Strategic Planning

Assignments: Each part must be 250 words and clearly labeled

Part 1:

Strategic Planning Process

In your own words, define strategic planning and explain why it is crucial to an organization’s survival. In your response, include a description of how strategic planning differs from strategic management. Lastly, explain how your current or previous organization’s strategy might influence its business model.

Part 2:

Problems with Strategic Planning

After reading the article “

UPS holiday season fiasco: a failure of strategic planning .

,” describe where the problem was with UPS’ and FedEx’s strategic planning. How did the fear of losing market share affect their strategic planning? What are potential solutions?

Article:

Banker, S. (2013, December 30).

UPS holiday season fiasco: A failure of strategic planning

. Forbes. Retrieved from

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2013/12/30/ups-holiday-season-fiasco-a-failure-of-strategic-planning/

Assignments: Each part must be 250 words and clearly labeled

Part 1:

Strategic Planning Process

Part 2:

Problems with Strategic Planning

After reading the article “

UPS holiday season fiasco: a failure of strategic planning .

,” describe where the problem was with UPS’ and FedEx’s strategic planning. How did the fear of losing market share affect their strategic planning? What are potential solutions?

Article:

Banker, S. (2013, December 30).

UPS holiday season fiasco: A failure of strategic planning

. Forbes. Retrieved from

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2013/12/30/ups-holiday-season-fiasco-a-failure-of-strategic-planning/

Week 1

Text

Required Resources

Text

Read the followings chapters in

(Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Strategic management for organizations

· Chapter 1: Strategic Management

· Chapter 2: Leadership, governance, Values and Culture

Articles

Banker, S. (2013, December 30).

UPS holiday season fiasco: A failure of strategic planning (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2013/12/30/ups-holiday-season-fiasco-a-failure-of-strategic-planning/

My Strategic Plan. (n.d.).

Mission Statements
(Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

. Retrieved from http://onstrategyhq.com/resources/mission-statements/#Defining%20Your%20Mission

· This resource provides a deeper understanding of mission statements and how they relate to strategic plans.

Week One Lecture

Chapter One: Strategic Management

Welcome to Strategic Planning for Organizations. Strategic planning is an essential part of every organization. In order to understand strategic planning for organizations, there are several components that need to be identified. Let’s first start by looking at the definition for strategy. According to Carpenter and Sanders (2009) “strategy is the coordinated means by which an organization pursues its goals and objectives” (p.10). In our textbook there is an illustration of the strategic management model, Figure 1.1. In this model there are four parts: strategic thinking, strategic planning, internal analysis, and operational and budget planning, all of which equate to one thing – implementation. Below is a video that does a great job illustrating the strategic management model.

Strategic Management Model – By Prof. Mohammed Ahmed.

(

)
In an effort to think outside the box in terms of strategic planning, like so many things in our world, there are multiple ways to do things and still achieve desired results. According to Dr. Carter McNamara “there is no one perfect strategic planning model for each organization. The approach, or model, for strategic planning depends on several factors” (n.d., para1). Dr. McNamara outlined six models that all relate to strategic planning (n.d.):

Model 1 – Vision-Based or Goals-Based Strategic Planning
Model 2 – Issues-Based Planning
Model 3 – Alignment Model
Model 4 – Scenario Planning
Model 5 – “Organic” (or Self-Organizing) Planning
Model 6 – Real-Time Planning

Our textbook illustrates that strategic planning consists of five steps: “1. Strategic thinking including external analysis, 2. Internal analysis, 3. Identifying key strategic issues, 4. Developing viable strategic alternatives and 5. Choosing the best strategy” (Abraham, 2012, pg 4).
Think back to a time when you were responsible for planning something. Perhaps it was a vacation trip, a baby shower, a wedding, or a family picnic. There are several things that need to happen in order to have everything go as planned. Let’s use the example of a vacation. You first need to “strategically think” about where you want to go, what type of weather you want to have, if you prefer to be near a beach, mountains, lake, etc. Once you have decided on where you want to go, you then need to conduct an “external analysis”. For example; where you will stay, how you will get around, if there are restaurants nearby, what activities you can do there, etc. Then you move on to the “internal analysis” in which you look at your finances; what you can afford, if you can get the time off work, whether you can arrange pet sitting, etc. Next we move onto the “identifying key strategic issues.” In this scenario it might consist of the following; can we get to this location by plane, boat, or car? How long will it take to get there? Do we need to plan an extra day for vacation due to the time it takes to travel there? Can we use our Visa, Master Card, etc.? Next is “developing viable strategic alternatives.” This is the “what if’s”… What can we do if we arrive and our hotel is overbooked and we don’t have room? What if we miss the flight? What if someone gets sick while on this vacation? Lastly is “choosing the best strategy.” Now that we have identified the place we want to go, the time needed for this trip, how we will get there, where to stay, how to get around, and a backup plan should anything go wrong, we are now ready to “implement”, or book the vacation.
For organizations the process is similar but typically involves a higher scale of analysis and decision making. There are two key elements that are vital to strategic planning for organizations. The first is to understand the organizational mission. The second is to identify the organizational vision. Strategic management and planning work hand in hand by understanding the company’s mission and vision. One cannot create a strategic plan without understanding what the overall vision and mission are.
Below are two interesting videos that relate to strategy:

7 Steps to Successful Strategy and Implementation – by Robynne Berg

(

)

You need strategy for Your Organization – Prof Michael Porter – by Reza Baniasad.

(

)

Chapter Two – Leadership, Governance, Values, and Culture

Leadership within an organization requires a level of knowledge in terms of the direction the company is pursuing. In order to maintain such direction, it is important to have a guide to help keep the leadership and organization on track. For many companies this guide is known as a mission statement and a vision statement.
According to Hill and Jones (2010), “a company’s mission describes what the company does.” This is true, but it goes beyond just identifying what the company does. It is important to capture the essence of your company’s goals and philosophies (Entrepreneur, 2003). The mission statement should also identify “what your business is all about to your customers, employees, suppliers and the community” (Entrepreneur, 2003, para1).
Below are some great questions to ask when composing a mission statement:

· Why are you in business?

· Who are your customers?

· What image of your business do you want to convey?

· What is the nature of your products and services?

· What level of service do you provide?

· What roles do you and your employees play?

· What kind of relationships will you maintain with suppliers?

· How do you differ from your competitors?

· How will you use technology, capital, processes, products, and services to reach your goals?

· What underlying philosophies or values guided your responses to the previous questions? (Entrepreneur, 2003, para 9).

The vision statement identifies the desired future state of the organization; “it articulates what the company would like to achieve” (Hill & Jones, 2010, pg 15). According to Arline (2013) “a good vision statement provides the inspiration for the daily operations of a business and molds its strategic decisions” (para 1).
Here is a basic example: Most adults at some point in their life will think about goals they wish to accomplish. For many in this class, it is assumed finishing your degree is one of those many goals. For some it may be to find their dream job, others it may be to purchase a home. Some have goals of working in Washington or others to perform on Broadway. We all have goals in mind that wish to achieve one day. A vision statement would help us recognize these goals by writing them out in a statement that identifies these goals and whether they are short or long term goals. Just to be clear, a vision statement does not outline how we will achieve these goals, as that comes from the tactical, operational and strategic goals that all lead up to the vision we have outlined.

Often people confuse a mission statement with a vision statement, thinking they are one in the same; they are not. So often these two statements are used interchangeably. Below is a clear explanation of the difference between the two:

· Mission statements are present-based statements designed to convey a sense of why the company exists to both members of the company and the external community. Vision statements are future-based and are meant to inspire and give direction to the employees of the company, not anyone outside the company (Hom, 2013, para. 4).

Now that it has been established what the mission and vision statements consist of, the next step would be to look at the leadership and identify the difference between a leader versus a manager. Our textbook provides a great outline of the differences between a leader and a manager. See table 2.1 in our textbook for more information. Through the years there have been numerous papers and definitions that describe the differences between the two. The most basic definition would be that a leader is one that people follow because they choose to and a manager is one that people follow because they have to. In terms of strategic planning, most companies have an organizational design, which identifies what role each member of the company has, who they report to and what they are responsible for. If you are able to, take time this week to review your organizational chart and identify how the company design is set up. In addition, seek out to find if your company has a mission and/or vision statement and what it says.

Forbes School of Business Faculty

References

Ahmed, M. (2010, June 9).

Strategic management model

[Video file]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/XP9F1xcuRrc
Arline, K.. (2014, December 11).

What is a vision statement?

Business News Daily. Retrieved from

http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/3882-vision-statement.html

Baniasad, R. (2012, July 22).

You need strategy for your organization – Prof Michael Porter

[Video file]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/DViVtgD0xwE

Berg, R. (2011, Oct 2).

7 steps to successful strategy and implementation

[Video file]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/LkesApAMSQk

Carpenter, M. & Sanders, W.G. (2009). Strategic management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Entrepreneur (2003, October 29).

