Strategy Is Not Something That an Organization Has But Something Its Members Do - Literature review Example

Strategy Is Not) Something That an Organization Has But Something Its Members Do” Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Course Name Date of Submission Contents Strategy as a practice and Leadership (Sт4s19) 15 1 Contents 2 “(Strategy Is Not) Something That an Organization Has But Something Its Members Do” 3 Competing Models of Strategy Development 3 Specialization Strategy 6 Community, Learning, Power, Change, Formality, and Diversity 7 Soft Systems Methodology 8 Three-Stage Process of Organizational Learning 10 Leadership in the Knowledge Era 10 Bridging Macro and Micro Factors 11 Schools of Strategy Formation 12 Conclusion 12 References 14 “(Strategy Is Not) Something That an Organization Has But Something Its Members Do” Entrepreneurs initiate a business with the ostensible objective of promoting growth so that the business can register success and dominate the market. Apparently, they have to use a strategy, which is defined as the approaches that are used by a company to achieve its aims in the market. In particular, strategies are the various forecasts that are made by businesses, or avenues that are instituted to ensure the business achieves its long-term plans (Kaye and Allison 2013, p. 11). For example, the main aim of an airline company is to have a fleet of aircrafts to transport individuals to many destinations across the globe. Evidently, the concern of the administration is to accumulate resources and raise the finances that can be used for the implementation of the proposals. Apparently, the propositions of the firm are focused on two important aspects. First, the firm has to involve generic suggestions that will enhance the overall outlook of the business so that it grows periodically (Mintzberg and Lampel 990, p. 24). Secondly, the leaders of the firm have to engage competitive strategies, which enhance the concentration of a firm in a market. This paper will focus on the different aspects of strategies that are used by firms, in addition to the different perspectives that are considered important. Competing Models of Strategy Development Academicians have institutionalized two approaches that are used by organizations to formulate their strategies, which have been used effectively over the years. The two models include the formal process that is based on the organizational structures and the emergent phenomenon model. In the emergent phenomenon model, the firm solves problems when they arise using distinctive tools and process, and this may include specific panels that are responsible for the situation. On the other hand, the processes based plan involves various groups that are formally formed to oversee the functions and activities of the company. In particular, they have to include the stakeholders that are directly concerned with the performance of the business. Thereby, they have to use various schemes that will analyze and study the environment such that a number of changes have to be implemented to improve performance. For example, the SWOT analysis is a preferred tool for many organizations as it defines the marketplace. First, the strengths define the internal advantages of a business, and they ought to be exploited to enhance the prevalence in the market (McLarney and Chung1990, p. 234). Secondly, the weaknesses define the disadvantages that the firm has, but they should be contained so that the business is not affected in the long run. Thirdly, the firms have opportunities, which are loopholes that can be used to augment its performance. Lastly, the firm has to focus on the threats, which can lead to the extermination of the business. Additionally, the firm has to focus on other applications including the PEST analysis, which define the prospects that a firm can have in a particular place. For example, the political atmosphere has a critical influence on the performance of a business especially when the legislations favor the businesses. However, the business may plunge into losses if the government does not institute laws that will protect the growth of entrepreneurship. Nonetheless, the organization has to focus on the economy, social perspective, and technological advancement so that an appropriate strategy is developed. In the same perspective, a business can use the logical incremental, adaptive and incremental strategy, which is also noted as a school of learning. Evidently, businesses have to encounter different environments, opportunities, threats and issues that might affect their stability and sustainability. Thus, they have to make constant changes to their strategy so that they can have leverage over the competitors. In particular, it is noted that the marketplace is characterized by constant change and this helps to reshape businesses (Rousseau, 2010, p. 432). Critically, firms have to refine and redefine their plans so that they can make crucial proposals that will help them to control the market. Therefore, it is important for the administration to search for information and opportunities that are available in the market so that they can be exploited to benefit the firm. Objectively, some of these activities may be executed in the short run while others are implemented in a business on permanent basis. As an example of the adaptive model, firms develop new products due to the information that is available in the market. It is noted that customers appreciate products that enhance their livelihoods, and they are likely to buy products that add value to their life. However, they may not show interest in some of the products that are overshadowed