Strategic intent as an agent of change - Essay Example

Running Head: Strategic Intent Strategic Intent: How It Brings About Change By: November 10, 2009 Strategic Intent: Introduction Definition For decades, business organizations have been using various principles of project management discipline to manage the projects that they execute. However, despite such efforts, little has been done to recognize such disciplines as one of the core competencies that are required to create a competitive edge in the business strategy executed by the organization. There have been several cases where some projects have failed to be coherent with the strategies of the organization and this may be due to the fact that project management discipline is regarded as an operational tool to be utilized in order to control the duration of the project. Without strategic intent therefore, there is an inappropriate use of both human and financial resources. In addition, time is also wasted on projects that may end up having a negative effect on the competitiveness of the business organization. Therefore, there is a need to investigate the issue of the strategic intent of a company, where it is best to identify the factors that help organizational competitiveness and at the same time, identify the factors that hinder it (Okumus, 2003). According to Bartlett & Ghoshal (1999), strategic intent refers to the alignment with and adherence/ coherence to the goals set by an organization. Of course, the concept of strategic intent also focuses on achieving the goal of the organization by the members who belong to it. Thus, it follows then that strategic intent focuses on exactly how to achieve the goal put forward by the company (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1994). In order for this to happen, there is a need for all the members of a particular group or company to collaborate together, or work separately in order to achieve the objectives or goals set aside by the organization. In order for this to happen, there is a need for the members to act in such a way that their actions or tasks complement each other. Should this not be the case, instances of confusion may arise. Therefore, it is necessary that every member should be able to understand his or her own approach to any task assigned, and how this approach would be able to mesh with the approaches of the other members of the organization or group (Campbell & Goold, 1988). On the same note, vision plays an important role in the core objectives set by an organization and the direction of the organization’s progress. It follows that the core ideology is what defines the identity of the organization and this is what gives the organization the character to endure any challenges that it may face. Successful companies such as Hewlett-Packard (HP), and Walt Disney are just some of the companies that have core values and a core purpose. The core purpose is what acts as the company’s guide in order to achieve its goals. However, for this to happen, there is a need for a leader to set the vision and to make sure that all the members who belong to the same organization see the same vision. Unless communicated and actually reinforced, vision is of no use (Welch, 2005). Put simply, according to Landrum (2008), strategic intent refers to the strategy followed by a company. Mintzberg (1990), has mentioned that strategic research is divided into ten schools of thought. These are namely: design, planning, positioning, entrepreneurial, cognitive, learning, political, cultural, environmental and configurational. The school of design is primarily concerned with the state of the organization and the need to come up to expectations. The planning school on the other hand, is concerned with the management team crafting strategies that can further be categorized into three components, namely, 1) corporate, 2) business and 3) functional. 1) The positioning school is concerned with ‘positioning’ these strategies in the proper context. 2) The entrepreneurial school of strategic thought is focused on the leader who is expected to be a visionary, and one who has skills in judgment, wisdom, experience and insight. The leader is one who is able to attract followers to hold the same goal or vision. 3) The cognitive school of thought, on the other hand is more concerned with perceptions, concept attainment, reconception and the differences in cognitive styles. Through this school, organizations are able to learn from previous experience in order to allow for further development. 4) The learning school views strategy as an emergent. Through the learning school, despite actions that lack in organization and are messy, organizations are able to learn from their own actions. 5) The political school is one where strategy is viewed as a power process. This strategy is basically determined by the individuals who hold positions within an organization and is seen as self-serving. 6) The cultural school on the other hand views strategy as a reflection of organizational culture and is a process of collective behavior that is based upon shared beliefs. This kind of culture is one that does not produce strategic change in the same way that it perpetuates the state of affairs and strategy. 