How to write your mission statement

. Retrieved from

http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/65230

McNamara, C. (n.d.). Basic overview of various strategic planning models . Retrieved from

http://managementhelp.org/strategicplanning/models.htm

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 1/49

Chapter 1

Strategic Management

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Learning Objectives

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 2/49

By the time you have completed this chapter, you should be able to do the following:

Appreciate the complexity of strategic management and how it is critical to achieving ongoing and future
corporate success.
Understand the role of strategy and strategic planning in strategic management.
Understand the basic framework of a strategic analysis used to determine what strategy a company
should pursue.
Appreciate that a corporation—or any organization—doesn’t exist in a vacuum but in the context of its
operating and larger environment.
Appreciate that in a capitalist society with free markets, competition governs what products are
produced (the ones people are willing to buy).
Understand how �irms compete for customers.
Understand the �ine distinction between a strategy and a business model.
Get a feel for what constitutes “success” in business.
Understand the range of stakeholders to whom the corporation owes some duty.

You are about to embark on a journey where you will learn what managing a large or small company is all about and how to plan and manage
a company to realize its long-term vision, purpose, strategy, and objectives. To be successful, the company must continually become a
stronger competitor and constantly seek new opportunities, because the world is changing rapidly. Leading and managing a company for
long-term success is really what strategic management is all about.

Chapter 1 sets the stage for understanding the topic of strategic management and the key concepts that underlie it. You will need to become
familiar with many new terms that are vital to understanding concepts in later chapters.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 3/49

Strategically managing a corporate business year after year is
dif�icult to do, as demonstrated by corporate failures such as
Enron.

Associated Press/Pat Sullivan

1.1 What Is Strategic Management?

Strategic management is nothing less than steering and managing a
company to be successful over time—not just for the next quarter or year, but
for the long term. It involves deciding the direction in which the company
should go, what the company should produce, and hence in what industry it
competes. It requires identifying who are its competitors and how it might
beat them. It means knowing who its customers are and what they want. It
entails determining whether it can produce the kinds of products customers
want to buy, whether it has the people and organization to make it all happen,
and, most important, how to make a pro�it when all is said and done.

The corporate graveyard is littered with notable failures—Enron, Pan Am,
Tyco, Arthur Andersen, Circuit City, and Adelphia to name a few—
demonstrating that managing strategically is very dif�icult to do year after
year. And how does strategic management differ from just ordinary
management? If one were suddenly called in to manage a company that
continued to do what it had been doing and all one had to do was make sure it
was done well, we might say that would constitute “managing.” However, if one worried about external challenges—emerging low-cost
foreign competition, changing customer tastes, impending legislation, rising material costs, and a slowing economy, to name a few—and
began to look at how the company might have to change, what that change would cost, and where the money would come from for it to
remain in business and be successful, then that would constitute “managing strategically.”

The Strategic Management Model

Although strategic management is complex and dif�icult, it can be understood and learned. Just as you need a diagram and instructions and
tools to assemble certain purchases in kit form, so too do you need a process or model for strategic management. Most writings on strategic
management are based on a model, which can be de�ined as a device for codifying a complex activity that is at once easy to explain,
understand, and learn providing the reader with a “road map” as to how everything �its together. While the model enables the components of

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 4/49

such a complex activity to be examined separately and in detail, it cannot begin to describe the dif�iculties that constantly arise in the real
world as companies try to implement everything.

Figure 1.1 presents the strategic-management model on which this text is based. The model is aligned with the approach espoused by the
Association for Strategic Planning (ASP), whose slogan is “Think—Plan—Act.” In other words, it prescribes strategic thinking, strategic
planning, and strategic implementation. This catchphrase is also the subtitle of this text, which you should look at again now that you know
what it means.

Figure 1.1: The strategic-management model

Elements of Strategic Management

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 5/49

To appreciate and understand the totality of strategic management, you have to understand all its elements and how they affect each other.
Training in strategic management and the real-world experience you obtain will help further your career, perhaps one day even to the
position of chief executive of�icer. It is at this level with a view of the entire organization and its environment that the responsibility for
managing a company strategically lies.

Strategy Formulation

Strategic management involves both strategy formulation and implementation. Strategy formulation, also known as strategic planning, is a
complex process in its own right involving �ive discrete steps: (1) strategic thinking including external analysis, (2) internal analysis, (3)
identifying key strategic issues, (4) developing viable strategic alternatives, and (5) choosing the best strategy using as criteria whatever the
company de�ines as “success.”

Strategic thinking is a continual activity that seeks to �ind whether a better strategy and business model exist, and seeking a market space
that is not currently served and has few competitors. This cannot be done without external analysis, which entails observing, analyzing, and
understanding what is changing in a company’s external environment to anticipate what the future might hold.

Internal analysis means knowing, analyzing, and understanding everything about the company itself, especially what makes it a strong
competitor or why it isn’t as strong as it could be. Does it have a core competence, an enabling culture, strong leadership, adequate �inancial
resources, and a good understanding of its customers?

Key strategic issues are a synthesis of both the external and internal analyses that focus the management’s attention on the most important
issues the company faces. Viable strategic alternatives are bona �ide strategic options or alternative futures from which a company can choose
the best one. They consist of strategies, strategic intent, programs, and methods of �inancing.

Strategy Implementation

Some experts suggest that strategy implementation comprises as much as 90% of strategic management. It is all about successfully
executing the strategies developed, thereby enabling the company to achieve the vision and meet the objectives set by management. The �irst
step is operational and budget planning to determine who will do what to implement the strategy and to ensure that the company has the
resources—money, people, and know-how—to do these things. A consideration in this planning stage must be how progress will be
measured. The actual performance of the myriad tasks involved in implementing the strategy is called operations. An information system to
collect and analyze operational data must be devised and constructed. Actual performance must be measured at regular intervals and the
data entered into the system to compare against planned estimates. When things don’t go according to plan or resources are being wasted,

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 6/49

The Association for Strategic Planning has a strategic-
management model, whose slogan is “Think—Plan—Act.”

Chris Clinton/Digital Vision/Thinkstock

corrective action should be taken immediately. Lastly, the strategic-planning process itself must be managed and improved on an ongoing
basis.

Figure 1.1 shows in which chapters the various parts of the process are presented. It also shows that the adjustments a company must make
in response to challenges and changing conditions as it implements the strategy in turn affect the assessment of the company the following
year. A strategically managed company is constantly updating its information and mental models to take into account the changes occurring
both outside and inside the company.

People have their own ideas about things in the world around them.
Sometimes they know very little about something and sometimes they know a
lot. What we know or think we know about something forms our mental
model of it. For example, our mental models about pollution may not be well
formed. It’s a complex topic with many facets, and our motivation for learning
more about it and what needs to be done may be low. Most people were
probably not aware that ships had for years been dumping plastic waste into
the Paci�ic Ocean on the probable assumptions that, in the vastness of the
ocean, this would go unnoticed and no harm done. Their mental model of
marine pollution was likely not based on personal observation but limited to
what they might have occasionally read in newspapers. For many, that mental
model must have been radically updated when a series of articles about ocean
pollution revealed the existence of the Paci�ic Trash Vortex consisting of non-
biodegradable plastics �loating in the “western garbage patch” off the coast of
Hawaii and the “eastern garbage patch” off the United States continental coast.

The latter was estimated to be twice the size of Texas (Weiss, 2006). In another example, we are all familiar with newspapers and bookstores
and no doubt think we have pretty good mental models of those businesses. But can you imagine a world without either of them, at least in
their current form? There’s a good chance that might happen in the next few years. If that happens, we will have two more mental models to
update (Olivarez-Giles, 2011).

Strategic planning and strategic management are best explained while examining a company that is in only one business. This approach is
used in the �irst 10 chapters. Chapter 11 explains how diversi�ied (multi-business) companies, international companies, and global companies
operate and why they are considerably more complex to plan for and to manage. Companies in very fast-moving industries, as with most

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 7/49

high-tech businesses, are also dif�icult to manage because keeping abreast of rapid changes often requires a technology strategy in addition to
a company strategy and requires a higher level of investment.

The coming sections in this introductory chapter explain the context of business, what is meant by “success,” the meaning of strategy and
strategic planning (among the most misused and misunderstood words in business), what business models are and why every business has
one, and the importance of stakeholders in business decision making. The remaining chapters in the book explore in greater detail each of the
major elements of strategic management and clarify them. In the end, you will have a conceptual grasp of how everything �its and works
together. To manage strategically well takes years of practice and accumulated experience, often people’s entire careers.

Discussion Questions

1. The Association for Strategic Planning’s motto of “think—plan—act” also forms the foundation of this book. Are these
three basic elements enough?

2. What are the principal elements of the strategic-management process? How are they interrelated?
3. How does strategic planning differ from strategic management?
4. What part of doing strategic planning appears, in your opinion, to be the most dif�icult to do? Which part, if not done well,
would be most likely to lead to poor strategic decisions?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 8/49

Market share is the percentage of a �irm’s
annual sales based on the annual sales of the

Gunnar Pippel/iStockphoto/Thinkstock

1.2 About Competition

In this section, we’ll begin to examine the different kinds of competition at various stages and levels of business.

Free Versus Regulated Markets

Capitalism allows a free market to exist and promotes competition. The United States is a mixed economy, which means that some markets
are freely competitive with almost no state intervention, and some are highly regulated, making competition very dif�icult. It is convenient to
assume initially that a market is not regulated until the nature and degree of the regulation can be identi�ied and understood. An example of a
regulated market is public utilities, regarded as a public good and which require regulation to maintain high levels of accessibility,
affordability, and safety that otherwise might be jeopardized in pursuit of pro�it. Other regulated markets include communications, energy,
food production, trucking, workplace safety, and airlines, to name a few. All involve public-safety issues and the need to balance the public
interest with what’s good just for a particular company.

