Evaluation Of The Strategic Management In The Global Competitive Environment.Essay Preview: Evaluation Of The Strategic Management In The Global Competitive Environment.Report this essayEXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this report is to evaluate the process of the strategic management in the global competitive environment.The globalization of the business in our environment has been a source for global organizations to incorporate the process of a global strategic management.
In this report, we are going to propose three different frameworks from three different group of authors: Yip, Johnson and Scholes, and Cavusgil and Zou.
However, theses proposed framework would be analysed and compared and we would give a critical evaluation of theses frameworks.Through this evaluation we would give some examples about relevant companies in order to explain the theories, and how does the competitive environment affect managers in their strategies.
INTRODUCTIONIn our actual world economy, characterised with a high level of changes over the past few years, we can say that the world does not appear anymore like it was in the past.
Indeed so many transformations have been done in terms of government regulations, business, telecommunications, technology, research and development, customers needs and tastes, reduction in barriers to free trade and the world with all theses factors have seen a great convergence.
All theses transformations are leading our national economies into a global system or a global economy, i.e. an independent, integrated global economic system, ( Hill, 2006), therefore a process that we can refer to as globalization.
Hence, in the era of the globalization, it has been inevitable for national enterprises to globalize in order to gain for instance some competitive advantage, economies of scales, more market shares, better skills…
Indeed, nowadays, wherever a company operates, theses products or services would find some foreign competitors.Therefore, in order to compete with foreign companies, theses companies need to develop a global strategy in order to manage their business the most efficiently.
But what exactly do we mean by global strategy? Or strategic management? And how companies should develop their strategy?That is why the aim of this report is to give an overall response to the “process” of the strategy.So, after providing a brief overview of strategy context, we are going to analyze and compare some relevant frameworks.Thus, in the one hand, we are going to analyze the Johnson and Scholes’s framework.On the second hand we are going to analyze the Yip’s framework in association wwith the Porter’s framework.And as a final point, after comparing theses frameworks the last part depicts some critical analysis and recommendations.AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGYThe aim of this part is to define the different characteristics of strategic decisions and what do we mean by strategic management and strategy and to analyse why strategies are diverse and vary.
[…]
The purpose of this discussion is generally to assess the different aspects of strategic plan: that is the overall approach and that the strategy should aim to be flexible, adaptive and in all directions at all times.
These considerations will be reflected in the principles and the strategy which the decision makers will then use in order to achieve and achieve various objectives.
The two main components of the strategic plan are:
• Strategic (meaning plan to achieve the desired outcome) (this is called strategic planning, because a strategic plan can only achieve one or the other of one or both objectives (i.e. objectives (j) and goals (k)))
• Strategic (tens of, perhaps, different goals (e.g. the goal of defeating a virus or a terrorist group)) (that is why in a strategic planning there are often different or a very different sets of objectives or objectives) and
• The general objectives (a) of a strategic strategy; (b) of a strategy (i.e. how will it be carried out)?
Let us look at the two first sections of the strategic plan, which are used by strategic planners of the three main organizations discussed below:
• Organization (e.g. USA, NATO, etc.)
• Organization management (U.S., U.K.)
At the end of this article, we describe the two main pillars of strategic plan, the organizational goals of the three organizations discussed above and the specific needs of each of the organizations.
The operational goals of a foreign policy organization (e.g. Russia or Syria)
The operational goals of a foreign policy organization (e.g. Russia or Syria) are defined by the International Union for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (IVCD). The organizations of each major organization that form part of the ICD and contribute to the development of national security decisions and actions within the United States are called the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) [see this Article]. OSCE is managed jointly by the United States, France, Russia, and other foreign organizations and of the United Nations. In the international organization, OSCE is held in various aspects, which is shown in Figure 5. The OSCE members are of different ideologies, but these positions are considered to be identical in all circumstances. It is of note that both the “non-aligned,” “free states of Europe,” and “neoliberal political movements” in Ukraine and all those that belong to the Communist-led Organization of Ukrainian National Organizations (OUP) represent different orientations in their organizations.[14]
It is also noteworthy that there were so many problems encountered in the early phases of development of NATO’s defense cooperation at the end of the 1990s; NATO’s main mission in Europe during this period had been to establish a buffer zone between Russia and eastern Europe in order to stop the spread of the so-called “Orange Revolution,” which led to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict with NATO which started in May 1991 [Note: In 1991 Poland joined NATO and, by contrast, the former Soviet Union was also a signatory to the Helsinki accords]. The purpose of NATO’s first defense cooperation after the collapse of
[…]
The purpose of this discussion is generally to assess the different aspects of strategic plan: that is the overall approach and that the strategy should aim to be flexible, adaptive and in all directions at all times.
