Strategic lenses (1.design lens, 2.experience lens, and 3.idea lens)
Diversity of thought
Importance of developing trust in management situations
Managing boundary-less organizations
Effective management (how to effectively make management work)
Peter Drucker and the essentials of management
1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The ISP is made up of topics that could be seen among other topics in the table of content above. They are to be completed respectively making up to about 20 pages in all. Deep and thorough review of several literatures that were searched mostly over the internet has been utilized with consideration of each topic or area in different perspectives. I have tried to connect different views under a topic just to broaden the scope of each material. References could be seen at the foot of most pages for easy tracing of sources of materials. Considerable care has been exercised to make points as clear as possible. Quotes have been well revised repeatedly in order to draw down to their appropriate applications to the point they were meant to clarify and make. Where I constructed diagrams for use, I have appropriately referred them. In fact, this paper in totality, is a real coverage of quite a high percentage of materials covering each topic and could be as well as deemed fit for academic references by whoever might be aspiring to such a task.
1.1 STRATERGIC LENSES (1.DESIGN LENS, 2.EXPERIENCE LENS, AND 3.IDEA LENS)
DEFINITION: According to Wikipedia1 “strategic lenses are a concept of strategic management. They are the three angles from which strategy can be viewed and implemented on corporate level”. Here, the three lenses above have been considered under the strategic lenses i.e. the designed, the experience, and the idea lenses.
Carrol, of the Sloan School of Management2 considered the three lenses as ; strategic design lens, political lens, and cultural lens. The strategic lenses have also being considered at one website 3 as of four kinds being; stake holder engagement lens, resource mobilization lens, knowledge development lens, cultural management lens. These four strategies have been considered here as very effective in tackling challenges that are wide ranging. Road Map Strategy 4 considered the same strategic lenses under; social/cultural, human, technologies, and financial lenses. Here, the socio-cultural lens aspect highlighted on what propels us as an organization forward when we work closely with customers as a culture and when we work with our hearts in high social mood or status. With the human lens aspect, it is a question of human ramification of strategic decisions and decisions upon strategic course as well as what that will mean in skills and capabilities terms, once required, in order to execute strategies. It also concerns investment in training, consulting etc. The technological lens case concerns new technologies as well as their impact on existing ones an organization employs. There is need for new skills i.e. the human lens to challenge assumptions for long-terms by focusing on the best and right approach to things i.e. socio-cultural lens. This in turn has to do with finance i.e. financial lens. Here again, the financial lens aspect in turn requires appropriate allocations of resources, updates of skills training due to new strategies i.e. incurring cost in the human lens. Also, the financial aspect connects, orgs, to communicate extensively i.e. social-cultural lens, and mainly the need for capital investment to start up. The four lenses are interconnected and could be combined in application to give effective results.
THE DESIGN LENS
At the Wikipedia website, it is posited that “this lens views strategy development as a process of logical determinism”. That, “optimal strategy and direction are determined by carefully evaluating the industry, the environment, and the available resources of the firm”. The above definition and statement can be seen in the strategy diagram below. This diagram is not for the design lens but the strategic points in general.
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
FIG 1. I CONSTRUCTED THIS DIAGRAM TO REPRESENT A SUMMARY FROM THE REFERENCES GIVEN, THAT COULD BE TRACED FROM THE URLs, TO SHOW STRAGIC POINTS
In this diagram “evaluation” is noted as well as “resources”. The statements imply a process termed “analysis-selection-implementation-process”. Despite any processes and no matter how tactical management should be involved, it is necessary that it (i.e. management) throws its full weight behind it i.e. financial support etc. Responsibilities of strategy development are hence seen to be top management driven coupled with efficiency in selecting the optimal business strategy. This will aid the success of the process. According to Carrol of the Sloan School of Management, “the strategic design lens could be analyzed with five key points or factors. These are; model, key processes, key concepts, leader, and drivers of change”.