Industries Versus Markets

The terms market and industry are often used interchangeably in everyday usage, but they
have quite distinct meanings. The collection of �irms that provides similar products or
services to the same customers is called an industry. The buyers for those products or
services are collectively called the market. To an economist, the industry is the “supply” side
of the equation and the market is the “demand” side, which is illustrated in Figure 1.2 below.
When demand is greater than supply and people can’t get enough of what they want, they
become willing to pay more. The price will go up until the point where demand again equals
supply and prices stabilize. Conversely, when companies can’t sell all that they have produced,
supply is greater than demand. Producers will try to reduce accumulated inventories and the
price will go down until supply again equals demand and prices stabilize.

Thus, it is more accurate to talk about industries—not markets—being regulated (or not). The
exception is the term market share, which means a �irm’s annual sales as a percentage of the
annual sales of the entire industry. Given this de�inition, “industry share” is more accurate
than “market share,” because that is how it is calculated. However, using the term market

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 9/49

entire industry.share to mean this is so ingrained in the business lexicon that we will go along with the norm
and call it market share in this book (even though we mean industry share). At least you will
know what it really means when you read about companies and their market shares.

Figure 1.2: Industries vs. markets

How Firms Compete in an Industry

In any industry regardless of the degree of regulation, �irms compete with each other to sell more products or services to customers; their
purpose being to “capture more of the customer’s dollar.” Firms are free at any time to offer whatever products they think people need at any
price they believe people would be willing to pay. If they succeed, customers will buy their product; if not, they won’t. That’s the nature of
competition. Ultimately, consumers, whether individuals or businesses, communicate through their buying behavior exactly what goods and
services they need. Companies that fail to deliver products that satisfy customers’ needs will soon go out of business.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 10/49

In one extreme situation in which a particular �irm is the only company in an industry, then it has a monopoly. It can charge any price it likes
since customers cannot get the product from any other source. At the other end of the scale, when many �irms in an industry all produce
essentially the same product (such as paper clips or fertilizer), they compete on the basis of price. In such a market, customers’ perceptions
that products are all the same will base purchase decisions on price alone. This is called price or “perfect” competition. Another example of
this is that people who believe that supermarkets are all the same will buy from any one, especially the one that reduces their overall grocery
bill the most.

Differentiation

Companies can also compete by being differentiated, that is, have a strong and distinctive brand, along with unique or different products. In
that instance they can charge more for their products because in the consumer’s mind, they are offering something that no one else is
offering. Examples of this are a designer perfume or a Porsche automobile. Differentiation can, depending on the product, be achieved by
offering customers superior quality, product features, technology, convenience, selection, style, performance, safety, comfort, reliability, cost
savings, warranties, return policy, customer service, and so on. The key is to differentiate based on the customers’ needs, not what the �irm
thinks they need. When consumers perceive that your product alone best meets their need, they will buy it and be willing to pay more for it.

Companies can compete based on many other factors beyond attributes of the product or service. They may offer customers on-time delivery
or shipment without spoilage or damage for products such as fresh produce. Ef�icient distribution such as Net�lix provides, automated
warehouse operations, and excellent management of the supply chain all may provide a competitive advantage that a company can use to
attract customers. The list is endless. As with product differentiation, the point is to address the needs of the customer.

Case Study
Case of Mistaken Differentiation

A watch manufacturer once made a very average watch that sold just well enough to keep the company going as it did not offer
customers any distinct advantages over competing products. The company was forced to compete on price, thus returning thin
margins. The CEO lamented that the company’s watch was never the “best” in any dimension, so he couldn’t charge more for it.
This changed when his chief engineer observed that he could make the watch accurate to within a fraction of a second per year
for only a $10 increase in price. The CEO concluded that with the most accurate watch in the world he could raise the price by
more than $10. He gave the go-ahead.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508-… 11/49

Today, many companies are increasingly cooperating through
partnerships, agreements, and joint ventures rather than
competing with each other. A recent example of this is the
cooperation of aircraft companies Grumman and Boeing to
build the U.S. Air Force’s KC-135 tanker planes.

Associated Press/Azamat Imanaliev

The marketing department created a new ad campaign touting the watch’s accuracy and doubled the advertising budget. Soon,
the watches were distributed to retailers, and the campaign blitzed the media.

To the dismay of the CEO, sales never picked up. He instructed his VP of marketing to �ind out what was going on. The report
was troubling. Potential watch buyers weren’t interested in accuracy. In fact, losing or gaining minutes a year was not a concern
for them. What they really wanted was for the watch to be more of a fashion accessory with interchangeable snap-on covers in
different designs and colors.

The CEO realized too late that, while the company’s watch could actually be differentiated from the competition, it had to be
perceived by customers to be differentiated along some dimension that they valued. Differentiation strategies must be
preceded by market research to determine what customer need is not being met and then move quickly to meet it. Only then
will customers be willing to pay more for the product and the company command higher margins.

Cooperation

Companies are increasingly cooperating with other �irms in an industry rather
than competing, or doing both. They do this through partnerships,
agreements, and joint ventures. Is cooperating really competing? In certain
industries, the answer is yes. For instance, companies in the defense-
aerospace industry used to prepare proposals on their own to bid on large
military contracts. As military hardware has become increasingly complex and
expensive, the cost to vendors of preparing such proposals has over time
soared to many millions of dollars, exposing them to greater risk. This in turn
effectively raised the cost of such contracts to the military. In response, pairs
or consortia of competitors got together to bid together on such contracts to
lower the risk and costs. The military allowed such cooperation as it also
reduced its own costs. The Boeing Company and Northrop Grumman
Corporation have collaborated on many large military contracts that would be
prohibitively expensive for a single company such as the Ground-Based

Midcourse Defense (GMD) component of the United States ballistic missile defense system. Such an instance of cooperation is described as an

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 12/49

agreement or strategic alliance, where two �irms partner for their mutual bene�it but retain their distinct corporate identity. There are other
kinds of strategic alliance, discussed in Section 1.6, including simple contracts for services rendered at one end of the scale (minimum
commitment) to minority ownership of another �irm or joint venture at the other (heavy commitment).

Discussion Questions

1. You own a small �irm selling grass seed. Who might your competitors be? (Think about factors other than other �irms
selling grass seed.) How might you cope with some of these competitive threats?

2. Competitors are usually thought of as other companies like yours producing similar products for the same market. Would
any factor that reduced overall demand for your product also be viewed as a competitor? Why or why not?

3. Over the last 10 years or so, do you believe more companies are cooperating with one another? Why or why not?
4. Why do you pay exorbitant prices for concessions at movie theaters and sports venues?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 13/49

Globalization is the process by which regional
economies, cultures, and societies become
integrated in a global network of political and
economic ideas through communication, trade,
and transportation.

Robert Humberman/SuperStock

1.3 The Globalization of Business

The world today is a lot different than it was just a decade ago. The global human population has surpassed 7 billion people (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2011), and technological advances have profoundly affected our daily lives. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman describes
the arrival and spread of the Internet as “�lattening the world,” meaning that the reach of every individual has become global and the power of
consumers equalized (Friedman, 2007). We have all heard the expression, “the world is shrinking,” alluding to the fact that international
travel is easier, and we have instant access to news about events in just about every corner of the earth.

A de�inition of globalization as it is commonly used is “the development of an increasingly
integrated global economy marked especially by free trade, free �low of capital, and the
tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets” (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 2004, p.
532). A more comprehensive de�inition for the purposes of this discussion is an amalgam
from two sources. “Globalization describes the process by which regional economies,
societies, and cultures have become integrated through a global network of political ideas
through communication, transportation, and trade” (Bhagwati, 2004). Globalization is
typically identi�ied as being propelled by a combination of economic, technological,
sociocultural, political, and biological factors. The term can also refer to the transmission of
ideas, languages, or popular culture across national boundaries. Some facet of life that has
undergone this process can be considered to be globalized (Croucher, 2004).

What does all this mean with respect to strategic management? Not too long ago, companies
might have asked themselves whether they should globalize; today, they should instead ask
why they shouldn’t (Yip, 2003). Consider the following scenarios and the challenges they pose
to businesses.

If you managed a local or regional company, you might think that you would be competing just
locally or regionally. This assumption is no longer true. It’s highly likely that foreign competitors would be getting a foothold in your market.
You or your competitors would almost certainly be buying parts or materials from foreign companies to make your products at lower costs.
You could even be outsourcing your entire manufacturing to a foreign company; lately it seems that everything one buys is made in China. You
may well be employing people from other countries. Without question you would be using equipment, from machines to cell phones to cars,

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 14/49

made by foreign companies. So even an American company competing in the United States experiences globalization in every facet of its
business.

If you directed an American company and your domestic market had matured or become saturated, meaning that sales had leveled off and no
unserved demand exists, you would want to �ind new avenues for growth. If you believed that consumers in other countries buy your product,
you would want to expand to one or more foreign countries to continue growing and making a pro�it. Globalization means doing just that, but
you can expect to face tough foreign competition from other companies chasing the same customers. To succeed, you will have to do this in a
country whose laws, culture, currency, customs, and even language are unfamiliar. You will have to make critical decisions such as whether to
make the product in the United States and ship it to those countries or manufacture the product there. As you can imagine, this gets
complicated very quickly.

