Robin Hood's Methods for Strategic Development - Case Study Example

Robin Hood is wise to be considering a change in strategy for his second year of campaigns for two reasons. First, the Merrymen seem to lack the understanding of the need for flexibility when they grow in numbers. This may have been caused by a low barrier to enter the group. Second, food and supplies are becoming scarce when Robin Hood is preparing for his campaign's second year.  The group is growing which is causing stress on the flow of supplies. With the Sherriff increasing in strength and awareness of Robin Hood’s tactics, Robin is wise to take a look at his strategy and make the necessary changes.

Question 3

Robin Hood should consider several factors in revising his strategy. One of those factors is his method of recruitment. He currently accepts just about anyone. He should tighten requirements for membership including the men having skills that the group needs. He might consider a hierarchical organization for his group so that new members could go through a review process, and more control can be kept over the band. He should also consider other methods to fund the organization, as food and supplies are growing thin.

Expected Learning Objectives:

• Develop a fundamental understanding of strategic leadership from a leader’s perspective.
• Understand the broad array of variables that affect Robin Hood’s decisions and actions and understand the uncertainties that varied factors introduce to the strategic leadership challenge.
• Consider how the new challenge faced by Robin Hood encompasses the five elements of strategy as described on the strategy diamond: arenas; vehicles; differentiation; staging and pacing; and economic logic.
• Evaluate Robin Hood’s success to date through considering how he has executed his strategy (implementation levers and strategic leadership) and the outcomes he has achieved.
• Robin Hood is operating in a dynamic environment. The emerging internal conflict in his organization and changes outside of his organization provides a platform to understand the dynamic nature of strategic leadership.

Case Study 2: Razorfish

Case Questions

Question 1

Razorfish had many variables affecting its rise and its quick decline. Internally, Razorfish developed an innovative business model that focused on advanced technology, staffing, marketing, and consulting practices. The staff’s ability to identify and use advanced technology was key in its rapid growth. Externally, the company got started in the early stages of the internet, which allowed them to grow as there were few competitors in the market. They accepted investment from investors who were open to new technology and internet-based companies, and they had a global demand for their products and services. Reasons for the company’s decline included factors such as an overvalued stock price and a heavy increase in market competition.

Question 2

Razorfish had an aggressive entry and growth strategy. Given the hindsight view, this was a very appropriate strategy. However, because it was such a new industry, they could have taken more time to see how the market would play out. The high rate of change in the industry with new technologies, however, made it a prime environment for growth. They could have focused more horizontally and gotten into a wider array of services if they wanted to hedge risk.

Question 3

Investors were ready and willing to invest in companies in the loosely defined industry because of the potential for high rewards. Investors knew that this industry could have a profound impact on the world as they knew it and wanted to cash in.

Expected Learning Objectives:

• Identify characteristics of the early stages of the internet industry.
• Appreciate the dynamics of industry evolution, particularly under conditions of environmental change.
• Observe the impact of dynamic environments on industry and the firms that operate within it.
• Consider the risks associated with rapid organizational growth.
• Recognize the challenges for organizations to remain flexible in ambiguous contexts when a previous business strategy has been successful.