Part 1

Card Set Information

Author:
Jaspervdmeel
ID:
194187
Filename:
Part 1
Updated:
2013-01-21 11:29:27
Tags:
poep
Folders:

Description:
poep
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user Jaspervdmeel on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Five Ps for strategy
    Strategie als een plan (bedoelde): een richtingsaanduiding naar de toekomst, een pad om vanhier naar daar te komen.

    Strategie als een pattern (uitgevoerde): een consistent gedrag in de loop der tijd.

    • § Strategie als een position: het koppelen van
    • bepaalde producten aan bepaalde markten. “Strategy is the creation of a unique
    • and valuable position, involving a different set of activitied” (Porter). Strategie kijkt naar beneden en naar buiten (externe
    • marktplaats)

    • § Strategie als een perspective: de fundamentele manier waarop een organisatie dingen doet (zie figuur 1.4).
    • Strategie kijkt naar binnen (in de organisatie, hoofden van
    • strategisten) en naar boven, naar de visie van de enterprise.

    Changing position within perspective may be easy; chaning perspective, even while trying to maintain position, is not.

    Strategie als een plot (ploy): het behalen van marktaandeel door een bepaalde ‘manoeuvre’ bedoeld om de tegenstander of de concurrent slimmer af te zijn.
  2. The ten schools
    • Prescriptive schools hoe strategieën tot stand zouden moeten komen):
    • - The Design School: strategievorming als scheppingsproces (process of conception)- --The Planning School: strategievorming als formeel proces
    • - The Positioning School: strategievorming als analytisch proces

    • Descriptive schools (hoe strategie in de praktijk tot stand komt):
    • - The Entrepreneurial School: strategievorming als visionair proces- The Cognitive School: strategievorming als geestelijk proces

    • De vier scholen die volgen hebben geprobeerd om het proces van strategie formatie te openen, verder dan het individu, naar andere krachten en andere actoren.
    • - The Learning School: strategievorming als ontstaansproces (emergent process)- The Power School: strategievorming als onderhandelingsproces
    • - The CulturalSchool: strategievorming als collectief proces
    • - The Environmental School: strategievorming als reactiefproces


    • Combinatie (integratie van de verschillende scholen):
    • - The Configuration School: strategievorming als veranderingsproces (transformation)
  3. Strategy Pros and Cons
    1. Strategie bepaalt de richting: echter de strategie kan als oogkleppen fungeren en zo ervoor zorgen dat potentiële gevaren worden niet gezien (je vaart in een ijsberg). Wanneer je langzaam beweegt, kijkt naar voren maar niet te ver vooruit, en naar iedere kant, kan gedrag op ieder moment worden veranderd.

    2. Strategie zorgt voor geconcentreerde inspanning: activiteiten worden gecoördineerd waardoor er geen chaos ontstaat, echter wanneer teveel op één doel gericht ziet men andere mogelijkheden niet meer, groepsdenken kan ontstaan.

    3. Strategie bepaalt de organisatie: eenvoudig handvat om de organisatie te begrijpen en zich te onderscheiden van anderen, echter kan leiden tot te eenvoudige omschrijving zodat het een cliché wordt en de rijke complexiteit van het systeem verloren gaat.

    4. Strategie zorgt voor consistentie: nodig om onduidelijkheden te verminderen en voor orde te zorgen, echter strategie is een vereenvoudiging van de werkelijkheid waardoor er een verkeerd of vertekend beeld kan ontstaan.
  4. The design school
    The design school represents the most influential view of the strategy-formation process. The SWOT analysis is an outcome of it.As its simplest, the design school proposes a model of strategy making that seeks to attain a match, or fit, between internal capabilities and external possibilities. “Economic strategy will between as the match between qualifications and opportunity that positions a firm in its environment.” ‘Establish fit’ is the motto of the design school.
  5. Intentions fully realized in strategy
    Intentions that are fully realized can be called deliberate (no learning) strategies.
  6. Not realized intentions
    Those that are not realized at all can be called unrealized strategies. (in planning school)
  7. Emergent (no control) strategy
    where a pattern realized was not expressly intended. Actions were taken, one by one, which converged over time to some sort of consistency or pattern.Strategies have to form as well as be formulated.
  8. Strategy Pro's and Cons
    1. Strategie bepaalt de richting: echter de strategie kan als oogkleppen fungeren en zo ervoor zorgen dat potentiële gevaren worden niet gezien (je vaart in een ijsberg). Wanneer je langzaam beweegt, kijkt naar voren maar niet te ver vooruit, en naar iedere kant, kan gedrag op ieder moment worden veranderd.

    2. Strategie zorgt voor geconcentreerde inspanning: activiteiten worden gecoördineerd waardoor er geen chaos ontstaat, echter wanneer teveel op één doel gericht ziet men andere mogelijkheden niet meer, groepsdenken kan ontstaan.

    3. Strategie bepaalt de organisatie: eenvoudig handvat om de organisatie te begrijpen en zich te onderscheiden van anderen, echter kan leiden tot te eenvoudige omschrijving zodat het een cliché wordt en de rijke complexiteit van het systeem verloren gaat.