While even the most global of companies must have their headquarters in one country, that aside, they are truly global. They have operations
all over the world with employees from each of the countries in which they are located. Research and development centers may be
established on several continents. Manufacturing is conducted in many locations, typically located near suppliers and customers to minimize
transportation costs. Sales of�ices are found everywhere the company sells its products. It may be that products have to be tailored to a
particular country, for example, cars out�itted with steering on the right for countries that drive on the left or appliances that operate on
different voltages depending on the country. An enormous challenge is that a company must comply with the laws of each country in which it
does business. An example of a company in this scenario is Volkswagen, a German auto company that sells cars in the United States that are
manufactured in Mexico.

Today, anyone starting a company in the proverbial garage can �ind customers all over the world through the Internet. Imagine, a craftsman or
rug maker in Northern India with access to an Internet connection can now sell his products globally. Conversely, a consumer in the United
States shopping for a particular product can now choose from suppliers or retailers anywhere in the world. Of course, this ability also brings
with it new considerations for the consumer. The reliability of buying from an Internet retailer, the security of making payment, and return
policies would all factor into the purchase decision.

Case Study
Globalization at Work in San Miguel

In San Miguel de Allende, a colonial town in Central Mexico and World Heritage Site, a collection of upscale art and furniture
galleries occupies what was once a textile factory. Negociación Fabril de la Aurora was a company that once supplied manta, or

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 15/49

Free trade agreements resulted in a transformation of
the Mexican textile industry. When cotton imports
�looded the market, many textile plants like Negociación
Fabril de la Aurora were forced to close their doors.

Associated Press/Eduardo Verdugo

unbleached muslin, to all of Mexico.

Constructed in 1902 by an English company, the factory was equipped
with cylinders, spindles, and looms to process the bales of raw cotton
from the central part of Mexico and from Sinaloa and Sonora states.
The raw �iber was cleaned, ginned, carded, and spun into yarn or
thread and �inally woven into manta. The Aurora manta was of high
quality and used to make indigenous clothing and home linens. By the
1970s, production included heavy canvas used for making tennis
shoes.

In the mid-1950s, most of the English machinery was replaced with
later models from Germany and Switzerland. Until the time of its
closing, La Aurora was the largest employer in San Miguel de Allende
with a work force of over 300 and an integral part of the daily lives of
its workers and the community. It sponsored soccer and baseball
teams, held picnics for families on Sundays with a live band on the grounds, and even arranged an altar inside the factory for a
local priest to deliver Mass.

“Free trade agreements brought many changes to the Mexican textile industry and La Aurora was not an
exception. Cotton imports began �looding the market and domestic production was greatly affected. As a
result, the steam-generated whistle which signaled the start and �inish of each shift and was a notable sound
in San Miguel for almost 90 years blew for the last time on March 11, 1991.” (Fabrica La Aurora, para. 7)

Source: Fabrica La Aurora. History of Negociación Fabril de La Aurora (1902–1991), framed at the entrance to La Aurora,
photographed on March 26, 2011.

Discussion Questions

1. Can a company today survive in its domestic market by remaining entirely domestic? How would you rank order the
threats it faces from nondomestic companies?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 16/49

2. How can a company determine where else in the world its products might be in demand and how tough the competition
might be in those markets?

3. Name some of the most global businesses in the world. What do they produce, and how did they get to be so big and
expansive?

4. In the case of La Aurora, the company appeared to have been suddenly overwhelmed by events that led to its demise.
Could it have foreseen any of these events? If so, what might it have done to counter them?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 17/49

While most industries have regulations in place, corruption
and con�licts of interest still exist in U.S. businesses.

Comstock/Thinkstock

1.4 The Inexorable Pace of Change

The world today is changing at an ever-faster pace compared even to a few years or a decade ago. Given the rate of change, it’s easy to get lost
in just how far technology has advanced in such a short time. For instance, Facebook didn’t exist until 2004, YouTube until 2005, and the
iPhone, which has gone through numerous updates, wasn’t unveiled until 2007. Kodak, for decades the producer of the most popular
photographic �ilm in the world, stopped marketing �ilm cameras in January 2004 in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. By 2007 it
neither manufactured nor licensed any �ilm camera with the Kodak name. The world had truly gone digital. In early 2012, this company,
which had been a prominent entry in the Fortune 500 list since that ranking �irst appeared, was facing bankruptcy.

It is easy to observe how rapidly technologies are advancing and the products
they spawn are being developed. High-tech industries in which such rapid
changes are occurring and where changes in market share are temporary are
termed hypercompetitive. Profound changes are occurring all the time in
other areas as well. The political maps of Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and
Africa have all changed radically over the past 20 years. The so-called Arab
Spring of 2011 saw popular uprisings overthrow autocratic regimes in
Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya that had brutally oppressed their citizens for
decades. Many observers and participants cite the use of Twitter and
Facebook, tools that did not exist even �ive years before, with facilitating the
wave of revolutions. Political upheavals, even in distant parts of the world, can
bring both threats such as the disruption of oil supplies and the rise in the
price of gasoline in all countries, and opportunities like the opening of new
markets and sources of materials. Businesses must be attentive to seemingly
unrelated events happening in faraway places.

Many legislative and regulatory changes affect business. Building codes get updated so that buildings might withstand earthquakes or
hurricanes. Environmental safety regulations mandate reduction in non-biodegradable plastics, new limits on air and water pollution, and
promote an increase in recycling. The pace of such change is increasing.

Ethical behaviors by both individuals and businesses are also changing, but perhaps in the wrong direction. It appears that corruption,
bribery and kickbacks, con�licts of interest, and greed are rampant in the United States and, regrettably, becoming more like the norm than

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 18/49

the exception (Fisman, 2009). It has infected politics at every level, the highest echelons of business, and industries like pharmaceuticals, real-
estate development, health care insurance, and banking and �inancial services. People are far more motivated now by money (gained legally
or covertly) than what’s good for the company, the public good, or other people. This trend, unsettling as it is, has profound implications as to
how companies are run and even how they compete.

Discussion Questions

1. Discuss elements in your own life that have changed faster than you would have imagined. How did the changes happen?
2. What things can or do you buy now that did not exist �ive years ago? Three years ago?
3. What are some things that will become available in the next 3–5 years that are not now available? What do companies have
to do to make them happen (besides, of course, having the necessary technology)?

4. How can a company’s strategic-planning process take into account very rapid changes in its environment?
5. In which areas do you think the most profound and rapid changes are occurring? Why?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 19/49

A company does not know its true worth or market value until
it is bought.

Daniel Haller/iStockphoto/ThinkStock

1.5 What Is “Success”?

Most companies have one or more purposes they are trying to achieve, even though their purpose may never be expressed in writing or
conveyed to the employees. These purposes can be construed to represent what the companies consider “being successful.”

The most common purposes are to survive, to increase shareholder value, and to make a pro�it. Surviving means enduring. While survival
cannot be measured, it is at the back of all executives’ minds, simply because many companies don’t survive.

Shareholder Value

Shareholder value is a computed value based on a company’s projected cash
�lows for the next 10 years, discounted to the present time using discounted-
cash-�low (DCF) analysis and an appropriate discount rate. From that
computed value is subtracted all current debt. If computed exactly the same
way, even using different discount rates over time, one can keep track of
shareholder value and use it as a criterion in decision making and investing
(Rappaport, 1997).

Michael Raynor, who came to prominence for his contribution to the idea of
disruptive innovation, believes that companies should adopt as their main
purpose survival rather than shareholder value (Raynor, 2009). His thesis
questions the choice of shareholder as the most important stakeholder
because they are “owners” of the corporation and therefore deserve to have
their investment maximized. Instead, as he says, “A stock certi�icate is a
particular sort of claim on corporate wealth . . . not a deed of ownership”
(Raynor, 2009, p. 5 ). More accurately, as suppliers of capital to the
corporation, stockholders deserve to be paid enough to keep them investing, just as employees deserve enough payment to keep them
motivated. Rather than maximizing stockholders’ returns at the expense of returns to other stakeholders, Raynor advocates being fair to all
suppliers of inputs at a level that guarantees their continuation to ensure the corporation’s survival.

Net Worth

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 20/49

Calculating the net worth or value of a privately held company is more dif�icult but becomes necessary if a company wants to be acquired or if
it wants to issue shares to investors. What is typically done is that a valuation consultant is engaged and uses several (usually 3–5) valuation
methods, eventually taking an average. Not until a company is actually bought is its true worth or market value established. Market value is
distinct from book value, which is what is re�lected on the company’s balance sheet and takes into account its depreciated and amortized
assets, inventory, and goodwill. Market value represents the value an asset might fetch if sold on the open market. For example, a customer
list (part of goodwill) has one value to an accountant and perhaps far more value to an acquirer.

Pro�it

Pro�it is a popular reason why companies stay in business, but, as said in various ways in the �inancial sector, “Cash is fact, pro�it is opinion.”
Certainly, it’s complicated. In the sense used here, we mean net pro�it after taxes (NIAT) or “the bottom line.” It is what is left after all
allowable expenses have been deducted over a speci�ied period. There are other kinds of pro�it: gross pro�it; operating pro�it; earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA); earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT); and net income before taxes (NIBT). Just
look at any income statement.

NIAT is an accounting artifact, approved by the American Institute of Certi�ied Public Accountants (AICPA) and conforming to widely accepted
accounting rules called GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). The �inal value depends on depreciation and amortization of assets
on arti�icial schedules created by accountants. Some equipment, for example, may be fully depreciated, having zero value, yet continue to be
used for years.