Organizations in terms of the design lens are designed or engineered to achieve goals agreed-upon. Under politics, model means contests for power and autonomy among internal stakeholder and in terms of culture; it is shared mental maps, identities, and assumptions.
The design lens here explains this as a growing formal structure, linking, alignment, and a fit to the environment. Actually, it is true that, processes involve connecting links through dialogue alignments. We still want to be as realistic as possible hence we end up in comparing facts and probable results with the environment through research work of a sort. It is only then that organizations are able to proceed in some certainty with confidence. The political aspect of key processes states that it is conflict, negotiation, and coalition building, whereas, the cultural aspect sees the key process as meaning and interpretation, attribution, cognitions that are taken for granted, and normative invested with value.
The design lens of the key concept is stated to be goal-directed, tasks, roles, information flows, and interdependence, but the political aspect of the concept entails power, influence, networks, autonomy, interests, and dominant coalition, whereas, the cultural aspect details on artifacts, symbols, myths, values, assumptions, identities, and subcultures.
The design lens outlines a leader as a strategist, designer and an architect. In politics in organizations, leader means a coalition builder and a negotiator. The cultural aspect spells out a leader to be a symbol of culture and an articulator of symbols and vision.
Drivers of Change
In design this is lack of fit to the environment and internal lack of alignment. When things go bad in an organization in the short-term, there is the need to immediately call for reason and change and the above asserts the problem source to be either from the environment or inside the org itself. The need to call for a change depending on organizational climates is really important and necessary. In politics drivers of change points to shifts in power of stakeholders which can really be influenced by changes in design, the environment or strategy applied as a driver of change. In culture, drivers of change mean challenges to basic assumptions and new interpretations. In strategic design, the basic process is to get the people with the appropriate acumen and give them appropriate tasks with sufficient information in order for them to accomplish the goals of the organization. Figure 1 above indicates the summary of processes in strategic management for that matter the strategy lens as a whole but for the design strategy, the diagram in figure 2 below summarizes the points involved i.e. according to Carrol, Sloan School of Management.
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
FIG 2 ASSESSMENT OF BOTH THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE ORG, THROUGH STRATEGIC INTENT BY INTELLECTUAL ENGINEERING OR DESIGN WITH GROUPING, LINKING AND ALIGNING FOR RESULTS WHICH ARE IN TURN FITTED TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE ORGANIZATION.THIS DIAGRAM DESCRIBES THE DESIGN LENS
However, Mintzberg5, argued that “the design lens is often inaccurate as top management executive are too distant from daily developments of the org therefore, strategic development should be adaptive experience”. In fact, experience and ideas are conspicuous in successfully carrying out the above. For this reason let’s look at the experience lens followed by the idea lens.
Mintzberg, labeled that strategy development should be adaptive and he divided it into three sections; intended, realized, and emerged lenses. Here, it is seen as the continuous adaption of past tactics or strategies based on experience. In his view, strategy is said to be greatly influenced by taking the culture of design or assumption for sake and staining more to lots of bargains and negotiations. Bargaining and negotiating are typical to experience since through this, data due to experience and past recurrence etc. are deemed to give realistic results by experience. However, a risk arises from this due to an effect known as strategic drift. This strategic drift is a result of becoming too much dependent on the past occurrences i.e. past activities and failing to act upon current changes of the environment. The environment is very important and since an organization’s products and services must fit to the needs and interests of the market and the environment, it is important to become continuously adaptive to it. Strategies that are experience based should be intended, realized, and emergent. That means it must be planned (intended) and results must be realized through implementation and should be highly likely useful and ongoing (i.e. emergent).
