This article deals with strategic
choice. This implies that there are many alternating or array of strategies
from which the organisation can chose based on the outcome of the
organisation’s environmental analysis. In making strategic choice, the manager
must take cognizance of certain factors like structure and the culture of the
organisation. Strategic choice
basically comprises strategy generation, strategy evaluation and selection. The
techniques of doing these are presented in the article.
After a critical analysis of both the internal and external environment of the organisation, the management needs to generate a number of strategic possibilities. Thus, there is a need for techniques that will assist in the evaluation of the available options and choices. Thus, essentially the choice element of the strategic management is concerned with choosing a strategy based on the results of the foundations laid by the strategic analysis.
Any good manager must be able to generate and evaluate possible strategies taking cognisance of the nature of his/her own organisation or industry. The manager must seriously consider the risk, structure and culture of the organisation before making a straight choice. In this article, we shall discuss the techniques of generating, evaluating and selecting strategic options. The elements that are usually associated with making strategic choices are shown in the following Figure.
Basically, strategic choice has three
aspects:
(i)
The
generation of strategic options which go beyond the most obvious courses of
action identifying the options.
(ii)
The
evaluation of strategic options which may be based on exploiting an
organisation’s relative”s strengths or on overcoming its weakness.
(iii)
The
selection of a preferred strategy which will enable the organisation to seize
opportunities within its environment or to counter threats from competitors.
Generation of strategy options involves identifying as
many as possible potential courses of action. In reality, to find all possible
courses of action may not be feasible but the fact is that only the very
obvious ones are spotted or identified.
The
evaluation of strategic options is done within the frame-work produced by
strategic analysis. The various
alternatives listed as strategic options have to be tested for strategic fit
(suitability), feasibility and acceptability, which are the three major
evaluation criteria.
Usually, the selection of strategic options results in
a single strategy or a set of strategies that can be used in the strategy implementation process. The major factors that normally influence strategy
selection process are the culture and the power structure of the organisation.
This is an element in strategy choice process which
has the aim of generating adequate flow of strategic options for subsequent
evaluation. There are many ways of doing this. Johnson and Scholes (1993)
suggest identification, what basis “which direction and how options”.
Porter classifies three possible ways for an
organisation to outperform its competitive rivals based on five competitive
forces acting on an organisation. This is later reduced to four. He says that
the choice is between three generic business strategies, which are low cost,
differentiation, focus/niche. The generic strategies are in two parts: (a)
Product differentiation and (b) overall leadership. The focus/niche aspect of
the strategy concerns a distinct segment. This aspect is further sub-divided by
Porter to low cost, focus/niche and differentiation focus/ niche to give the
four generic strategies.
In spite of
its criticism, the notion of generic strategies is pragmatically useful as a
device to force explicit consideration of the way of competing by showing the
alternatives as by lowest cost (giving strength from strong loyalties) and
where competing showing the alternatives as everywhere or in a segment. This model’s limitation is the
complexity of the reality on ground and in many instances the
effective management is to create some mixture of the strategies.
There are many strategic directions
which an organisation can focus. These different directions have been
put together and modelled by Ansoff (1968). Seven
alternative directions have been indicated. The seventh alternative, with its diversification, is divided further into two
sub-options, i.e. related and unrelated business areas.
| | Internal | Acquisitions | Joint |
| 1 Do nothing | – | – | – |
| 2 Withdrawal | Liquidate | Complete sell out partial divestment management buy out. | Licensing subcontracting |
| 3 – – – | Buy and shut down | – Technology transfer subcontracting | |
| 4 Market penetration | Increase: – – – | – Buy market share industry rationalisation | Collaborations |
| 5 Product | Research | Buy-one products | Licensing, franchising, consortia, lease facilities |
| 6 Market | Extend | Buy competitors | New agents licensing consortia |
| 7 | Switch Create subsidiaries holdings buy subsidiaries | – – – | |
| Source: Scholes (1993) | |||
The summary of the strategic options indicating the
various directions on organisation can focus is presented in figure 6.2 each of
these options are hereby discussed.
This means that the organisation will
have to continue in the present direction, i.e. maintain the status quo. As a
long-term measure, it may not be beneficial but as a short-term, it may be
appropriate. Some growth may
occur if the current market grows. Otherwise everything remains constant or the
same.
Under this situation, the organisation is removed from
the industry because of an irreversible decline in demand, changes or
opportunity cost which indicates that other business ventures offer more
appropriate strategic directions. It is more of a strategy for asset
realisation and resource deployment.
Strictly
speaking, it is a strategy adopted to maintain the existing market share. It is
done when a dominant organisation aims at stability in order to accumulate cash
reserves for some future activities. This can be achieved by cutting costs or increasing prices with
the aim of obtaining a better margin.
It is different from consolidation when its main aim
is to obtain a reduction in the scale of operations.
Using this
strategy, the organisation seeks to increase market share, i.e. sales growth within the same market for the present
product(s) or services through greater marketing efforts in which the market
shares of others can be grabbed. It includes increasing the number of sales
persons, advertising expenditure, extensive sales promotions or publicity
effort. It is regarded as the most conservative of growth strategies since it
builds on the strength of the organisation and requires no easy during the
growth phase. It may meet fierce opposition if the market is static or
declining.
This strategy seeks increase by increasing or
modifying present products or services. The strategy keeps the organisation
operating with current markets but competing on the basis of new product. So,
growth is achieved if the new products are successful. Product development
usually entails large expenditures. It is a relatively low-risk strategy and
one that works well when products life cycles are short and products are the
natural spin-off from research and development process.
This involves introducing present products or services
into new geographical areas or new markets. It is a relatively high risk
strategy given the state of ignorance of the new market. When growth is sought
and existing markets have little scope, this direction is taken into new areas,
new market segments or new market uses. It is least risky when the
organizations competence is product-related rather than market-related. In Zambia
today, many domestic firms are striving hard to carry their products abroad. It
is, however, to be noted that expansion into the world market is no guarantee
for success. It is important to allow greater care in quality control and
customer service.
This strategy takes the organisations away from both
the existing markets and existing products. This has the highest risk of all
strategies because of unfamiliarity. But related diversification remains
broadly within this same industry, either backward into the supply chain,
forward into the distribution chain or horizontal into complementary activities
and so lowers the risk. However, unrelated diversification is a popular
strategy among the holding company conglomerates.
The strategy is becoming less
popular since business organisations are finding it difficult to manage diverse
business activities. Firms are advised to “stick to the knitting” and not to
stray away too far from the firm”s area of competence. Nevertheless,
diversification is still an appropriate and successful strategy. Sometimes for
a company like Philip Morris, diversification makes sense because cigarette
consumption is declining, product liability suits are a risk and some investors
reject tobacco stock on principle.
It is
possible to implement growth strategies by means of internal organic
development of growth over time. However,
this is slow.
Growth can also be by external development via mergers
and acquisitions. This may be expensive but is fast gaining access to marketers
through joint ventures. The organisation will have to consider the trade-off
between cost/risk/speed and shape the choice between these alternatives.
Broad
strategy alternatives and
other strategic options may be considered besides those earlier mentioned. They
include growth, stability and retrenchment. The growth strategies reproduce
development, diversification, market development or market penetration
strategies. The stability strategies are doing nothing (also referred to as
holding) and consolidation (or harvesting) strategies. The retrenchment
strategies can, in turn, be considered according to Robson (1997) in three
subdivisions.
This involves selling all the company”s assets in part for their tangible worth. Liquidation is the recognition of defeat and could be an emotional and difficult strategy. However, it may be better to lease operation than to continue to lose large sums of money. It could also be a redeployment of resources to somewhere else.
It involves selling a division or part of an organisation. It could be part of an overall retrenchment exercise, to reed an organisation of businesses that are unprofitable, that require too much capital or that may not fit well into the organisation”s other activities. Divestment can also be adopted when the organisation perceives threats in the environment such that the division can no longer be effective. The strategy is often associated with returning to the core business by shedding peripheral activities.
This strategy is used to recover from forced liquidation of business or bankruptcy. It is the most complex strategy to pursue since turning a non-profitable business into a profitable one will be beyond management skills of the organisation. It may be a strategy resulting from new management or owning groups.
Other authorities (Rackff et al, 1985) have expanded on Porter”s work on competitive strategies and offered a more comprehensive model of industry competition. They suggest that strategic thrusts are the major moves or actions that an organisation takes, which may be offensive or defensive in nature. The strategic thrusts model suggests that all possible activities can be summed up in the words of Robson (1997) as follows:
This aims to get an advantage by distinguishing products and services from competitor or by reducing the differentiation advantage of rivals.
This aims at getting an advantage by reducing own
suppliers” or customers” costs by raising the costs of rivals.
This is aimed at getting an advantage by introducing a
product change that fundamentally changes the industry”s method of
business.
This aims to get an advantage by volume or geographic
expansion, backward or forward integration, product line or entry
diversification.
This is diverted at getting an
advantage by forging marketing agreements, forming joint ventures or making
acquisitions related to the other four thrusts.
These strategies can be applied to three possible
targets or categories, which are:
a.
Supplier Targets: those providing the organisation with materials, capital, labour, services,
etc.
b. Customer Targets: those requiring the
organisation” s products
or services, either for their own use
or for subsequent re-sale.
c.
Competitor Target: those selling or potentially selling products seen by customers to be the
same as, or tolerable substitutes for, those produced by the organisation.
This model, as indicated, permits the analysis of the
three strategic targets of the organisation”s industry and makes the
manager aware of the main actions the organisation can take in the quest for
competitive gain. So, with this kind of model, the organisation should always
know its strategic target, whether it is the suppliers, customers or
competitors. The organisation should also know the kind of strategic thrust to
be used against the target, be it differentiation, cost innovation or growth of
alliance. The strategic model should also be known, whether it will be
offensive or defensive and the direction of thrust to be used, be it usages or
provision. These strategies have to be properly considered before the choice of
a strategic option. Often times, it is better to use a combination of
strategies to achieve desired goals.
This article deals with the three elements of strategic choice and the mode. It is clear that there are certain factors to be considered before making a strategic choice. The factors are strategy generation, evaluation and strategy selection. There are usually alternative competitive strategies. One of them is chosen based on critical and proper evaluation of these alternatives as well as the focus of the organisation.
The concept of "Building Blocks Marketing" refers to a systematic approach to developing a marketing…
This blog post aims to provide a comprehensive exploration of the various types of interviews…
An annual marketing plan serves as the blueprint for business growth, allowing companies to strategically…
This blog post delves into the philosophy of market management, exploring its key concepts, strategic…
This blog post seeks to explore the multifaceted impact of technology on teaching, outlining its…
Umuganura is derived from Kinyarwanda, Rwanda's national language, where “umuganura” translates to "the first fruits."