factors of the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment (Raduan et al., 2009;Jafar et al., 2010;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Muogbo, 2013).

Survival-Based Theory
The survival-based theory was first exposed to the study of economics with emergent thinking and the natural processes of decision-making in economics with regards to investment (Raduan et al., 2009;Jafar et al., 2010;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011;Muogbo, 2013;Alaba, 2021).The survival-based theory holds the philosophy of survival fittest in economics, specializing in the application of firms' evaluation, equipping, and competing in heterogeneous markets and economic changes (Jafar et al., 2010;Akintokunbo, 2018).In addition, this theory was advanced by Herbert Spencer, but subsequence scholars chose to name the theory the survival-fittest theory of organization (Al Suwaidi, 2018).The theory gained its most awareness in the early 19th and 20th centuries.With a philosophy established by nature, the preeminent and fittest organizations will win competitiveness and survival in the daunting and complex business environment and therefore stimulate social community development if firms must survive (Raduan et al., 2009;Jafar et al., 2010;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011).In addition, the theory becomes magnificently effective and efficient when applied in industrial economics as the basis of firm growth and development in the heterogeneous market.Whereas, the survival-based theory of perception was theoretically introduced into strategic management for the continuous survival of the business organization through robust strategy design and implementation for effective operational activity in proportional response to dynamic and complex competitive business environmental changes (Alaba, 2021).Nevertheless, the theory was adopted in the marketing environment since every business organization competes with one another for survival.It is also proposed that business firm trial and error strategies be adapted as the best fittest typology of strategic management advancement (Raduan et al., 2009;Jafar et al., 2010;Omalaja & Eruola, 2011).

Strategic Leadership Theory: Absorptive, Adaptive, and Managerial Manifold Wisdom Strategic Leadership Theory
The present-day volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) business environment has imposed a great challenge on strategic management theories, which results in insignificant strategic management performance because of the inability to meet the predetermined strategic management theories hypothetical expectations and robust competitive superiority advantage and sustainable performance.
The synergistic combination of strategic management theories and strategic leadership theories has posited the ability to predict, maintain flexibility, and empower others to create strategic change as necessary.This clarifies that strategic leader as a multifunctional and dynamically translating business organization goals and objectives into reality through synergistic supports and involvement of the organizational citizen (Hitt et al., 2012;Hunitie, 2018;Jaleha & Machuki, 2018;Nwachukwu & Vu, 2020;Calabrò et al., 2021).In accentuation, strategic leadership at strategic management possesses prompt managerial skills, knowledge, ability, competency, and experience in managing internal and external turbulence in the business environment and accomplishing firm predetermined strategic plans (Deeboonmee & Ariratana, 2014;Quadri, 2018;Ervin et al., 2018;Mukhezakule & Tefera, 2019;Tetik & Akkaya, 2021).Strategic leadership reiterates the driving force behind sound strategic management performance through indisputable involvement, commitment, passion, creativity, innovation, effective information dissemination, due procedure, workforce development, magnificent decisional choices, role-taking, and empathy toward achieving organizational competitiveness and sustainable performance in the dynamically heterogeneous and heterogonous marketplace (Peter et al., 2018;Bhattacharyya & Jha, 2018;Hunitie, 2018;Rahman et al., 2018;Abatecola & Cristofaro, 2018;Seaton, 2018;Shao, 2019;Samimi et al., 2020).Strategic management and strategic leadership underpin a systematic process where the top executive management team influences organizational citizens with a definite determination to actualize enterprise-predetermined goals and objectives.This has posited and accounted for that organizations reflect strategic management team strategic direction, recognition, personal worth, and values (Quadri, 2018;Jaleha & Machuki, 2018;Lola & Nyangau, 2018;Keeton, 2018;Mukhezakule & Tefera, 2019).
Studies further posited that strategic leadership in synergy with other strategic management teams is said to have efficacious summed up of the decisional choice, a builder of cordial relationships among functional departments and the workforce with respect to the integration of individualistic personalities and demographic backgrounds toward effective translation of firm goals and objectives (Abatecola & Cristofaro, 2018;Irtaimeh, 2018;Norris, 2018;Alkheyi et al., 2020;Samimi et al., 2020;Hambrick & Wowak, 2021).The multifunctional capability of strategic leadership style reiterates a potentiality to guide, stimulate, inspire, motivate, and encourage organization citizen personal growth and development while advancing firm effective strategy implementation and improving competitive superiority and sustainable performance in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment (Amos, 2018;Najmi et al., 2018;Kowo & Akinbola, 2019;Luciano et al., 2020;Adobor et al., 2021).Strategic leadership at strategic management posits action programs are taking place in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment with access to information and progressive hyperactive distortions for effective implementation of the strategic management decisions (Bhattacharyya & Jha, 2018;Mui et al., 2018;Asif, 2020;Kurzhals et al., 2020;Samimi et al., 2020;Adobor et al., 2021).Therefore, it is pertinent that strategic leadership at top management build and develop absorptive, adaptive competencies, abilities, and manifold wisdom or managerial intellectual skills in managing business organizations (Todorova & Durisin, 2007;Kriger & Zhovtobryukh, 2016;Wang, 2018;Konlechner et al., 2018;Ali et al., 2018;Saleh et al., 2018).We submit that strategic leadership depicts a strategic and operational action-oriented program as such: strategic decisional choices, inventions, effective translating and disseminating strategic direction choice (vision, mission, objectives, and core values), building strategic proficiencies, organizational structures, span of control, chain of command, power and influence, delegation, operational due process, designing strategic plans, implementation, effective monitoring, assessment, adjustment, and supervising manifold business environments.Also, strategic leadership reiterates sequential building and emerging succession leaders, defining sustainable firm culture, and imbuing effective corporate governance, moral worth, and norms into business enterprises.These absorptive, adaptive competencies, abilities, and manifold wisdom or managerial intellectual skills will be explained briefly as follows: Figure 2: Strategic Leadership Theories Model