    4. Strategie zorgt voor consistentie: nodig om onduidelijkheden te verminderen en voor orde te zorgen, echter strategie is een vereenvoudiging van de werkelijkheid waardoor er een verkeerd of vertekend beeld kan ontstaan.
  9. major role of strategy in organizations?
    it resolves the big issues so that people can get on with the little details – like targeting and serving customers instead of debating which markets are best.
  10. Strategie als struikelblok
    Een strategie wordt gebruikt om bepaalde doelstellingen te verwezenlijken, echter de situatie kan veranderen (de omgeving wordt stabiel, posities in de markt verdwijnen, er ontstaan nieuwe kansen) waardoor de strategie niet meer doeltreffend is en een blok aan het been wordt.Thus we conclude that strategies are to organizations what blinders are to horses: they keep them going in a straight line but hardly encourage peripheral vision. All this leads to our final conclusion, which is that strategies (and the strategic management process) can be vital to organizations by their absence as well as their presence.
  11. Basicmodel
    BasicmodelStroming hangt model aan waarin geprobeerd wordt de interne capaciteiten (krachten en zwakheden blootleggen) te rijmen met de externe mogelijkheden (bedreigingen en kansen ontdekking).Basismodel (zie figuur 2.1 p.26) benadrukt belang van de evaluatie van externe en interne omstandigheden, met als doel de risico’s (Threats) en kansen (Oppertunities) in de omgeving respectievelijk de sterke en zwakke punten van de organisatie (Strenghts en Weakness) boven water te halen.De assumptie is dat verschillende alternatieve strategieën worden ontworpen en geëvalueerd, zo dat er een kan worden geselecteerd. Het beste framework om deze evaluatie te maken is in termen van een serie testen:Consistency: the strategy must not present mutually inconsistent goals and policies.Consonance: the strategy must represent an adaptive response to the external environment and to the critical changes occurring within it.Advantage: the strategy must provide for the creating and/or maintenance of a competitive advantage in the selected area or activity.Feasibility: the strategy must neither overtax available resources nor create unsolvable subproblems.Figuur 2.1External appraisal: technological, economic, social and political aspects of a company’s environment, and brief consideration of the issues of forecasting and scanning.Internal appraisal: difficulty to know themselves, acting and responding, etc.Two other factors that are believed important in strategy making. One is managerial values – the beliefs and preferences of those who formally lead the organization, and the other is social responsibilities – specifically the ethics of the society in which the organization functions, at least as these are perceived by its managers.

    • Table 2.1 p.29: environmental variables checklist (keertje doorkijken)Table 2.2 p.30: strengths and weaknessess checklist (keertje doorkijken)
  12. Premises of the Design School
    1) Strategy formation should be a deliberate process of conscious thought: doeltreffende strategieën komen voort uit strak geleid denkproces. Strategievorming niet intuïtief maar moet formeel worden geleerd.

    2) Verantwoordelijkheid voor controlle en consciousness bij de topbestuurder (de strateeg): beslissingen worden opgelegd aan de gehele organisatie en bewaakt. Geen ruimte externe spelers en zeer beperkte rol van de omgeving (wel rekening houden met omgeving maar geen interactie).

    3) Model strategievorming simpel en formeel: enige manier om proces te bewaken door één persoon is door proces zo eenvoudig mogelijk te houden.A line between nonconscious intuition on one side and formal analysis on the other, a position Andrews characterized as ‘an act of judgement’. This distinguishes the design school from the entrepreneurial school on one side and the planning and especially positioning schools on the other.

    4) Strategie moet uniek zijn: the best ones result from a process of individualized design: strategie toegesneden op specifieke situatie. Proces strategievorming is creatieve handeling en gebaseerd op de onderscheidende vaardigheid van de onderneming.

    5) Ontwerp-proces is afgerond wanneer strategie volledig geformuleerd is. Eerst formuleren strategie daarna implementeren. Geen formulering tijdens of na implementatie

    6) Strategie expliciet en eenvoudig zijn: zodat iedereen in de organisatie de strategie kan begrijpen.

    7) Uitvoeren strategie pas als deze volledig geformuleerd zijn: onderscheid opstellen strategie (denken) en uitvoeren (doen)ervan. De structuur komt na de strategie.
  13. Critique of the Design school
    A strategy that locates an organization in a niche can narrow its own perspective. This seems to have happened to the design school itself with regard to strategy formation.

    - Meten sterke/zwakke punten (leren wordt overgeslagen): strategievorming gezien als proces van schepping (conception) en niet zozeer van leren. Organisatie kan niet zomaar op basis van analyse weten wat de sterke en zwakke punten zijn. Je weet niet van tevoren of een vaardigheid een sterkpunt is. Ervaringen (leren) kan hierover inzicht geven.

    - Structuur volgt strategie: de strategie is dan belangrijker dan de gevestigde capaciteiten (structuur) echter deze capaciteiten zijn input voor SWOT. Strategievorming is een geïntrigeerd systeem en niet een arbitraire opvolging. We conclude that structure follows strategy the way the left foot follows the right foot in walking. In effect, the development of strategy and the design of structure both support the organization, as well as each other.

