GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
IntroductionThe ideas of various scholars who have addressed the
issues of strategic management by developing models or Schools of
thought have been extensively researched and justified in
epistemology. The theory underlies the ideas of these Classical
Schools of strategic thinking in the business environment can be
traced back to classical and neo-classical economic thinking,
which depends on the body of theory that is described by
concepts of linearity, stability, and
predictability. These macroeconomic concepts fit within a
microeconomic view of a firm as a
cybernetic system (Masuch, 1985; Morgan, 1986; Dixon et al.,
2004) Classical and
opposing schools based on the criteria of historical and future
trends in strategic management. The classical school of strategic
management gathers premises of the founders of strategic management
as a scientific field. Although the premises are shaped about
eighty years ago, they
out the years and almost each of contemporary premises can be
traced back to those years or is formed as the opposing premise of
the one dating in the past (Steven French 2009d). Lets discuss
these schools of thoughts with relevance to critical analysis.
To
pGLook before you leap
The Design School
Strategy Systems as Processes of Conception Among the schools of
strategic thinking, this one explains all prescriptions in the
field. The design school suggests a very simple model that shows an
essential fit between external threat and opportunity and internal
distinctive competence. Strategy formation is a premeditated course
of action of conception designed by the CEO, who decides the scale
or guidelines of the company, perhaps in terms of a mission vision
statement company cultures and its core values, The CEO look at the
external environment with respect to companys position and try to
bring maximum value to shareholders by using company strengths and
available opportunities to take corrective action against the
company weakness and external threats. He sets objectives for
others to achieve and implement. The firm is a cybernetic system.
However this is a theoretical1GET YOUR WORK DONE BY
www.TopGradePapers.com
ra
de
represent the cornerstone of the field still valid today. The
premises have been developed though
Pa
contemporary schools are two out of the four of schools of
strategic management. They are the
pe rs
(Steven French 2009a), but all these schools have been developed
in a Modernist/Functionalist
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
concept, it is not essentially formalized, and the
responsibility of management is to effectively and efficiently
plan. The model of strategy is not formalized so it is important
that it remains relatively simple. No theory of strategy creation
is impending from the Design School. The repercussion is that a
think-tank approach to the directions given by the chief executive,
will
articulate strategy. The base line for this school is
architecture as a metaphor. It is more useful in relatively stable
environment. This model is to be kept simple and informal and hence
the
strategies produced should be unique, simple and explicit
(Richard A. Swanson et al. 2001). Further, these strategies should
be fully formulated before they are implemented. The chief
executive is the main strategist. The school suggests that strategy
systems are processes of
conception. The strategies formulated are clear and unique. Thus
the strategy of the organization is designed to represent the best
possible fit. It falls in Prescriptive school category.
The Planning SchoolA stitch in time saves nine
Strategy Systems as Formal Processes
The philosophy of the Planning School emerged directly as an
extension of the thoughts of the Design School. The basic
difference is the move away from simple, conceptual, informal plans
to more sophisticated, state of art, deliberate, highly formalized
plans, developed by a team of specialized planners whose job is to
bring the scattered ideas in to refined course of action . The era
of the specialist strategic planner happened together with the
market favoring the planning
To
pG
model of strategy formulation (Steven French 2009b). Its main
roots underlay in systems thinking and cybernetics. The strategy is
broken into set of steps, which comprises from the analysis of the
situation to the execution of strategy. These processes give clear
direction and enable firm resource allocation. Chief executive has
the core responsibility for the complete process and the execution
responsibility rests with staff planners. Strategies are made
explicit so that they can be implemented through detailed attention
to objectives, budgets, programs and operating plans of various
kinds. The base disciplines are some links to urban planning,
cybernetics and system theory. The strategy may become too static
as the predicting is difficult.