by the inventions that are provided by new factories (Hellmann 2005, p. 2). For example, Kodak was amongst the established businesses in the past few centuries as it controls a vast share of the market. Most of the products were reliable, thus they were purchased by a vast majority of the population. However, the company opted to stick to its primary strategy to provide the customers with the same products over time. In particular, Kodak is the first company to invent a digital camera, but it did not implement the strategy to roll out the production of the products. In the recent past, the company has performed dismally due to the limited demand for its products. In particular, the company no longer operates in the market since there is not demand for their products. Accordingly, companies such as Nokia and Samsung have struggled in the past to maintain a stable market demand for their products. Notwithstanding, they have had to use their innovativeness to define new approaches to business with the sole aim of making an additional market segment. For this reason, they have inducted new product lines that attract different market divisions all over the world. In particular, they started production of digital cameras, and this was a conception that was appreciated in the market (Stiles and Jarratt 2010, p. 29). Evidently, they have made progress in the market as many people have created a demand for the digital cameras. Consequently, they made various changes to ensure the products improve with time. For this reason, they are currently dominant firms in the industry due to their models that change in accordance with the preferences of the customers. Specialization Strategy According to Adam Smith, the productivity of workers improves when they are engaged in a specified activity for a period. Evidently, the workers in a firm need to divide the work amongst them and define the individuals that are suited to specific jobs. Thus, people that are established at marketing will promote the products and services while the individuals that are experienced in packaging will execute the particular job. Accordingly, the "knowledge at work" is a notation that shows that the companies have special knowledge that ought to be utilized in the production process (Galbraith 2001, p.23). Notably, it is stated that knowledge is costly to create, preserve and utilize, and they should be used efficiently. Thus, the economic value of specialization should be engaged in strategies of the organizations to define success. For example, the entire worker ought to work in groups so that they can execute a stated job in a specified amount of time. Through this approach, the firm will have established a number of activities at the same time. Consequently, this will be a prudent approach by the company as most of the jobs are executed within limited time frame. Eventually, the firm will have various benefits that will add an advantage to its placement in the market. For instance, specialization leads to quality production where are the work is done through rigorous action. Similarly, there is use of machinery to achieve more quantity though the energy consumed is constant. Nonetheless, there is use of dexterity where some of the workers that have been amputated can still use their knowledge to enhance production in the company (Jarzabkowski and Spee 2009, p. 69). Additionally, the firm benefits through periodic processes where a mistake can be identified in the chain of production. Thus, the customers will be served with quality products and services as well as larger quantities since the production is augmented. Community, Learning, Power, Change, Formality, and Diversity A business is dependent on a number of aspects so that it can record success in most of its activities. Evidently, all businesses are dependent on both the external and internal environment since they have an impact on the activities that are executed by the organization. For instance, the power of the leaders will have an effect on the productivity of the workers because of the authoritative supervision. Additionally, the formalities that are used in the execution of tasks will affect the business especially if they are enacted in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution (van den Berg, 2012, p. 163). Thus, it is crucial to consider the community, learning perspectives, power, change, formality and diversity as explained from different angles. Firstly, according to Lave and Wenger, a community involves a number of people that are involved in consistent work in a stated period. For instance, butchers are involved in the supply of meat to the community for a long time, and they may not change the profession immediately. Additionally, Brown and Duguid states the community is an informal group of workers that have similar jobs. On the other hand, Wenger, McDermott, and Sydney state that a community is an informal group that has special interest in an organization and they should be supervised by the management. Secondly, the view of learning defines the various perspectives that ought to be used by the management to ensure the workers collaborate to solve some of the persistent problems. Thirdly, conflicts occur between generations in an organization, and they can affect the performance of a business in the area of specialty. Although many people are at the same level in the community, they may have disagreements at the workplace, and this can affect the productivity of all the members. For this reason, the indulgence of the leadership is critical, as they ought to strategize the best avenues to solve such scenarios. Additionally, there is the formal