    - Strategie expliciet maken (starheid bevorderen): omgeving is veranderlijk, wanneer strategie expliciet dan focust op één punt en men heeft oogkleppen op en dan is het zicht op buiten weg. Daardoor is het een obstakel voor strategische verandering wanneer dit noodzakelijk is.The point of the authors is that organizations must function, not only with strategy, but also during periods of the formation of strategy, which can endure for long periods. During6periods of uncertainty, the danger is not the lack of explicit strategy but the opposite

    – ‘premature closure’.- Scheiding denken en doen: kloof tussen formuleren en uitvoeren strategie. Echter strategie die bedacht is moet ook nog kunnen worden uitgevoerd. Ervaringen in uitvoering komen niet terug bij degene die formuleert. Scheiding denken en doen kan alleen in een stabiele en voorspelbare omgeving. Wanneer omgeving complex en instabiel wordt dan moeten denken en doen worden geïntrigeerd om zo tijdig te kunnen inspelen op de veranderlijke omgeving.There is a process of designing that lead to outputs called designs. What we are here calling the design school has focused on the process, not the product. But it has assumed that the two are intrinsically linked: that strategy is a grand design that requires a grand designer. There is no one best route to truth in strategy, indeed no rout there at all.
  14. Contexts and Contributions
    The critique of the authors has been intended to dismiss not the design school but its assumption of universality. They reject the model ware strategy formation has to emphasize learning, especially on a collective basis, under conditions of uncertainty and complexity. And where it tends to be applied with superficial understanding of the operations in question.
  15. They see a set of four conditions in particular that should encourage an organization to tilt toward the design school model:
    1. Alle informatie die nodig is voor opstellen strategie kan door één persoon worden verwerkt.

    2. Persoon moet situatie volledig en in detail leren kennen.One strategist can understand in a deep sense that is going on. We might add that he or she can only know the organization by truly being in the organization.

    3. De situatie moet stabiel blijven of in ieder geval voorspelbaar.The strategist must know what needs to be known to conceive an intended strategic perspective that will have relevance well beyond the period of implementation.


    4. Organisatie moet bereid zijn centraal opgestelde strategie uit te voeren.
  16. Best use for design school
    Het model van de ontwerpschool lijkt het best te kunnen worden wanneer de organisatie een grote verandering doormaakt en daarna in een nieuwe periode van stabiliteit terechtkomt (period of reconception). Een andere context is wanneer het is een nieuwe organisatie en het moet een duidelijke richting hebben (initial conception).Fundamentele bijdrage school: strategie is een combinatie van externe kansen en interne capaciteiten.
  17. The planning school (Strategy formation as a Formal Process)
    The central messages of the planning school fitted in neatly with the whole trend in management education and big businesses as well as big government practice: formal procedure, formal training, formal analysis, lots of numbers. The planning school originated at the same time as the design school. This school was to find out how planning really worked out in practice, because the strategic planning literature grew dramatically, quantitatively, but not qualitatively.
  18. The Basic Strategic Planning Model
    The Basic Strategic Planning ModelThere are hundreds of different strategic planning models. Most can be reduced to the same basic ideas: take the SWOT model, divide it into neatly delineated steps, articulate each of these with lots of checklists and techniques, and give special attention to the setting of objectives on the front end and the elaboration of budgets and operating plans on the back end.

    THE OBJECTIVES-SETTINGS STAGEIn place of thinking about values in the design school, proponents of the planning school developed extensive procedures for explicating and, wherever possible, quantifying the goals of the organization. Planning people tried to distinguish goals from strategies, while subscribers to the design school rarely did so.

    THE EXTERNAL AUDIT STAGEOnce the objectives have been set, the next two stages, as in the design school, are to assess the external and internal conditions of the organizations. A major element of the audit of the organization’s external environment is the set of forecasts made about future conditions.

    THE INTERNAL AUDIT STAGEThe study of internal strengths and weaknesses is subjected to extensive decomposition. (use of checklists and tables)

    THE STRATEGY EVALUATION STAGE Because the process of evaluations lends itself to elaboration and qualification, techniques abound, ranging from the simple, early ones of return-on-investment calculation to a rash of later techniques such as “competitive strategy valuation,” “risk analysis,” “the value curve,” and the various methods associated with calculating shareholder value (most are oriented to financial analysis -> value creation) Assumption: strategies are not evaluated or developed so much as delineated (explained/defined), at a particular point in time.

    THE STRATEGY OPERATIONALIZATION STAGEHere is where most of the models become very detailed. Decomposition is important: all strategies must be broken down into sub strategies for successful implementation. The label for all this effort at operationalization is planning, but, as suggested above, the intention has often really been control.

    SCHEDULING THE WHOLE PROCESSNot only the steps in the process, but also the timetable by which they are carried out, has to be programmed. (voor al deze stappen zie figuur 3-1 blz 50 = kopie)
  19. Sorting Out the Hierarchies
    There are four planning hierarchies divided in two groups.

    The first group is called performance control and the second one is called action planning.

    Action planning strategies (strategies hierarchy & programs hierarchy) are concerned with making decisions before the fact in order to drive behaviour.Performance control strategies (budget hierarchy & objectives hierarchy) are designed to assess the results of behaviour after the fact.

    Performance control strategies (budget hierarchy & objectives hierarchy) are designed to assess the results of behaviour after the fact.
  20. Premises of the planning school
    1. Strategies result form a controlled, conscious process of formal planning, decomposed into distinct steps, each delineated by checklists and supported by techniques.

    2. Responsibility for the overall process rests with the chief executive in principle; responsibility for its execution rests with staff planners in practice.

