Discussion: View Thread

From: Deborah L Rhodes

To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU

Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 7:05 PM

Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: Definition of Strategy

I too have been following this discussion and am taking a “strategy” course at the same time. I must concur with the rants and issues, but the question remains: What can or should be done differently to educate and train new managers and organizational governors to do things differently?  

As educators who have the ability to craft courses and train students and incumbent managers, what are the next steps?

I am not convinced that the nonprofit world is any better at ethical behavior, but there are different constraints such as the nondistribution of excess revenues to keep some of the problems to a smaller scale.  DEB

Deborah L Rhodes
Capella University, doctoral learner
School of Business and Technology
Management Education Specialization
Resident in Tampa, FL


On 2/28/09 4:44 PM, "Leybourne, Stephen A." <sleyb@BU.EDU> wrote:

I have been following this discussion for a few days now, and am in absolute agreement with Jim's last 'rant' on the current MBA generation.

I have only just moved to the US, and taught in the UK before - but the problem is the same everywhere...  There seem to be two main types of MBA programme: either the entrepreural path, where it is absolutely about making your money fast and getting out, or the managerial path, where MBA's are taught to be risk averse, meaning that when they get into the business world, they are taking the least risky option, which often means following the status quo within their organisation.  This kills innovation, and ultimately results in economic decline.

Unfortunately, risk aversion (in terms of both career and organisational development) means that it is easier to do nothing than to do something that may not be successful in the eyes of the organisation.  We as academics are often setting new MBA's up with confidence in perceived abilities that they just do not have, and won't have without some 'real' business experience.  There is an arrogance inherent in MBA cohorts that is sometimes quite astounding, maybe perpetuated by grade inflation (and don't get me started on that subject !!!).  If these students come out of their MBA programmes with a string of 'A's, they think they know it all...  and that is a real problem.

Sorry - this is a bit of a 'rant' as well...

Steve Leybourne

_________________________________________________

Dr Steve Leybourne Ph.D
Metropolitan College
Boston University
808 Commonwealth Avenue
BOSTON, Ma 02215

Phone:   (617) 358 5626
Fax:       (617) 353 6840
Email:    sleyb@bu.edu
Web:     http://people.bu.edu/sleyb  


 

---

From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Clawson, Jim
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 2:59 PM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Definition of Strategy

George,
 
I agree with you—AND I see so many American managers, executives, and executive teams who don’t seem to get it.  Global instantaneous communication (the web) has meant that you can’t hide margins anymore so yes, as one writer commented, I agree we are slipping worldwide into a homogeneous lukewarm standard of living.  I don’t know if that’s what you mean by “post-modern”.  A big question for me is what does America produce anymore?  It feels to me like we’ve become a nation of “flip-and-extractors” where the concept of providing on-going, high value added goods and services has left us.  Everyone wants to get a piece.  I’m getting emails almost daily from this or that group (entrepreneurs, associations, universities) all asking how they/we can get their piece of the bailout money.  JEEZ!  THAT’s the problem—so many trying to get so much for free!!!  Loopholes, compliance looking for loopholes, trying to find free money, America, in my view, needs to get back to basics:  assumed dependable high quality and differentiating experiences for customers.  I got a Japanese haircut when I was 19 and it ruined me for life.  I’ve been searching for a similar experience in the US and it’s NOT to be found.  America wants more now, and hang tomorrow.  Caveat emptor.  Grow!!  Grow or die!  We as a nation need to move back toward a fair day’s work for a fair day’s wage.  I’ve had 5-6 30 year old MBA candidates in class tell me and each other “you can fake anything for two years, get your money and run.”  I went ballistic—ruined my ratings.  We’ve become a nation of fakers.  The deal on the table is never the real deal.  In the midst of this, real value delivery not the fake financial “value” seems to have been lost.  What’s the strategy not for the top 100 US companies, what’s the strategy for the US as a nation?  What do we produce?  What value do we add?  Automobiles?  TVs?  Appliances?  Chips?  Sugar water?  Fuel/energy?  Cinema?  Music?  We have a 14 trillion $ economy with a $10 trillion debt load—and rising.  
 
