The paper “ Planned Strategy vs Emergent Strategy, Game Theory and Concept of Driving Markets - Strengths and Weaknesses" is a meaningful version of a term paper on management. Marketing planning is an aspect that is carried out in many organizations. Analysis, however, shows that it is quite important to find a balance between planned and emergent approaches strategy. This paper will, therefore, compare the effectiveness of game theory as proposed by Nalebuf and Brandenburger and driving markets as proposed by Jaworski. This is basically the difference between the two approaches. This is in relation to assisting marketers to find a balance.
This paper will also elaborate on the strengths and weaknesses of game theory and the concept of driving markets. (Brandenburger, 1994, p. 800)It is quite essential that a balance between the planned and emergent approaches to strategy be found. Strategic planning involves putting clear future goals of an organization. In this case, planners put in place steps that have to be implemented in order to achieve goals. Analysis of various planning strategies shows that they end up creating a climate that is uncongenial to stakeholders.
This is one of the main reasons as to why a balance between planned and emergent strategy is important. It is quite clear that the planned strategy puts across foreseen aspect in a market. (Bell, 1980, p. 295)The planned strategy has been known not to use a committing but a calculative style. In this case, the managers only look at the ultimate goal and not bother about stakeholder preferences. This means that managers only push employees towards achieving the ultimate goal. This type of approach kills employees’ enthusiasm.
It is quite essential that a balance between planned and emergent strategy be reached. In this case, the management can use planned strategy to have a clear view of what they want to be achieved but at the same time consider other stake holder’ s views and market changes. It is very essential that a balance between planned and emergent strategies be reached. This is because the planned strategy basically focuses on assumptions that are linear based. On the other hand, emergent strategy bases on the business reality on the ground.
(Steiner, 1979, p. 30)This means that in the pursuit of goals and objectives, managers need to recognize that assumptions made during planning may not necessarily follow a linear framework. A planned strategy is mostly carried out through beliefs, common reasoning and experience of the planners. The planned strategy consists of a structure that is expected to be followed by stakeholders. This structure undergoes conditioning once defensive and challenging customs emerge in an organization. The emergent strategy recognizes that the business world is quite dynamic in nature. This means that changes need to be managed and initiated accordingly.
Some of the changes in a market may be quite chaotic in nature. This aspect is not put into consideration in the planned strategy. Emergent strategy highly recognizes the elemental interaction of multifaceted systems in a market. This is whereby both positive and negative feedbacks are analyzed accordingly. This strategy easily deals with strategic behavior within an organization. This strategy perceives strategic behavior as an observable fact that materializes in a way that is not predictable. This is due to various facets of interaction and influence that occur in business organizations.
The emergent strategy greatly analyses the performance of the planned strategy. In case the planned strategy is deemed to be ineffective then appropriate measures are taken. These measures may include re-engineering and restructuring of organizational systems.