    3. Strategies appear from this process full blown, to be made explicit so that they can be implemented trough detailed attention to objectives, budgets, programs, and operating plans of various kinds.
  21. About planning school 
    The planning school accepted most of the premises of the design school, save one and a half. But these made a considerable difference.The model was the same, but its execution was prescribed to be highly formal (at the limit almost mechanically programmed). The simple, informal model of the design school thus became an elaborated sequence of steps.Machine assumption: produce each of the component parts as specified, assemble them according to the blueprint, and the end product (strategy) will result.
  22. Recent developments in the planning school
    1. Scenario planning

    • 2. Strategic control: most obvious her is control of strategy itself – keeping organizations on their intended strategic tracks. In the critique the authors argue that a great deal of what has been called strategic planning really amounts to this kind of strategic control. According to Goold and Campbell (1987) strategic control is one of three strategy-making styles available to the headquarters of a multibusiness, diversified company:a. Strategic planning: headquarters are involved in many of the key strategic decisions of the individual businesses.b. Financial control: responsibility is devolved to the individual businesses within the corporation.c.
    • Strategic control: this is a hybrid style, which involves both business unit autonomy and promotion of corporate interests. Responsibility for strategy rests with the division, but strategy must ultimately be approved by headquarters.

    Strategic control has to broaden its scope beyond strategic planning. It is the performance of the organization that matters, not the performance of its planning.Simons (1995) developed a model consistent with this statement. He argues that despite the ubiquity of the diagnostic control systems, managers pay little attention to tem, focusing more on the interactive control systems.
  23. The seven deadly sins of strateic planning
    • 1. The staff took over the process
    • 2. The process dominated the staff
    • 3. Planning systems were virtually designed to produce no results
    • 4. Planning focused on the more exciting game of mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures at the expense of core business development
    • 5. Planning processes failed to develop true strategic choices
    • 6. Planning neglected the organizational and cultural requirements of the strategy
    • 7. Single-point forecasting was an inappropriate basis for planning in an ear of restructuring and uncertainty.
  24. Plannings unplanned troubles
    Strategic planning ran into trouble in the early 1980s, when the activity was cut back in many companies. Yet surely no technique has ever had more managerial attention than strategic planning. Plans by their very nature are designed to promote inflexibility – they are meant to establish clear direction, to impose stability on an organization.Next, planning is built around the categories that already exist in the organization. That hardly makes it easy to change the categories, which is what true strategic change is all about.
  25. The Fallacies of Strategic Planning
    The critique is not of planning but of strategic planning – the idea that strategy can be developed in a structured, formalized process.

    THE FALLACY OF PREDETERMINATIONTo engage in strategic planning, an organization must be able to predict the course of its environment, to control it, or simply to assume its stability. Strategic planning requires not only predictability following, but also stability during, strategy making. If strategy means stability, then strategy making means interferences-unexpected interference.

    THE FALLACY OF DETACHMENT (afstandelijkheid)Detached managers together with abstracted planners do not so much make bad strategies; mostly they do not make strategies at all. Effective strategists are not people who abstract themselves from the daily detail, but who immerse themselves in it while being able to abstract the strategic messages from it. Effective strategy making connects acting to thinking which in turn connects implementation to formulation.Oftewel: Het denken wordt van het doen gescheiden waardoor het vereist is dat alle relevante informatie ook op de juiste plaats terechtkomt.

    • THE FALLACY OF FORMALIZATION
    • Strategic planning ha snot been presented as an aid to strategy making, as some kind of support for natural managerial processes (including intuition), but as strategy making and in place of intuition. Strategy making is an immensely complex process involving the most sophisticated, subtle, and at times subconscious of human cognitive and social processes. Above all, learning, in the form of fits and starts, discoveries based on serendipitous events, and the recognition of unexpected patterns, plays a key role, if not the key role, in the development of strategies that are novel. The failure of strategic planning is the failure of formalization – of systems to do better at

    THE GRAND FALLACY OF “STRATEGIC PLANNING”Because analysis is not synthesis, strategic planning has never been strategy making. Analysis cannot substitute for synthesis. We conclude that strategic planning has been misnamed. It should have been called strategic programming.
  26. Two types of planners:
    - Left-handed planners: encourage creative strategic thinking, they raise all kinds of difficult questions, and they search around for emergent strategies in streams of their organizations’ actions.

    - Right-handed planners: are concerned with more formal kinds of strategy analysis, and particularly with the strategic programming of clearly intended strategies, which, as we hope this discussion has made clear, suit only a context that is rather stable, or at least predictable, or what amounts to the same thing, controllable by the organization.
  27. The Context and Contribution of the planning school
    Planners have important roles to play around the black box of strategy formation, if not within it. When necessary, but only then, planners can carry out formal planning too, but as a means to program the strategies that came out of that black box – to codify them, elaborate them, translate them into ad hoc programs and routing plans and budgets, and use these for purposes of communication and control.
  28. Chapter 4: The positioning school (analytical process)
    Although this positioning school accepted most of the premises that underlay the planning and design schools, as well as their fundamental model, it added content, in two ways. In the literal sense of emphasizing the importance of strategies themselves, not just the process by which they were to be formulated. And it added substance: after all those years of the general pronouncements of the planning school and the repetition of the design school model, the positioning school, by focusing on the content of strategies, opened up the prescriptive side of the field to substantial investigation.
  29. Premises Positioning School
    De veronderstellingen van de positioneringschool zijn:

    1. Strategieën zijn generieke, uitdrukkelijk algemene, aanwijsbare posities in de markt.

    2. Die markt (de context) is economisch en concurrerend.

    3. Het strategievormingsproces houdt in dat één van de generieke posities wordt gekozen aan de hand van een cijfermatige analyse.

