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, 2nd 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)
No comments:
Post a Comment