Agenda
General – The role of plans and planning in strategy?
• Annual, discrete
• Strategy and structure
Mintzberg
Staber & Sydow
• Continuous?
io
n
•
•
• Diversification
–Differentiation vs. Low Cost
n
tio
ta
en
• Realized and intended strategies
 What does a strategy process look like?
• Paradigms of manufacturing strategy
em
pl
• Business level
–Five forces
–Generic strategies
–Miles & Snow’s typology
• What makes planning hard?
Im
• Views of strategy
–Outside-in vs. Inside-out view of strategy
•
 Planning prerequisites?
• Plan vs. Planning
–Ansoff’s strategy process model
• Corporate level
–Industry attractiveness
–Diversification
–Core competence
• Manufacturing level
–Hayes & Wheelwright’s typology
• outcome and process
at
• Strategi congruence
 Plan and planning
m
ul
• What is strategy?
 Föreläsning 2 – Komplettera och (i
någon mån) kritisera
Fo
r
 Föreläsning 1 – Förtydliga och
fördjupa
• A note on the seminars.
Some remarks
Analysis
Formulation
Implementation
48
Hans Andersson
50
Hans Andersson
Business level – Views on Competitive advantage
On Mintzberg’s structures
 Outside-in
 The configurations represent ideal types.
• … relating the firm to its environment in
order to meet long-term objectives
successfully.
• The key to success is ’out there’.
• External analysis in order to find a
profitable position.
 Inside-out
• c.f ”figure of thought”
• Competitive advantage is based in the
• ”pure types” – do not expect to find them in the ideal forms in reality.
resources of the firm.
• i.e a conceptual framwork!
–Tangible resources as land, machines
money etc.
–Intangible resources as knowledge,
capabilities, relations etc.
• Managements way of relating resources
important.
 ”..effective organization will favor some sort of configuration, - some form of
logically consistent clustering of its elements – as it searches for harmony in its
internal processes and consonance with its environment.” (Mintzberg 1980:322)
 ’Harmony’ and ’consonanance’
–Just controlling resources is not enough.
• Similar to Nilsson & Rapp’s ”congruence”.
• Barneys view (obs! one of several
within the Resource Based View).
–Valauable
–Rare
–Inimitable
–Organizational
51
Hans Andersson
54
Hans Andersson
All strategies are not realized
Diversifiering
 A study of Swedish
manufacturing companies
chage of diversification and
internationalization 1985-2005
 Definitions
• Enaffärsföretag
Källa: Bengtsson & Kalling 2007
– 95-100% av omsättningen från ett
affärsområde.
• Dominantaffärsföretag
– Viss diversifiering. 70-94% av
omsättningen från det dominerande
affärsområdet.
Intended
strategy
Realized
strategy
Deliberate
strategy
• Relaterat diversifierade företag
– Mer än 70% av diversifieringen
relaterar till företagets tidigare
kompetens/verksamhet
• Orelaterat diversifierade företag
Unrealized
strategy
source: Mintzberg 1987
Hans Andersson
– Mindre än 70% av diversifieringen
genom relatering till ursprunglig
kompetens/verksamhet.
Emergent
strategy
57
59
Hans Andersson
Differentiation and cost from an operations perspective
Hans Andersson
source: Naylor et al 1999
65
Alternative paradigms of manufacturing (Voss 1995/2005)
’To make or to buy, that is the question.’
 1995 Voss identified three
Paradigms of manufacturing
strategy
Some significant trends:
• Competing through manufacturing
–Competing through the factory
 Manufacturing is not located to one
factory but rather to a network of
owned and not owned factories.
• Strategic choices in manufacturing
–Process and infrastructure
 Outsourcing (incl. offshoring)
• Best practice
–What are others and especially the
Japanese doing?
• From ’Material flow’ to ’Supply Chain
Management’.
source: Naylor et al 1999:110
• Globalization impact
• There has always been outsourcing, the
phenomenom is not new.
 The three paradigms were
revisited by Voss in 2005.
 The role of service has increased
considerably.
• One major question has grown much
stronger since 1995:
- What to make and what not to make
yourself.
• Who should do what and what should
be controlled by whom?
66
Hans Andersson
67
Hans Andersson
So, why do organizations need strategies? (Markides 2004)
References
 … to set the parameters within which people are given the freedom
and the autonomy to operate and try things out.
• ”who to target”? Who not to target.
• ”what to offer”? What not to offer.
• ”how to do it”? What activities to perform and what it will not perform.
85
Hans Andersson
 Internal integration may not be
enough.
Ansoff, I. (1964) A Quasi-analytic Approach to the Business Strategy Problem, Management Technology, 4(1), pp. 67-77
Bengtsson, L. & Kalling, T. (2007) Kärnkompetens, Malmö: Liber
Bingham, C. B., Eisenhardt, K. M. and Furr, N. R. (2011). Which Strategy When? Mit Sloan Management Review, 53(1):
71-78.
de Wit, B. & Meyer, R. (2005) Strategy Synthesis, London: Thomson Learning
Grant, Robert M. (2008) Contemporary Strategic Analysis (6:th ed.), Oxford: Wiley
Markides, Costas (2004) What is strategy and how do you know if you have one? Business Strategy Review 15(2), 5-12
Mattila, L. & Strandell, A-C. (2006) Defining and measuring relocation and outsourcing of production, Östersund: ITPS
A2006:005
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, J. H. J. (1978). Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process.
Academy of Management Review, 3(3): 546-562.
Mintzberg, H., (1980) Structure in 5’s: Synthesis of the research on organizational design, Management Science, 26(3),
pp. 322-341.
Mintzberg, H. (1987). The strategy concept I: Five Ps for strategy. California Management Review, 30(1): 11-24.
Mintzberg, H. (1994). The fall and rise of strategic planning. Harvard Business Review, 72(1): 107-114.
Naylor, J. B., Naim, M. M., & Berry, D. (1999). Leagility: Integrating the lean and agile manufacturing paradigms in the
total supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1-2): 107-118.
Nilsson, F. & Rapp, B. (2005) Understanding Competitive Advantage, Berlin: Springer
Porter, M. E. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review 57(2): 137-145.
Porter, M. (1987) From comptetitive advantage to corporate strategy, Harvard Business Review, 65(3), 43-59
Porter, M. (1980) Competitive strategy, New York: The Free Press
Porter, M, (1985) Competitive advantage, New York: The Free Press
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3): 79-91.
SCA Shape, 2/2008 [www.sca.com]
Staber, U., & Sydow, J. (2002). Organizational adaptive capacity - A structuration perspective. Journal of Management
Inquiry, 11(4): 408-424.
Voss, C. A. (2005). Paradigms of manufacturing strategy re-visited. International Journal of Operations & Production
87
Management, 25(12): 1223-1227.
Hans Andersson