What is strategy?
Strategy is considered as a plan that serves as course of action, a guideline that faces the challenges of a situation. Based on the game theory, strategy is a comprehensive plan that identifies the options that one will make in every probable situation (1996). According to the management theories, strategy can be a unified, comprehensive and integrated plan that is intended to guarantee that the basic objectives of the company be attained. While, based on dictionaries, strategy is a plan, an approach or sequence of exercises or devices used to achieve a specific objectives or outcomes.
Strategy can be defined as the art and science of formulating, implementing and evaluating cross-functional decisions that enables any organisation to attain its objectives. As this definition entails, strategic management gives emphasis on integrating management, marketing, finance, production/operations, research and development and computer information systems to achieve organisational success. The term strategy is also used synonymously with strategic planning (2001).
Strategy is guiding an organisation relative to challenges and opportunities appearing in the contingent environment. This environment is composed of those external elements that most directly affect organisational goal achievement and new goal development (1999). Thus, organisation system design and management should complement strategic actions taken for productive subsystems, as well as those providing output delivery and other support functions for the organisation. To the extent possible, the organisation bases its actions on strategic planning that, rather than a one-time effort, is an ongoing process of adaptation of original conceptions of mission, goals, structure, roles, and so forth relative to environmental dynamics (2002).
Strategy includes developing a vision and mission to be achieved by the organisation, analysing and identifying an organisation’s external opportunities and threats, determining the internal position of the company including its strengths and weaknesses and establishing long-term objectives. Strategic analysis means to know the overall position of the organisation within and outside the marketing environment (2002). There are many ways in which a company can be able to analyze the overall position of the organisation internally and externally.
On the other hand, strategic choice refers to the activity of an organisation which involves generating alternative strategies and choosing particular strategies to pursue (2003). The degree of discretion or strategic choice an organisation has will be determined to a large extent by leadership style, national culture, commitment to past and continuing strategies, the success of certain symbolic actions, and the nature of its systems and processes (1999). The perspective of strategic choice reverses the emphasis by concentrating on the responsibilities of the management teams in shaping the conditions and processes of the strategic management from both internal and external environment of an organisation. In addition, strategic action draws upon the social activities and strategic management concept to improve the view that any managerial actions can influence or affect performance. The range of strategic actions is very broad. In environmental context, strategic choice comprises the selection of the product/market realm in which a certain organisation will engage (2003).
On the other hand, in organisational context, strategic choice involves the selection of the structures and allocation of the resources to be adopted within the chosen real. Further, strategic choice also involves activities for selecting the most appropriate strategy to be used by the organisation to stay competitive and survive in the stiff competition of the marketplace. Hence, it can be said that strategic choice is one of the crucial element of strategic management because the success of the implementation of the strategic management depends on how well and efficient the choice made by the management team.
The scope of strategic management is inherently greater than that of operational management. With long time spans and complex organisational-environmental links, it is often impossible to determine the causes of a particular success or failure. Hence, it is difficult, if not impossible, to learn or foresee whether a certain strategic decision is good or bad for the firm. Furthermore, strategic management is concerned with non-routine issues and innovation at the organisational level; thus, strategic management is complex and ambiguous. As already mentioned, complex and ambiguous problems requires different approaches than simple and straightforward ones. In other words, managers who are used to managing day-to-day operations and solving the problems there may find it a challenge to be part of strategic management (1996).
A typical symptom is that of educational projection: accountants tend to view all problems. Strategic management, in contrast, is the whole of all these areas; it is a holistic problem that requires a holistic approach to decision making. For one thing this approach implies that strategic analysis, choice, and implementation cannot be kept separate. In the real world of strategic management, implementation begins at the moment it is decided to undertake a strategic analysis; and activities such as analysis, choice, and implementation are concurrent and feed off each other. Another way of saying this is that strategic management is closely related to the notion of organizational change ( 2003).
On the one hand, they appear to be rather incompatible, but on the other hand, they are still two sides to the same coin: the organization that must survive and prosper. This corresponds to the third view, which is a holistic view in the sense that it sees both product-markets and core competencies and attempts to integrate them for the benefit of the firm (1999). The considerations so far make it possible to propose a division of strategic management into three sub decision areas: product-market strategy, competence-based strategy, and integration of the other two decision areas.
How does knowledge of the literature on strategy affect one’s experience and perception of play?
Basing from this question, it is implied that the player has already developed a familiarity or an idea of what strategy is based on the previous paragraph. If this is the case then we can more or less say or conclude that the player’s perception of play and game experience is congruent or parallel to the definition of strategy as in the previous question. After absorbing the gist of the definition of strategy, most probably the player’s game progression and style would be that of devising a plan and pattern of actions for the player’s civilization to develop by means of garnering “tech advancement”, as they are called in the game, after tech advancement after tech advancement. The players actions are also guided by the situations and conditions his or her civilization is facing. This will go on until the player reaches the ultimate objective of the game which is to be the best civilization overall. Whether the player wins or not as a result of this plan and courses of actions is another thing.