ra
de
PaGET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
pe rs2
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
The Positioning SchoolStrategy Systems as Analytical
Processes
Advocator to the ideas of the Positioning School, also accept
most of the building blocks of the Design School and the Planning
School but add two cautions of their own. First, more stress is
given to the importance of the strategic ideas, not just to the
process & procedures by which they are formulated, and, second,
by focal pointing and focusing on the content of strategies, the
prescriptive side of the field is opened up to substantial
investigation. Its roots lie in economics and military history. The
strategy systems focus on strategies that are generic, especially
common and identifiable. So the market is to be economic and
competitive. (Steven French
can improve its strategic positioning within that industry. This
school made Strategic Management into a science, enabling future
progress. In the early 1980s, with Modernist ideas of the Planning
School firmly deep-rooted, and management theorists generally
influencing ideas, business strategy was suddenly re-directed by
the influence of Industrial Organization (IO) economists
fettered to the equilibrium assumption. IO is a branch of
economics that study the behavior of
To
pGTake us to your leader
firms within industry groups, upholding that a firms performance
depends on the interactive relationship between the number and
distribution of firms in a market and the behavior they exhibit
(Shivasharan and Shashidhar, 2005). It focuses on hard economic
facts and it is more useful in early stage of strategy development.
The strategy formation process places the business within the
context of the industry and finds out ways how organization can
improve its competitiveness in the industry. This school neglects
power, politics, culture and social elements. It is also a
Prescriptive school.
The Entrepreneurial SchoolStrategy Systems as Visionary
Processes3GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
ra
de
2009c). It places the business within the context of industry
and looks for the ways enterprise
Pa
pe rs
Nothing but the facts, maam
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
According to this school, the strategy systems are semiconscious
and are rooted in the experience and intuition of the leader.
Leader has being through such situation and he uses his intuition
and come up with new ideas. The strategy systems are processes
existing mainly in the mind of
values of the organization (Steven French 2009b). The school
focuses on the intrinsic and inherent mental states and processes
such as intuition, judgment, wisdom and experience
(Ahlstrand, B 1998). The leader is responsible to promote the
vision on his own and also responsible for maintaining control of
implementation processes. So, entrepreneurial systems
tend to be both Deliberate and Emergent. A sound vision and a
visionary leader can cohesively sail organization through muddy
waters when organization is going through its difficult years
(Mintzberg, Lampel, 1998). These strategies best work out where
the companies are owned and managed by a single individual.
Entrepreneurial strategy systems are argued to tend to take the
form of niche strategy, one or more patches of a market position
protected from the forces of
needy qualities?
I will see it when I believe it
Strategy Systems as Mental Processes
To
pG
Its main roots lye in psychology (cognitive) and strategy
systems are prescribed to be cognitive processes that come in
strategists mind. Strategies emerge in the form of concepts, maps,
schemes and frames. These inputs flow through all sorts of
distorting filters before they are decoded by the cognitive maps
(Chaffee, 1985). Its main focus is on how people perceive pattern
and process information. It purely focuses on what is happening in
the mind of strategist and how that happening is being processed.
It stresses the creative side of the strategy process. This is very
useful to explain why our minds are imperfect (Mintzberg, H. 1990).
As concepts, strategies are difficult to attain in the first place,
considerably less than optimal when actually attained and
subsequently difficult to change when no longer viable (Richard A.
Swanson 2001). In this regard various forms of cognition have an
influence on how strategy systems are said to function, such
cognition as confusion, cognition as information processing,
cognition as4GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
ra
The Cognitive School
de
outright competition. But the question still exits how can you
find the right leader with all the
Pa
pe rs
leader. Strategies are relating to a sense of long term
direction mission, vision, culture and core
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
mapping, and cognition as concept attainment. This approach,
based upon the science of brain functioning, regards strategy
formation as a mental process, and analyzes how people perceive
patterns and process information. It is not very practical beyond
the conceptual stage and
The Learning SchoolIf at first you dont succeed, try, try again
Strategy Systems as Emergent Processes
Its main roots are also in psychology, strategy systems are
processes of learning over time in which formulation and
implementation activities are intertwined and indistinguishable in
nature.
