Strategology

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.

Michael Ported is definitely the biggest proponent for this school. He has written book on the subject and is very knowledgeable. Other less likely proponents are Sun-Tzu and Carl von Clausewitz. Both of these men were prominent military leaders of their time and had their own original ideas about positioning and how it applies to strategy. Sun-Tzu understood that the “market place is a battlefield,” and so his war strategies carried over and are incredible applicable to the business world. Carl von Clausewitz was the same way. He was fighting in the midst of a battle where everyone was using the same tactics, but he helped change the traditional view of war, and consequently change the business world too.

The basic model of this school is to “focus on the content of strategies, opened up the prescriptive side of the field to substantial investigation.” What this means is, it’s important to always look at strategies (no matter how straight forward they are) with an open mind to see how you can use it in an original way to make your company more competitive. The premises for this school are:

1) Strategies are generic, specifically common, identifiable positions in the marketplace

2) That marketplace (the context) is economic and competitive

3) The strategy formation process is therefore one of selection of these generic positions based on analytical calculation

4) Analysts play a major role in this process, feeding the results of their calculations to managers who officially control the choices

5) Strategies thus come out from this process full blown and are then articulated and implemented; in effect, the market structure drives deliberate positional strategies that drive organizational structure.

The first criticism of this model is that the focus is too narrow. There is a fear that the focus is too concentrated on the more quantifiable side of things, therefore nor giving enough attention to the non-quantifiable things such as society or politics. Another concern is in regards to the bias that the positioning school has on big, traditional business. Not all businesses fall into that category and so there is the worry that this school would not be applicable to smaller, more independent models. The third concern is about the process that this school uses- which tends to be more thoughtful and calculating than most would prefer. A lot of times the only way a person learns is by getting out there and doing, so this method would not be as effective. The next and final criticism of this the strategy itself. This strategy seems to be more generic and not individualistic, which makes it harder to apply to other types of businesses. This of course is a problem for any one type of strategy.

All in all, the Positioning School has lots to offer the business world as long as it is taken with caution, much like anything else. It has made many contributions to the business world including the Elements of Industry structure and Porter’s generic strategies.