In building a civilization there is always be strategies involve, thus Porter’s Five Forces Model is applicable to this:
An important part of the Strategic Analysis and Planning concerns Porter’s Competitive Forces Model and it is interesting to see how this well-defined part can be modeled so that the knowledge that it contains can be used in an expert system. (1996) Knowledge in the field of strategic analysis is either uncertain or incomplete. An expert in the field generally will not have all data at his disposal. In particular, many data concerning the environment of the enterprise, such as data of competitors and suppliers, will sometimes be missing or is difficult to uncover and thus cannot be taken into account. But also data from within the own enterprise is not always readily available. Whatever the reason for this lack of data may be, the expert is expected to generate an analysis the best he can based on data that is available. Naturally, the more relevant data he can use, the better the quality of the analysis will be. In other words, if the input data is not sufficiently available, conclusions drawn will be correspondingly less certain. This is one of the most striking characteristics of an expert. He is able to come to conclusions based on a limited number of data that – in addition – may also be uncertain. For this purpose he will use his experience. It must also be observed, however, that sometimes an analysis report must be generated in a very limited period of time and then, whether available or not, the number of data used must inevitably be limited. It is obvious that an expert system must also be able to deal with this type of heuristic knowledge and come to conclusions that consequently will also be uncertain.
The model of the Five Competitive Forces was developed by Michael E. Porter in his book „Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors“in 1980. (1998) Since that time it has become an important tool for analyzing an organizations industry structure in strategic processes.
Also according to Porter competition is high when there are new entrants in the business. (1998) The competition in an industry will be the higher, the easier it is for other companies to enter this industry. In such a situation, new entrants could change major determinants of the market environment such as market shares, prices, customer loyalty at any time. There is always a latent pressure for reaction and adjustment for existing players in this industry. The threat of new entries will depend on the extent to which there are barriers to entry.
Porter’s model is based on the insight that a corporate strategy should meet the opportunities and threats in the organizations external environment. Especially, competitive strategy should base on and understanding of industry structures and the way they change.(1998) Porter has identified five competitive forces that shape every industry and every market. These forces determine the intensity of competition and hence the profitability and attractiveness of an industry. The objective of corporate strategy should be to modify these competitive forces in a way that improves the position of the organization. Porter’s model supports analysis of the driving forces in an industry. Based on the information derived from the Five Forces Analysis, management can decide how to influence or to exploit particular characteristics of their industry.
A threat from substitutes exists if there are alternative products with lower prices of better performance parameters for the same purpose. (1997) They could potentially attract a significant proportion of market volume and hence reduce the potential sales volume for existing players. This category also relates to complementary products.
In a competition there will always be competitive force and rivalry. (1997) This force describes the intensity of competition between existing players (companies) in an industry. High competitive pressure results in pressure on prices, margins, and hence, on profitability for every single company in the industry. Competition between existing players is likely to be high when
- There are many players of about the same size,
- Players have similar strategies
· There is not much differentiation between players and their products, hence, there is much price competition
- Low growth rates (growth of a particular company is possible only at the expense of a competitor),
- Barriers for exit are high (e.g. expensive and highly specialized equipment).
How does one’s experience and perception of play affect one understands of the literature on strategy?
One’s experience and perception of play affects understanding of the literature on strategy in two ways. The player would look at the definition as a guide or basis of his or her actions for their next game or would look at it as something to ponder on with regards to their previous game. After playing, one could use it as a basis of his or her actions once they play the game again. They would realize that this is the meaning of strategy and they would use this meaning to guide their plan of action. On the other hand after one has been through the motions of playing this game, he or she could look back at their previous game and then after realizing the definition of strategy, they would ponder on what actions could they have done better or what moves could they have done differently for them to succeed in a better way. One thing is common to both; the definition of strategy would be used as basis for actions, the other one for future the other for previously done ones.
The advances in technology and the fast modernization of the world, in general, opened new and very promising avenues of business opportunities not just in an individual’s locale but also abroad. A lot of business-minded individuals from different countries with different nationalities and cultural orientation have and continuously defied the geographic boundaries that exist between continents. This is evident in the growing number of internationally-operating business firms all over the world run by entrepreneurs of varying race and culture. The information man has successfully rebelled against intercontinental borders and the challenge that confronts him the most, deals with how to fit and blend in the new cultural environment in which their businesses are situated.
Organizations are neither the rational, harmonious entities celebrated in managerial theory nor the arenas of apocalyptic class conflict projected by Marxists (1980). and (1996) believe that modern organizations passed by the guild structures and as organizations grew larger, skills become increasingly fragmented and specialized and positions become more functionally differentiated. Organizational change is part of and a result of struggles between contradictory forces, also change management practice is related with endeavoring to manage their competing demands. To understand why and how to change organizations, it is first necessary to understand their structures, management and behaviour.
These systems of ideas, or organizational theories are crucial to change management in two respects. First, they provide models of how organization should be structured and managed. Second, they provide guidelines for judging and prescribing the behaviour and effectiveness of individuals and groups in an organization. It is clear that in many organizations there is no clear understanding if the theories. Change cannot hope to be fully successful under circumstances (1996).
It can be said that organizational change is one of the critical determinants in organizational success and failure (1998). (1998) stated that the focus of successful organizations is on customers and their needs, which includes investing in ways to improve sales and provide superior service to clients, and they do not forget that their customers and their customers’ needs underlie their organization’s existence. In addition, adapting factors crucial to the success of certain missions and the implementation of solutions to problems are common traits of a successful organization (1998). The lack of such initiatives can throw an organization into confusion, being stuck in traditional practices that cannot solve or handle the current problems faced. Thus, the lack of such factors stresses the need for a strategic organizational change. It is basically a flexible strategic planning process as opposed to a static form of strategic planning.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment