1 / 57

Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases

2. GE: Strategy and Structure Changes?. Only company listed in the Dow Jones Industrial Index that was also in the original (1986) indexMid-2005 Jeffrey Immelt (who replaced Jack Welch four years earlier) changed GE's structure from eleven to six strategic business units (SBUs)Why? [to] acceler

tamitha
Download Presentation

Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. 1 Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases Part III: Strategic Actions: Strategy Implementation Chapter 11: Organizational Structure and Controls

    2. 2 GE: Strategy and Structure Changes? Only company listed in the Dow Jones Industrial Index that was also in the original (1986) index Mid-2005 Jeffrey Immelt (who replaced Jack Welch four years earlier) changed GE’s structure from eleven to six strategic business units (SBUs) Why? “…[to] accelerate GE’s growth in key industries” while simultaneously helping the firm become more focused on emerging technologies with significant commercial potential Even with this reorganization, GE continued using related-linked diversification strategy at the corporate level and SBU form of multidivisional structure

    3. 3 GE: Strategy and Structure Changes? (Cont’d) Mid-2007 call for GE to sell non-core businesses (i.e., NBC Universal and Money). This would change GE’s corporate-level strategy from related linked to related constrained, necessitating a change in structure from SBU form of the multidivisional to cooperative of multidivisional

    4. 4 Introduction All firm use at least one business-level strategy Once selected, strategies are NOT implemented in a vacuum! Organizational structure and controls provide framework within which strategies are used

    5. 5 Organizational Structure (OS) & Controls (OC) Organizational Structure (OS) Specifies firm’s formal reporting relationships, procedures, controls, authority & decision-making processes (i.e., work to be done and how to do it!) Effective use of firm’s strategies facilitated when structure is properly aligned Structural stability: Capacity firm requires to consistently and predictably manage its daily work routines Structural flexibility: Opportunity to explore competitive advantages firm will need to be successful in the future Pioneer Alfred Chandler found organizations change their structures when inefficiencies force them to do so

    6. 6 Organizational Structure & Controls (Cont’d) Organizational Controls (OC) Guide the use of strategy, indicate how to compare actual results with expected results, and suggest corrective actions to take when the difference is unacceptable Two types include strategic and financial

    7. 11–7 Organizational Controls Strategic Controls: Subjective criteria Are concerned with examining the fit between: What the firm might do (opportunities in its external environment). What the firm can do (competitive advantages). Evaluate the degree to which the firm focuses on the requirements to implement its strategy.

    8. 8 Organizational Structure & Controls (Cont’d) Organizational Controls (OC) 1. Strategic controls: largely subjective criteria intended to verify that the firm is using appropriate strategies for the conditions in the external environment and the company’s competitive advantages Concerned with what firm might do vs. what it can do Used to evaluate degree to which firm focuses on the requirement to implement strategies (i.e., SUB: primary and support activities; corporate level: knowledge, markets & technologies across businesses) Focus on the content of strategic actions Encourage decisions that incorporate moderate and acceptable levels of risk

    9. 11–9 Organizational Controls Financial Controls: Objective criteria Accounting-based measures include: Return on investment Return on assets (Capital) Market-based measures include: Economic Value Added (EVA)

    10. 10 Organizational Structure & Controls (Cont’d) Organizational Controls (OC) (Cont’d) 2. Financial controls Objective criteria used to measure firm’s performance against previously established quantitative standards (used for unrelated diversification) Focus on short-term financial outcomes Produce risk-averse managerial decisions

    11. 11 Strategy vs. Structure: Relationships Reciprocal relationship Implies change to one causes change in the other “Research shows strategy has a much more important influence on structure than the reverse.”

