Strategic Management: Creating Value in a Turbulent Times - Essay Example

? Strategic Management Introduction According to De Wit and Meyer , “Strategizing is about perceiving strengths and weakness, envisioning opportunities and threats and creating the future for which imagination and judgement are more important than analysis and logic” (p.7). Modern day business runs on strategies rather than organizational resources. Even if an organization has plenty of resources, such as man power, material, machine and money, failure to formulate adequate business strategies may cause huge problems to that organization. All these resources may become useless unless the organization formulate suitable strategies to exploit it. For example, Apple Inc was on the verge of destruction in 80’s and 90’s because of the loop holes in the strategic management of its business. However, Steve Jobs changed the business strategies of Apple Inc during the latter part of 90’s and at the beginning of 2000. The transformation of Apple Company from a computer company to a consumer electronics company has brought huge success. At present, Apple Inc. is the second largest company in the world in terms of market capitalization and they are the most valuable technology company in the world. At the same time, Microsoft was the leader in IT industry until a couple of years before. Same thing cannot be said about them now. Samsung is another company which was successful in developing suitable business strategies to increase its competitive power in global market. In short, strategic management of business is the most important topic in the organizational world at present. This paper analyses various theories with respect to strategic management in general and Porters five Forces Model theory in specific. General Discussion: Strategic Management “Good strategy is about letting alone and about creating the conditions of innovative adaptations” (Robert and Holt, 2009, p.56). Innovation is the key for organizational success. In the absence of innovative strategies, organizations may struggle to survive in the heavily competitive business world. As mentioned earlier, Apple Inc. is one company which showed the importance of innovation to the business world recently. It should be noted that Nokia was the leader in the mobile phone industry until recent times. They thought that nobody can question their supremacy in the mobile phone industry. Apple proved Nokia wrong. When all the traditional mobile phone manufacturing companies thought about enhancing the features of mobile phones, Apple thought differently and developed the touchscreen phone. The entry of iPhone in the mobile phone market caused huge problems to mobile phone manufacturers including Nokia. At present Apple is one among the top two mobile phone manufacturers in the world. In fact Nokia and other mobile phone manufacturers forced to follow the path of Apple. According to De Wit and Meyer (2010), “the four components of strategy are market opportunity, corporate competence and resources, personal values and aspirations and acknowledged obligations to segments of society other than stakeholders (p.76). Sustainable business practice is gaining grounds at present. It is impossible for modern organizations to excel in the market without showing commitments to corporate social responsibility. Companies which follow unethical business behaviours are blacklisted by the modern consumers. The reputation and brand image of the company is important things for the modern consumers. In short, ethical business practices are part of strategic business management at present. “Since the world is changing rapidly, we can also expect the firm’s strategy to do so. This may involve developing new bases of competitive advantage or completely new lines of business”(Fitzroy and Hulbert, 2004, p.5). Diversification of business is one of the major elements in strategic management. It should be noted that competition is increasing day by day in global market after the introduction of globalization. Along with existing players, new players are also entering the market. As a result of that organizations are facing stiff competition. For example, Facebook was the undisputed leader in social networking business until recent times. The entry of Google in social networking business is causing big problems to Facebook. Same way Amazon was the leader in online book selling industry. The entry of Google Books is causing major concerns to Amazon. They are currently trying to intrude into the territories with the help of their own search engine. In short, all prominent companies are currently trying to diversify the business as a strategy to counter the challenges from the competitors. “Strategy is the link between the firm and its environment. It is not a detailed plan or program of instructions; it is a unifying theme that gives coherence and directions to the actions and decisions of an organization”(Grant, 2010, p.4). It is not necessary that the strategy successful for one organization may be successful for another organization. Even same organization use different strategies while doing business in overseas countries. For example, Wal-Mart used joint venture as the mode of entry to Indian market whereas they used merger and acquisition as the mode of entry to European and South African markets. This is because of the huge differences in economy, geography, environment and legal frameworks in these different countries. Plenty of theories or models with respect to strategic management are evolving out in the organizational world at present. Porter’s five forces model, PEST analysis, SWOT