    4. Analisten spelen een belangrijke rol in dit proces (ze maken niet te strategieën!).

    5. Er rolt een volledige strategie uit de bus die vervolgens onder woorden gebracht en uitgevoerd moet worden.Strategy precedes structure. But another form of ‘structure’, that of the industry, was added on top, so that industry structure drove strategic position which drove organizational structure.
  30. Stromingen (Waves of positioning school)
    • Er zijn drie stromingen binnen de positioning school:
    • 1. Het vroegere militaire onderzoek;
    • First wave: origins in the military maxims

    • 2. De aanwijzingen uit de advieshoek;
    • Second wave: the search for consulting imperatives (‘60-’80)

    • 3. Het recente empirische onderzoek.
    • Third wave: the development of empirical propositions (‘70-’80)
  31. First wave positioning school
    • First wave: origins in the military maxims
    • een duidelijk omschreven, beslissend en bereikbaar doel;
    • - offensieve actie;
    • - massa (= concentratie);
    • - efficiënt gebruik van geweld;
    • - manoeuvre (= flexibiliteit);
    • - eenheid in bevel;
    • - veiligheid;
    • - verassing.
  32. Second wave Positioning school
    Second wave: the search for consulting imperatives (‘60-’80)

    Er zijn diverse hulpmiddelen: BCG growth-share matrix: star, cow, dog en problem childThis was part of ‘portfolio planning’, which addressed the question of how to allocate funds to the different businesses of a diversified company.Pijlen geven de succesvolgorde aan.12 Ervaringskromme: bij verdubbeling van cumulatieve fabricage van een product nemen de productiekosten met een vast percentage af (10-30%). Het suggereert dat wanneer de rest gelijk blijft, het eerste bedrijf in een nieuwe markt zijn volume snel kan laten stijgen om een kosten voordeel te behalen. Schaal wordt belangrijk.

     PIMS-databank: van data naar dicta. PIMS (profit impact of market strategies). Duizenden bedrijven voeren hun gegevens in en konden in ruil daarvoor hun positie steekproefsgewijs vergelijken met die van anderen

    Er zijn een aantal strategie variabelen geidentificeerd: investment intensity, market position, quality of products. Dit om te verwachte return on investment te schatten, het marktaandeel en de winst.
  33. Third wave positioning school
    • Third wave: the development of empirical propositions (‘70-’80)
    • Deze wave bestond uit systematisch empirisch onderzoek naar de relatie tussen externe condities en interne strategieën. Systematische studie zijn de ideale strategie kunnen ontdekken.Er zijn diverse modellen: Porter’s model van competitive analysis (five forces p.101): bedreiging van nieuwe binnenkomers, onderhandelingsmacht van de suppliers, onderhandelingsmacht van de klanten, bedreiging van substituten, intensiteit van de rivaliteit onder concurrenten. Dit bepaalt de strategie.Er zijn een paar generieke strategieën waardoor je kunt overleven. Generieke strategieën van Porter: Cost leadership: laagste kosten produceren. Differentiation: uniek zijn, loyaliteit. Focus: smalle marktsegmenten. Value Chain van Porter: it suggests that a firm can be disaggregated into primary and support activities. Primary activities are directly incolced in the flow of product to the customer. Support activieit exist to support primary activites. Firms achieve profit margins based on how the value chain is managed.

  34. Four sorts of researches in positioning school
    • Four sorts of researches in positioning school
    • 1. Afzonderlijk en stabiel (single static)

    2. Gegroepeerd en stabiel (cluster static)

    3. Afzonderlijk en dynamisch (single dynamic)

    • 4. Gegroepeerd en dynamisch (cluster
    • dynamics)The tendency has been to favor the simpler forms of research.

  35. Critique of the positioning school
    • The positioning school can be critiqued on the same grounds as the design and planning schools.
    • The separation of thinking from acting can render the strategy-making process excessively deliberate and so undermine strategic learning.
    • Further, dangers in looking to the future by extrapolating the trends of the present, in relying excessively on hard data, and in overformalizing the strategy-making process.
    • In our view no one has ever developed a strategy through analytical technique, what they presume.
    • - Een beperkte focus: gericht op economische en vooral de kwantificeerbare en niet op het sociale, politieke of niet-kwantificeerbare economie.

    - Een smalle context: er is een bias richting traditionele grote bedrijven (waar de harde data is). Dit zorgt ook voor een bias richting stabiliteit. Veel van de problemen komen door de bias voor externe condities, vooral van industrie en concurrentie, ten koste van interne capaciteiten (deze balans is wel aanwezig in de design school).

    - Over het proces. Het bericht is niet om naar buiten te gaan en te leren, maar binnen te blijven en de calculeren. Maar dit kan leren en creativiteit en persoonlijke commitment tegen werken. Er is namelijk geen optimale strategie die van te voren kan worden uitgewerkt, dit moet door energie, het goed maken door het werkelijkheid te maken.