Many firms have learnt and are now discovering that strategy is
about redefining and re-shaping the industry in which they will
compete according to the environment. They suggest that a strategy
is as much a state of mind within an organization a Post-modern
concept as it is a set of actions in the market place a Modernist
concept. Product advantages are surprisingly fleeting. Intellectual
capital such as patent, copy writes are the eventual leverage point
and it is extremely difficult to imitate strategy analysis,
irrespective of the tools, techniques and method
The intellectual ability of the managerial resources of a firm
is the key to competitive advantage. The environment of the
enterprises is complex and of unpredictable nature (Steven
French
To
pG
2009b). As world does not allow strategies to be developed all
at once hence, strategies emerge in small steps throughout the
journey of enterprise (Jelenc 2009). It offers solution to
complexity and unpredictability in strategy formation. It produces
strong strategies in complex situations with continuous change. The
learner may be the collective system of the enterprise or leader
may be the main leader. This implies that there are many potential
strategies in most enterprises (Lampel, 1998). The learning is a
process proceeding in emergent fashion, through behaviour that
stimulates thinking retrospectively, so that sense can be made of
action. Thereby, the role of leadership becomes not to preconceive
deliberate strategies, but to manage the process of strategic
learning, from which novel strategies can emerge. The base
discipline perhaps links to learning theory in psychology and
education; chaos theory. The champions to this school are people
inclined to experimentation, ambiguity and adaptability. This
strategy is not useful at all
ra
employed. Strategy must be focused upon understanding and
challenging how managers think.
de
PaGET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
pe rs5
currently not very useful to guide collective strategy process.
School category is Descriptive.
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
in crises. Also there are costs associated with learning. You
should not cross a chasm by taking small steps. The school category
is Descriptive.
The Power SchoolLook out for number one Strategy Systems as
Processes of Negotiation
Its roots are in politico-logy (the study of politics), and
strategy systems are described to be
shaped by politics and power. Strategies formulated under this
are tend to be emergent in nature and takes the forms of positions
and ploys. It can be divided into Micro Power and Macro Power
(Mintzberg, Lampel, 1998). In micro power, strategies are made
through interplay, persuasion, bargaining, direct confrontation and
shifting coalitions. On other hand, Macro power sees the enterprise
as promoting its own welfare by making corporations with other
enterprises. Strategies are developed as a process of negotiation
between power holders within the company and its external
stakeholders (Whittington, 1993). It can help the strongest people
to survive in the corporate jungle. It also ensures that all
aspects of an issue are fully debated. It also can help to reduce
resistance after a decision is made. Its base line is political
science. But it uses a lot of
just doing some tactical maneuvering (Steven French 2009e). It
overstates the role of power in strategy formation. The school
category is Descriptive.
To
pGThe Cultural School
An apple never falls far from the tree Strategy Systems as
Collective Processes
Its roots in anthropology describes the strategy systems as
processes of social interaction, that base on beliefs and
understandings shared by members of enterprise (Henry Mintzberg
1990). These beliefs are acquired by acculturation and
socialization which are largely nonverbal. Hence the members
describe only those beliefs that underpin their culture; while the
origin and
explanations may remain obscure (H. Igor Ansoff 1991). It views
the strategy formation process as a collective and cooperative
process. The strategy formulated is a reflection of corporate6GET
YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
ra
energy, causes wastage and is costly. Further, more badly, it
can lead to having no strategy or
de
Pa
pe rs
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
culture of organization. Its emphasis is on crucial role that
social processes beliefs and values are playing in decision making
and in strategy formation. The champions include the people who
like the social, the spiritual and the collective environment
(Steven French 2009g). It has the
category is Descriptive.