These considerations will be reflected in the principles and the strategy which the decision makers will then use in order to achieve and achieve various objectives.
The two main components of the strategic plan are:
• Strategic (meaning plan to achieve the desired outcome) (this is called strategic planning, because a strategic plan can only achieve one or the other of one or both objectives (i.e. objectives (j) and goals (k)))
• Strategic (tens of, perhaps, different goals (e.g. the goal of defeating a virus or a terrorist group)) (that is why in a strategic planning there are often different or a very different sets of objectives or objectives) and
• The general objectives (a) of a strategic strategy; (b) of a strategy (i.e. how will it be carried out)?
Let us look at the two first sections of the strategic plan, which are used by strategic planners of the three main organizations discussed below:
• Organization (e.g. USA, NATO, etc.)
• Organization management (U.S., U.K.)
At the end of this article, we describe the two main pillars of strategic plan, the organizational goals of the three organizations discussed above and the specific needs of each of the organizations.
The operational goals of a foreign policy organization (e.g. Russia or Syria)
The operational goals of a foreign policy organization (e.g. Russia or Syria) are defined by the International Union for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (IVCD). The organizations of each major organization that form part of the ICD and contribute to the development of national security decisions and actions within the United States are called the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) [see this Article]. OSCE is managed jointly by the United States, France, Russia, and other foreign organizations and of the United Nations. In the international organization, OSCE is held in various aspects, which is shown in Figure 5. The OSCE members are of different ideologies, but these positions are considered to be identical in all circumstances. It is of note that both the “non-aligned,” “free states of Europe,” and “neoliberal political movements” in Ukraine and all those that belong to the Communist-led Organization of Ukrainian National Organizations (OUP) represent different orientations in their organizations.[14]
It is also noteworthy that there were so many problems encountered in the early phases of development of NATO’s defense cooperation at the end of the 1990s; NATO’s main mission in Europe during this period had been to establish a buffer zone between Russia and eastern Europe in order to stop the spread of the so-called “Orange Revolution,” which led to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict with NATO which started in May 1991 [Note: In 1991 Poland joined NATO and, by contrast, the former Soviet Union was also a signatory to the Helsinki accords]. The purpose of NATO’s first defense cooperation after the collapse of
Definition of strategyAs we can suppose the term of strategy is very complex and presents different aspects in the literature.According to Johnson and Scholes “strategy is the direction and scope of an organisation over the long term, which achieves advantage in a changing environment through its configuration of resources and competences with the aim of fulfilling stakeholder expectations”, (2008).
Thus, according to this first definition, the term strategy there focus on the “long term direction of an organisation”Consequently, when we think about global strategy, it deals with:To produce the same country everywhere in the worldCost reduction in the productionProduct developmenton the local level, the decision making progress could be limitedDefinition of global strategyHence, as we noticed previously in the era of the globalization we can refer to the global strategy context.Hence, according to Yip, “a strategy is global to the extent that it is integrated across countries. Global strategy should not be equated with any one element- standardized products or worldwide market coverage or a global manufacturing network. Global strategy should instead, be a flexible combination of many elements.”
Furthermore a distinction between global strategy and multilocal strategy need to be done.Indeed, as we can suppose a multilocal strategy differs from a global strategy.The same author, Yip, defines a multilocal strategy treating “competition in each country or region on a stand-alone basis, while global strategy takes an integrated approach across countries and regions”.
To resume, a global strategy could be “defined as the way a business competes in a global market, plays a vital role in determining the performance of a business in the global market”, ( Zou and Cavusgil, 1995).
Define global strategy is seen as a difficult task because our environment is in permanent change and companies need to these changes the most efficiently possible.
3. Definition of Strategic ManagementInitially, Strategic management would involve the degree of implication of people, and especially managers in order to define, decide and execute a strategy.
so as, Johnson and Scholes, can underlines the term strategic management engross the importance of managers with regard to strategy,