Most of the respected strength training programs focus on exactly that: strength.
In general the rep ranges are your biggest lever to play with with strength vs hypertrophy vs endurance.
There's also relationships between muscle cross-section size as it compares to strength. Boiled down, the idea is that 2 square inches of muscle can generate more force because of physics than 1 square inch of muscle can. But that relationship isn't clearly understood:
It is commonly believed that maximal force and CSA (cross sectional
area) are strongly related. Studies examining varying levels of
training status display discordant data suggesting complex
relationships between training status, CSA and peak force.
The F/CSA relationship seems complex, and future studies are required
to elucidate the relationships among key factors in the expression of
Boiled down, you basically want to follow a strength training program, and be suspicious of a lot of work in the hypertrophy rep range.
Eventually a strength athlete will get big. If you can squat 600lb, deadlift 700, and bench 315, you will be large, no matter how hard you try to avoid it. Just to put that into the equation as well.
I don't have any evidence of this, but in Pavel Tsatsouline's kettlebell books he talks about kb training being as being desired by a law enforcement folks because you get a decent level of strength, conditioning, and don't get "big". Again, just something to consider.