I think MBAs need either at the beginning or at the end or both of their degree programs a serious hard look at the problems facing their generation and encouragement to think of how their new skills and degree are going to help them solve those problems.  I see way too many MBAs coming in who just want to make a fast fortune by investing and flipping and don’t talk about a career or a life’s work.  
 
I am, obviously, disturbed by the trend I see.  If our capstone courses would help students identify major issues in their generations and then develop strategies, personal and corporate, for dealing with them, and give them some determination to do so, I think that would be a good thing.
 

  Jim
James G. S. Clawson
Johnson & Higgins Professor of Business Administration
Darden GSB, University of Virginia
Box 6550, Charlottesville, VA 22906   
100 Darden Boulevard, Charlottesville, VA 22903  USA
Tel:  434 924 7488              Fax:  434 243 7680
Web:  http://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj


From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of George Graen
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 12:53 PM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Definition of Strategy


Jim and Joop,



Thanks for getting us back to the original question about the future of our capestone business courses: How do we design these courses for the onsetting knowledge era.  If we watch our post-modern concept of a business and how to make it fly crashing around us and our students, we should recognize the need for new and more appropriate designs for the aftermath of the 9/11/2008 crash and consequent recession.



My suggestions are packaged under the concept of "game-changing designs" which require constructing and sustaining a knowledge-driven corporation using much more of the creative thinking and leadership of all stakeholders.  Our dominant games for businesses have not kept up with the incredible explosion of knowledge, i.e., "company secret" has become an oxymoron.  Our major impediment to considering such a change is our fear of going the way of the outdated concept of capestone.  What do you think?



George

/jag



In a message dated 2/27/2009 11:52:12 A.M. Central Standard Time, ClawsonJ@DARDEN.VIRGINIA.EDU writes:

I'm  enjoying this conversation despite the sometimes edgy comments.  It seems  to me that leadership, strategy, and managing change are inextricably  intertwined.  We may break it/them down into pieces for the sake of  analysis and teaching, but leaders (not managers) must answer the question  "leadership to what end?" and that leads us to strategy and since we must go  from here to there that implies leading/managing change, so in fact, I'm  thinking our courses should be more accurately titled "Leading Strategic  Change."  I believe they are overlapping Venn diagrams.

Musings  from the peanut gallery,  

   Jim
James G. S.  Clawson
Johnson & Higgins Professor of Business  Administration
Darden GSB, University of Virginia
Box 6550,  Charlottesville, VA 22906   
100 Darden Boulevard,  Charlottesville, VA 22903  USA
Tel:  434 924 7488     Fax:  434 243 7680
Web:   http://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj

-----Original  Message-----
From: Management Education and Development Discussion  [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Joop Remme
Sent: Thursday,  February 26, 2009 6:09 AM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re:  Definition of Strategy

Dear Dundar,

Thank you for your valuable  comment. It connects strategy with leadership.
I am sometimes worried with  all the interest on leadership, thinking that
some people treat leadership  as grooming a saviour, especially in these
troubled times, while I am much  more inclined to think that leadership has
to mean that each individual has  to take his or her responsibility, albeit
some  may show an example in  this. From this perspective, strategy becomes
partly a matter of a fight/  fright choice: decide over your collective
future or be the victim of  someone else's decisions.

Best regards,

Joop  Remmé
0654761087
remme@knowdialogue.nl
remme@msm.nl  
www.knowdialogue.nl
www.synmind.nl
www.msm.nl  
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Management Education and  Development Discussion
[mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] Namens Dundar  Kocaoglu
Verzonden: donderdag 26 februari 2009 0:28
Aan:  MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: Definition of  Strategy

Joop:

I define strategy in a very similar way. I also  add that we develop strategy
to design a future to our liking because if we  do not do it, somebody else
will do it for us, and we will not like  it.

Dundar  Kocaoglu


===========================================================


Dundar  F. Kocaoglu, PhD;  Fellow, IEEE
Professor and  Chairman, Department of Engineering and Technology Management
and  President and CEO, PICMET
Portland State University, Portland, Oregon,  97207-0751, USA

+1 503-725-4660 - office
+1 503-725-4667 -  fax
http://www.etm.pdx.edu/  and   http://www.picmet.org/
============================================================


-----Original  Message-----
From: Management Education and Development  Discussion
[mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Joop  Remme
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:35 PM
To:  MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Definition of Strategy

Dear  colleagues,

Allow me to contribute my two cents.

In my teaching,  I define strategy as answering three questions:
1) where are we?
2)  where do we want to go?
3) how are we going to get there?

You might  say that dealing with these questions in the right order (it is  my
impressions that often they are mixed to a point of total confusion) is  in
fact a way of being, comparable perhaps to kai-zen in quality  management.

Of course, I welcome all comments.

Best  regards,

Joop Remmé
remme@knowdialogue.nl
remme@msm.nl  
www.knowdialogue.nl
www.synmind.nl
www.msm.nl  

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Management Education and  Development Discussion
[mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] Namens  nickols@att.net
Verzonden: woensdag 25 februari 2009 22:17
Aan:  MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: Definition of  Strategy

Jack Ring points to a "fine line" I draw between strategy and  tactics.
There is another fine line in Jack's post and it's well worth  some
attention.

Jack writes in part:

> Suppose strategy,  rather than declaring a course of action, declares a way

> of being.  Suppose tactics are process while strategy is tenets.
>
> Years  ago a clear distinction between the Green Bay Packers and Dallas
>  Cowboys was their respective strategies. Vince Lomabardi's strategy  was
'hit
> them where they are strongest' whereas Tom Landry's was  'confuse them
(with
> variety).'

The two strategies cited  above qualify in my way of thinking as "courses of
action."  They are  quite broad and no doubt took various forms at more
specific levels of  description and in various forms of execution, but I view
them as courses  of action nonetheless. They are what some call "grand
strategies" (as in  Winston Churchill's preferred strategy in WWII of
"attacking the underbelly  of Europe (i.e., Sicily and Italy).

Another example is a one-time  strategy of mine: "Work my way East then
leapfrog back to the West  Coast."  That strategy tied to 1974 and my
retirement from the  Navy.  My exiting pay as a Chief Petty Officer was $720
per month and  I was desirous of ramping up my income as quickly as possible.
Back then,  or so I believed at the time, the cost of living (and salaries)
were much  higher on the East Coast than on the West Coast.  So, I envisioned
a  strategy of obtaining a series of jobs/engagements moving from West to
East  that would enable me to make my way to the East Coast and once there
moving  all the way back to California (at the same salary), thus ratcheting
up the  purchasing power of my East Coast salary.  The strategy worked  as
envisioned - to a point.  I went from San Diego to Evanston,  Illinois to
Bethesda, MD.  Once there, however, things changed.   I fell in love with the
East Coast.  Business was good, I was making  more money than I ever
imagined, and I no longer wanted to go back to  California.  

My point is that a "course of action" doesn't have  to be spelled out in
excruciating detail to quality as such.  Nor does  a plan have to fill
several three-ring binders to qualify as such.   When I head out to Office
Depot or Staples to pick up a ream of paper for  my printer, I am following a
plan.  I have a goal, an object in mind:  to obtain a ream of paper.  I have
some actions in mind: getting in  the car, driving to Staples, purchasing the
paper (and perhaps some other  items as well), and returning home with the
paper.  Mission  accomplished.

Jack mentioned that he enjoyed my piece on strategy, its  definitions and
meanings.  So did a CEO who sent me an email and  inquired if I might do the
same for plans and planning.  By golly, I  think I will.  For starters:  A
plan, at its simplest, consist of  one or more goals and some actions
intended to achieve the goal(s).   It doesn't even have to be written down.
Schedules, resource allocations,  due dates, deliverables, assignments and
evaluations are all  optional.  It all depends on the scope and scale of  the
effort.

Finally, one minor correction to Jack's post:  The  paper on strategy, its
definitions and meanings, has been on my web site  for a few years now, not a
few months.  It gets some minor editing  from time to time and I update the
copyright notice whenever I do  that.  But, the basic paper has been out
there a  while.


--
Regards,

Fred Nickols
Managing  Partner
Distance Consulting,  LLC
nickols@att.net
www.nickols.us

"Assistance at A  Distance"
  
-------------- Original message  ----------------------
From: Jack Ring  <jring@AMUG.ORG>
>
> Fred's declaration of strategy as 'a  planned course of action' puts a
rather
> fine line between strategy  and tactics, perhaps a line that students are
not
> prepared to  notice, let alone appreciate.
>
> Since enjoying Fred's  "Strategy: Definitions and Meanings" when it was
first
> posted  several months ago, I have been interested in how to communicate
the  
> essence to those not yet imbued with sufficient experience to 'get  it'
> viscerally (aka' deep learning).
>
>
> On the  futbol pitch, we often see the strategy change from 'score goal'  to

> 'retain possession' especially when time is running out and one  team is
> ahead in goals scored.
>
> In NASCAR, Dale  Earnhardt's engines sacrificed maximum horsepower at peak
> RPM in  favor of more HP in at approximately 80% of peak RPM. This because
he  
> could accelerate from yellow flag lap speed to top speed in less time  than

> could the other configurations. Given 7 or so yellow flag  incidences per
> race that gave him a built-in one to two lap advantage  for the whole race
> even though his top speed was a little lower than  others.  This allocation

> of 'resource' to demand (impediment)  was not a course of action but a way
of
> being during the course of  action.
>
> The essence of Dee Hock's Birth of the Chaordic Age  is the Principles by
> which members agree to abide. These are not  coursed of action but ways of
> being. In fact many organizations have  failed when attempting the chaordic

> way because they are too  focused on Being to put enough energy into Doing.
>
> What must  we BE and DO in order to create a sufficient leaning environment

>  for students (of all ages) to 'get' strategy?
>
> cheers,
>  Jack Ring
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From:  <nickols@att.net>
> To: <MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
>  Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:41 AM
> Subject: Definition of  Strategy
>
>
> >I never did get around to responding to  Jack Ring's request for a
succinct
> >definition of strategy so  I'll take a shot at it now:
> >
> >            "Strategy is a planned course of action intended to  realize an

> > objective."
> >
> > Now for some  elaboration:  Together, strategy and tactics bridge the gap

>  > between ends and means.  Both are concerned with courses of action,  with

> > getting from here to there. Strategy forms the context  for tactics and
> > tactics informs strategy as to reality.  As  von Moltke observed, "No
> > battle plan survives contact with the  enemy."  And, of course, strategy
> > and tactics are both  concerned with resources - but here their concerns
> > differ.   Strategy is concerned with the "deployment" of resources and
> >  tactics is concerned with their "employment."
> >
> > As  strategy unfolds, which is to say as the plan is put into action,
some  
> > the "impediments" Jack mentioned turn out to be real and are  dealt with;

> > some never appear; and some that were never  anticipated crop up and
> > require an adjustment in tactics and,  perhaps, in strategy as well.
> > Strategy, then, is an emergent,  evolving course of action, not one that
is
> > chiseled in  stone.  The same is true of tactics.
> >
> > One might  well ask about the difference between strategy and tactics.
> >  Consider the following definition of tactics:
> >
> >          "Tactics are those plans and actions intended to  realize a
> > strategy."
> >
> >
> > For  more in this vein, there is a paper on my articles web site titled
>  > "Strategy: Definitions and Meanings."  If you care to read it, go to  
> > www.skullworks.com and click on the link to Strategy.
>  >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Fred  Nickols
> > Managing Partner
> > Distance Consulting,  LLC
> > nickols@att.net
> > www.nickols.us
>  >
> > "Assistance at A Distance"
> >
> >  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> > From: Jack  Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
> >>
> >> Yea, verily,  start with the end in mind.
> >> However, I suggest that 'result'  is equivalent to objective. Kim
didn''t
> >> ask
>  >> about pedagogy regarding choosing objectives. He asked about  learning
to
> >> craft
> >> strategy which I claim  is equivalent to the act of supposing how to get

> >>  there
> >> (what impediments thus what resources, when).
>  >> Or maybe not.  Anyway, thanks for the response.
> >>  cheers,
> >> Jack Ring
> >

---

A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! <http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62>