analysis, Robert S. Kaplan’s management accounting and balanced scorecard (1990) theory, Henry Mintzberg’s organizational architecture, strategic management (1970s–2000s) theory etc are some of the prominent theories of strategic management. PEST (Political, Economic, Social and Technological) analysis helps managers to understand macro-environmental factors very well and formulate effective management strategies whereas SWOT analysis helps managers to understand the micro-environmental factors such as Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats. The balanced scorecard (BSC) is a strategy management tool which helps companies to measure the performance accurately. It consists of various things such as semi-standard structured report, design methods and automation tools etc. All these tools help managers to take accurate measures of the execution of activities by the staff within their control. Kaplan describes the innovation of the balanced scorecard as follows: "The balanced scorecard retains traditional financial measures. But financial measures tell the story of past events, an adequate story for industrial age companies for which investments in long-term capabilities and customer relationships were not critical for success. These financial measures are inadequate, however, for guiding and evaluating the journey that information age companies must make to create future value through investment in customers, suppliers, employees, processes, technology, and innovation."(What is the Balanced Scorecard?, 2013). The figure given below illustrates BSC. What is the Balanced Scorecard?, 2013 BSC helps managers in many ways to understand the vision and strategy of the organization properly. It helps managers to realise the relationships between organizational vision and strategies. The role of customers, finance, internal business process, learning & growth in achieving organizational vision is made clear to the managers by BSC. According to Henry Mintzberg’s organizational architecture, strategic management theory “the strategy an organization adopts and the extent to which it practices that strategy result in five structural configurations: simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form, and adhocracy” (Lunenburg, 2012. p.1). Mintzberg argued that each organization has some goals and objectives at a given point of time. A group of tasks and jobs constitute the goals. On the other hand, jobs are divided based on departments such as marketing, sales, advertising, manufacturing, and so on. “Departments are linked to form the organizational structure. The organization’s structure gives it the form to fulfil its function in the environment” (Lunenburg, 2012. p.1). In short, Mintzberg’s theory helps managers to understand the organizational structure properly. In other words, this theory helps managers to realize the contributions of each part or department to the success and failures of the organization. Moreover, it helps managers to realize the extent of employee participation in the decision making process. In short, there are plenty of strategic management theories evolved out in recent times which help managers to realize the opportunities and threats in the market. However, none of these theories seem to be as popular as Porter’s five forces model. Porter’s five forces theory helps managers in many ways to evaluate or assess the competitive power of an organization. Description: Porter’s Five Forces Model Michael Porter has formulated this theory while he was working as a professor in Harvard University in the 1970’s and 80’s. The aim of this theory was to determine the competitive power of an organization. Even though there were plenty of management theories, none of those theories were able to evaluate the competitive power of an organization. Porter has introduced new benchmarks such as potential entrants, supplier power, industry rivalry, buyer power and threats from substitute products to assess the competitive power of an organization. It should be noted that in a heavily globalized and competitive business world, it is important for organizations to know their positives and negatives. Realization of positives and negatives would help the organizations to fine tune their business strategies so that their competitive power could be increased further. According to Michael Porter, the five competitive forces that may affect any organization doing business in any sector are; Threat of substitute products, Threat of new entrants, Intense rivalry among existing players, Bargaining power of suppliers and Bargaining power of Buyers (Porter’s Five Forces Model, 2009). The figure given below explains Porter’s five forces theory. (Porter’s Five Forces Model, 2009) Threat of substitute products means the challenges raised by a product that performs the same or similar function as another product. For example, majority of the activities performed using Apple’s iPhone 5 can be performed using Samsung Galaxy S3. Moreover, there are plenty of Chinese made cheaper phones which claim the same features that an iPhone or Galaxy S3 has. In short, Substitute products can cause problems to a particular product in the market. Threat of new entrants is another element in Porter’s five forces model. Until recent times, Samsung and Apple ruled the smartphone market. However Sony and Nokia like companies are currently entering to the smartphone market. The entry of these companies may challenge the supremacy of Apple or Samsung in smartphone market. Rivalry among existing players is another major factor of concern for companies while assessing their competitive power. Apple