7) The environmental school is one that views strategy as positive and as a response to the pressures brought about by the environment. It follows that the most fit of organizations will be able to survive no matter what environment. Finally, the 8) configurational school is one that views strategy as episodic and progressing through stages determined by the life cycle (Mintzberg, 1990). Relation to Organization Change and Business Improvement The size of the organization is an important factor to consider when it comes to strategic planning. Naturally, the bigger the company, if follows that there may be more tasks that need to be accomplished. In this light, the company may also have more diverse missions and objectives that need to be achieved. The least requirement is that these organizations are expected to consider their strategies from a corporate, functional and business unit perspective on a daily basis in order to make the most out of the output and the contributions that are incurred by the various divisions existing in the company (Balkema & Mollemann, 1999). When it comes to human capital, it is mandatory that human resource implications are considered and this can be done through the interaction of the strategic intent and the planning system, otherwise known as corporate guidance. Innovative analysis techniques have the potential to reveal significant opportunities to redirect resources to higher value opportunities and build improved capabilities (Okumus, 2003). These techniques have the advantages of re-evaluating the impact of proposed and ongoing projects through an integrated analysis of the portfolio of projects. The problem with some organizations of today is that their investments in projects are often not aligned with their strategic intent. Thus, reviewing project and technology related initiatives in addition to using an integrated-analysis technique will enable a company to increase their efforts in projects that are aligned with their strategic intent. On the other hand, they can also cancel or redesign projects that do not. New techniques that improve project management have the possibility of producing short term efficiencies and increasing long term shareholder value by continually aligning the project portfolio with the intentions of the business. In order to achieve optimum organizational performance, companies have to identify the future capabilities that are required to pursue projects that allow them to adapt to changing business conditions. This approach is more advisable as compared to the approach of selecting an optimum portfolio of projects on the assumption of a predictable future (Benko & McFarlan, 2004). Companies should have an organizational strategy which mentions the immediate needs of the company. All employees and potential employees should be made aware of such a strategy, and from the very beginning, both the human resource department and the potential employee should be aware of the positions that he/she is applying for, and the challenges that are faced while working under such a position. On the part of the human resource department, it would be a huge help if the management team is clear with the requirements needed to fulfill the job. This includes the necessary business experience, education attainment, and of course, the knowledge, skills and capabilities of the applicant. In addition, both the management and the potential employee should already be made aware of tasks, duties and responsibilities that will be and may be assigned to him/her, without leaving any details out. This means that it is the job of the human resource department personnel to make sure that the objectives of the company are understood by the employee in addition to any accountabilities (Golden, 1992). Woolridge & Floyd (1990) state that the business environment of today is one that demands cooperation between two parties, namely the top management team and the other members of the organization who belong to other managerial levels. This is because top managers are required to articulate the context and develop the organizational structures and reward systems that encourage strategic thinking among middle managers. Such a need may also require the need for different roles for staff at various managerial levels in the process of strategic planning (Starzmann & Baca, 2004). On the other hand, it has been suggested that the participation of the management in the strategic planning process can actually encourage informational, emotional and affective effects on the organization and its members. Thus, the participation and involvement of the management in strategic planning has the possibility of enforcing the practice of strategic planning and its effectiveness (Ketokivi & Castaner, 2004). Skills in Relation to Organization Change and Business Improvement According to Fawcett et al. (1996), in order to improve organizational competitiveness through strategic intent lies n the consistency and coordination among the basic building blocks that make up the foundation on which the firm seeks to establish a distinctive competitive advantage. Meeting the needs of customers, for instance has been repeatedly emphasized to be one of the major factors that contribute to strategic success. However, one of the major mistakes that companies do is the failure to talk directly to their customers in a systematic manner regarding the factors that may contribute to the company’s competitiveness and what may contribute to raising customer satisfaction levels (Hambrick et al. 1993). In addition, some companies in the past have also failed to address the needs of managers who are responsible for converting organizational resources into customer value more effectively and efficiently (Gianesi, 1998). Managers who fail to focus on these responsibilities often have to face poor measurement systems that downgrade the company’s ability to manage daily operations in a high value-added manner. This then results in the company’s difficulty in developing strong and distinct capabilities even when they are able to align their strategic objectives to the needs of their pool of customers (Bowman, 1997). It seems then that competitive success can be achieved by selecting strategies that are customer-appropriate and then developing the corresponding operational excellence that will ultimately leave the customer feeling satisfied. In this light, the greatest obstacle to competitive success stems from maintaining the focus and consistency among strategic goals and value-added capabilities. Thus, it is advisable for a company to implement information and measurement capabilities that are aligned to their operational activities. Furthermore, developing a better and thorough understanding of the role and influence of information and measurement practice is vital to the successful implementation of the programmes designed and intended by the company to promote development (Fawcett et al. 1996) When it comes to a company’s operational performance, the company’s choice of competitive priorities should be aligned with the process of resource allocation and daily decision making in such a manner that it leads to superior organizational performance in areas where there is an emphasis in strategic intent. This means that the initiatives that are directly associated with the company’s strategic direction has to be targeted in such a way that managerial attention is received in addition to greater financial and technical support. Worker training and worker motivation are additional resources that can help contribute to achieving the company’s goals (Stock & Lambert, 1992) Strengths and Limitations of Strategic Intent Strategic intent has the function that ensures that a company’s long term objectives shall be achieved. This shall be done by seriously acting on intended actions that require top management decisions and large amounts of the company’s resources (Kaplan, 1984). Through strategic intent, an organization’s long term prosperity is affected, thereby making strategic intent crucial for a company that is future oriented (Al Ghamdi, et al. 2007). According to Daft et al. (1998), the communicator, be it a member of the top management team or other managerial departments has the task to collaborate with all the members of the organization. This may be done by 1) acknowledging what is happening in the status quo, putting it in context with a clear perspective, 2) being informed about how issues within the organization are addressed and 3) involving people within and even outside the organization by developing a solution so that issues and opportunities are addressed accordingly. With communication, it is highly likely that the employees of the organization are more committed to accomplishing their assigned tasks, thus allowing for further organizational development and success. According to Roy (2001), communication has been recognized as a crucial element for successful strategy implementation. Basically, the concept of successful communication involves the transfer of information from the sender to the receiver, with the information being understood by the two parties (Lengell & Draft, 1988). It has been considered as the prerequisite to the coordination, collaboration and managing organizational change within a firm, big or small. To be more specific, communication is required for internal managerial functions. These are namely 1) to establish and disseminate the goals of the company, 2) to develop plans for future achievements, 3) to organize human and other resources in a manner that is most effective and efficient, 4) to select, develop and appraise the organization’s members, 5) to lead, direct, motivate and to create a climate in which all members are motivated to contribute, and 6) to control performance (Kagan, 2004). Strategic intent may be misinterpreted and miscommunicated. There have also been cases where strategic intent in itself may be wrong. For instance, some management teams may establish and implement the wrong strategies when it comes to their operational processes, thereby making communication with all the members of the organization even more crucial to the development and improvement of the company. If there is frequent collaboration and communication with the company’s employees, managers can and will learn more about how to go about their business processes. Of course, there is also a need to communicate with individuals outside the organization, since this may also provide managers suggestions on how they can further improve themselves (Anderson et al, 1992). In order to achieve a successful result of strategic intent, there are four specific traits that are desirable qualities of a manager. These are 1) eco-driven- organizations should promote effective collaboration in order to utilize relationships and resources provided by the ecosystem into valuable organization assets, 2) outside-in- companies should continually work with other companies that are the best at doing what they do, 3) fighting trim- companies should seek to be agile and coordinated at all times in order to maximize their options, 4) house in order- companies should also develop and maintain an efficient cultural environment that values, supports and facilities collaboration (O’Neill, 1999). Conclusion Setting vision and mission statements are intended not only to create competitive advantage for the company that has established them, but also to create a superstructure of uniqueness that will be difficult for other organizations to imitate. However, there is a need for the top management team and the other managerial departments of an organization to be heavily involved in carrying out their strategic intent and making sure that all the members of the organization cooperate to the best of their abilities. Thus, mission statements and whatever vision that a company may have for its own development and improvement would highly likely lose its purpose if these do not get through the member and is not acted upon. In order to meet the competitive challenges of a rapidly changing and globalizing marketplace, companies have to do so much more than simply adopt appropriate competitive strategies. These strategies must, first and foremost be implemented effectively. Successful implementation has been said to require a coordinated and cohesive effort throughout the organization. However, strategic intent has the weakness of failing to be translated into the measurement and information capabilities that are required to enhance operational performance. The lack of connection between priorities that have been expressed and measurement may explain some of the cynicism that prevails in many organizations that have decided to adopt different management programmes in order to boost their competitiveness. Mintzberg (1990), has mentioned that there