and informal approach that is used in the system to manage the organization. Concisely, in the informal approach, the management uses the tabulated options in the organizations, and they are used to indicate change while the informal approaches are implemented as counteractions (Cox 2005, p. 529). Lastly, the firms ought to use diversity to enhance the production and strategize its placement in the market. For instance, a number of employees are equipped with knowledge in a particular specialty, and they are effective. For example, some people in the company are effective to serve customers and answer customer queries. However, they may not market the products, and this explains the importance of diversity. Therefore, it is crucial for the organization to exploit the diversity of the workers such that they execute their work efficiently. Soft Systems Methodology Organizations encounter various problems that are complex, and they need a soft systems methodology to solve such situations. Accordingly, they get the experience to tackle the concerns and develop better mitigation structures avoid their recurrence. In order to solve such issues, the leadership has to look at the situation of the problem but avoid focus on the difficulty. In particular, this should be done in unstructured manner such that the leaders have an open mind about the perspectives to correct it (Armson 2003, p. 5). Ideally, there is a need to represent the dilemma such that it is understood by all the involved parties. For example, the facts and information should be shared with the firm so that all the workers and supervisors comprehend the issue. Additionally, the concerned parties should outline the most important aspects of the problems so that they are given priority. Nonetheless, the administration needs to select a system that is relevant to the themes that have been mentioned in the problem. For example, there is the use of the CATWOE criteria, which defines the customers, actors, transformations, worldview, owners and the environment. Consequently, the management needs to formulate a conceptual model that will convene the logical steps that need to be established primarily. After this, the involved individuals need to compare the conceptual framework with the real world situation as well as focus on the elements that will be solved through this approach (Yaeger and Sorensen 2009, p. 14). Additionally, engagement of discussions with stakeholders to ascertain the relevance of the strategy is critical as it will outline the acceptable approaches that can be used. Evidently, the supervisors will also find the changes that ought to be instituted so that the problem is solved immediately (Reisman and Oral 2005, p. 179). Lastly, the firm ought to take action through the various steps that have been identified. Accordingly, the management needs to implement the plans that have been formulated through the discussion, and they should monitor the transformations in the organizations. Through periodic supervision, the management will consider the positive modifications and augment their impact to the organization. Three-Stage Process of Organizational Learning Accordingly, organizations have to learn so that they can tackle situations that arise appropriately, and this will enhance the preparation for any uncertainties. First, the individuals in the organization ought to provide ample data in concern to the situation, and this includes scrutiny in the various departments that have critical facts. Evidently, the data collection approach should be rigorous so that all data is provided before the strategy is outlined. Secondly, the employees have to extrapolate and comprehend the data that is provided so that they interpret it. For example, an organization that has inconsistencies in revenue collection needs to collect the information about the income and record the facts for a period (Maresco and York 2005, p. 2). Analysis of the data gives the employees a picture of the situation, and this leads to an understanding of the situation. Evidently, this will enhance the acceptance of the situation as the data can be used effectively to define the problem. Thirdly, the workers have to learn about the situation after they understand the mistakes that are practiced in the firm. Through such knowledge, the situations may not arise in the consequent periods. Leadership in the Knowledge Era Democratization, technology, globalization and deregulation are some of the influencers in the knowledge era, and firms have to deal with these developments to solve their problems. In particular, firms need to exhibit speed, adaptability, and flexibility so that they are not affected by these concerns. Although challenges are immense, the leadership needs to define various methods that can be used to limit the impact of the problems. For example, the enactment of complexity leadership theory in organization helps the leaders to learn and adapt to the various changes through creativity (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKelvey 2007, p. 299). Additionally, they are effectively involved in the implementation of control structures such that they coordinate, execute and enhance production in the workplace. However, they need to institute a framework that will enable the administration to adapt, lead and enable the management to learn the various aspects that affect the organization. Bridging Macro and Micro Factors Both macro and micro environment are important for an organization as they have an impact on the productivity. In such a case, the organization ought to think organizationally to define the human behavior in concern to the groups that