    - Strategie zelf neigt naar een smalle focus. Het wordt gezien als een generieke positie, niet als een uniek perspectief. De design school promootte strategie als een perspectief en moedigste zijn creatieve design aan.Aan de dynamische kant heeft de positioning school een categorie ‘first mover advantage’. Maar door de oriëntatie op de analyse van harde data in bestaande categorieën ontmoedigt dis zo’n voordeel. Wanneer het analyseren klaar is, kan het voordeel al weg zijn.Het is de meest deterministische school. Er wordt geloofd dat er één beste generieke strategie is voor aan gegeven set van condities.
  36. Contribution and context of the positioning school
    The positioning school has reduced its role from the formulation of strategy to the conduction of strategic analyses in support of that process. This, the role of positioning is to support that process, not to be it. It has added content to the planning school, while shifting the role of planner to that of analyst.
  37. The entrepreneurial school (strategy formation as a visionary process)
    From the schools of prescription, we now move toward those of description, which seek to understand the process of strategy formation as it unfolds. We begin, however, with a school that stands in between.The design school, if not the planning and positioning schools, took formal leadership seriously, rooting strategy formation in the mental processes of the chief executive. The design school specifically sought to avoid the softer, more personalized and idiosyncratic elements of leadership. The entrepreneurial school has done exactly the opposite. Not only has this school focused the strategy formation process exclusively on the single leader, but it has also stressed the most innate of mental states and processes – intuition, judgement, wisdom, experience, insight. This promotes a view of strategy as perspective, associated with image and sense of direction, namely vision.Vision: a mental representation of strategy created or at lest expressed in the head of the leader. That vision serves as both an inspiration and a sense of what needs to be done.The environment, if not exactly subservient, becomes the terrain on which the leader manoeuvres with some ease, at least in terms of directing the organization into a protective niche.
  38. Origins in EconomicsThe entrepreneurial school, like the positioning school, grew out of economics. The entrepreneur figures prominently in neo-classical economics.Depending on one’s point of view, an entrepreneur can be:
    • a. the founder of an organization
    • b. the manager of a self-owned business
    • c. the innovative leader of an organizations owned by others
  39. Four types of entrepreneurs:
    • 1. the calculating inventor
    • 2. the inspirational innovator
    • 3. the overoptimistic promoter
    • 4. the builder of a strong enterprise
  40. This body of literature focuses on the entrepreneurial personality, unfortunately much of this research is rather negatively. Among the various characteristics attributed to the entrepreneurial personality have been strong needs for control, for independence, and for achievement, a resentment of authority, and a tendency to accept moderate risks.The chief characteristics of the approach of such personalities to strategy making according to Mintzberg (1973):
    1. In the entrepreneurial mode, strategy making is dominated by the active search for new opportunities (problems are secondary).

    2. In the entrepreneurial organization, power is centralized in the hands of the chief executive.

    3. Strategy making in the entrepreneurial mode is characterized by dramatic leaps forward in the face of uncertainty.

    4. Growth is the dominant goal of the entrepreneurial organization.
  41. VISION AS DRAMAFrances Westly and Henry Mintzberg (1989) contrasted two views of visionary leadership.
    1. Hypodermic needles (more traditional): the active ingredient (vision) is loaded into a syringe (words), which is injected into the employees. That causes them to jump up and down with great energy.

    • 2. Strategic vision as drama, as beginning in that magical moment when fiction and life blend together.
    • a. Repetition suggest that success comes from deep knowledge of the subject at hand
    • b. Representation (performance) means not just to perform but to make the past live again, giving it immediacy, vitality. (Vision goes beyond words, into action)
    • c. Assistance (attendance) means that the audience of the drama, whether in the theatre or the organization, empowers the actor no less than the actor empowers the audience.

    So, visionary leadership is style and strategy coupled together. It is drama, but not play-acting. Such leadership is born and made, the product of a historical moment.
  42. ENTREPRENEURIAL STRATEGY FORMATION IN A SUPERMARKET CHAIN
    Dit gaat over een voorbeeld van een supermarktketen. Er was een winkel die niet winstgevend was, in plaats van deze winkel te sluiten probeerde de eigenaar een hele nieuwe strategie uit, namelijk zelfservice tegen lagere prijzen. Pas toen het in deze winkel een succes bleek te zijn, werd dit concept uitgebreid richting de andere winkels binnen deze keten. Het idee erachter was dat de eigenaar de betreffende industrie erg goed kende en dat deze geconcentreerde kennis heel effectief gebruikt werd. Omdat deze eigenaar er zo dicht op zat, wist hij wat er speelde binnen het supermarktwezen, in tegenstelling tot de mensen op het hoofdkantoor die nog nooit een supermarkt van binnen gezien hebben. (in andere gevallen proberen deze mensen op het hoofdkantoor de strategie te bepalen en dit werkt dus niet). De waarschuwing is wel dat als deze persoon wegvalt, de strength een weakness wordt.Oftwel: Een nieuwe visie ontwikkelenHierbij moet eerst de mentale instelling veranderen voordat zich een nieuwe strategie kan vormen. Vervolgens moet deze worden afgeschermd, uitgewerkt en kunnen consequenties worden nagegaan.
  43. Where does vision come from? How do entrepreneurial leaders pick up signals in the environment that allow them to trigger major shifts in strategic perspective?
    Unfreezing: overcoming the natural defense mechanisms

    Change: require a shift in midset before a new strategic vision can be conceived

    Refreezing: the object is not to read the situation, at least not in a global sense, but in effect to block it out.
  44. Premises Entrepreneurial school
    • Premises Entrepreneurial school
    • 1. Strategy exists in the mind of the leader as perspective, specifically a sense of long-term direction, a vision of the organization’s future.

    2. The process of strategy formation is semiconscious at best, rooted in the experience and intuition of the leader, whether he or she actually conceives the strategy or adopts it form others and then internalizes it in his or her own behaviour.

    3. The leader promotes the vision single-mindedly, even obsessionally, maintaining close personal control of the implementation in order to be able to reformulate specific aspects as necessary.