The Environmental SchoolIt all depends Strategy Systems as
Reactive Processes
This school has its roots in biology, strategy systems are
described to react in natural manner with the corporate external
environment. The external context is the central factor in strategy
making processes. The strategy formulated is a response to the
challenges that were imposed by
not be selected out (Steiner, George Albert1979). In the long
run, enterprises end up clustering together in distinct
ecological-type niches, positions where they remain until resources
become scarce or conditions too hostile (Mintzberg et al. 1998).
The champions include population ecologists, some organization
theorists and positivists in general. In the long run, it gives the
central role in strategy formation to the environment. As the
dimensions of the environment are vague and aggregated, it becomes
less useful for strategy formation. It is unrealistic that it
denies
To
pG
real strategic choice that an organization may have. The school
category is Descriptive.
The Configuration School
To everything there is a season
The base line of this school is History. This school underlay
that strategy formation is a process of changing organization from
one type of decision making structure to another. It says that with
the time organization need to adopt the change and it has to move
its direction towards the competitive position (Steven French
2009b). It matches the organizational shape with strategy as
they are closely integrated. Organizations have some stable
configurations in its characteristics, which cause to create
particular strategies (Kippenberger, T. 1998). But these stability
periods7GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
ra
de
external environment. If the enterprise does not respond to
external forces, that enterprise will
Pa
pe rs
limitation of resistance to change and gives few clues on how
things should unfold. The school
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
are interrupted by some processes of transformation. So these
strategies do not work for organizations in long run (Lampel,
1998). Key to success in strategic management is to sustain
stability or adapting to strategic changes. Therefore, strategy
formation itself has configurations.
reality organizations do not have a limited number of valid
configurations; also patterns in the eye of beholder are not
limited. If reality is prescribes by using configuration, it will
distort the reality in order to explain it.
CONCLUSION:
In each of these schools, the strategy formation process is
something like black box because no one of these schools is able to
outline that how an individual or organization will leap from the
collection of information to the conceptualization of alternative
courses of action.
In the final analysis, just as none of the blind men's
descriptions of the elephant was completely adequate, yet each
contained elements of truth, none of these 10 approaches is
complete in and of itself, either. Each offers some useful
concepts, and some strong points to aid understanding, but has its
disadvantages or limitations as well, likely: as there is still
room for more classifications of strategy formation and the
complexity of these schools, at a glance, may scare the strategist.
But at the same point it cant be denied that these approaches have
also helped the strategists in
To
pG
like Illumination of origins and characteristics of the
different schools of thoughts in strategy formation and
understanding and appreciating differences between strategy
formations.
ra
de
PaGET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
pe rs8
The champions include lumbers and integrators in general and as
well as change agents. In
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
REFERENCES1. Steven French. (2009a). Critiquing the language of
strategic management. The Journal of Management Development, 28(1),
6-17. Retrieved September 13, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1611833551).
5. Morgan, G. (1986), Images of Organization, Sage, Beverly
Hills, CA. 6. Masuch, M. (1985), Vicious circles in organizations,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 30, March, pp. 14-33.
To
pG7.
8. Steven French. (2009d). Cogito ergo sum: exploring
epistemological options for strategic management. The Journal of
Management Development, 28(1), 18-37. Retrieved September 13, 2009,
from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1611833561).
9. Steven French. (2009e, April). The inductive frame. Journal
of Management Development, 28(3), 225-241. Retrieved September 13,
2009, from Business Source Premier database.
ra
4. Steven French. (2009c). Exploring the house built on sand.
The Journal of Management Development, 28(1), 38-50. Retrieved
September 13, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID:
1611833571).