Wikipedia has the view that, idea lens interprets strategy as a process coming from within an organization and influenced by the environment around strategy of flexibility of opinion exchange horizontally among employees and the onward movement upwards in a vertical direction to management is allowed. This managerial strategy is termed “bottom up” approach. Employees are allowed the freedom to express ideas that intellectually go into the improvement of the organization. This approach helps to well utilize the firm’s innovations where, strong emphasis is placed on the importance of innovative variety as well as diversity. It is important for the ultimate need that seeks out from within an org, emergent strategy. Strategic management encourages innovative thinking and developments unlike in the case of design lens where strategy is viewed as the process of logical determinism involving linking, alignment, and fittings.
OTHER SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT
Finn’s6 idea lens says it is a process which consists of in-depth market research. That, it includes a multitude of elements essential to any business, including; clients, products, technology, corporate position, target audience, competitive analysis, evaluation of market trends, drives, and deterrents. Though these, business development opportunities are developed. Of course any of the lenses has a pack of ideas that contribute together for ultimate organizational achievements. It is geared towards fast technological advancement i.e. it is an essential ingredient for competitive advantage over competitions of an organization.
At the website7 it is clarified that most challenges call for actions of four common strategic areas, the first is stakeholder engagement, this calls for a real-deep-impact-on-progress, second is values-are-blended-through-resource-mobilization, and the third is adaptability-comes-through-cultural-management, and the final is knowledge-development-leads-to-efficient-strategic-approaches. These four must work together through top management strategic applications for total control progress, and prosperity of organizations. The design lens is what helps an organization to know its stand as it compares to the environment to see if it is the “right peg” in the right hole, and that, it is feedback oriented through outcomes it gets in the end. The environment consists of competitors, market, trends and skills. For this analysis so far, I can make resource mobilization as a subject of the same direction of focus such as getting the right people or skills and using them, also, utilizing the assets structures i.e. infrastructure, logistics etc. to their fullest advantages. I can compare the idea lens and knowledge developmen t here, where the later is a subset of the former. The experience lens should be of a characteristics that play between and around all, and these are; stakeholder engagement, culture management, resource mobilization and knowledge development, taken several cues from what pertains in the past, till now. “Road Map Strategy”8, has illustrated on the figure below as the model of the strategic lenses.
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
FIG 3 STRATEGIC LENSES MODEL, ACCORDING TO ROADMAPSTRATEGY.COM
Here again the socio-cultural climate and human with technologies backed by finance is the whole engine that moves the wheel above, under a whole organization to keep it on should the lenses above be well combined by top management. We get our profit from how we sell things, and whether our products meet high quality standards indeed. We get continuously propelled forward having stain to the lenses without retreat. We get what we sell depending on what we want to sell (goal), our competitors, the available technologies and skills, and the caliber and number of “who are they that want it to buy?”. We get who our customers are from the market demand and competitors supply and our ability to supply our target quantity, as well as the sort of value we add to it.
At this stage it is clear where our design lens, experience lens and idea lens can fit in the above wheel.
Definitions 9 ; Org(s) = Organization(s).
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
1.2 DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES
INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES: Whatever is dynamic is well informed or tuned to be flexible and competent. Therefore, I will say that the term “dynamic capabilities” should be whatever is well informed or tuned, flexible, competent and has the capability to stand a challenge. A challenge could be any task that is good or not. The idea is that, dynamic capabilities could be attributed to a person or a system that is alive i.e. a pc or system of routine of activities, or an organ or a group of people of a common aim. An organ of a group of people of a common aim could have different or divergent set of responsibilities but as far as it remains an organ, the various responsibilities must work together for a resultant common direction for the organ. This common direction should be a common goal of the organ. Since the organ is of a group of people, I would conclude that it is an organization i.e. the common term that we are all used to. We now have the common term that is an “organization” and with this, we have people in mind. Whoever is well informed is learned or an intellectual of a sort. An intellectual of a sort should be a flexible person in the face of change and must be able to stand the changing situation or condition. If someone is able it means that he or she has a “capability”. If the capability is there in addition to competence then he must be experience (he here, means he or she). The word “change” has emerged in this analysis so far done trying to break down “dynamic capabilities”. It implies that “dynamic capabilities” itself, is already a signification of “change”. Definition10 traced to “dynamic”, defined dynamics as: 1- The way in which people or things behave and react to each other in a particular situation, 2- the science of the forces involved in movement, 3- a force that produces change, action or effects, 4- Changes in volume or music. From the four dictionary definitions we can see the following terms; behave, react, force, movement, change, action, and effect. People hence an organization’s behavior must be reactive and forceful to cause a move, to bring a change through this action for an effect to take place advantageously to signify the extent of competence of the organization and hence its people. In this case, we say that the org is a living system. A living system must be managed but the management must be strategic with all the above analysis especially in the face of change and this is where the dynamic capabilities surfaced. Where, this term is the one signifying the management of this change in a strategic way backed by top management since it remains strategic. See Wikipedia’s11 definition of “dynamic capabilities”. The following terms were further considered under dynamic capabilities; organization, well informed people, flexible people or flexible org, competent people or competent org, capable org, etc. All these could be utilized to effect the changes through 1- the way they perform, 2-the procedures used, and 3- the extent to which they will configure resources to meet the change. We will look at these in turn.