As if to support the previous point, a company can spend cash but not pro�its. Nor can it spend retained earnings, which is a balance-sheet
account that accumulates pro�its or losses from previous years. It can spend only cash. At some point, pro�its show up as operating cash, loans
are an in�lux of cash, investment gains result in cash, and even selling stock results in cash in�low. So it’s cash that is king, not pro�its. Having
said that, NIAT is so pervasively used in business as an indicator of success that companies continue to use it widely.

Highly related to NIAT are several �inancial ratios that use NIAT, like net pro�it margin (NPM), which is NIAT divided by revenues, and
return on equity (ROE), which is NIAT divided by total stockholders’ equity. NPM is a measure of a �irm’s pro�itability relative to its
revenues, and ROE is a proxy for the net pro�its that are, in a sense, generated by stockholders’ investment in the company.

Market Share

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 21/49

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Another measure of success is market share. Every company wants to be the market leader, but only one can be. What is not so obvious,
especially to companies that publicly avow to increase market share, is that to do so, their revenues have to grow faster than total industry
revenues. They will maintain their market share if they grow as fast as the industry, and actually lose market share if their growth lags behind
the industry’s.

Some years ago, a graduate student prepared a report on the company he worked for, a defense-aerospace contractor in Los Angeles. He was
tired of hearing the CEO constantly telling everyone he wanted the company to gain market share. His study revealed that the company would
have had to invest about $1.5 billion over the next three years to do so, and simply did not have that amount of money, either in cash or
borrowed funds, to invest. When he showed his results to the CEO, the CEO changed his tune about wanting to gain market share.

Often, market share cannot be measured, whether because there are simply too many competitors or because many competitors are privately
held. In addition, it may not be possible to know how fast the industry’s total sales are growing against which a company could compare its
own rate of revenue growth. In these circumstances, market share is not a good indicator of success. A closely related indicator is the
company’s own revenue growth, which can be measured.

Another indicator of success is whether the company has a core competence, a capability that gives it a strategic or competitive advantage
over its competitors. This will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

Brand Equity

Having a strong reputation, strong brand, or strong brand equity are also
indicators of competitive success. These signify a successful differentiation
strategy and, more than likely, a sizable market share, strong revenue growth,
and healthy pro�its. A company is doing well on this criterion when customers
buy its product because its brand is the primary reason for their purchase
decision. Many people when they are thirsty go for a Coke, because Coca-Cola
has such a strong brand and they have developed a habit of buying that brand.
McDonald’s has a similar grip on many people wanting a quick hamburger. In
the auto industry, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, Lexus, Volvo, Toyota, and Honda
all conjure up speci�ic brands—a unique set of promises—that attract loyal
customers. They have strong brands and meet the needs of people who buy
their cars.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 22/49

Nordstrom’s excellent customer service has become its core
competence and its brand. If employees do not maintain a high
level of customer service, the brand’s worth will decline.

Brand equity or brand strength refers to the power of a brand to in�luence
purchases and loyalty. Brands and reputations can increase, remain the same,
or erode over time if efforts to maintain them aren’t made. The main reasons
for brand erosion are competitors duplicating the quality of a brand so that it

is no longer unique or a company failing to perform in ways that the brand promises. Nordstrom’s department store offers an illustration of a
successful differentiation strategy. More than the strategy, Nordstrom’s legendary customer service has become its core competence and its
brand. However, if other department stores provided similar outstanding service or Nordstrom’s own employees failed to live up to the
company’s reputation, its brand equity could begin to decline. People would then stop shopping there because its brand had eroded, thereby
adversely affecting its performance on other measures like revenues and pro�its

Discussion Questions

1. Imagine you are a country’s minister for health. What measures of success might you adopt in order to judge whether
health expenditures are being made wisely?

2. What measures might you look at personally to assess how happy you are?
3. Imagine you have just graduated and are in the job market. What criteria might you use to help you land the best job,
assuming you got more than one offer?

4. It is widely held that it is enough for a �irm to be pro�itable. Is it? What other measures might you consider using to help
ensure that the company would still be in business �ive years from now?

5. Imagine you are on the verge of retiring. Looking back on your career, how would you gauge how successful it was?
6. Imagine you have only a few days to live. What criteria would you use to indicate to yourself how good a life you have
lived?

7. How might you tell that your company is the technological leader in its industry?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 23/49

1.6 What Is Strategy?

Strategy is how a company actually competes (Abraham, 2006). This simple de�inition is not only true but also effective because it tacitly
recognizes that companies could have a bad or ineffective strategy and hence not be able to compete well. Typical de�initions of strategy are,
in fact, de�initions of a good or ideal strategy (see Appendix A for 77 such de�initions). While these are commonly accepted terms, there is no
agreement on a single de�inition of good or ideal strategy. In this section the most common strategies are introduced, grouped for
convenience into seven categories: concentration strategies, product-development strategies, market-development strategies, conglomerate-
diversi�ication strategies, innovation strategies, technology strategies, and generic strategies

Concentration Strategies

A concentration strategy is some combination of producing an existing, improved, or new product or service for an existing, expanded, or
new market. It’s useful to think of them as being one of the following types.

Product-Development Strategies

Product-development strategies entail continuing to produce an existing product or service, improving them over time, and introducing
new ones, all for the same market. The best examples are the auto companies that bring out improved versions of every model every year
and, usually every four years, redesign every model. They periodically also introduce completely new models, like Honda’s Element, Toyota’s
Scion line, and Nissan’s Leaf. Likewise, software companies bring out successively improved versions of their product by labeling them
Version 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 3.0, and so on. Microsoft has introduced successive versions of its ubiquitous Windows operating system, from 1.0
through the famous XP and the infamous Vista to the current Windows 7, a remarkable feat of constant improvement.

Market-Development Strategies

Market-development strategies involve penetrating an existing market, expanding into related markets, or �inding new markets for the
existing products or services a company produces. A jeans manufacturer targeting young men could target older men or children. Banks
expand their presence by opening of�ices in supermarkets. If a company does business in only one state, expanding to other states and
eventually nationally is �inding new markets, as is a domestic company expanding internationally.

A combination of product- and market-development strategies is employed when expanding a market or �inding a new market requires
modifying the product. Examples of this are jeans for men having to be redesigned for women, or cars having to be modi�ied for countries

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 24/49

Innovation strategy is a product-development strategy that
requires research and development to focus on introducing
technologically advanced processes or products.

JupiterImages/Creatas/Thinkstock

where drivers drive on the other side of the road. Sometimes modifying a
product is the only way of expanding the market. Increasing a car’s
performance to appeal to younger male buyers, adjusting its size and
�lexibility to appeal to families, expanding its range of colors to appeal to
women buyers, or adding luxury features and status to attract higher-income
and older people all illustrate this approach. Most concentration strategies fall
into this category.

Conglomerate-Diversi�ication Strategy

A conglomerate-diversi�ication strategy is one in which a company
introduces a brand new product or service for a new market. In business, this
is rare because of the high risk, and few if any companies use it. If a company
really wants to do this, it would instead purchase another company in the
industry it wants to enter, which would drastically reduces its risk.

Innovation and Technology Strategies

Innovation strategy is a product-development strategy that deserves discussion on its own. Innovation strategy requires research and
development (R&D) and focuses on introducing technologically advanced products or processes. The “R” of R&D involves both basic and
applied research. Basic research focuses on discovering new things and processes unimagined before and is very costly with uncertain
outcomes. Applied research takes existing knowledge and concentrates on commercializing it. The “D” of R&D is highly applied and focuses
on improving existing products.

Figure 1.3 shows the basic types of innovation strategy, varying from short-term, relatively inexpensive, and low-risk in the bottom-right
corner of the �igure to long-term, requiring considerable investment, and high-risk in the top left. As the degree of change increases along
either dimension, the likelihood that the project will require more time and resources also increases. The ideal situation for a company
pursuing an innovation strategy is to have a balanced portfolio including projects ready without much investment in the near term, some
requiring more investment and time ready in the medium term, and some more risky, long-term projects requiring more research and
advanced development.

Figure 1.3: Degrees of innovation strategy

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 25/49

From Robert A. Burgelman, Modesto A. Maidique, and Steven C. Wheelwright, Strategic Management of
Technology and Innovation, 2nd edition, p. 661. Copyright © 1996 McGraw Hill/Irwin. Reprinted with

permission.

Technology strategy, another facet of an innovation strategy, instead focuses on developing new or improving existing technologies and
becomes the domain of companies whose products or whose very existence depends on winning the technological race. Technology refers to
both abstract and concrete tools—such as knowledge, skills, and artifacts—that can be used to create, produce, and deliver products.

Generic Strategies

Michael Porter (1985) discovered in his research that a lack of a competitive advantage was the reason companies generated below-industry-
average pro�its. He proposed that the way to obtaining a competitive advantage was through one of three generic strategies, so called
because they applied to any industry. Those generic strategies are differentiation, low-cost leadership, and focus.

Differentiation

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 26/49

A differentiation strategy involves developing a product that is unique from or superior to the product offered by the competition. There are
myriad ways of doing this as was discussed when differentiation was introduced (Section 1.2). The dif�iculty of competing in this way is that
customers must perceive the product as being differentiated. It does not matter how differentiated you think your product is, if customers
don’t perceive it, they won’t buy your product. An attraction of this strategy is that if your product is differentiated, you can charge more for it
because customers will be willing to pay more. When companies “play a different game” and leave competitors behind, they take
differentiation to a new level.