and Samsung are currently engaged in fierce battle to acquire supremacy in the smartphone market. Plenty of legal battles are currently going on between these companies. Industry rivalry can affect the growth prospects of an organization. For example, ANZ is facing stiff challenges from domestic banks and international banks such as CBA, NAB and WBC, regional banks and, in lending, mortgage brokers and originators. It also competes against the standalone wealth managers such as AMP, AXA and Perpetual (Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited, n. d). These competitions are retarding the growth prospects of ANZ. Bargaining power of the buyers is another element in Porter’s five forces model. At present there are plenty of smartphones available in the market. Until a couple of years before, only few smartphone makers were there and hence buyers had little choices. However, the availability of more smartphones from different brands enhances the bargaining power of the buyers. Same way, bargaining power of the suppliers also contribute heavily to the building of competitive power of an organization. When there are only few suppliers, the bargaining power of the suppliers’ increases. “Supplier power exists when there are only few suppliers. It also exists when the switching cost becomes more for the organization to move from one supplier to another” (For Marketing Learners Globally, n.d). If the suppliers have connection with many other organizations, they will not compromise much in negotiations One the other hand, if the suppliers have fewer connections or dealings with other organizations they will be ready to compromise, in order to find market for their raw materials. Reflection: Porter’s Five Forces Model Porter’s five forces model has many strengths and weaknesses. Some people believe that this model is ideal to measure the competitive power of a modern organization whereas many others believe that this model is not addressing some critical issues facing by modern organizations. Strengths of Porter’s Five Forces Model According to Sumpio (2013), “Porter's generic strategies attempt to create effective links for business with customers and suppliers and create barriers to new entrants and substitute products” (Sumpio, 2013). The links between an organization and stakeholders are beautifully explained by Porter’s five forces model. Ultimately, the success and failure of a business or an organization is determined by its stakeholders. It is important to know how each stakeholder and his activities may affect an organization. Porter’s model helps organizations to know the strengths and weaknesses of each stakeholder and formulate strategies in accordance with that. Grundy (2006) pointed out that Porter’s model helps organizations in mapping the competitive forces; understanding its dynamics; prioritizing the forces; doing macro analysis of the sub-drivers of each of the five forces and in exploring key interdependencies, both between and within each force (p.213). Porter argued that the five forces model helps an organization to realise the potential profitability of a given business. For example, no entrepreneur would like to establish a business in a heavily competitive business sectors. All entrepreneurs like to establish business in segments which competition is less and opportunities are more. Entrepreneurs like to establish business in sectors in which supplier power, buyer power, threat of substitutes, threat of mobility and threat of rivalry are extremely less. Porter’s model helps them to assess these forces and decide about the profitability of doing a particular business. For example, “Emergency Medicine plays a vital role in the health care continuum in the United States. Michael Porters’ five forces model of industry analysis provides an insight into the economics of emergency care by showing how the forces of supplier power, buyer power, threat of substitution, barriers to entry, and internal rivalry affect Emergency Medicine (Pines, 2006, p.447). An entrepreneur who is trying to invest in hospital industry or Emergency Medicine industry can make use of Porter’s model to assess opportunities and threats in this industry. Turnaround is common in business world. It is the recovery of a company which was performing poorly for a period of time. Porter’s model helps companies to understand the reasons of poor performances and take remedial actions to improve business. “Turnaround has been described as a two stage process; performance decline followed by performance improvement” (Harker et al, 1998, p.2). It is not necessary companies sustain their good performances for a longer period. Business growth always depends on many internal and external factors. It is impossible for a company to put control over all these internal and external factors all the time. In certain cases, some unexpected problems may cause huge problems to the company. For example, Toyota has faced recall problems recently. Millions of Toyota vehicles all over the world were called back to factory to repair the break, accelerator pedal and airbag problems. Toyota announced recently the decision to more than 1 million vehicles sold in the United States over faulty airbags and windshield wipers (Thompson, 2013). It should be noted that competitors are exploiting this situation very well. Nissan has already published an advertisement to ridicule Toyota’s claims as the most reliable automobile company in the world. Porter’s model helps Toyota like companies to understand the extent of rivalry in the corporate world. It also helps companies to understand how rivals exploit the situations when a company faces problems. Weaknesses of Porter’s Five Forces Model Many scholars believe that Porters model is static in nature. In their opinion, this model is incapable of taking account of the changes that taking place in the current competitive environment (Coate, 2007). Business principles and strategies are changing day by day because of the developments science and technology and the changing relationships between different countries. It should be noted, on one side America is the strongest criticizer of China and on the other side American companies are doing everything possible to establish business units in China. Porter’s theory is not taking account of such changes taking place in the business world. This theory has identified five competitive forces and it is trying to accommodate the competitive power of an organization within the frameworks of these five forces alone. Proctor & Papasolomou-Doukakis (2000) pointed out that a sixth force, government regulation, is often the most significant influence in determining the profitability of an industry (p.104). Governments can control the business activities in every country with the help of business regulating measures. In fact government determines how much freedom can be given to a foreign company and what sectors can be opened for foreign direct investments. For example, majority of the governments regulate or control FDI in defence sector. Same way some governments regulate the operations of foreign companies in telecommunication and power generation & supply services. In short, governments can control the activities of the companies in many ways. Hence governmental regulation should be considered as the sixth force while deciding the competitive power of a company. “In fact, when Porter studied the pharmaceuticals and airline industries he discovered that government regulation and deregulation were important factors relating to profitability in both” (Proctor & Papasolomou-Doukakis, 2000, p.104). However, Porter’s theory or model does not have the provision to accommodate additional forces to calculate the competitive power of a company. According to Wei Wang and Peter Chang (authors of the book "Entrepreneurship and Strategy in China: Why Porter's Five Forces' May Not Be”), Porter’s five forces model consisting of industry competitors, potential entrants, suppliers, buyers, and substitutes may not be relevant to strategy development (A new model for strategy and entrepreneurship in China: Alternative five forces. 2009, p.19). Porter’s model does not have universal acceptance. In other words, this model might be more successful in evaluating the competitive power of companies operating in America or Europe. However, this model is not so successful in Asian countries because of the huge differences Asia has with America and Europe, in doing business. Business purpose, business climate, and business location are more important in Asian conditions than Porter’s five forces in deciding the competitive power of an organization. Asians give more importance to the corporate social responsibility and environmental protection. Only sustainable business practices are getting support in Asian countries. Under such circumstances, profit making mottos alone may not help a company to establish business in Asia. For example, Coke forced to stop its operations in Kerala, India recently because of the protests from the people. Coke tried to exploit the underwater resources of Plachimada, a village in Kerala. Plachimada people faced drinking water shortage and they started agitations against Coke. In 2003, women from the Vijayanagaram Colony in the village of Plachimada, protested that their wells had dried up because of the over exploitation of groundwater resources by the Coca-cola plant. They complained that they now had to walk nearly five kilometres twice a day to fetch water In April 2003, the Perumatty Grama Panchayat (Village Council) refused renewal of Coca-Cola’s licence to operate on the grounds that it was not in the public interest to renew the licence (Case against Coca-Cola Kerala State: India, N.d.) From the above example, it is evident that business climate and location are important factors which can make or break an organization. Kerala people are well educated than people of other Indian states. They know very well that foreign companies always try to exploit the natural resources. It should be noted that Coke is not facing much problems in other states of India. In short, Porter’s model cannot be used everywhere in the world to assess the profitability and potential of a business. Porter has formulated this model in the 80’s when computers and internet were only in the developmental stages. At present, it is impossible to think about the competitive power of an organization without considering the influence of computer and internet related technologies upon it. Porter’s model says nothing about the influence of computers and internet in deciding the competitive power of an organization. It should be noted that outsourcing is one of the most popular business strategies at present. American and European companies are exploiting cheap labour available in India and China like Asian countries with the help of outsourcing. Labour costs in America and Europe are extremely higher compared to that in Asia. Outsourcing of jobs is the only option for companies to cut down their overhead expenses. Outsourcing of works can be done only with the help of computers and internet. Under such circumstances, it is imperative to attach role of modern technologies in determining the competitive power of an organization. Siaw & Yu, (2004) pointed out the importance of internet in banking industry. In their opinion, Internet has fundamentally changed everything within the banking industry. It not only shifted the overall competitive landscape, the technical and standards infrastructure, and the requirements of individuals and business users but also serve as a source of competitive advantage (p.514) Karagiannopoulos et al. (2005) pointed out that “Michael Porter's arguments are based on exaggerated phenomena. In their opinion, Factors that determine a sector's profitability could be enriched with the innovation that prevails in the particular sector (p.66). For example, Nokia was the leader in the mobile phone industry until recent times. However, Apple Inc. innovated and introduced touchscreen phones at the beginning of 2000. There rest is history. At present Nokia is far behind Apple Inc. and Samsung in terms of market share and market capitalization. This example clearly shows the importance of innovation in increasing the competitive power of an organization. However, Porter’s model says nothing about the importance of innovation in determining the competitive power of an organization. The opinion of Hills & Jones (2009) is relevant here. In today’s dynamic markets, technological breakthroughs may completely change business models (Hills & Jones, 2009). Michael Porter analyses competitive power based on competition alone. He assumes that the goal of competitive strategy is to subjugate and gain ascendancy over suppliers and buyers (Campbell et al., 2002). However, recent developments in the business world show that many international companies are currently establishing strategic alliances to improve competitive power instead of competing each other. For example, Wal-Mart has established joint venture with Bharti Group in India as a mode of entry to India. It is easy for Wal-mart to acquire an Indian company as a mode of entry to India. However, they decided to keep Bharti as a partner. There are plenty of such examples in international business circuits. These examples show that competitive power depends on collaboration along with competition. However, Porter stressed the importance of competition alone in in his model while evaluating the competitive power of an organization. Another argument in the corporate world at present is that individual capabilities bring more profitability to a company than industry factors (Rumelt, 1991). Even though an organization has many resources to compete effectively in the market, human resources seem to be the most effective one. No company can progress properly even if it has huge resources, in the absence of smart employees. In other words, employees can make or break a company. According to Bratton & Gold (2012), “Labour is not a commodity. It is people in work organizations who sets overall strategies and goals, design work systems, produce goods and services, monitor quality, allocate financial resources and market the product and services” (p.8). Porter’s model says nothing about the importance of human resources in increasing the competitive power of a company. It focuses mainly on external factors rather than internal factors, while assessing the competitive power of a company. Some people argue that potency of five forces put forward by Porter may differ from business to business (Cullen, 2004). In other words, it is difficult to apply these forces across all business operating all parts of the world. The universal acceptance of Porter’s five force model is questioned by many scholars. As mentioned earlier, Porter developed this model in 1980’s. At that time globalization and liberalization policies were not evolved out properly. The world has witnessed how these revolutionary policies have affected global business after its introduction in 80’s. It should be noted that America and Europe were the wealthiest and heavily industrialized regions in 80’s. Therefore Porter’s considerations while formulating this model were mainly based on the business parameters in America and Europe. However, global wealth is currently shifting from American and European continents to Asian continent and industries are developing rapidly in Asia. Even American and European companies are looking for investment opportunities in Asia. Porter’s model failed to consider Asian business parameters while formulating this model. Some people argue that Porter has given more importance to buyers rather than customers while formulating this model. It should be noted that the shareholders of a company has many roles in deciding the competitive power along with the buyers and suppliers. The investor behaviors can affect a company in many ways. It should be noted that "UK investors tend to have an extremely small proportion of their portfolios invested in the US, despite the historic and language links” (Knight, 2012). In other words, UK investors are more interested in investing in UK alone rather than investing in any other countries. At the same time, plenty of Indian investors have invested in American companies even though India is a culturally different country compared to America or UK. Porter’s model says nothing about the role of investors in deciding the competitive power of a company. Conclusion Current business world is extremely globalized and heavily competitive compared to that in the past. Instead of theories or principles, strategies are more important in the business world at present. Under such circumstances, strategic management is extremely important for organizations to stay competitive all the time. Strategic management theories are undergoing changes because