INTRODUCTION
Strategy determines the long-term direction of the organisation and comprises a
decision-making process and a management role. It enhances organisation
effectiveness by providing satisfaction to the personnel of the organisation. Business
strategy is a plan that integrates an organization’s major goals, policies, and action
sequence into a cohesive whole. Strategies provide the framework for plans by
guiding operating decisions and often pre-deciding them. If strategies are developed
carefully and understood properly by managers, they provide more consistent
framework for operational planning. If this consistency exists and applied, there
would be deployment of organisational resources in those areas where they find better
use.
       The concept of strategy first has to perform the function of reconstructing the
variables involved, namely identifying those that appear to have some impact in a
particular space-time context. In other words, the concept of strategy includes the ex-
post synthesis of the complexity of firm-environment relationships (Anderson, 1982;
Venkatraman and Camillus, 1984; Camerer, 1985); its role involves the reconstruction
of meanings, an aspect that is increasingly attracting attention (Pennings, 1985), such
as design, luck, opportunism and judgement.
       Strategies focus on course of activities by specifying what activities are to be
undertaken for achieving organisational objectives. They make the organisational
objectives more comprehensive and specific. Strategies ensure organisational
effectiveness in several ways. The conception of effectiveness is that the organisation
is able to achieve its objectives within the given resources. Therefore, it is not only
necessary that resources are put to the best of their efficiency but also that they are put
in a way which ensures their maximum contribution to organisational objectives. This
can be achieved by taking strategic management, which states the objective of the
organisation in the context of given resources. Each resource of the organisation has a
specific use at a particular time. Thus, strategies ensure that resources are put in action
in a way in which these have been specified. Organisation will achieve effectiveness,
if it is done efficiently.
                                LITERATURE REVIEW
Human nature insists on a definition for every concept and strategy can be defined as
a set of guidelines to deal with a situation. The purpose of formulating a strategy is to
ensure that basic objectives of the organization are achieved, through a unified,
comprehensive and integrated procedure (Glueck, 1980:9). Many authors have
discussed about strategy and its establishment and according to Mintzberg, there are
five definitions of strategy; plan, ploy, pattern, position, and perspective.
       Strategy as plan, deals with how an organization seeks to establish direction.
Managers formulate strategies in order to initiate the organization to follow a course
of action that is agreed upon. As ploy, organizations attempt to process a formation to
counter threats and employ resources to gain competitive advantage. Strategy
concentrates on action, and as a pattern, introduces the concept of achieving
consistency in the behaviour of the organization. As position, it influences to explore
the various competitive environments, enabling the organization to survive against
hostile competition and uncertainty. Strategy as a perspective, introduces that all
strategies are abstractions and diffuses the view about intention and behaviour in a
collective context.
       Strategy is just not ideas of how to tackle competition or a market, it is rather
an instrument used by the organization for collective consideration and action. A lot of
emphasis needs to be focussed to analyze social forces and structures as a basis for
understanding effective command styles and motivational stimuli (Von Clausewitz,
1976:8). Given that strategy determines the direction and action concentration of the
organization, its concoction should comprise of three essential elements; goals or
objectives to be achieved, policies guiding or limiting action, programs that are to
accomplish the defined goals within the limits set (Quinn, 1980). Key concepts
support the development of effective strategies, which provide balance, structure, and
focus. Prediction of the defined ways in which all intruding forces could interact with
each other, be altered by nature, or be tailored by the imaginations and determined
counteractions of intelligent opponents (Braybrooke and Lindblom, 1963). Strategy
deals with instability, as well as the unknown, therefore, the core is to build up a
stance strong enough, to withstand and achieve the goals in spite of unforeseeable
external forces affecting the organization.
       Studies have not recommended various key criteria for evaluating a strategy
(Tilles, 1963; Christensen et al., 1978). These include the transparency, motivational
impact, internal stability, compatibility with the environment, suitability in light of
resources, degree of risk, complement personal values of key figures, time horizon,
and workability. Clearly, other factors contribute towards achieving goals and
objectives; such as luck, vast resources, fitting implementation and competitor’s error.
Furthermore, the moment at which a strategy is formulated, one cannot draw on to the
reason for success because the outcome is still unknown (Quinn, 1980). An
organization’s strategic model can be summarized as the future policies of the
business that will prepare it to perform in the future. Clayton Christensen and Michael
Overdorf (2000) emphasized the need to consider resources, processes, and values in
an existing organization in comparison to the challenge of needed change.
       It can be distinguished that the interpretative approach and the policy-making
approaches, which look at strategy "as being" or "as wishing to be" (Andrews, 1971,
p. 16), or can differentiate a descriptive as opposed to an evaluative tone. Four main
meanings of the term strategy are thus identified by a typology (appendix A), which
apparently does not incorporate all the possible meanings but comprises some of the
more accepted ones. The descriptive/interpretative approach is the most inclusive
approach, assigning strategy’s general meaning to the specificity or exclusivity
actually achieved by the firm, without any further attributes. Strategy is the logic of
the firm's behaviour or, in brief, the reason of the firm. As Mintzberg puts it
(Mintzberg, 1978; Mintzberg and Waters, 1985), we are presuming the meaning of the
"stream of actions", i.e. adopting an interpretative approach.
       The evaluative/interpretative approach is a narrower approach, attributing to
strategy’s meaning of a "superior specificity" as actually followed, considering the
value of its distinctiveness. The exclusivity of the firm is still considered from an
external or "objective" standpoint. An evaluation of the degree of reliability and fit
between firm-system and environment-system is thus introduced (Coda, 1983, 1984;
Miles and Snow, 1984; Venkatraman and Camillus, 1984), and the dominance or the
degree of control and success of the firm's behaviour is evaluated with reference to
the sustainable nature of its principal management. The descriptive/policy-making
approach compared to the first approach, is too a narrower approach. It interprets the
meaning of strategy in terms of the intended uniqueness or the future project planned
by the firm, to be pursued. The specificity of the firm can be considered, from an
internal or "subjective" point of view. The firm's uniqueness is also considered
without indication to the equilibrium. The evaluative/policy-making approach is a
narrow approach followed by the business that interprets strategy in terms of the
superior distinctiveness. The aspect of the organization is still judged in a "subjective"
perspective. The evaluation of the degree of external and internal rationality is
introduced (Venkatraman and Camillus, 1984), as a situation for the completion of the
"winning" strategies intended.
       Henry Mintzberg has suggested Ten Schools of Thought model as a
framework for strategic management; The Design School – this school identifies
strategy formation as a process of conception approach. Its approach is clear and
unique formulation in a deliberate process; The Planning School – his school perceive
strategy formation as a formal process; The Positioning School – this school identifies
strategy formation as an analytical process, placing the organization within the
context of its industry and how the organization can develop its strategic positioning
within the industry; The Entrepreneurial School – this school refer to strategy
formation as a visionary process; The Cognitive School – this school sees strategy
formation as a mental process; The Learning School – this school sees strategy
formation as an emergent process; The Power School – this school sees strategy
formation as a process of negotiation; The Cultural School – this school specifies
strategy formation as a collective process; The Environmental School – this school
perceive strategy formation as a reactive process; The Configuration School – this
school sees strategy formation as a process of transformation.
       Some of the schools clearly are aspects or stages of the strategy formation
process. Dealing with complexity in one process may seem overcoming. Strategy
formation is judgemental designing, perceptive visioning, and evolving learning; it is
about transformation as well as continuation. Strategy formation must involve
individual cognition and social interaction, cooperative as well as conflictive. There
must be a balance in between the processes and must be in response to the
environment (appendix B).
                                      ANALYSIS
Strategy in turn is a term that people define in one way band often draw on to in
another, without realizing any difference. A business strategy formulation generates
the critical issue of how to achieve the targets set by the organization. A strategy is an
instrument in achieving the targets and the result are the objectives. An organization
blends in various components in order to successfully implement a strategy; such as
deliberate and purposeful actions, shared learning of the organization including
internal activities, and reactions to unforeseen developments (Mintzberg, 1990).
Planned strategies are likely to encounter alteration as market conditions vary over
time. Future business situations are suitably uncertain and impulsive, which leads to
the decision being taken at the moment. Therefore, it can be held that strategy
formulation involves developing an intended strategy and a reactive strategy; linking
the organization’s business approaches. In brief, strategies are fashioned to
accommodate the varying environment, enhancing the organizations competitiveness.
       Organizations prepare strategies at three distinct levels (appendix C);
operating strategy, which is accountable for strategies on basic operating units;
functional strategy, specified to functional units of a business; corporate strategy,
approach to all of the organization’s processes. Operating strategy relate to managing
frontline business units – such as sales, distribution, plants, and successful execution
of considerable operating tasks – such as inventory control, maintenance, advertising
campaigns. These strategies articulate the short – term achievements of the
organization, and are undertaken by front – line managers. Functional strategies are
developed for administering functional processes or activities within an organization –
such as marketing, production, finance. These strategies aim for medium – term goals
to be achieved by the business. Functional strategies support and leverage the overall
core business components. Corporate strategies apprehend the intentions of the
organization to establish them self in the industry, and correlate the actions and
approaches followed by the organization to enhance their performance. These
strategies are crafted by top – level managers, who take upon these long – term goals
of the organization to be achieved.
       While evaluating the implementation of the organization’s strategy, the present
competitive scope within the industry needs to be considered. Perceptive
comprehension of an organization’s resource capabilities and deficiencies, its market
opportunities, and the external threats to its future welfare is fundamental to a
proficient strategy. Therefore, the business needs to assess the organization’s strengths
and weaknesses, and its external opportunities and strengths, known as the SWOT
analysis (appendix D). This analysis enables the organization to generate a strategy
that aim to produce in sync the business’s resource potential and its external
condition.
