Critically discuss the approaches to the developing strategy. Is there evidence in today's business world to suggest that there is one best way?

Résumé du document

In the context of the fast changing environment in today's business world, the majority of companies use a strategy to approach the future, to ensure the continuation of the company, and anticipate factors associated with the external and internal environment. In this corporate strategy context, there exist different ways to reach purposes and essential policies to achieve those goals, but if the business world is viewed as being complex, one question is fundamental: which strategy to adopt? Is there a best way? And in this view, which is the best way?

This essay is a critical analysis of the different approaches to developing strategies. To discuss if there is a best way to succeed in today's business world, on one hand, it is essential to understand what is a strategy and identify what kinds of different ways exist. On the other hand, Chandler (1962) defines the strategy like this: 'It's the determination of the basic long-term goals and objectives of an enterprise, and the adoption of courses of action and the allocation of resources necessary for carrying out these goals.' On this based-view, there are two main approaches.

Extraits

[...] Is there evidence in today's business world to suggest there is one best way? Nowadays, in this context of fast changing environment in today's business world, the major part of companies use a strategy to approach the future, to ensure the continuation of the company, and anticipate factors associated with the external and internal environment. In this corporate strategy context, it exists different ways to reach purposes and essential policies to achieve those goals, but if the business world is viewed as being complex, one question is fundamental: which strategy to adopt? [...]

[...] After this different ways's discuss, it is established several manner and process to success in strategy development, but there is not really a “perfect” or way, each approach content theirs pros and cons. Prescriptive approach traduced by “what to and Emergent approach by to Each firms choose a strategy in the aim of taking competitive advantage, the most important thing is to takes care of changing environment, and to try to reach objectives with the less risk as possible and the better effectiveness. [...]

[...] They emphasize the improvisational nature of emergent strategy.” (Alexis Downs, Rita Durant, & Adrian N. Carr, Emergent Strategy Development for Organizations, 5-28, 2003) There are some benefits from emergent strategy which can give a competitve advantage in a fast-changing environment: flexibility allows better proactivity, and strategic change ; learning is the key to always better adapt to changing environment, take care of commercial environment; entrepreneurial spirit consent to let people try, etc “People are not machines” (Lynch, 2003), this sentence can sum up globally the post-modernism strategy because this framework is based on practical strategy: money, people resource, a collective process, like a socialist model, and also foundamental needs. [...]

[...] On the other hand, the human factor needs to be considered during the strategic development of corporate mainly because the increase of technological skills required knowledge based, and human resources related strategies need to be explored. If on the first hand, the modernism approach can be summarized in “What to on the other hand the emergent approach can be summarized in to that means this second approach takes in account the human factor and the environment's changes while the strategy started. [...]

[...] McGahan, Introduction: Michael Porter's Competitive Strategy, The publication in 1980 of Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors by Michael E. Porter marked a critical juncture in the field of business strategy. [...]