are different schools of strategical thought, all of which aim to guide managers and company members to think about the appropriate strategies that are necessary towards their organization’s development. These are namely 1) 1) The positioning school, 2) The entrepreneurial school, 3) The cognitive school, 4) The learning school, 5) The political school, 6) The cultural school, 7) The environmental school and the 8) configurational school. By studying the concepts of these schools of strategic thought, managers may be guided into establishing their strategic intent and how to best go about it. There are certain skills that require a successful implementation of strategic content. The core of all these skills lies in communication and the ability to communicate with all individuals within and outside the organization in order to promote success and development. Since strategic intent inspires members of an organization to work hard towards achieving a certain goal, it follows that if managers are able to communicate the goals and the objectives of an organization to their employees, then the employees would know what tasks they need to accomplish and how to go about these tasks (Lengell & Draft, 1988). Despite the fact that the strategic intent of companies is predictable, it is one of the driving forces for managers to actually look around their environment and see what kind of impact they are able to have on their society. If they are able to see that their products and services cause more harm than good, then their strategic intent needs to be reviewed and they must analyze why they are sticking to it, and if they should continue to do so. It must be reminded that strategic intent is not always perfect and there have been some companies that have established incorrect strategies to go about their business processes. Again, this is why communication between the members of the company would be valuable, and managers may indeed benefit from it. References Al Ghamdi, S., Roy, M., and Ahmed, Z. (2007) How employees learn about corporate strategy: an empirical analysis of a Saudi manufacturing company, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14, No. 4. Anderson, J.C., Cleveland, G., and Schroeder, R.G. (1989) Operations strategy: a literature review, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 8 No.2, pp.133-58 Balkema, A. and Molleman, E. (1999), Barriers to the development of self-organizing teams, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 134-50. Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1994) Changing the role of top management: beyond strategy to purpose, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 72 No. 6, pp. 79-89. Benko, C. and McFan, W. (2004) Managing a growth culture: how CEOs can initiate and monitor a successful growth-project culture, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 34-42. Bowman, C., and Ambrosini, V. (1997) Using single respondents in strategy research, British Journal of Management, Vol. 8 pp.119-31 Campbell, A. and Goold, M. (1988) Strategic management styles, in Pettigrew, A. (Ed.), Competitiveness and the Management Process, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, New York, NY. Daft, R., Sormunen, J., Parks, D. (1998), Chief Executive scanning, environmental characteristics, and performance: an empirical study, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9 No.2, pp.123-40. Fawcett, S., Smith, S., and Cooper, M.B. (1996) Strategic intent, measurement, capability and operational success: making the connection, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics, Vol. 27, No. 7., pp. 410-421. Gianesi, I.G.N. (1998) Implementing manufacturing strategy through strategic production planning, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18 No.3, pp.286-99 Golden, B.R. (1992) The past is the past – or is it? The use of retrospective accounts as indicators of past strategy, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35 No.4, pp.848- 60. Hambrick, D.C., Geletkancyz, M.A., Fredrickson, J.F. (1993) Top executive commitment to the status quo, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14 pp.401-18. Kagan, A. (2004) Can you hear me now? The importance of communicating employee share plans, Workspan, Vol. 47 No.4, pp.25-8. Kaplan, R. (1984) Yesterday’s accounting undermines production, Harvard Business Review, July-August 1984, pp. 95-101. Ketokivi, M. And Castaner, X. (2004) Strategic planning as an integrative device, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 337-365. Landrum, N. (2008) A narrative analysis revealing strategic intent and posture, Qualitative Research in Organization and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 127-145. Lengel, R. and Daft, R. (1988) The selection of communication media as an executive skill,The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 225-32. Mintzberg, H. (1990) Strategy formation: schools of thought, in Frederickon, J. (Ed.), Perspectives on Strategic Management, Ballinger, Boston, MA, pp. 105-235. ONeill, M. (1999) Communicating for change, CMA Management, Vol. 73 No.6, pp.29-33. Okumus, F. (2003) A framework to implement strategies in organizations, Management Decision, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 871-82. Roy, M.H. (2001) Small group communication and performance: do cognitive flexibility and context matter? Management Decision, Vol. 39 No.4, pp.323-30. Starzmann, G. and Baca, C. (2004) Total rewards: creating freshness that lasts, Workspan, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 55-61. Stock, J. and Lambert, D. (1992) Becoming a ‘world class’ company with logistics service quality, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 3, No. 1., pp. 73-80. Welch, J. and Welch, S. (2005) Winning, Hammersmith, London, Harper Collins. Woolridge, B. And Floyd, S.W. (1990) The strategy process, middle management involvement and organizational performance, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, No.3, pp. 231-241. Read More