    12. 12 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns Chandler found firms tend to grow in a predictable pattern, including the areas of volume, geography, integration (horizontal & vertical) & product/ business diversification Growth pattern implies structural changes! Several structure forms, used to implement strategies, evolved including 1. Simple 2. Functional 3. Multidivisional

    13. 11–13 Strategy and Structure Growth Pattern

    14. 14 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Three main structures 1. Simple Owner-manager makes all major decisions and monitors all activities, staff acts as extension of manager's supervisory authority Few rules, limited task specialization, unsophisticated technology system As firm grows more complex, need to add layers and controls

    15. 15 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Three main structures 2. Functional CEO and a limited corporate staff make all decisions, with functional line managers in dominant organizational areas Allows functional specialization resulting in active knowledge sharing in each functional area Can negatively affect communication and coordination among those representing different organizational functions When changing from a simple to functional structure need to focus on value-destroying bureaucratic procedures

    16. 16 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Three main structures 3A. Multidivisional Operating divisions each represent a separate business or profit center in which the top corporate officer delegates responsibilities for day-to-day operations and business-unit strategies to division managers 3B. Multidivisional (M-form) structure Ties together several operating divisions, each representing a separate business or profit center to which responsibility for daily operations and business-unit strategy is delegated

    17. 17 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Three main structures 3B. Multidivisional (M-form) structure (Cont’d) It enables corporate officers to more accurately monitor the performance of each business, which simplifies the problem of control It facilitates comparisons between divisions, which improves resource allocation process It stimulates managers of poorly performing divisions to look for ways of improving performance

    18. 18 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) No one structure (simple, functional or multidivisional) is superior to the others

    19. 19 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Business-level strategies & functional structure matches for implementing strategies (N=3): 1. Cost leadership (CL) 2. Differentiation (D) 3. CL/D strategy Structural characteristics (N=3) drive different forms of organizational structures 1. Specialization 2. Centralization 3. Formalization

    20. 20 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Structural characteristics defined 1. Specialization Type and number of jobs required to do work 2. Centralization Degree to which decision-making authority is retained at higher managerial levels 3. Formalization Degree to which formal rules and procedures govern work

    21. FIGURE 11.2 Functional Structure for Implementation of a Cost Leadership Strategy

    22. 22 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 1. Cost leadership (CL) & 5 Forces of Competition Low-cost position is a valuable defense against rivals Powerful customers can demand reduced prices Costs leaders are in a position to absorb supplier price increases and relationship demands, and to force suppliers to hold down their prices Continuously improving levels of efficiency and cost reduction can be difficult to replicate and serve as significant entry barriers to potential competitors Cost leaders hold an attractive position in terms of product substitutes, with the flexibility to lower prices to retain customers

    23. 23 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 1. Cost leadership (CL) and the functional structure Simple reporting relationships Few decision-making and authority layers Centralized corporate staff Strong operational focus on process improvements Low-cost culture Centralized staff decision-making authority Jobs specialization Highly formalized rules and procedures

    24. 24 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 1. Cost leadership (CL) strategy risks Processes can become obsolete Focus on cost reductions can come at the expense of understanding customer perceptions and needs Strategy could be imitated, requiring the firm to increase the value offered to retain customers

    25. FIGURE 11.3 Functional Structure for Implementation of a Differentiation Strategy

    26. 26 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 2. Differentiation (D) strategy Integrated set of actions designed by a firm to produce or deliver goods or services at an acceptable cost that customers perceive as being different in ways that are important to them Target customers – perceived product value Customized products – differentiating on as many features as possible: Unusual features, responsive customer service, rapid product innovations, technological leadership, perceived prestige and status, different tastes, engineering design, performance

    27. 27 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 2. Differentiation (D) & 5 Forces of Competition Customer loyalty: the most valuable defense against rivals Unique products reduce customer sensitivity to raised prices High margins (for differentiated products) insulate firm from supplier influence Significant entry barriers: customer loyalty & product uniqueness Firms with customers loyal to their products are positioned effectively against product substitutes

    28. 28 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 2. Differentiation (D) and functional structure Complex and flexible reporting relationships Cross-functional product development teams Strong focus on marketing and product R&D Development-oriented culture Decentralized decision making Broad job descriptions Informal rules and procedures