One special case of differentiation is a blue-ocean strategy, which is a way of competing that requires �inding a market that is not being
served at all. In other words, identifying a market where you are the only provider and have no competitors. Such a market space is called a
blue ocean. The name comes from an analogy where a “red ocean” represents a bloody shark-feeding frenzy all going after some prey,
meaning there is too much competition. A blue ocean, on the other hand, is free of any predator except you—no competition, no blood.

Having a strong brand is another form of differentiation but is singled out because the basis of the differentiation is reputation. Companies
with strong brands have strong reputations and are highly differentiated from each other. The reputation is built over time and represents the
degree to which a company has met or exceeded its promises to customers. The more a company delivers on or exceeds its promises, the
stronger will be its reputation. In turn, more people will have con�idence buying from the company. For example, if a company promises great
customer service and consistently treats every customer like a VIP, it will become known for customer service—just as with Nordstrom’s
department stores—and people will shop there because of that great customer service. Reputations and brands can, if a company is not
careful, erode with time, either because a company is not so assiduous doing what it promised or because competitors are successfully
imitating it. If all department stores improved their customer service to the level of Nordstrom’s, would customers still make a point of
shopping there? Curiously, though it isn’t rocket science, no other department store has been able to match Nordstrom’s customer service for
a long time and diminish its brand.

Low-Cost Leadership

A low-cost leadership strategy is completely invisible; neither competitors nor customers know what a company’s costs are. Yet, if a price
war were ever started, the company with the lowest costs in the industry would be the one standing at the end. This strategy isn’t about just
reducing costs but rather reducing them to be the lowest in the industry. Thus, through subtle and not-so-subtle signals that are put out to
other industry players, a company can tell its competitors, “Don’t mess with me, because I have the lowest costs.” This is one reason that
makes Walmart the most formidable of competitors.

Focus

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 27/49

A specialization or focus strategy targets a very small market (often called a niche) and, in so doing, reduces greatly the number of
competitors in the arena. Big competitors won’t be interested in a niche market with a relatively few customers. For example, instead of
being a publisher or even a textbook publisher, be a medical-textbook publisher with only medical students as customers. You will have a
chance to dominate the niche as not many other publishers will want to specialize in that niche and even charge enough to cover higher unit
costs because of the lower volume.

Strategic Alliances

Strategic alliances are basically agreements between two companies, ranging from simple contracts (minimal integration and collaboration)
to joint ventures and minority ownership (heavy integration and collaboration), but where each company remains separate. Figure 1.4 shows
various kinds of strategic alliances and where along the spectrum they lie. The following discussion elaborates on the �igure beginning at the
left-hand end.

Outsourcing and Simple Contracts

Into this category fall simple purchase agreements for products or services, like engaging consultants that often spell out terms such as
deliverables and payments. Companies need protection in case products delivered are faulty, services are unsatisfactory, or even payment is
late or not paid. Agreements take care of these eventualities.

Licensing

Companies that own a patent or desirable trademark make extra money through licensing use of it to other companies. In this way, they
control use of that asset, how much they are compensated, and the extent to which their brand is strengthened. Harley-Davidson, the global
motorcycle manufacturer, licenses its name and logo on clothing, mugs, and telephones, while Disney makes a fortune licensing use of its
proprietary characters such as Superman, Spiderman, and Mickey Mouse on all kinds of products made by others. Have you ever wondered
why clothing and caps from your alma mater are so expensive? About half the price goes toward the university itself as a licensing fee.

Licensing works both ways. Not only do owners of patents and trademarks bene�it but companies on the other end are happy to pay the
licensing fees and royalties for using someone else’s intellectual property since they are spared the years and expense of developing that
product themselves. For example, just about every company in the world making inkjet printers licenses the basic technology from Canon.

Shared Resources and Competences

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 28/49

Companies may share the cost of R&D to develop technologies that require large amounts of capital and risk. A consortium of semiconductor
manufacturers did this in the 1980s and ’90s when they created Sematech. Companies may negotiate exclusive cross-distribution agreements
whereby two companies in different countries agree to market each other’s products in their own country. Joint R&D projects between
companies and universities for the bene�it of both is becoming increasingly common. Sharing resources is common in the auto industry—
Ford, for example, had Mazda develop a new transmission for the Ford Probe when the two companies decided that Mazda’s transmission
was better than Ford’s.

Partial Acquisitions (50%)

Sometimes small, high-tech startup companies come up with new technologies and products that revolutionize industries or take them by
storm. They desperately need capital for additional R&D or to take the product to market. Some entrepreneurs feel that venture capitalists
often take too large a chunk of equity for the capital they provide, earning the nickname “vulture capitalists.” An alternate source of capital
can be large companies looking for new ideas and technologies that would bene�it them. In fact, many have “venture divisions” for just that
purpose—to �ind and invest in promising new companies and technologies. To be sure, they want an equity stake, but the equity demands are
typically more reasonable since they are more interested in �irst rights to the technology when it is developed, giving them a competitive
advantage. These investments typically result in 10–30% equity stakes in these companies in exchange for investments of $1–10 million. Such
investor companies also may acquire a controlling interest in the small company later for an additional investment.

Joint Ventures

Whereas two companies forming a strategic alliance still remain separate entities, forming a joint venture (JV) requires the formation of a
new corporate entity jointly owned by the two companies. An apt analogy often used in the literature is two parents giving birth to a child.
The JV is governed by a detailed and encompassing agreement that speci�ies what each parent will contribute to the child, how much of the
risk each parent incurs and the percentage of pro�it each is due, how long the agreement will endure, under what circumstances the
agreement can be terminated, and how the remaining assets are distributed. Initial contributions take the form of capital, management,
technology and patents, facilities, and so on. Research has shown that JVs tend to be more successful when the management team comes from
one parent—usually the dominant one—rather than both parents, especially in international JVs (Killing, 1983).

In the 1950s, Fujitsu and TRW formed a JV called TRW-Fujitsu, based in Los Angeles, for the express purpose of marketing Fujitsu products in
the United States. Fujitsu contributed technology, products, and capital, while TRW contributed management and staff, facilities, and capital.
Ultimately, it was terminated a few years later because sales did not meet expectations.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 29/49

When British Airways merged with Spanish air carrier Iberia,
they were adopting a strategy that would make them more
competitive in the marketplace.

Associated Press/Ian Nicholson/PA Wire

Acquisitions and Mergers

An acquisition strategy is one in which a company buys another to take full
control of it. It may purchase anywhere from a majority 51% stake to an
outright 100% ownership. “Full control” means that the acquirer makes all
subsequent decisions, and its board of directors and management survive
intact; the acquired companies do not. However, if it is doing well, it may make
sense to retain the full management of the acquired company and simply
invest in it so that it can grow and do even better. Acquisitions are paid for
with cash, a combination of cash and debt and stock, or entirely with stock. In
an all-stock acquisition, shares of stock in the acquired company would be
exchanged for a negotiated number in the combined company. In any
acquisition the �inal price and method of payment is, of course, negotiated by
both boards of directors.

The principal reason to acquire another company is because it �its with the
overall strategy, but other reasons are also common, such as for �inancial gain

or appreciation, to prevent a competitor from doing so. Acquisitions are often risky, because the value it was expected to add is seldom
realized. In many cases this happens because the acquirer overpaid. Additionally, problems can arise if the cultures of the acquired company
and the acquirer clash and key personnel in the acquired company leave (Ackatcherian, 2001).

Figure 1.4: Continuum of strategic alliances

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 30/49

From Stanley C. Abraham, Strategic Planning: A Practical Guide for Competitive Success, p. 32. Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Reprinted by
permission.

A merger strategy also combines two companies, but the combined entity makes joint decisions and literally merges its operations carefully
—some members of the board, senior management, and operational management stay on in the combined company. Often the CEO is from
one company and the president from the other. Mergers succeed only when the cultures of the two entities are similar and both parties feel
that merging would be in their mutual interest. In common usage the term merger is loosely used to refer to an acquisition, which is a very
different arrangement.

Diversi�ication

A diversi�ication strategy signals a move to enter another industry, which could be related to the industry it’s in or unrelated. It is often
misused when companies call the broadening or extending of their product line “diversi�ication.” There are two principal ways to enter
another industry or segment. The �irst approach is through internal R&D, as when, for example, a new technology or product has application
in another industry. A company that invented a �low meter to measure more accurately gas �low in an automobile was able to implement this
strategy when it learned that this same �low meter could, in a much smaller design, be used to measure blood �low in a human being.

The second route to diversi�ication is through acquisition, particularly in an industry in which no one in the company has any experience. The
idea is to not only become an instant player in that industry but also minimize the risk by having managers and employees already
experienced in that industry. The strategy works particularly well when a growth industry is targeted and all the company needs to grow and
succeed is capital. Mattel, Inc., the toy company, sought to diversify into the electronic segment of children’s games and acquired The Learning
Company for $3.6 billion, badly overpaying for it (Mattel, Inc., 2000).

Retrenchment and Divestiture

A retrenchment strategy is a conscious decision to become smaller. This could be a response to a declining industry or declining level of
funding such as some defense companies had to do when military budgets were slashed. In other situations a company will divest itself of
some assets by selling off a division or closing poorly performing stores. When revenues suddenly decline, companies have to trim expenses
and payroll accordingly to �it their new reality. Selling off a division or major assets is also called a divestiture strategy.