exist within the firm. Thus, it ensures that the organization prepares individuals to work in teams so that they can execute the various activities appropriately (Bryson 2011, p. 12). Evidently, some individuals perform exemplary work when they engage personal efforts, but they may not be motivated to perform their tasks in groups. Thus, such individuals may not be important to a firm especially when all the duties are executed in teams. Evidently, they may not help the company to achieve its objectives in the long run because their productivity will be limited. Therefore, the organization needs to strategize on the best avenues that can be used to solve such a situation. Similarly, the leadership needs to conceptualize strategies through the information that is available in the environment. Accordingly, this information can be used to implement transformations that will benefit the firm. Nevertheless, use of concepts from multilevel perspectives ensures the business is prepared to adopt processes that will enhance productivity (Jacobs 2004, p. 139). Additionally, cross-level interventions are importance as the leaders solve problems in distinct organizational divisions, which enhance collective performance. Lastly, different methods can be engaged to solve a single problem, and this will save time. Schools of Strategy Formation Accordingly, various schools can be used to formulate a strategy. First, the design school allows the organization to conceive a process through focus on the internal strengths and external weaknesses. Secondly, the visionary school defines a plan that is focused on the future. Thirdly, the positioning school engaged analytical perspectives that are used to deduce a response. Fourthly, the planning school institutes staff conspirators that develop schemes that ought to be used (Heck 2000, p. 12). Fifthly, the cognitive school follows the mental processes to solve problems. Sixthly, the learning school encompasses an improvement in knowledge and skills to rectify a situation. Seventhly, the environmental school focuses on the degree of freedom to strategize their plans. Eighthly, the configuration school follows a specified transformation process that enacts change. Ninthly, the cultural school follows a social process to define responses while the power school uses authoritative approaches to negotiating a solution. Conclusion Conclusively, strategy in an organization is an important aspect as it defines the forecasts, plans, and futuristic positions. For example, the leaders have to define the environmental perspectives as they have an ultimate effect on the performance of the firm. Additionally, they have to look at the strategic positioning, which involves the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. Evidently, the companies need to transform and adapt new approaches so that they can contain the competition, and they should have structures that initiate change over time. Additionally, they ought to use variant schools of thought so that they can solve different problems in distinctive avenues. References Armson, R 2003, A quick sprint through soft systems methodology. A workshop with Rosalind Armson, viewed 30 March 2015 http://technology.open.ac.uk/cts/spmc/2003july-armson-quicksprint-day1.pdf Bryson, J. M 2011, Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. Cox, A 2005, What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works. Journal of Information Science, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 527–540. Galbraith, C. S 2001, Strategies and organizations in transition. JAI, Greenwich. Heck, A 2000, Organizations and strategies in astronomy. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Hellmann, C 2005, Strategy practices –what they are (not) reflections on the strategy-as-practice research agenda. European Business School, Hamburg. Jacobs B 2004, Using soft systems methodology for performance improvement and organizational change in the English National Health Service. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1-22. Jarzabkowski, P., & Spee, A. P 2009, Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 69–95. Kaye, J., & Allison, M 2013, Strategic planning for nonprofit organizations: A practical guide and workbook. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Maresco, P. A., & York, C. C 2005, Ricardo Semler: Creating organizational change through employee empowered leadership. Sacred Heart University, Fairfield. McLarney, C., & Chung, E 1990, When giants collide: strategic analysis and application. Norbert College, De Pere. Mintzberg, H., & Lampel, J 1990, reflecting on the strategy process, viewed 30 March 2015 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1862789 Reisman A., & Oral, M 2005, Soft systems methodology: A context within a 50-year retrospective of OR/MS, viewed 30 March 2015 http://ssrn.com/abstract=537623 Rousseau, D. M 2010, “Reinforcing the micro/macro bridge: Organizational thinking and pluralistic vehicles,” Journal of Management, vol. 37, pp. 429. Stiles, D., & Jarratt D 2010, “How are methodologies and tools framing managers’ strategizing practice in competitive strategy development?” British Journal of Management, vol. 21, pp. 28–43. Uhl-BienM., M. R., & McKelvey B 2007, “Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era,” The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 18, pp. 298–318. Van den Berg, H. A 2012,”Three shapes of organisational knowledge,” Journal Of Knowledge Management, vol.17, no. 2, pp. 159-174. Yaeger, T. F., & Sorensen, P. F. (2009). Strategic organization development: Managing change for success. Information Age Pub., Charlotte. Read More