    29. 29 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 2. Differentiation (D) strategy risks Price differential for differentiated product may be perceived as too large Firms’ means of differentiation may cease to provide value for which customers are willing to pay (successful rival imitation) Experience can narrow customers' perceptions of the value of a product's differentiated features Counterfeit goods might appear in the marketplace

    30. 30 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between business-level strategies and functional structure to implement 3 strategies: 3. CL/D strategy These firms may sell products that create value because of relatively low and and reasonable sources of differentiation Difficult to implement, but frequently used in the global economy Challenge due to primary/support activities Need to successfully combine specialization, formalization and centralization

    31. 31 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies and multidivisional structure 3 forms

    32. 11–32 FIGURE 11.4 Three Variations of the Multidivisional Structure

    33. 11–33 FIGURE 11.5 Cooperative Form of the Multidivisional Structure for Implementation of a Related Constrained Strategy

    34. 34 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies & multidivisional structure: Cooperative form/related constrained strategy Cooperative form: organizational structure using horizontal integration to bring about interdivisional cooperation Divisions formed around products, markets or both All of the divisions share one or more corporate strengths Interdivisional sharing depends on cooperation Links resulting from effective integration mechanisms support sharing of both tangible and intangible resources Centralization is one integrating mechanism that can be used to link activities among divisions, allowing firms to exploit common strengths and share competencies

    35. 35 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies & multidivisional structure: Cooperative form/related constrained strategy (cont’d) Success influenced by how well information is processed among divisions Success can be influenced by managerial commitment levels and the response to some lost managerial autonomy Matrix organization may evolve organizational structure in which a dual structure combines both functional specialization and business product or project specialization

    36. 11–36 FIGURE 11.6 SBU Form of the Multidivisional Structure for Implementation of a Related Linked Strategy

    37. 37 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies & multidivisional structure: SBU form/related linked strategy Related linked: Firms that share fewer resources and assets among their businesses, concentrating on the transfer of knowledge and competencies among the businesses Strategic Business-Unit (SBU) Form: multidivisional organization structure with three levels to support the implementation diversification strategy 1. Corporate headquarters 2. Strategic Business Units (SBUs) 3. SBU division

    38. 38 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies & multidivisional structure: SBU form/related linked strategy SBU Form (Cont’d) Divisions within each SBU are related in terms of shared products and/or markets Divisions of one SBU have little in common with divisions of other SBUs Divisions within each SBU share product or market competencies to develop economies of scope Integrations used in cooperative form are equally effective for the SBU form Each SBU is a profit center Financial controls are more vital for evaluating performance

    39. 11–39 FIGURE 11.7 Competitive Form of the Multidivisional Structure for Implementation of an Unrelated Strategy

    40. 40 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies & multidivisional structure: Competitive form/unrelated diversification Competitive form defined: organizational structure in which the firm's divisions are completely independent Divisions do not share common corporate strengths Integration devices not developed to coordinate activities across divisions Efficient capital markets in unrelated strategies require organizational arrangements that emphasize divisional competition rather than cooperation Specific performance expectations and accountability for independent divisions stimulate internal competition for future resources

    41. 41 Strategy vs. Structure: Evolutionary Patterns (Cont’d) Matches between corporate-level strategies and multidivisional structure: Competitive form/unrelated diversification (Cont’d) Headquarters maintains a distant relationship to avoid intervention in divisional affairs Strategic controls are used to monitor performance relative to targeted returns Headquarters remains responsible for cash flow allocation, performance appraisal, resource allocation, and the legal aspects related to acquisitions

    42. 11–42 FIGURE 11.8 Worldwide Geographic Area Structure for Implementation of a Multidomestic Strategy

    43. 43 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Three (3) Primary International Strategies: 1. WW geographic area structure to implement the multidomestic strategy Multidomestic Strategy: international strategy in which strategic and operating decisions are decentralized to the strategic business-unit (SBU) in each country to allow the units to tailor products to local markets Worldwide (WW) Geographic Area Structure: organizational structure emphasizing national interests and facilitates efforts to satisfy local or cultural differences (used to implement the multidomestic strategy)