Strategic Leadership: Adaptive Competencies
Strategic leadership adaptive competencies reiterate continuous research and investigation for new novelty in divergent dimensions such as abilities and readiness to overcome obstacles during strategic management implementation (Ma et al., 2018;Verdu-Jover et al., 2018;Naim & Lenka, 2020;Camby, 2021).The study posited that strategic leadership capacity reinforces mutual sharing and manifold wisdom through information dissemination and creative inventiveness among the workforce.It develops traits that underpin correction measures that spring through organizations and pose confidence that builds synergy with business organizations (Bindra et al., 2019;Alzaabi & Ghani, 2021).

Managerial
Manifold Wisdom Strategic leadership adaptive capacity posited the essentiality of initial competition among the workforce with adequate motivation, proactive attention, interval sharing of knowledge, mutual agreement, and respect (Jaleha & Machuki, 2018;Castillo & Trinh, 2019;Adebayo, 2019;Adobor et al., 2021).As such, it is crystal pertinent that the strategic management team or strategic leaders possess a distinctive adaptive potential to advance the steering role of the organizational strategic management performance while strengthening and reinforcing other firm standing policies into action-oriented implementation (Nicotra et al., 2015;Hunitie, 2018;Ali & Zulkipli, 2019;Yoon & Suh, 2021).
A strategic leader's adaptive competency engineer's potential to advance a course amidst turbulence circumstances because the heterogeneous market demands the rapid accumulation of plans and proportionally balanced environmental circumstances for effective firm performance, improve concentration on creative invention through constant acquisition of manifold wisdom to succeed by influencing strategic tractability (Nicotra et al., 2015;Mohd Ali & Zulkipli, 2019;Yoon & Suh, 2021).
The strategic leadership adaptive capacity among the strategic management team iterates firm strategic planning, proactively defends, and reacts promptly to heterogeneous market dynamics (Ghorban & Gholipour, 2018;Lam et al., 2018;Bell et al., 2018).Strategic leaders' adaptive competency posited that dynamic behavior, cognitive and social intricacy, a growing mind-set, and recognition of the relevance of circumstances must come to bear in fostering effective strategic management performance (Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2018; Hays & Reinders, 2018;Evgenevna, 2021).