PROCEDURE: This topic encompasses a lot of processes through dynamic capability for an org to conform or adapt to changes. Procedures must be designed to be continual and consist of learning and coordination. Wikipedia considers that “learning requires common codes of communication and coordinated search procedures”. “That is, the organizational knowledge generated resides in new patterns of activity, in “routines”, or a new logic of organization”. The diagram below further details on other processes under consideration termed procedures. Diagrams or figures are easy to remember therefore I tried to put these complexes into the form of diagrams that are simple and self explanatory.
The topic encompasses the firm's performance which is determined by the effective and efficient internal coordination of strategic assets. According to Garvin, (1988), “quality performance is driven by special organizational routines for gathering and processing information”. The rest of the points are summarized in the diagram below. It is hoped that, this diagram is self explanatory.
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
FIG 1 REPRESENTS THE SUMMARY OF POINTS SPELT OUT AT THE WIKIPEDIA WEBSITE AND THIS WAY THEY ARE MADE EASY TO FOLLOW AND BE SELF EXPLAINED
This topic encompasses the ability of reconfiguration of the firm's asset in the face of fast changing market so as to accomplish the necessary internal and external transformation. This according to Amit and Schoemaker, (1993),”change is costly and so firms must developed processes so that low pay-off changes are minimized”. The capability to change is summarized in the diagram below. It is hoped that, this diagram is self explanatory. We will read further details on this topic later in this paper.
FURTHER VIEW ON DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES
According to O'Reilly et al, dynamic capability entails two different approaches one at a time to have it executed advantageously and these are to explore and to exploit. Some top management cherishes the exploration approach, whereas others cherish the exploitation approach. However, the two can be approached a time same time by a top management of an org. Approaching the two at a time is termed “ambidexterity”.
Exploration: This promotes both change and ability to compete competitors. This action involves searching, discovering, innovating, embracing of variation, and a gain of autonomy.
Exploitation: This becomes dominant in the short-term but obsoletes in the long-term and could fail. This promotes increased productivity, gaining control, assuming certainty, resuming high efficiency, and reducing variance. Even though exploitation can fail in the long-term, it is worthy of note to point out that exploration has setbacks too. Returns on exploration are more uncertain, more distant in time and a threat to existing units of the organization. For reasons of these, organizations are often less effective at exploring. They end up becoming vulnerable to market changes and technology. To be efficient, firms must be ambidextrous and in addition be capable of reconfiguring resources and organizational structures.
SUMMARY: The org must sense, seize, and configure. Sensing entails scanning, searching and exploring. Seizing is making the right decision and executing it, and reconfiguration entails reorganizing resources.
