While this article was written clearly, it seemed to lack the definite structure and purposefulness that the other articles we have read lately have. The article was organized of course, but difficult to follow the construction. The authors seemed to use a more intuitive approach because they didn’t give any definite guidelines for their bigger concepts. They gave lots of examples of what different businesses were doing, but didn’t go into greater detail than that. This article offers a new model of strategic thinking by basing the core of the resulting plans in certain competencies or in other words competitive advantage that companies possess in order to put themselves in a position to defend themselves against competitive forces and create end products that the consumer will be willing to purchase.
This article was clear and easy to understand. It was also written in a way that flowed smoothly. The author was convincing in a logical argument.This article is focused on the process of the strategy from various companies. This article didn’t exactly present itself as a new model or approach to strategy but rather a reminder that no matter what strategy a company plans to implement, it is imperative that they remember and respect the powers of competitive forces and therefore plan accordingly to avoid and/or overcome them.
The foundation of the fourth chapter in the book Strategy Safari is on the ‘single leader’. The other chapters have been focused on management as a whole and all of those involved, but this particular school is instead focus on the individual and the mental processes such as intuition, judgment, wisdom, experience, and insight. All of these together promote one of the most important things- perspective. Perspective sets the tone and then inspires vision, which is the root of all businesses.
Most of the proponents in this field were economists. They understood the importance of entrepreneurship and how to implement it. Therefore, Karl Marx was a leading proponent of this school. He lauded entrepreneurs for being the catalyst of change in an economy. Another important proponent was Joseph Schumpeter. He presented the idea of creative destruction which helped to inspire and promote the ones with the business ideas, the entrepreneur’s themselves.
In the third chapter of the book Strategy Safari by Henry Mintzberg, Bruce Ahlstrand, and Joseph Lampel the reader can start to see how all the chapters flow together to make one congruent thought on the main topic- Strategy. The Positioning School is really an extension off of the previous chapter, The Planning School. This School is based on the idea that the only types of strategies that are worth the time and trouble are those that “can be defended against existing and future competitors.” This thought is also something that was heavily discussed in the two article we had to read for class. The idea that all strategies should live up to those standards provides the basis for the Positioning School model.
This article was written clearly and easy to understand. It was also well organized that flowed smoothly. The author is convincing with a logical argument.
This article is focused on the content of the strategy.
This article presents a new approach to strategic management. While most top manager’s knee jerk reaction to conflict is to resolve it or avoid it completely this article attempt to present us with a different option which is to invite and embrace conflict as a way to not only create a consistency through out the company but a method of reaching the most efficient solution for a given problem.
Our group found this article to have clear understanding in the way it was written. It seemed somewhat organized; but sometimes jumped around. The author did convince us with a logical argument. The article suggests a new and seemingly reckless approach to strategy. It makes a case for companies to essentially “Go with the flow” and if you make a mistake it is nothing but a learning opportunity. It wants companies to not rule out emergent strategies as a possibly the best plan of action.
The foundation is built upon the basic sets of ideas are rooted in the basic model of design school. It originated at the same time as the design school and the most influential book: Corporate Strategy by H. Igor Ansoff – published in 1965. It casts a barely pale shadow of its former influence. This chapter is not just an approach to strategy information but a virtual religion to be promulgated with the fervor missionaries. One of the leading proponents is Peter Lorange. The basic model is:
· Objectives-setting stage
The foundation of this chapter was the two influential books written at the University of California (Berkley) and at M.I.T.
· Philip Selznick’s Leadership in Administration of 1957
o Distinctive competence
o Need to bring together the organization’s “internal state” with its “external expectations”
o Argued for building “policy into the organization’s social structure” – “implementation”
· Alfred Chandler’s Strategy and Structure of 1962. Established this school’s notion of business strategy and its relationship to structure
We think this article is focused both on the content and process of strategy. We believe that both aspects are important and this article does a good job of going over both. It gives necessary attention to both the steps involved in strategy and the contents that are so key to the topic. We liked this article because we thought it offered some very practical advice. The article was informative and interesting. This article relates to the other article, ‘Strategic Intent’ in how it needs to be flexible for various situations that may occur.
This article offered some very practical advice. It focused on the process of strategy and then gave examples of companies who had been through the same experiences that were being explained. It provided us a practical discussion on what strategy is and how we can apply it to our lives in school and also out in the business world.
Although it offered some great information, it was not organized. There was no clear definition, instead they offer descriptive statements. The author seems to be using more of a logical argument in this article because of the way he analyzes a situation and than ask, “why is it done that way?” and than says, “this is why, or how, it does not work”. Although at times it does seem to be a bit more passive that a full-out argument for the way things MUST be done and can pick up on some intuitive material.