Dixon, J., Dogan, R. and Kouzmin, A. (2004), The dilemma of
privatized public services: philosophical frames in understanding
failure and managing partnership terminations, Public Organization
Review: A Global Journal, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 25-46.
de
3. Shivasharan, N.S. and Shashidhar, P. (2005), Research in
strategic management: a theoretical exposition, available at:
www.smfi.org/convention/researchxseminar/shivasharanx&xshashidhar.pdf
PaGET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
2. Steven French. (2009b). Re-thinking the foundations of the
strategic business process. The Journal of Management Development,
28(1), 51-76. Retrieved September 13, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1611833581).
pe rs9
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
10. Steven French. (2009f, April). Action research for
practising managers. Journal of Management Development, 28(3),
187-204. Retrieved September 13, 2009, from Business Source Premier
database.
12. Jelenc, Lara(2009), categorizing the field of strategic
management
http://crosbi.znanstvenici.hr/prikazi-rad?chset=ASCII&lang=EN&rad=410515
, accessed at 31/08/2009
Design School: Reconsidering The Basic Premises of Strategic
Management , Vol. 21, pp. 98-112
14. Kippenberger, T. (1998), How strategy is formed? Ten schools
of thought, The Antidote, Vol. 3 No. 6, pp. 11-14.
To
pG17.
16. Henry Mintzberg (1990) The Strategic Management Journal
Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic
Management, John Wiley & Sons
18. Richard A. Swanson, Elwood F. Holton (2001), Foundations of
human resource development, berrett-koehler publishers, Inc.
19. H. Igor Ansoff (1991) Critique of Henry Mintzberg's The
design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic
management available at
raReview, vol 72 no 1, pp. 8
15. Mintzberg, H. (1990), Strategy formation: ten schools of
thought, in Fredrickson, J. (Ed.), Published By: KnightRidder
Henry Mintzberg (1994), The fall and rise of strategic planning
Harvard Business
de
PaGET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
13. Ansoff, H.I., (1991 ) Strategic Management Journal Critique
of Henry Mintzbergs The
pe rs10
11. Steven French. (2009g, April). The deductive frame. Journal
of Management Development, 28(3), 242-266. Retrieved September 13,
2009, from Business Source Premier database.
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/113455268/abstract
(accessed: 30 August 2009)
the Wilds of Strategic Management,
http://www.bizsum.com/strategysafari.htm, accessed at
29/08/2009.
21. James L. Haye ,"Effective managers live in the present but
concentrate on the future." available at
accessed at 31/08/2009
22. Henry Mintzberg, Bruce Ahlastrand (1997), Categorizing the
field of strategic
http://www.12manage.com/methods_mintzberg_ten_schools_of_thought.html
, accessed at 27/08/2009
23. Bill Richardson (1994), Comprehensive Approach to Strategic
Management,
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezproxy.scu.edu.au_Insight_ViewContentServlet_conten
tType=Article&Filename=_published_emeraldfulltextarticle_pdf_0010320805.pdf,
accessed at 28/08/2009
To
pG
24. Steiner, George Albert 1979: Strategic Planning, What Every
Manager Must Know, The Free Press, New York
25. Chaffee Ellen Earle (1985), Three Models of Strategy,
Academy of Management Review, Vol.10, No.1, pp. 175-182
26. McKiernan Peter (1997), Strategy past: Strategy futures.
Oxford: Long Range Planning, Vol.30, no. 5, pp.22-2311GET YOUR WORK
DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
ra
de
management
Pa
http://www.1000ventures.com/business_guide/mgmt_inex_stategy_10schools.html,
pe rs
20. Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., Lampel, J. (1998), Strategy
Safari A Guided Tour Through
GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
27. Ansoff, Igor (1987), The evolution of corporate planning,
working paper, Graduate School of Industrial Administration,
Carnegie-Mellon University
28. Mintzberg Henry (1994), The rise and fall of strategic
planning: Reconceiving roles for planning, plans, planners, Free
Press (New York and Toranto)
29. Hamel, G.(1996), The core competences of the corporation,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 23, pp. 232
30. Whittington, R (1993), What is Strategy and Does It Matter?
London: Routledge
To
pG
ra
de12GET YOUR WORK DONE BY www.TopGradePapers.com
Pa
pe rs