    4. The strategic vision is thus malleable (subtle, flexible), and so entrepreneurial strategy tends to be deliberate and emergent – deliberate in overall vision and emergent in how the details of the vision unfold.

    5. The organization is likewise malleable a simple structure responsive to the leader’s directives, whether an actual start-up, a company owned by an individual, or a turnaround in a large established organization many of whose procedures and power relationships are suspended to allow the visionary leader considerable latitude for maneuver.

    6. Entrepreneurial strategy tends to take the form of niche, one or more pockets of market position protected from the forces of outright competition.
  45. Contribution, Critique, and Context of the Entrepreneurial School
    • Under entrepreneurship, key decisions concerning strategy and operations are together centralized in the office of the chief executive.Stacy (1992) has pointed to a number of “harmful consequences of vision”
    • 1. The advice to form a vision is neither concrete enough to be useful, nor is it possible whn the future is unknowable.
    • 2. Visions can fix managers too tightly in one direction.
    • 3. The current quests for vision place a tremendous and unrealistic burden on the leader
    • 4. The advice about vision distracts attention form what people are really doing when they successfully handle unknowable futures – learning and political interaction.
    • 5. As suggested in these and earlier comments, the entrepreneurial approach is risky, hinging on the health and whims of one individual.
  46. Critics entrepreneruial school
    • Critics entrepreneruial school
    • - De strategievorming ligt in handen van één individu.
    • - De totstandkoming van de strategie blijft een ‘zwarte doos’.
    • - Er bestaat de mogelijkheid dat ‘de grote baas’ zich verliest in operationele details zodatde strategische overwegingen uit het zicht verdwijnen.Men kan beter een visionaire organisatie opbouwen dan alles in handen legen van één leidermet visie.
  47. The cognitive school (strategy formation as a mental process)
    The job of the cognitive school is to get at what strategy making means in the sphere of human cognition, drawing especially on the field of cognitive psychology.The body of work that we shall be discussing forms not so much a tight school of thought as a loose collection of research, which seems, nonetheless, to be growing into such a school.Strategists are largely self-taught: they develop their knowledge structures and thinking processes mainly through direct experience. That experience shapes what they know, which in turn shapes what they do, thereby shaping their subsequent experience. This duality plays a central role in the cognitive school, giving rise to two rather different wings:

    1. The more positivistic wing treats the processing and structuring of knowledge as an effort to produce some kind of objective motion picture of the world.

    2. The other wing sees all of this as subjective: strategy is some kind of interpretation of the world.This chapter sits in this book as a kind of bridge between the more objective schools of design, planning, positioning and entrepreneurial, and the more subjective schools of learning, culture, power, environment and configuration.
  48. The world is large and complex, while human brains and their information-processing capacities are highly limited in comparison. Decision making thus becomes not so much rational as a vain effort to be rational.Analogies and methaphors, which, as we saw in the last chapter, can open up thinking, can also work in the opposite way, by oversimplifying and so narrowing the range of solutions considered. Dugaime and Schwenk (1985) have probed into how these and other distortions can affect acquisition and divestment (ontdoen van) decisions: (cognitive school)
    1. Reasoning by analogy: a methods that solve new problems based on past cases from a different domain.

    2. Illusion of control: Decision makers may overestimate the extent to which the outcomes are under their personal control.

    3. Escalating commitment: involves continued and increasing investment in the face of poor and declining outcomes of performance.

    4. Single outcome calculation: once divestment is considered as a way of dealing with a failing unit, it may quickly become the only alternative considered.
  49. Strategists differ in their cognitive styles, so that psychologists who study such characteristics of human behaviour as “cognitive complexity” or “openness” help to inform strategy making too.
    • Extroversion (E): energized by the outside worldIntroversion
    • (I): energized by the world inside one’s own headSensing
    • (S): information comes from relying on the sensesIntuition
    • (N): information comes from trying to grasp the essential patternsThinking
    • (T): relying on analysis for decisionFeeling (F): relying on feelings for decisionJudgement
    • (J): to live in a planned, orderly, controlled wayPerception
    • (P): to live in a flexible, spontaneous wayCombining these leads to sixteen possible types or styles.
  50. Cognition as Information ProcessingBeyond the biases in individual cognition are the effects of working in the collective system forprocessing information that is called an organization.
    Cognition as Information ProcessingBeyond the biases in individual cognition are the effects of working in the collective system forprocessing information that is called an organization.

    This besluitvormingsmodel van Corner, Kinicki and Keats (1994) argues that individuals andorganizations operate along essentially the same principles:

    ATTENTION: determines what information will be processed and what will be ignored.

    ENCODING: gives information meaning, by looking for a fit between the information andexisting categories. Such categories are, of course, often the source of bias, because they driveout nuance. Central to this entire process is some sort of shared group knowledge structure, bywhich a common frame of interpretation becomes dominant. Corner and colleagues distinguishbetween two types of consensus frames:- Emergent frame: constructed in an ad hoc fashion to deal with a novel problem or issue- Entrenched frame: a frame that is used automatically when interpreting strategic information,whether it is appropriate or not.

    STORAGE/RETRIEVAL: Cognition begins with memory. In the case of individuals, memory Isa web of associations between different items of information. In the case of organizations, theassociations are also embodied in forms, rules, procedures, conventions, and technologies. Thelink between the two is socialization: the organization works on the individual to accept existingroutines. Then these routines become part of the individual’s own memory, thus attuningcognition to organizations.

