According to Markides (1999) “There is surprisingly little agreement on what strategy really is”. (I have critically analysed this statement.)

by Kunal Rathi (Written on: 16th March 2009)

Introduction

This assignment will argue and analyse the statement of Markides (1999) “There is surprisingly little agreement on what strategy really is.” (Markides, 1999) It will look over the writings of different authors and will extract their view points, opinions and definitions on the field of strategy. With the study just over the statement on Markides (1999) it just looks like a very less authors have given light over the field of strategy in management literature. But as the assignment will progress towards its end we will look over the different statements, view points, opinions and definition given by different authors on the field of strategy.

One would be amazed to find out two different people within academic or business world that might be having the same definition and share the same view point about the strategy. (Markides, 1999) No wonder due to this reasoning the economist says that, “Nobody really knows what strategy really is.” (The Economist, 1993: 106) According to Bernus et al. (2003) the word strategic as well as strategy are well known and are generally used as well as misused in the modern business environment. Although strategy is an important aspect in today’s business environment, amazingly there are very little definitions given on what a strategy really is. (Markides, 1999; Bernus et al., 2003) Strategy is a word which is commonly used for different reasons that it’s meaning’s clarity has just lost. (Kalpic, 2002) The notion of strategy historically has been taken from the military and today is widely used in business world. (Nickols, 2006) Nickols (2006) believed that tactics as well as strategy are the bridges to fill the gap between means as well as ends. Means through which policies can be easily affected is strategy, and there is saying that wars are an extension of political relations through other means. (ibid, 2006) Markides (1999) believed that looking over a problem from different perspective gives us more productive results than bring together limitless data and examining them. The author thought that it is critical to experiment new thoughts rather than going for scientific analysis plus discussion. (Markides, 1999) Today authors believe that making a successful strategy is never ending process. Wal-mart as well as Dell are two companies successful today due to the reason that they currently have superior strategy in business world. But this cannot guarantee them to be successful company in future. The reasoning being that none of the firm ever will be able to know or predict exactly how the environment will change and when these changes are going to take place in future. (ibid, 1999)

Historically the word strategy was associated with the military. Strategy is an art in general as well as it has been represented as a set of psychological skill along with behavioral skill of a character. (Bernus et al., 2003) For the first time the strategy word was linked with management as well as managerial skills during the time of 450 B.C. by Pericles. Alexander during 330 B.C. defined strategy as a skill to overcome opposition through employing forces as well as creating a joined structure of worldwide authority. (Kalpic, 2002) Harvard Business School from 1912 started a course which was intended to incorporate knowledge expansion in functional areas such as operations, finance as well as accounting thus providing students of management with a wider viewpoint on the strategic problems which management in an organization has to deal with. Strategy as a result can be understood as a symbol that widths the function area in organizations. (ibid, 2003) Making of a strategy is actually an interdisciplinary ground which involves management, economics, law as well as organizational theory. Although the subject of business strategy is being taught and academic researched are been conducted on the subject from over a century, still significant amount of disagreement is present on the topic of ‘what strategy really is?’, along with ‘how a good strategy is developed?’. (Miles and Snow, 1978; cited in Bernus et al., 2003)

“Strategy is generally related to time-consuming stages of planning, in a hierarchically planned system of objectives as well as goals, and linked to a preferred way of creating a fit among external environment, abilities and internal resources.” (Bernus et al., 2003) Bernus et al (2003) gives a narrow view over strategic management in his writing that strategy is the outcome of combined group actions, believe to be a continuing development as well as characteristic in this core moreover should be recognized as the formation of organization’s future, but not as a category. (ibid, 2003) Although several writers have enlightened the concept of strategy and business strategy through their various definitions, but we can see that a true meaning of business strategy is still missing or we can say writers are avoiding offering of a common or standard strategy definition. Instead, numerous theoretical traditions and strategic definitions are presented which overflows the strategic management field. (Ghemawat, 1999) Bernus et al (2003) offered resource based view in his writing for the reason that in the field of strategic management this view was the main govern theoretical schools, however it was ignored over and over again by managers. (Bernus et al., 2003) The explanation behind resource based view approach emerges to be that there are products as well as markets that distinguish the instant failure or else success of an organization, and a resource based view is separated from this daily reality. (Mahoney and Pandian, 1992)