Continuing the Mattel story, after paying too much for The Learning Company, it ran into �inancial trouble. Instead of increasing pro�its by $50
million the next year, it subsequently incurred $300 million in losses and resulted in $7 billion lopped off the company’s valuation—a 61%

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 31/49

plunge in its stock price, costing CEO Jill Barad her job. The new CEO immediately divested The Learning Company for a fraction of its
purchase price (many said “given away”) in October 2000 (Mattel, Inc., 2000).

Being acquired, or selling the company, is a special case of a divestiture strategy where the whole company is divested, that is, sold to
another company or person. It is the opposite of an acquisition strategy. Are there circumstances when any company would actually want to
do this? The answer is Yes. Selling a company represents a change in ownership, but in most cases the company continues to exist. In some
cases, however, it does get “folded into” the acquiring company and for all intents and purposes disappears. The reasons for selling a company
may include an owner wanting to cash out and retire or receiving an offer that is simply too good to pass up. Alternatively, a company might
be doing so poorly that the only strategy left is to sell it–but this should be a last resort, as it would get only cents on the dollar in this
scenario.

Discussion Questions

1. What are the risks of forming a strategic alliance with a foreign company? Consider things like selling through a distributor
based in a particular country, outsourcing to a factory in a particular country, a cross-distribution alliance, and so forth.

2. What strategies might you consider using against established competitors with low costs and signi�icant market share?
Which of these might be best and why?

3. Imagine a �irm 100% owned by a family whose wealth derives entirely from the �irm’s operations. The family has so far
refused requests to go public or sell any equity position to outside investors. Would such a �irm be likely to continue its
current successful ways, pursue a related-diversi�ication strategy, or pursue an unrelated-diversi�ication strategy?

4. In 1984, General Motors (GM) and Toyota created and operated a joint venture (JV) in California called NUMMI—New
United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.—to produce vehicles that would be sold by both companies. In June 2009 GM withdrew
from the venture, and in March 2010, Toyota transferred the remaining production to its other plants. In forming the JV,
GM was interested in learning how to manufacture high-quality small cars from Toyota, and Toyota was interested in
gaining access to GM’s U.S. distribution network and in reducing the political liability associated with local content laws.
Which of the two �irms, in your opinion, might have derived most bene�it from the JV while it lasted? Why?

5. Strategic alliances are often thought of as a way of getting help to compete instead of going it alone. In what ways might
one be better than the other?

6. A recent newspaper article about Apple, Inc., said, in part: “The company . . . is increasingly evolving from a computer
maker into a multi-product international powerhouse and a major force in the entertainment and publishing industries”
(Puzzanghera & Sarno, 2011). How do you think it could have transformed itself in such a short time? In other words, what
strategies do you think it used—either simultaneously or not—in the process?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 32/49

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 33/49

In some companies, only the CEO does strategic planning.
Others use a selected top-management team to implement the
plan to lower management.

Flirt/Superstock

1.7 The Strategic-Planning Process and Strategic Decision Making

First and foremost, strategic planning is a process. A company collectively tries to agree on where it is going (its vision) and how it’s going to
get there (its strategy). Those are the two principal purposes of strategic planning. Other valid purposes include achieving “success” as the
company de�ines it, such as increasing its shareholder value, market share, or long-term pro�itability. Yet another purpose could be to develop
a core competence and sustainable competitive advantage. Consequently, identifying the purpose or purposes to be achieved is an integral
part of the process. How and whether those purposes are achieved in reality is the job of the strategy (and management in implementing it).
So choosing the right strategy is crucial. This is another answer to the question, “Why have a strategy?” It also answers the question, “Why
engage in strategic planning?”

Participants in Strategic Planning

A critical dimension of strategic planning is who gets to participate in the
process. In a few companies, only the CEO participates with the mindset that
whatever he or she says goes. In others, the top-management team
participates, which is better, and then relays what has been decided to lower
management levels and employees in general. In still others, the participants
include those who will help implement the plan, that is, middle managers and
key other people in addition to top management. This last inclusive approach
is the best. Section 8.6 outlines a suggested strategic-planning process and
elaborates on the importance of involving the right people in the process.

Because the outcomes of strategic planning are so dependent on who
participates, the particular process used, and the information on which
decisions are based, it is clear that doing strategic planning remains very
much an art. It is a highly creative yet disciplined process that draws on the
individuals’ and group’s intuition, experience, know-how, and powers of
persuasion.

While the strategic-planning process is relatively straightforward, actually doing it is much more dif�icult for a number of reasons. People
seldom agree on where the company stands right now and how it is performing, whether because they have a limited perspective, don’t have

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 34/49

access to the same data, or have personal or hidden agendas. Sometimes politics gets in the way of candor and truth. The information that the
company and its people possess, for example on customers and competitors, may be incomplete, dated, inaccurate, or irrelevant, while the
information they most need is often unavailable. Lastly, the planning horizon is typically three to �ive years in the future, a future that is
unknown, ambiguous, and changing before our very eyes.

Strategic Decisions

Besides deciding on a vision and the best strategy for achieving it, strategic planning is often used to make other strategic decisions. Strategic
decisions differ from operational or tactical decisions primarily in that their complexity and consequences are more consequential for the
organization. For this reason strategic decisions tend to get made only after appreciable analysis, discussion, and debate, and typically involve
a number of people in the decision. Examples of strategic decisions include selecting a strategy, deciding which company to acquire or merge
with, choosing which technology to adopt, deciding whether to form a strategic alliance and with whom, to franchise rather than expand with
owned facilities, which new CEO to hire, whether to sell the business, whether to enter another industry or segment.

Operational decisions are not made during the strategic-planning process, but subsequent to it. The reason is that operational decisions and
plans �low from the strategic decisions made, and so the latter must precede the former. Operational decisions are made when doing
operational planning (discussed in Chapter 7) and involve deciding what has to be done (programs, activities, tasks, projects), who will do it,
who is accountable, what amount of budget is allocated, and a deadline for completing it. Examples of operational decisions include
upgrading the accounting system, installing a new production process, changing an advertising campaign, offering discounts or other
promotional incentives, lobbying for tariffs, hiring anyone other than the CEO, reducing costs, �inancing a particular initiative, investing
surplus cash, and so on.

Discussion Questions

1. Some corporations, like manufacturers of aircraft and nuclear plants, have to look 20–30 years into the future when
making decisions. How might strategic planning be different for them with such long planning horizons? What other
information or analysis might they require to help them make more robust decisions?

2. We know that operational decisions �low from strategic decisions, and must be made subsequently. Are they less
important? Why or why not?

3. Managers who are used to making and following operational and tactical decisions are often promoted to VP or C-level
executive positions. Explain what dif�iculties they might encounter as they transition from making operational decisions to
making strategic ones.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 35/49

4. The CEO of a small company has been making all the decisions for the past 20 years, and the company is doing well. What
can you say about the manager’s decision making? On the face of it, one might conclude that no strategic planning is taking
place. Would you agree?

5. Why is hiring a CEO a strategic decision but hiring anyone else isn’t? Hiring what other position might be strategic and
under what conditions?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 36/49

1.8 About Business Models

Business models are different from strategies, but in some people’s eyes the distinction is �ine. Earlier, we de�ined strategy as “how a company
actually competes.” A business model describes the way in which a �irm does what it does to deliver customer value (Abraham, 2006, pp. 10–
11). For example, a hospital’s strategy would be concentration (both market and product development) and possibly acquisition. Its business
model should answer some basic questions:

How to get people to come to the hospital for services? Will it attract patients by delivering high quality services, offering low prices to
insurance companies, training courteous staff, promoting wellness, etc.?
How to make money? Will it control costs by streamlining processes and removing wasteful steps, seeking volume discounts from
suppliers, selling more wellness products, etc.?
How to grow? Will it produce growth by expanding services that can be ef�iciently served by existing facilities, acquiring physician
practices, etc.?

Three well-known instances of companies transforming an industry by successfully using a different business model are Dell, Inc.,
Progressive Insurance, and Net�lix. These examples will illustrate why business models are important and how they can be so easily confused
with strategy.

Prior to Dell’s 1985 debut, businesses buying computers for their employees
relied on a system in which they purchased a large number of identical
computers at a generous discount. Dell provided a fresh option to
corporations, in which employees could personalize their computer orders at
the same low price point. Because employees such as engineers, accountants,
and sales staff all used computers in different ways, this provided the option
to purchase a computer based on speci�ic features and functionality. Dell
pioneered this “con�igure to order” style of manufacturing by using a JIT
assembly process, in which standard components are used to create custom
products. In the �irst year alone, Dell made more than $73 million. The JIT
process minimized its inventory costs, another critical part of its business
model in an industry where components depreciate very rapidly (Fortune
500, n.d.). Although Dell did not radically change the way that computers are

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 37/49

Reed Hastings got tired of video rental late fees and
established Net�lix. With this new business model, customers
would receive their movies in the mail and there would never
be a late fee.

Associated Press/Paul Sakuma

McDonalds is leading the pack in innovation execution. It’s all
about the ability to personalize its products in the global
marketplace. The company keeps its brand individual while local
markets are given latitude to appeal to their speci�ic customers.

McDonalds: Decentralization of Business Model

produced, the way it sold computers—its business model—was vastly
different from industry competitors.