    CHOICE: The process of choice goes back and forth, from one stage to another, before movingdecisively towards resolution. The notion of a definitive category called “decision” may help toundertake action as well as to gather more information, but that category too cannot be viewed assome isolated event.

    OUTCOMES: Outcomes herald the beginning of the feedback process.19Cognition as MappingIn spite of the diversity of views in he cognitive school, on one point there is widespread agreement: an essential prerequisite for strategic cognition is the existence of mental structures to organize knowledge.A wrong mental representation is better than no representation at all, for at least it gives encouragement, and so can stimulate action.Everyone is bombarded with data. The problem is how to store it and make it available on a moment’s notice. Schemas do this by representing knowledge at different levels. Decision makers have certain expectations associated with a particular schema. Of course, activating a schema is only the first step. One still has to decide whether or not to take action.
  51. Cognition as Concept Attainment
    • Cognition as Concept Attainment
    • Managers are, of course, map makers as well as map users. How they create their cognitive maps is key to our understanding of strategy formation.Much of our crucial knowledge may be tacit: we may know far more than we can tell.Simon (1987) went on to argue that the essence of intuition lies in the organization of knowledge for quick identification and not in the rendering of that knowledge for inspired design. But this view is open to question.The source of insights may be mysterious. But the presence is not. Shimizu (1980) has referred to insights as intuitive sensibility, an ability to grasp instantly an understanding of the whole structure of new information.In-sight, seeing inside, seems to come to the decision maker when her or she can see beyond given facts to understand the deeper meaning of an issue.Careful study of the strategy-formation process in organizations repeatedly bears witness to phenomena of this nature – at the very heart of the process.Have we focused to much of our research and technique of strategic management on the wrong side of the human brain? Overall, we have a long way to go in understanding the critical mental processes of strategy making as concept attainment. Hence we must conclude that the cognition school, while potentially the most important of the ten, practically may well now be the least.
  52. Cognition as ConstructionThere is another side to the cognition school (the 2nd wing),
    Cognition as ConstructionThere is another side to the cognition school (the 2nd wing),

    • very different and potentially, perhaps more fruitful. This views strategy as interpretation, based on cognition as construction. To proponents of this view, the world “out there” does not simply drive behaviour “in here”, even if through the filters of distortion, bias, and simplification.For the interpretative or constructionist view, what is inside the human mind is not a reproduction of the external world. The mind imposes some interpretation of the environment – it constructs its world.Bateson argued that the psychological frame performs a function not dissimilar to that of a picture frame: it resolves the ambiguity of what is inside and what is outside, what is real within the context of interaction between viewer and situation and what is not. More generally, a psychological frame, according to Bateson, has the following properties:
    • - They are exclusive: by including certain messages within a frame, certain other messages are excluded.20
    • - They are inclusive: by excluding certain messages, others are included. (dit is niet hetzelfde als het punt hiervoor, maar waarom begrijp ik niet helemaal)
    • - They are related to what we call premises. The picture frame tells the viewer that he or she is not to use the same sort of thinking in interpreting the picture that might be used in interpreting the wallpaper outside the frame.
    • - A frame is metacommunicative: any message, which either explicitly or implicitly defines a frame, ipso facto (??) gives the receiver instructions or aids in any attempt to understand the messages included within the frame.
  53. Cognition as Construction
    A study of El Sawy points to the distinction between the schema which essentially belongs to the individual, and the frames which belong to the group. The schema depends on what the individual sees and believes. The frame, on the other hand, depends on group dynamics – on the relationships of individuals to each other and to the group.Managers need a rich repertoire of frames – alternative views of their world, so as not to be imprisoned by any one. The problem, of course, is that the practice of management requires focus, sometimes even obsession. “On the one hand, on the other hand” is hardly the best route to decisive action. On the other hand, opening up perspectives is also critical for effective management.
  54. IS THE ENVIRONMENT CONSTRUCTED? (cognitive school)
    The social constructionist view begins with a strong premise: no one in an organization “sees” the environment. Instead, organizations construct it from rich and ambiguous information in which even such basic categories as “inside” and “outside” can be very fuzzy.Social constructivists argue that since environments are constructed within the organization, they are little more than the product of managerial beliefs. Many people balk at this conclusion. Surely, they say there is an environment out there. To which social constructionists reply: this objection itself represents a simplistic assumption about the meaning of “environment”.
  55. Smircich and Stubbart (1985) help to clarify this by describing three competing conceptions of the environment. Historically, our understanding has moved from the first, through the second, and now toward the third:
    Smircich and Stubbart (1985) help to clarify this by describing three competing conceptions of the environment. Historically, our understanding has moved from the first, through the second, and now toward the third:

    • 1. The Objective Environment: an organization is embedded within an environment that has an external and independent existence. Environmental analysis thus entails discovery, or finding things that are already somewhere waiting to be found.
    • 2. The Perceived Environment: Strategists are permanently trapped by bounded rationality and by their incomplete and imperfect perceptions of the environment. From a practical standpoint, the challenge is minimizing the gap between flawed perceptions and the reality of their environment.
    • 3. The Enacted Environment: separate objective environments simply do not exist. Instead, organizations and environments are convenient labels for patterns of activity.

    Under this constructionist perspective, strategy formation takes on a whole new colour. Metaphors become important, as do symbolic actions and communications.

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview