Towards the Understanding of the Strategic Intent by Hamel and Prahalad - Assignment Example

Critical Review of the Article “Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K. (1989) Strategic Intent in Harvard Business Review, May-June” Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Overview 3 Whittington’s 4 Schools of Strategy 3 Theoretical Underpinnings 5 Strengths of the Article 5 Weakness of the Article 7 Convincing Content of the Article 7 Unconvincing Content of the Article 8 References 9 Bibliography 10 Overview In this paper, an article written by Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad will be reviewed. Basically the article has been written on strategic intent but it has covered many of the related topics. At the very first stage, article will be analysed in light of a perspective of strategic management and in the rest of the parts, its weakness, strength, convincing and unconvincing factors will be exhibited. Whittington’s 4 Schools of Strategy Before linking the approaches to the Whittington’s 4 schools of strategy with the particular article, it needs to be understood that what the Whittington’s strategies imply. The four schools of thoughts can be discussed one by one. Classical Approach to Strategy: As per the view of the Whittington, the prime objective of the business according to the classists is the profitability. Following this strategy it can be said that the strategic aim of a business should be earning more profits and in case of unsatisfactory results, a corrective measure need to be taken. Even the activity which is responsible for that result can be abandoned. Evolutionary Approach on Strategy: It refers that there is no need to rely upon the top management’s ability to develop a strategy and act accordingly. As per this approach, profit maximisation is determined by the market not managers. It further denotes that only the best performer can survive in the market and the weaker ones are turned out of the market. Processual Approach to Strategy: This approach neither follows the classical approach nor agrees with evolutionary approach. It denotes that instead of striving for the ideal, it needs to handle the reality offers. This theory further implies that rational economic cannot be expected as it is not able to consider all the factors simultaneously. Systemic Approach on Strategy: According to the systemic theorists, organisation is capable enough to plan and act effectively and economic activity can not be estranged from the social relations. It implies that organisation is not only a combination of individuals but also of social factors (Cuizon, 2009). Basically classical and evolutionary approach has been considered under the prescriptive approach where the other two can be taken as the emergent approach. Again both the classical and evolutionary approach can be functional in the economic field where processual and systematic approach can be applied in psychology and sociology respectively (Macmillan & Tamppoe, 2000). From the understanding of the above mentioned theory and the article, it can be accomplished that the approaches which have been implemented in this article can be considered under the processual approach since the authors emphasise more on the strategy development as per the present condition of the organisation and not on the basis of profit motive or management concern. Theoretical Underpinnings In this article, the authors have considered certain assumptions. They have demonstrated the entire article in perspective of few specific instances. In the initial stage of this article, it has been found that the authors have adopted a comparative analysis among the companies between United States of America and Japan. They further describe the strategy of those companies to boost up their internal and external policies in order to gain the competitive advantages. Mostly they stick to the explanations of the growth study of Japanese companies in comparison to the American companies in the worldwide perspective, as they stated the expansion strategies in Asia and Europe market. From the overall understanding of the article, it has been observed that the analysis of all the theories and the assessment of the strategies have been made in respect of few organisations instead of the business environment. It can be argued that though the authors has brought into light entry strategies of the organisations of Japan and America, but they does not consider any companies that originated from different countries. Therefore, it can be considered that to some extent the authors have measured a restrictive world view. Regarding the presence of logic, this article can be rated as a rational piece as each and every strategy and policy have been justified with respect to the theoretical and practical perspectives. Strengths of the Article The main focus of the article is on the strategic intent and the authors have represented it in a very systematic way. Now the merits of this article can be described. First of all it has been found that the authors have undertaken a global perspective to analyse the topic. It is not only helpful to conceptualise ‘strategic intent’ in a broad perspective but also to build up a comparative analysis and develop a well built concept out of that. Secondly, they had started their discussion with a comparative analysis of mainly two countries and those are America and Japan. They make it clear that how the Japanese companies modify their strategies and become capable enough to provide a tough competition to their American competitors. This is a part of the article but somehow denotes that how a feeble company can boost up and