       Business strategies are developed to attain competitive advantage, the edge
over competitors. There are several methods to competitive advantage, the basic being
providing superior value to the customers. An organization’s competitive strategy
consists of initiatives and approaches undertaken by the business. Competitive
strategy deals exclusively towards accomplishing business targets by endowing with
superior value to customers. Michael E. Porter tailored an approach for competitive
strategy, which are divided into five distinct approaches (appendix E): cost leadership
– lowest cost producer and provider for customers; differentiation – originating a
product different from rivals; focused cost leadership – concentration on a narrow
market by offering lower cost than competitors; focused differentiation –
concentration on a narrow market by offering tailored product to a niche; best cost
provider – incorporating best value with lowest cost to customers.
                                    CONCLUSION
An organization’s strategy is the heart and soul of managing the business. Among all
the paths and actions that can be exercised to focus on the markets and customer
needs, a strategy is a managerial preference among alternatives to apprehend the
opportunities the market has to offer and dominate the industry with a competitive
approach. In my opinion, to craft a business strategy, managers need to incorporate
clarity in their approach. The inclusion of luck and opportunism is veritably required
for a strategy to be executed properly.
                               RECOMMENDATION
CHANGE YOUR STRATEGY AS NEEDED
IBM long pursued adaptation. It served overseas markets by establishing a mini-IBM
in each target country that performed a complete set of business activities and adapted
to local differences as necessary. But when IBM realized that country – to – country
adaptation had significantly curtailed opportunities to gain international scale
economies, it aggregated the countries into regions to improve coordination and thus
scale.
CONSIDER INTERGRATING TWO STRATEGIES
Indian IT company, Tata Consultancy Services has traditionally emphasized arbitrage
– exporting software services to markets with higher labour costs. But it has begun
augmenting this strategy with aggregation – building a new, coherent global delivery
structure comprising three kinds of software development centres. Global centres,
located mostly in India, serve large customers and possess breadth and depth of skill
as well as coding and quality control processes. Regional centres, in Brazil and
Hungary have select capabilities and emphasize addressing language and cultural
challenges. Near shore centres, such as in Phoenix and Boston focus on building
customer comfort through proximity.
Procter & Gamble (P&G) balances aggregation and adaptation. It created global
business units (GBUs) that retain ultimate profit responsibility but sell through market
development organization (MDOs) aggregated up to the regional level. To manage
tensions between GBUs and MDOs, P&G allows room for differences across business
units and markets. For example, its pharmaceutical division, with distinct distribution
channels, is not part of the MDO structure. And in emerging markets, where marker
development challenges loom large, country managers still have profit responsibility.
Protocols determine how different decisions are made, and by whom – the GBUs or
MDOs.
EXPLORE EXTERNAL INTEGRATIVE MECHANISMS
IBM is in joint venture in advanced semiconductor research, development, and
manufacturing; links to Linux and other open innovation efforts; and some
outsourcing of hardware to contract manufacturers. It has also forged a relationship
with Lenovo, the Chinese PC manufacturer, in personal computers.
The company Banglalink was previously known as Sheba Telecom. It not only
changed its name but also restructured its system. The company designed an
integrated business strategy by incorporating internal management system with a
focus to the external environment. For their expansion strategy, they followed vertical
integration i.e. using HR (human resource) policy as a base of their business strategy.
They enhanced their HR inventory by recruiting a good number of intelligent and
promising youngsters from various academic institutions and as well as from their
competitors. They provided very lucrative compensation package together with a
clear career path. Basically, these were the ground work for their promotional
activities. Side by side they developed new products to attract the customers.
A competency cannot be a sustainable competitive advantage if the competitors can
copy it easily. Competitive advantage is a company’s ability to perform in one or
more ways that competitors cannot or will not match. Michael Porter urged
companies to build a sustainable competitive advantage (Porter, 1980). But in real
world few competitive advantages are sustainable. At best they may be leverage able.
A leverage able advantage is one that a company can use as a springboard to new
advantages.
the concept of strategy as fit – the notion that a successful strategy is one that is
adapted to meet the characteristics of the firm’s environment and its internal resources
and capabilities.
By the early years of the new decade the need for a change in firms’ strategy priorities
was evident. Two key problems faced senior managers. First, the gains from cost
cutting and corporate restructuring – the low-hanging fruit on the tree of profit – had
been picked. Second, the unremitting quest for shareholder value had unforeseen and
undesired consequences for many companies.
The responses to these problems – in terms of strategic management – were twofold:
first, a “back to basics” movement in which companies have refocused their strategies
upon the fundamental sources of profitability; second, an emphasis on accessing more
complex and difficult to reach sources of competitive advantage.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
                                 APPENDIX
         A.
         B.
               Environmental
               School
               Cultural School
Positioning                       Planning
              Cognitive School                      Design School
School                            School
               Learning School
               Power School
                                       Configuration School
     Entrepreneurial
     School
C.    SWOT
C. Pyramid
D. Matrix