    44. 44 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Three (3) Primary International Strategies: 1. WW geographic area structure to implement the multidomestic strategy (Cont’d) Focuses on variations of competition within each country Customizes products to meet specific needs and preferences of local customers Decentralizes the firm's strategic and operating decisions to business units in each country Takes steps to isolate the firm from global competitive forces Establish protected market positions Compete in industry segments most affected by differences among local countries Deals with uncertainty due to differences across markets

    45. 11–45 FIGURE 11.9 Worldwide Product Divisional Structure for Implementation of a Global Strategy

    46. 46 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Three (3) Primary International Strategies: 2. WW product divisional structure to implement global strategy Global Strategy: International strategy whereby firm offers standardized products across country markets, with the competitive strategy being dictated by the home office Worldwide Product Divisional Structure: Organizational structure with centralized decision-making authority in the WW division headquarters to coordinate and integrate decisions and actions among divisional business units (used to implement the global strategy)

    47. 47 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Three (3) Primary International Strategies: 2. WW product divisional structure to implement global strategy (Cont’d) Emphasizes economies of scale Facilitated by improved global accounting and financial reporting standards Centralizes the firm's strategic and operating decisions at the home office Involves SBUs operating in each country that are interdependent Home office attempts to achieve integration across SBUs, adding management complexity Produces lower risk Is less responsive to local market opportunities Offers less effective learning processes due to the pressure to conform and standardize

    48. FIGURE 11.10 Using the Hybrid Form of the Combination Structure for Implementation of a Transnational Strategy

    49. 49 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Three (3) Primary International Strategies: 3. Combination structure to implement transnational strategy Transnational Strategy: International strategy through which the firm seeks to achieve both global efficiency and local responsiveness; usually implemented through global matrix structure and hybrid global design Flexible Coordination: Building a shared vision and individual commitment through an integrated network Combination Structure: Organizational structure in which characteristics and mechanisms are drawn from both the worldwide geographic area structure and the worldwide product divisional structure (used to implement transnational strategy)

    50. 50 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Three (3) Primary International Strategies: 3. Combination structure to implement transnational strategy (Cont’d) Assets and operations may be centralized/decentralized Functions may be integrated/nonintegrated Relationships may be formal/informal Coordination mechanisms may leverage efficiency/flexibility Mandates to subsidiaries may be global/specialized-contribution/ localized-implementation There are competing objectives when a worldwide combination structure is used to implement a transnational strategy

    52. 52 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Matches between cooperative strategies and network structures Network strategy: Partners form several alliances in order to improve the performance of the alliance network itself through cooperative endeavors Strategic network: Group of firms that form [around core] to create value to participating in multiple cooperative arrangements At core: Strategic Center Firm which has 4 primary tasks

    53. 53 International Strategy (IS) &Worldwide (WW) Structure (Cont’d) Strategic Center Firm’s primary tasks 1. Strategic outsourcing 2. Competencies 3. Technology 4. Race to learn

    54. 54 Implementing Business-level Cooperative Strategies Business-level complementary alliances (N=2) Vertical: partnering firms share their resources and capabilities from different stages of the value chain to create a competitive advantage. Horizontal: partnering firms share resources and capabilities from the same stage of the value chain to create a competitive advantage - commonly used for long-term product development and distribution opportunities

    55. 55 Implementing Corporate-level Cooperative Strategies Used to facilitate product & market diversification i.e., Franchising: contractual relationship to describe and control the sharing of its resources and capabilities with partners Allows firms to use its competencies to extend or diversity product or market reach, without completing a merger or acquisition

    56. 11–56 FIGURE 11.12 A Distributed Strategic Network

    57. 57 Implementing International Cooperative Strategies Strategic networks formed to implement cooperative strategies resulting in firm competing in several different countries Distributed strategic networks: Organizational structure used to manage international cooperative strategies Several regional strategic center firms are included in the distributed network to manage partner firms’ multiple cooperative arrangements

More Related