can gain competitive advantages. The article has been ornamented with certain assumptions which have been supported by few theories. Similarly, it has also been found that certain theories have been linked with the core topic and again those have been justified through practical instances. A separate part has been attached with article which deals with the strategy development and its implication on organisations. That portion of the article does not interrupt the flow of the discussion but has bestowed a well structured causal effect of different strategies which has further supported all the assumptions considered for the article. Apart from all these, the authors had exhibited the process and history of building up the competitive advantages of Komatsu through different passages of time. The most important aspect is that Hamel and Prahalad have explained all the supporting aspects of the core topic i.e. the strategic intent. These are leadership position, strategic planning, and developing strategic decisions such as joint venture, mergers and others, effect of technological resources, strategic business unit and strategic hierarchies. Critical analysis of these topics further enable the reader to enhance their understanding with regard to what extent strategic extent is useful and what affects it has on the organisational level. Throughout the entire discussion in the article, the authors have cited few examples of various companies across the world which has built up an in-depth understanding with the topic. Moreover the surrender process has also been described which is relative to the core topic. All these efforts and explanations have added value to the article and makes it more effective for the readers. Weakness of the Article First of all, the thorough discussion prevalent in this article can make it monotonous. It should have encompassed or it can be said that it could have ornamented with more headings and subheadings which can make the topics more prominent to the reader. Focusing more on two particular nations, America and Japan; somehow make certain portion of the article profligately specific. That has restricted the discussion flow. It could have been better if the authors considered five or six companies from different origins and continue the discussion in respect of different aspects. Thus, the effect of each strategy can be precise and clear to the reader. Convincing Content of the Article Basically in an article, the convincing factors are those assumptions which can satisfy the demand of the reader or in simple words it can be stated as those assumptions or statement whose outcomes are expected to the reader. Even it differs from reader to reader. According to me, the most convincing content is the recommendation of developing a competitor’s focus at each and every level and across the organisation. As per my opinion, human resource plays a significant role not only in the production but also in every department. It is also evident that at the era of artificial intelligence, significance of the human resource prevails. Therefore, they should be trained properly as stated in the article. To motivate them a well built reward system should also be there. Eventually after all these effort performance level of the employees need to be measured, which can be better achieved through the policy stated in the article. This refers to set the benchmark as per the best-in-class competitors. Unconvincing Content of the Article Unconvincing statement or assumptions are those which can not satisfy the expectations of the reader or rather, which differs from the reader’s perceptions. In this article, one assumption has differed from mine set of perception. According to the article, an organisation should be given time to assimilate a challenge before launching other. Disagreeing with the statement, I would like to state that a new product line or newly launched product or services can share the burden of a challenge or loss. Even it can be set off with the profit or success of newly launched product. As per the real scenario, the employees of an organisation can get panicked during the crisis of the organisation and this can be discarded through reducing the possibilities of fatal scenarios. I agree that launching of new product is another hectic process as it needs to set a specific objective, check proper execution of the launching process, disseminates best practice and others. But again it set off the load of challenges (Sachs, 2009). References Cuizon, G., 2009. Theories of Action in Business Strategy. Content. [Online] Available at: http://www.suite101.com/content/theories-of-action-in-business-strategy-a94410 [Accessed November 08, 2010]. Macmillan & Tampoe, 2000. Whittington’s 4 Generic Approaches to Strategy. Strategic Management. [Online] Available at: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:-KXqfbkHe2kJ:www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780198782292/freelecturer/ppts/ch03.ppt+Whittington%E2%80%99s+4+schools+of+strategy&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=in [Accessed November 08, 2010]. Sachs, R. M., 2009. How to Effectively Launch New Products. RMR. [Online] Available at: http://www.rmr.com/marketingtips.asp?nid=357&lid=1 [Accessed November 08, 2010]. Bibliography Hamel, G. & Prahalad, C. K., 1989. Strategic Intent. Harvard Business Review. Nelson, R. R. & Winter, S. G., 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press. Rivani, D., No Date. An Overview of Strategy Development Models and the Ward-Rivani Model. Papers. [Online] Available at: http://129.3.20.41/eps/get/papers/0506/0506002.pdf [Accessed November 08, 2010]. Read More