Schendel (1994) in his writing says that strategic management is basically an interdisciplinary topic where the viewpoint will always shift with new researches and approaches; it is suspect that a single n globally accepted theory of strategy will ever be established in the field of business. (Bernus et al., 2003) Hart (1967) in his writings has examined warfare which took place in ancient history till the modern world. His suggestions and writings are towards the literature of strategy, tactics as well as policies; the author defines strategy as, “an art of applying as well as allocating military resources to realize the ends of policy (objectives).” (Hart, 1967) But the definition was created with the influence of word military in mind, thus by eliminating (or subtitling) the word military (by business) from Hart’s definition, it can be easily related to the notion of strategy with world of business i.e., “strategy is an art of applying as well as allocating (business) resource to realize the ends of policies (objectives).” (Nickols, 2006) Steiner (1979) in his writings defines strategy in a very short sentence and explains strategy to be a way through which one (business) can counter its rival’s actual or predicted actions. He also makes a note on the point that there is very little conformity on the definitions of what strategy is in business world. (Nickols, 2006) Mintzberg (1994) said that there are several means through which people can use strategy. Mintzberg (1994) also made a note that strategy is a plan of getting from one stage to another; a how; it is a position, perspective as well as a pattern in actions over time. The writer says that strategies have risen as meaning which run into as well as accommodate a changing of reality over the time. Thus this is the pattern in decision as well as actions which Mintzberg identified as realized or emergent strategy. (Nickols, 2006) As a result Andrew’s (1980) definition shows expectation and links to Mintzberg’s (1994) attention to plan, perspective and pattern. (Nickols, 2006) Andrew (1980) in his writing has also drawn division between business strategies; which identify the basis of rivalry for a given organisation, as well as corporate strategy; which on the other hand decides for the organisation on which firm to compete with. Thus, anticipating position as a form of strategy. (Nickols, 2006) Porter (1986) in has writing said that competitive strategy is all about bring the difference in an organisation. In addition he says that it means purposely opt for a diverse range of actions to bring a distinctive mix up of benefits. (Porter, 1986; 1996) The author has also given light on the topic that strategy is about competitive position, about making difference and distinguishing your company from other from customer’s point of view. It is also about adding values to the company through a set of activities used together to achieve goal and should be different from other firms. (ibid, 1986; 1996) In addition he defines competitive strategy in another way by saying, “competitive strategy is a grouping of different objectives for which the company is motivated as well as the plans through which companies make attempt to reach its set objectives.” (ibid 1986; 1996) Porter seems to hold strategy as both position as well as plan. (Nickols, 2006)

Tregoe and Zimmerman (1980) have defined strategy in their writings as, “the framework which channels those preferences which determines the nature as well as the course of a business firm.” (Tregoe & Zimmerman, 1980) Tregoe & Zimmerman (1980) have based their decisions on a single driving force of the business. They took the position that strategy is essentially a matter of perspective. (ibid, 1980; Nickols, 2006)According to Andrews (1980), “Corporate strategy is the model of choices made in an organisation which decides the objectives, generates the most important plans as well as policies for the variety of trade the organisation is to deal in, the kind of economics as well as human organisation it is or else intending to become or to be, also the character of the non-economic as well as economic payout intended to be made to its employees, shareholders, communities as well as customers.” (Andrews, 1980: 18-19) Robert (1993) states that the genuine problem is thinking strategically as well as with strategic management. (Nickols, 2006) Similar to the arguments of Tregoe & Zimmerman (1980), Robert (1993) states that judgments made by companies about which services as well as product to offer, what kind of market segments to be served, which customer is to be served, in which of the geographic area should be prepared, all this is based on the single driving force. (Robert, 1993; ibid, 2006) Robert (1993) also states that there is existence of several driving force, but similar to Tregoe & Zimmerman (1980) only one can be used. (ibid, 1993; 2003; Nickols, 2006) Treacy and Wiersema (1994) stated that organisations attain positions of leadership by a narrow business focus not by a broader one. Treacy and Wiersema (1993) also acknowledged in their writing about three significance disciplines that can be provided as the source for every strategy and according to them these were customer understanding, product management as well as operational quality in addition to this only one can be the source for every strategy. (Treacy and Wiersema, 1993; 1994; Nickols, 2006)

Conclusion

Markides (1999) in his article ‘In Search of Strategy’ was true that digging deep in the field of strategy raises more questions than answers. (Markides, 1999) After looking over a wide range of definitions for different authors in the field of management and strategy, we can see that every author has presented their own different definition with some kind of disagreement on a previous definition with a sense of trying to make some modification in their new definition, although there are numerous kinds of definitions given in different languages or ways (simple, hard, paragraphed or just a note) they all mean the same i.e. in a very short and simple way a strategy can be defined as to ‘tactics which makes it easier for a firm to achieve its goal by applying different business resources into action.’ Thus, we can say that Markides’s (1999) statement was authentic that “there is surprisingly little agreement on what strategy really is.” (Markides, 1999)

Reference & Bibliography.

1. Andrews, K. (1980) The Concept of Corporate Strategy, 2^nd Edition, Dow-Jones Irwin.

2. Bernus, P., Nemes, L., Schmidt, G. (2003) Handbook on enterprise architecture, Springer.

3. Ghemawat, P. (1999) Strategy and the Business Landscape: Text and Cases, Hallow, Addison-Wesley.

4. Hart, B. H. L. (1967) Strategy, Basic Books.

5. Kalpic, B. (2002) Strategic Management: Theory and Application, Griffith University, December 2002

6. Mahoney, J. T. & Pandian, J. R. (1992) ‘The Resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management’, Strategic Management Journal, 13(5):363-380.

7. Markides, C. C. (1999) ‘In Search of Strategy’, Sloan Management Review, Spring, pp 6 -7.

8. Miles, R. E. & Snow C. C. (1978) Organizational strategy, structure and process, New York, McGraw-Hill.

9. Mintzberg, H. (1994) The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Basic Books.

10. Nickols, F. (2006) Strategy: Definitions and meaning, Skullworks.

11. Porter, M. (1986) Competitive Strategy, Harvard Business School Press.

12. Porter, M. (1996) ‘What is Strategy?’, Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec 1996.

13. Robert, M. (1993) Strategy: Pure and Simple, McGraw-Hill.

14. Steiner, G. (1979) Strategic Planning, Free Press.

15. The Economist, 20 March 1993, pp: 106.

16. Treacy, M. & Wiersema, M. (1994) The Discipline of Market Leaders, Addison-Wesley.

17. Treacy, M. & Wiersema, M. (1993) ‘Customer Intimacy and Other Value Disciplines’, Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb 1993.

18. Tregoe, B. & Zimmerman, J. (1980) Top Management Strategy, Simon and Schuster.

Source: Kunal Rathi’s University’s Assignment (2009)

What is radical consumption? (Discussed critically by making reference to theories and empirical examples of green and ethical marketing.)

by Kunal Rathi (Written on: 20th April 2009)

Introduction

“Environmental Protection and Sustainable development must be an integral part of the mandates of all agencies of governments, of international organisations, and major private sectors institutions.” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1984; cited in Alma & Lozada, 1996) Radical Consumption is indeed the basic nature of the consumption or the fundamental consumption. (Hole & Hawker, 2006) Radical consumption and ethical consumption is moreover a similar aspects in the theory, both of the term means the buying of those goods which are ethically made or/and are having some aspect towards greenness. Ethical consumption in today’s time is the biggest movement towards brand building by any company. Ethical consumption is purchasing of products as well as services which a consumer considers to be made ethically and marketed ethically by a company. It basically means minimum harm to animal and natural environment with minimum exploitation of human and/or employees. (Anonymous, 2009)

American Marketing Association believed that green marketing is marketing of the products which are supposed to be an environmentally safe product. Green marketing includes a wide range of activities, which includes changes to the production process, change in product, changes in packaging, as well as changes in advertising. Originally the idea of green marketing came into existence during late 1980s. Early marketing researches’ findings have shown the indications of corporate interest in green marketing and suggested major innovation processes and changing steps. Case studies of companies, for example; the Body Shop, Volvo, Ecover, 3M as well as McDonalds were almost cited in every literature over the green marketing as to show how and why green marketing schemes could pay. During 1990s specialist brands like Ecover as well as Down to Earth enjoyed the growth of their companies which they failed to enjoy in later periods, and there was discontinuation in the specialist green range of some major companies like Lever Brothers as well as Sainsbury’s. (Peattie & Crane, 2005) The philosophy as well as process of marketing is built around the customer of a company as well as relationship between them (the company and the customer). Peattie and Crane (2005) suggested that “green marketing will not work in the face of customer distrust, but then that distrust may be partly a product of the types of green marketing that relied upon so far.” (ibid, 2005)

“Green marketing is a part as well as parcel of the overall corporate strategy.” (Menon & Menon, 1997; cited in Prakash, 2002) Green Marketing is also linked closely to the industrial ecological as well as environmental sustainability issues such as extensive producers’ accountability, life-cycle study, material use as well as resource flows, plus eco-efficiency. Prakash (2002) believed that marketing literature on greening products and/or greening firms builds on both the societal as well as social marketing research. (ibid, 2002) According to Ward (2009) green marketing is simply the method of selling products and/or services which are based on their environmental benefits. In such conditions the product or/and production methods and/or packaging methods can be environmentally friendly. The assumption of green marketing is that buying decision of potential consumers will base on services’ and/or products’ greenness. (Ward, 2009)

Schaefer (2007) asks the question that “Is there only an environmental issue to worry about?” (Schaefer, 2007) and suggested that “If taken to natural consumption, green consumption would surely require some sacrifices.” (ibid, 2007) According to Schaefer (2007) the thought behind the green marketing is that today there is large number of customers who are ready to be charged little bit extra for a product which is environmentally friendly and comes from a companies which too are environmentally friendly. But even the idea of green marketing faces some issues in itself. It issue is the idea of greening the world through marketing which companies follow not for the issue to help environment but to increase the sales and profit. Another problem with green marketing is that the green revolution would not work with the current and expected customer demands. Just a small number of customers who are dedicated towards greenness will go to a significant depth in order to promote the issue of green marketing within the business world. (ibid, 2007)

The notion of green consumption according to Guattari ([1989] 2000) is of recycling; buying green products; and the act of consuming less, these three area of green consumption are clearly all linked, related as well as are between each other. (Guattari, [1989] 2000) According to Littler (2009) the issue with the Guattari’s buying green concept is the culture and social divisions around it. Often these kind of green products are charged little more than the normal goods therefore are less preferred by the middle and lower-class people and customers. These kinds of products are not only preferred for the motive of their saving energy but also because people think buying them is luxurious and food products might have better taste and good quality. (Litter, 2009) As we know there are limited resources on the earth which are at the extent of getting finished. The notion of consume less is one of the solution in which if the consumer will consume less which will result in less demand of the good resulting in less production and less requirement of raw-materials. Therefore it is clear: just consume less. The practice of consume less is a well known area of green consumption where a relationship between environmental, mental as well as social ecologies already in circulation. (ibid, 2009) The most complex area in the green consumption is recycling. It is so because of the reason that it involves various steps and numerous material requirements. Many of the company have not yet been able to adopt this method resulting the failure of some process of recycling area in green consumption. (ibid, 2009)

According to Peattie (2005) the market researches taken during 1990s have shows the growing concern of the customers towards environment during that period. But the companies had taken it for granted that green would sell although many firms responded by showing some changes in their campaigns with more ecological friendly manner. (Peattie, 2005) Green marketing has also developed its own tradition. As a result of which the companies, customers, corporation as well as colleagues, they all are having hard time in trying to develop a greener strategy. (ibid, 2005) Peattie (2005) suggested that green marketing is characterised by the socio-environmental subvention that many usual commodities successfully enjoy as well as the performance effect of eliminating unsafe manufactured goods components. Therefore the products which are often believed to be in a very hard as well as aggressive position are green products. (ibid, 2005)

Marketers should have knowledge about the social as well as ethical responsibility along with the issue happening from their actions. (Dibb and Simkin, 2001)In this case Corporate Social Responsibility plays a vital role. Corporate Social Responsibility is a mean by which a business can work ethically and according to Kotler and Lee (2006) “Corporate Social Responsibility is a commitment to improve community well being through discretionary business practices and contributions of resources.” (Kotler and Lee, 2006: 3; cited in Littler, 2009) According to Littler (2009) Corporate Social Responsibility is a mean or a way through which corporations scams on for whitewashing their flawed image in front of public as a result of which it can avoid itself being related to the issues such as human rights abuses and/or labour exploitation – or corporations can also use tokenistic eco projects for greenwashing their brand name in an era of public worry over the issue of global warming. (Littler, 2009) As Littler (2009) in his book says, “Corporate Social Responsibility is a mean by which corporations aim to ‘give something back’ to the society and community they are part of.” (ibid, 2009) According to Brenkert (2008) the critical problem with ethical marketing is on how to plan a system for manufacture, supply, as well as product monitoring in an ethical manner is essential when marketing relations has an important part in the corporation. (Brenkert, 2008) “Current ethical challenges to marketing arise during a time when marketing, as well as most businesses face considerable change.” (ibid, 2008)

During 1999 there was food scare which was insinuation for retailers, customers, regulators as well as producers. Although government promises, statistics in a NOP opinion poll states that majority of the consumers were worried about the intake genetically modified foodstuff, 88 per cent were having knowledge about GM foods, whereas 60 per cent of the public were worried about its consumption. Supermarkets were guaranteed to take assertion from traders about the GM’s ingredients in goods delivered to them. Safeway as well as Tesco have taken measures to label clearly food products modified by GM. While stores like Sainsbury’s have started with hot-line services in order to help consumers’ queries, issues as well as fears in relation to the GM food products. Some companies to increase their selling has stopped printing the right information on their products, i.e. they no more print about GM ingredients on their goods although they were still in use. (Dibb and Simkin, 2001)

Bandvulc tyres are a leading manufacturer of retread tyres in The United kingdom today. They came over to motivate for the reason of their strong environmental culture imbedded throughout their organisation. Till now the company has helped in focusing their marketing material on the benefits of using recycled tires. In their advertisements the company has been using Varity of material to show their loyalty as well as devotion towards the environmental issues by development of green company logo. In their advertisements company has also been showing how their in-house team been working hard to develop a product for their customers which can help is reduction of CO2 omission in the atmosphere and less fuel consumption by the vehicles using their products. (Anonymous, 2009)

Conclusion

It is clear that Radical Consumption, Green marketing and Ethical marketing revolve around same central concept of rightness and greenness. But they have a very thin line of difference between them. Normally people think green and ethical marketing to be one and a same thing, but theoretically they are two different aspects. As discussed earlier green marketing is mainly related to environmental aspect, the ‘greenness’ aspect, where as ethical marketing is mainly related to the right way of marketing a good, the ‘rightness’ aspect. Radical consumption can also be discussed as ethical consumption, which covers both the green and ethical marketed goods. If a person buys goods which are green and ethical, they are ethical (radical) consumers. As world Commission on Environmental and Development said, it’s just not the part of the company, but government as well as the consumers to make this a success. Different writers came up with different theories and conclusion on these topics. But at the end their writing were having same meaning and bases. As discussed with some example and case study of GM food products and Bandvulc tires, the company promoted their products with green and ethical marketing, and the customers for helping the environment were ready to pay a bit extra for every unit. Although in GM food case, there it was seen to be boycotted by the consumer, as they were worried about the environment and their health as the food product which was sold was not green and genetically modified. Therefore, we can say not just greenness is important but goodness as well as fairness is important too. Thereby, radical consumption is basically consumption of goods which are produced and marketed not just green but also can be ethical good.

Reference & Bibliography.

1. Anonymous (2009) http://www.bandvulc.com/SiteHomepage.aspx Accessed on: 17^th April 2009.

2. Anonymous (2009) http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/ShoppingEthically/WhyBuyEthically.aspx Accessed on: 19^th April 2009.

3. Alma, T. M. & Lozada, H. R. (1996) Green marketing in a Unified Europe, Haworth Press.

4. Brenkert, G. G. (2008) Marketing Ethics, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

5. Dibb, S. & Simkin, L. (2001) The Marketing Casebook: cases and concepts, 2^nd Edition, London, Thomson Learning.

6. Guattari, F. ([1989] 2000) The Three Ecologies, Trans. I. Pindar & P. Sutton. London: Continuum.

7. Hole, G. & Hawker, S. (2006) The Oxford English Minidictionary, 6^th Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

8. Kotler, P. & Lee, N. (2006) Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

9. Littler, J. (2009) Radical Consumption: Shopping for change in contemporary culture. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

10. Menon, A. and Menon, A. (1997) ‘Enviropreneurial marketing strategy: the emergence of corporate environmentalism as market strategy’, Journal of Marketing, 61: 51-67.

11. Peattie, K. (2005) ‘Green Marketing: legend, myth, force or prophesy?’, Qualitative Market Research: an international Journal, Vol. 8. No. 4. Pp: 357 – 370.

12. Peattie, K. and Crane, A. (2005) ‘Green marketing: legend, myth, farce or prophesy?’, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 8(4): 357-370.

13. Prakash, A. (2002) ‘Green Marketing, Public Policies and Managerial Strategy’, Business Strategy and the Environment, 11: 285-297.

14. Schaefer, A. (2007) http://www.open2.net/blogs/money/index.php/2007/06/25/green_marketing?blog=5. Accessed on: 4^th April 2009.

15. Ward, S. (2009) http://sbinfocanada.about.com/od/marketing/g/greenmarketing.htm. Accessed on: 4^th April 2009.

16. World Commission on Environment & Development (1984) Our Common Future, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Source: Kunal Rathi’s University’s Assignment (2009)

The Story of The Eagle…

by Kunal Rathi

The Eagle has the longest life-span of its’ species. It can live up to 70 years. But to reach this age the eagle must make a hard decision.

During its’ 40’s:

Its’ long and flexible talons can no longer grab pray which serves as food. Its’ long and sharp beak becomes bent. Its’ old-aged and heavy wings, due to their thick feathers, become stuck to its’ chest and make it difficult to fly.

Then, the eagle is left with only two options: DIE or go through a painful process of change which lasts 150 days.

The process requires that the eagle fly to a mountain top and sit on its’ nest. There the eagle knocks its’ beak against a rock until it plucks it out. After plucking it out, the eagle will wait for a new beak to grow back and then it will pluck out its’ talons. When its’ new talons grow back, the eagle starts plucking its’ old-aged feathers. And after five months, the eagle takes its’ famous flight of rebirth and lives for another 30 more years.

Now the question arise: Why is change needed?

• Many times, in order to survive we have to start a change process.
• We Sometimes need to get rid of old memories, habits and other past traditions.
• Only freed from past burdens, can we take advantage of the present.

Now you would be thinking, “What this have to do with management?”

The answer is very simple and basic:

• If you want to survive in the market, business need to have a changing process and less of resistance to changes.
• Old ways of working should be changed with the changing environment in which businesses are, or the competitors can take a full advantage over you.
• Businesses (i.e. people who manage) should learn from the past mistakes (of their as well as other firms), and then they can take advantage of the present.

 

Rest is very simple. Thereby, an eagle teaches us a good management lesson but more importantly, a lesson for a good life. Here we can see that every element of nature teaches us a lesson in one way or the other, its only on the individuals if they see it or not.

Source: Email & Self.