Strategic Leadership, Managerial Manifold Wisdom
Strategic leadership managerial manifold wisdom posits the heart of strategic leadership, which constitutes possession of perspicacity and chaos' time and prompt decisional making (Bachmann, 2019;Cortez & Johnston, 2019;Zacher & Kunzmann, 2019;Pierscieniak & Stelmaszczyk, 2020).The study elucidates strategic leadership managerial manifold wisdom and depicts the potential of the strategic management leader to conceive divergent environmental dynamics with defensive and attacking strategic plans while being thoughtful of the host community and cordial in the heterogeneous market environment (Jaleha & Machuki, 2018;Bhattacharyya & Jha, 2018;Samimi et al., 2020).Strategic leadership, managerial manifold wisdom, and thoughtfulness constitute social intelligence or interpersonal intelligence toward achieving organizational competitive supremacy and sustainability performance (Starr-Glass, 2018;Cortez & Johnston, 2019;Yoon & Suh, 2021).In addition, strategic leadership managerial manifold wisdom reiterates social awareness and skills to produce proactive strategic management performance (Dobe, 2018; Torres & Costa, 2021).Finally, strategic leadership managerial manifold wisdom emphasizing procedural skills acquisition, practice, and transfer of knowledge within the workforce.By these, the strategic leadership managerial manifold wisdom outcome stipulates progressive advancement in technical and operational skills (Starr-Glass, 2018;Hughes et al., 2018;Ramachandran, 2018;da Costa et al., 2018;García-Sánchez et al., 2018;Pierscieniak & Stelmaszczyk, 2020).The ultimate desire of strategic leadership is to acquire managerial manifold wisdom because of its relevancy, recognition, advancement, and achievement toward strategic management implementation and organizational performance.

Conclusion
The present study centre the emergent of strategic management, strategic management theories (agency theory, resource-based theory, contingency theory, human resources-based theory, survival-based theory, profit maximization theory), and the introduction of strategic leadership theory into strategic management theories because of its significant impact on enhancing strategic management team performance and sustainability performance, especially in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment.
The study finding posit that strategic management theories (agency theory, resource-based theory, contingency theory, human resources-based theory, survival-based theory, profit maximization theory) and strategic leadership theories Synergistic amalgamation is a new trend in 21st-century strategic management performance that attracts laudable research attention, support, and recognition among academicians and professionals in the field.
The study finding submit that the emergence and adaptation of strategic leadership theory among strategic management theories (agency theory, resource-based theory, contingency theory, human resources-based theory, survival-based theory, profit maximization theory) in the last twenty years has brought indisputable growth and development in business management as well as improved organizational performance.That strategic leadership demonstrates proactive capacity for assessing and evaluating the top issues surrounding strategic management performance ineffectiveness in the heterogeneous market through a theoretical model, empirical evidence, and methodological approaches and addressing them promptly in order to win competitive superiority and sustainable performance.
The study finding submit that the multifunctional starring role of strategic leadership in strategic management places emphasis on the acquisition of absorptive capacity, adaptive potentialities, and managerial manifold wisdom toward effective organizational strategic management performance.Therefore, strategic leadership theory posited scientific and empirical evidence to be recognized as a strategic management theory because of its adsorptive, adaptive, and managerial wisdom all-round strategic management steering role, decisional choice, competitive superiority, and sustainable performance in the present-day business environment.

Recommendation for Further Study
We recommend synergistic combinations of agency theory, resource-based theory, contingency theory, human resources-based theory, survival-based theory, profit maximization, and competitive-based theory for effective and efficient strategic management design, implementation, and evaluation in order to improve competitive supremacy and sustainable performance in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous business environment.We submit that further study could be conduct on strategic leadership adsorptive capacity, adaptive capacity and managerial wisdom among strategic management team in both private and public sectors.

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: Strategic Management Theory Model . On the other hand, studies hypothesize the remedies for solving the principal-agent bottleneck for effective organization growth and development by reducing operational overhead costs and inWu & Sun, 2019;(Kim & Mahoney, 2010;Wu & Sun, 2019; Nippa & Reuer,