of the rapid changes taking place in the organizational world. Business and management theories at present and a couple of decades before are entirely different. Even though plenty of strategic management theories were evolved out in recent times, none of them are fully successful in catering the needs of organizations all over the world. This is because of the fact that majority of these theories were formulated based on regional preferences rather than international preferences. In other words, strategic management theories successful in Europe need not be successful in Asia and vice versa. Michael Porter’s five forces theory is one of the popular strategic management theories in the corporate world. This theory was successful in assessing the competitive power of an organization based on five forces. However, it failed to account for the internal matters such as human resources of ability to innovate etc, which have significant roles in deciding the competitive power of an organization. In other words, this theory considered only macro parameters such as rivalry, supplier power, buyer power, threat of new entrants and substitute products etc, while evaluating the competitive power. Moreover, this theory was formulated in the 80’s. Since then lot of changes took place in the business world. In short, Porter’s five forces model needs some fine tuning to assess the competitive power of the present organizations. References A new model for strategy and entrepreneurship in China: Alternative five forces. 2009. Strategic Direction. May2009, Vol. 25 Issue 6, p19-21 Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ). 2010. [Online] Available at: http://www.anz.com/about-us/our-company/profile/facts/history/ [Accessed 09 April 2013] Bratton, J & Gold, J. 2012. Human resource management: theory & practice Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan; Fifth Edition, New Edition, 5th Edition (July 17, 2012) Coate, P. 2007. Focus on strategic management. Emerald Group Publishing Cullen, J.B. 2004. Multinational management: A strategic approach. Publisher: South-Western College Pub; 3 edition (February 19, 2004) Case against Coca-Cola Kerala State: India, N.d. [Online] Available at: http://www.righttowater.info/ways-to-influence/legal-approaches/case-against-coca-cola-kerala-state-india/ [Accessed 09 April 2013] Campbell, D., Stonehouse, G. & Houston, B. 2002. Business strategy an introduction. Butterworth-Heinemann Title; 2 edition (9 July 2002) De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. 2010. Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. Fourth Edition. Cengage learning. Fitzroy, P and Hulbert, J. M. 2004. Strategic Management: Creating Value in a Turbulent Times, Publisher: Wiley; 1 edition (September 29, 2004) For Marketing Learners Globally N.d. [Online], Available at: http://www.learnmarketing.net/porters.htm [Accessed 09 April 2013] Grant, R. M. 2002. Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell; 4th edition (January 3, 2002) Grant, R. M. 2010. Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Publisher: Wiley; 7th edition (February 9, 2010) Grundy, T. 2006. Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porter's five forces model. Strategic Change. Aug2006, Vol. 15 Issue 5, p213-229.  Harker, M. & Harker, D. 1998. The Role of Strategic Selling in the Company Turnaround Process, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 08853134, Spring 98, Vol. 18, Issue 2 Hil, C. Jones, G. 2009. Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. Wiley India Pvt. Ltd. Knight, J. 2012. Uncle Sam need not be the black sheep of investors' portfolios. The Independent. 15 January 2012. Karagiannopoulos, G. D., Georgopoulos, N. & Nikolopoulos, K.  2005. Fathoming Porter's five forces model in the internet era. Info.2005, Vol. 7 Issue 6, p66-76. Lunenburg, F.C. 2012. Organizational Structure: Mintzberg’s Framework. International Journal Of Scholarly, Academic, Intellectual Diversity. Volume 14, Number 1, 2012 Porter’s Five Forces Model. 2009. [Online], Available at: http://notesdesk.com/notes/strategy/porters-five-forces-model-porters-model/ [Accessed 09 April 2013] Proctor, T & Papasolomou-Doukakis, I. C. 2000. Strategic Marketing. Routledge, 2000 - Business & Economics Pines, J. 2006. Applying Michael Porter’s five forces model to emergency medicine. M. Journal of Emergency Medicine. May2006, Vol. 30 Issue 4, p447-453. Robert, C. H. C. and Holt, R. 2009. Strategy Without Design: the Silent Efficacy of Indirect Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Rumelt, R.P. 1991. How much does industry matter?. Strategic management journal. Volume 12. Issue 3. Sumpio, B.E. 2013. Application of Porter's Five Forces Model and generic strategies for vascular surgery: should be stuck in the middle?, Vascular [Vascular], ISSN: 1708-5381, 2013 Mar 21  Supplier relationship management in banking industry. N.d.n. d), . [Online], Available at: http://www.sap.com/usa/solutions/business-suite/srm/pdf/BWP_SB_SRM_for_Banking.pdf [Accessed 09 April 2013] Siaw, I & Yu, A. 2004. An Analysis of the Impact of the Internet on Competition in the Banking Industry, using Porter'sFive Forces Model. International Journal of Management. Dec2004, Vol. 21 Issue 4, p514-523 Thompson, M. 2013. Toyota recalls 1 million cars in the U.S. [Online], Available at: http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/30/autos/toyota-recall/index.html [Accessed 09 April 2013] What is the Balanced Scorecard?, 2013. [Online], Available at: https://www.balancedscorecard.org/BSCResources/AbouttheBalancedScorecard/tabid/55/Default.aspx [Accessed 09 April 2013] Read More