Sensing: This involves process variation, competitive intelligence, tracking technology change, new opportunities, balance in centralization and decentralization, culture of openness that encourages debate, feedback encouragement from the market promotion of exploration commitment of resources by senior management, encourage longer term thinking, encourage longer term mindset, accepting failure and learning from early mistakes and errors, provision for integration and transfer of knowledge.
Seizing: This implies that top management must create vision and strategy, do organizational alignment between exploiting and exploring resource allocation on time, and fix up complementing asset. Top managements must plan strategic intentions and consensus drawing and align this plan with their business models. In the absence of the above, the organization may see opportunity and threats but cannot quickly react to them.
Reconfiguring: Structure, processes, people and culture are shifted or aligned gradually or in sequence (Duncan 1976, Eisenhardt and Brown, 1997 et al). In the face of rapid change the above shifts are likely to occur in parallel (Govindarajan et al, 2005). The key to the implementation of the above reflects on senior managements who are able to facilitate the ability to design systems of organizations, incentives and structures that permit targeted integration across organizational units to capture the advantages of co-specialized assets and the appropriate staffing of these units, (Daneeds, 2002). The most important thing is the way or formulas by which the above units are connected, linked and integrated in order to harness the most out of them. Finally, top management needs to work hand in hand with stakeholders owing to the above processes.
1.3 MANAGING DIVERSITY
INTRODUCTION TO MANAGING DIVERSITY: BERKELY University of California12, defined diversity, see footnote. Marquis et al13. Marquis et al found that, more than a source suggested that “to be Competitive today, businesses must maintain a cadre of personnel who are both highly qualified and highly diversified”. That is, “a work force must be composed of a heterogeneous mix of people of different races ethnicities and genders”. They stated that, “the two most commonly mentioned reasons are that, a diverse workforce improves a company's bottom line and enhances the work environment”.
9 At the website, http://www.4lenses.org/part3/strategic_lenses, the following were defined and I hope they will be useful; STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT- A stakeholder is anyone who has a role to play in addressing the social problem (i.e. community, clients, donors, staff/management, board, environment, public, etc.); RESOURCE MOBILIZATION- Human (people and their skills), relational (networks, partners, communities-including- intangibles such as brand, reputation and image), physical (tangible assets, vehicles, land, buildings, raw materials), or financial (cash, loans, equity, grants etc.); KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT- This is the combination of information (content, results from research, data) and processes (methodologies, systems, techniques, procedures), culture results from the combination of the many belief systems and mindset found among stakeholders groups.
10 The Oxford Advanced Learned Dictionary (International edition), p.458
11 (http:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic Capabilities) defined dynamic capabilities as “the organization’s ability to integrate, build and reconfigure internal competences to address rapidly changing environments”. The basis assumption here according to Wikipedia, is that firms are forced in current fast changing markets to respond quickly as well as be innovative.
12 http://hrweb.berkeley.edu/GUIDE/diversity.htm, “Those human qualities that are different from our own and outside the groups to which we belong yet present in other individuals and groups”. A common term “otherness” was used by the same source quoted above to represent the definition above. According to Berkely University of California, “dimensions of diversity include but are unlimited to: age, ethnicity, ancestry, gender, physical abilities or qualities, race, sexual orientation, educational background, geographical location, income, marital status, military experience, religious beliefs, parental status, and work experience”, (Loden and Rosener, in work force America).
13 http://ucsfhr.ucsf.edu/index.php/pubs/hrguidearticle/chapter-12-managing-diversity-the-workplce/, led a research project on diversity in large companies in America, where there are a number of characteristics of best diversity companies, best HR companies, etc. using quantitative and qualitative methods. Their key findings are that, firms recognized for diversity are distinguished by a core set of motives and practices that resemble those presented in the best practices literature, now these best practices alone might not allow a company to achieve a high level of diversity but contextual factors like industrial affiliation and company size, might be significant as straight factors influencing the extent of a company's diversity.
- Quote paper
- Wisdom Yao Dornyo (Author), 2010, ISP. Principles of Management 1, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/520205