During the 1980s the state of California required rollbacks in auto-insurance
premiums and the process of utilizing auto -insurance was complicated and

tedious. A company called Progressive Insurance created a new policy in the 1990s to make the process more bene�icial to its customers.
Instead of taking weeks to process insurance claims, Progressive began settling them immediately, often before competitors were even aware
there had been an accident. In quoting rates to customers, it quoted competitors’ rates as well, even if they were lower. Also, it based its rates
more on where and when a car was driven rather than on age, a driver’s record, and other established criteria. The result was that it grew six
times faster than the industry and achieved a net pro�it margin of 8% compared to the underwriting losses experienced by its competitors at
the time (Abraham & Knight, 2001). Although Progressive Insurance, like its competitors, provided auto insurance for drivers, the way it did it
—its business model—was radically different.

For years, Blockbuster dominated the video rental industry, possessing
over 9,000 stores in 2002 (over 5,000 in the United States) and boasting
$6.1 billion in sales (Blockbuster Inc., 2005). No true competition
existed. Reed Hastings was a Blockbuster customer who had formerly
been successful in selling his own software company for $750 million.
After becoming frustrated with the late fees Blockbuster charged,
Hastings decided to start his own company: Net�lix. He envisioned
renting movies using proprietary Cinematch software, whereby
customers could save money by renting online, avoid late fees, and
receive access to reviews and recommendations—all services that
Blockbuster did not offer.

Customers could go to the Net�lix website, choose from several
subscription plans, and have access to its library of movies, which he
kept expanding every month by making deals with producers. Net�lix’s
business model also included a mail service, whereby each DVD sent to
the customer included a built-in return envelope. Using a large set of
distribution centers, movies were delivered quickly, often by the “next

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 38/49

McDonalds: Decentralization of Business Model
From Title: The Execution Plan (https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?

wID=100753&xtid=39954)

business day.” By 2003, the popular company soon had over 3 million
subscribers. Today, customers now have the option of streaming movies
directly to their computer or TV.

As with Dell and Progressive Insurance, even though Net�lix was
ultimately providing the same service—movie rentals—as its
competitors, it did so using a brand new business model. Despite
Blockbuster’s eventual efforts to copy Net�lix, it was unable to do so and
ultimately �iled for bankruptcy in September 2010. In April 2011, it was
auctioned to Dish Network for $320 million (Fritz, 2011).

Discussion Questions

1. What is the business model for a typical university? And for the university you are currently taking this course from? Does
such a business model have anything to do with strategy?

2. If you are currently working for a company—even a branch or division of it—try to articulate its business model. If you
found this exercise dif�icult to do, why do you think it was dif�icult?

https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=100753&xtid=39954

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 39/49

Stakeholders are groups or individuals who can effect and be
affected by the organization’s performance. Shareholders are
the largest of these groups.

Jürgen Schwarz/Getty images

1.9 Importance of Stakeholders

Stakeholders are “the individuals and groups who can affect, and are affected by, the strategic outcomes achieved by and who have
enforceable claims on a �irm’s performance” (Hitt, Ireland, & Hoskisson, 2007, p. 21)—stated somewhat more simply, those to whom a
company owes any duty or obligation. Several groups of people or companies can be de�ined as stakeholders, including investors in the
corporation, creditors, employees, customers, host communities, and even the environment. While the role of each body may differ in its
involvement, each is nonetheless a participant and/or has a stake in the company and its welfare.

Investors

Investors in the corporation, called stockholders or shareholders, are the
stakeholders that �irst come to most people’s minds. Investors have taken a
risk by investing in the company and expect to be appropriately rewarded.
Rewards come in two forms: stock appreciation and dividends. It is
conventional wisdom that unless companies provide such returns, investors
will withdraw their money and invest elsewhere; that is, they will sell their
stock in the company and �ind a more lucrative investment. Investors in
privately held companies are not called stockholders or shareholders, but
simply investors. In too many cases, however, top managements endeavor to
keep the stock price high, not so much to reward the �irm’s investors but
rather to line their own pockets, as a large portion of their compensation
comes in the form of stock.

Creditors

Creditors are another form of stakeholder. These are banks, other �inancial institutions, or individuals that loan the company money. If the
company does not repay its loans as agreed, it may �ind it dif�icult to continue getting new loans when it needs capital and could damage its
credit rating, thus raising the interest rate on future loans. Creditors also include anyone to whom the company owes money, for example, a
supplier that has sold goods to the company for which payment has not yet been made or employee wages that have not been paid.

Employees

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 40/49

As they are the ones providing the good or service, it goes without saying that employees are also one of the �irm’s most vital stakeholders. If
the business fails, investors lose just their investment and banks just their loans, but employees lose their jobs and put their families in
jeopardy. Companies vary greatly in how they treat their employees. At one end of the spectrum, employees are highly valued and sometimes
are co-owners of the company. Ocean Spray Cranberries and, at one time, United Airlines include employees in the ownership structure.
Companies invest in them, train them, and provide long-term bene�its. At the other end of the continuum, employees are treated as
commodities or objects, hired and let go at will, even being replaced by part-timers to “save” the cost of having real employees. In Mexican
maquiladoras, duty-free zones along the U.S.-Mexico border are low-cost-labor-manufacturing plants owned by U.S. and Japanese
companies. For every employee hired, another 10–20 wait to take their place. The incentive to give them opportunity, career paths, and even
stock in the company is zero. Likewise in China, some workers are forced to work in almost inhumane conditions around the clock until they
burn out. This is not considered a problem because, again, many others are ready to take their place. Cultures differ on this, but valuing the
employee stakeholder can have its own rewards.

Many companies believe, however, that they owe no duty to employees other than simply employing them. With this attitude, employees are
considered a “cost” and neither a resource nor stakeholder. Companies feel proud to outsource a lot of their operations for “cost-effective
reasons,” laying off employees without a second thought. They also try to automate their processes, particularly expanding the use of
information technology (IT) and justify the cost-effectiveness of the changes by laying off workers. A company that valued employee
stakeholders might be more likely to use IT to free up workers to do other valuable work for the company.

Customers

Customers are another body with a stake in the company, but are they really stakeholders? In truth, every company makes promises to its
customers, either explicit or implicit, that when they buy a product or service, it will perform as advertised, will not harm them, and will not
break down in the �irst few days or months. Companies that consider customers as stakeholders want them to believe that any product it sells
will keep or exceed its promises. Such companies have strong brand reputations. Other companies’ products break down often or harm
buyers and eventually cause customers to buy elsewhere; for such companies, customers are not stakeholders, but rather nothing more than
a source of revenues.

Other Stakeholders

Host communities, which are towns or cities where a company is based, are considered to have a stake in the company as well. While some
companies feel the most they owe to a host community is to provide employment, other companies take a more active role in the community.
Providing employment does indeed support many other businesses and services in the town, and many towns in turn exist because of a single

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 41/49

large employer. Company towns, although at �irst owned by their only employer, sometimes became regular public cities and towns as they
grew. Sometimes, a single corporation employs most of a town’s inhabitants, resulting in a physical and economic setting much like a
company town. Usually, company towns are detached from neighbors and centered around a manufacturing setting such as lumber or steel
mills or an automobile plant. Locals will typically work for the company or be related to those who do. When a company is unsuccessful or
fails, the �inancial toll on the town can be disastrous (Green, 2010). Beyond providing employment, a more active company might contribute
works of art for public display and sponsor many community and educational activities. Is this corporate social responsibility or valuing a
host community as a stakeholder? It doesn’t matter. What matters is that the environment in which employees live is valued as much as the
employees themselves. Generally speaking, a happy employee is more inclined to be productive at work and loyal to the company.

But things can turn ugly when a large corporation decides, for economic or competitive reasons, to close a factory in a small town where it is
the largest or even its only employer. Clearly, cost savings and pro�its dominate the decision. What happens to the employees that lose their
job and the other myriad small businesses that depend on them are rarely factored into the decision. These companies clearly do not consider
the host community a stakeholder.

Lastly, but important nonetheless, is the role of the environment as a stakeholder in a company. What duty do companies owe the
environment? In the past, the answer to that question would be, None. For years, companies’ factories would belch forth smoke and soot or
dump contaminants into running streams and rivers just because they could. In Mexico, pollution from maquiladoras continues unabated,
and exhaust from cars make Mexico City the most polluted city in the world (Energy Information Agency, n.d.). This is what economists call
“externalizing the costs of doing business.”

In the past, some workers were forced to work in hazardous environments without adequate protection, breathing in dangerous fumes for
hours and days on end, and contracting all manner of illnesses. If not for regulations that protect the general and workplace environments,
such practices would continue. Regulations are another way of saying, “Treat the environment as a stakeholder”; the public interest and the
future of our planet is worth protecting and trumps the private interests of one company. To comply with regulations, companies have to
build air–treatment systems that release only pure air into the environment, dispose of toxic byproducts of production in approved ways
instead of dumping them into the nearby river or sewer, and give employees protective masks to �ilter unhealthy fumes. These increase a
company’s cost of doing business and may even make it uncompetitive with foreign companies whose behavior is unregulated; but in this
country, it’s the law.

Recently, in an effort to slow climate change, companies are being required to “reduce their carbon footprint,” that is, to minimize or cease
emission of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide equivalent) into the atmosphere. Although there is no law as yet in the area of being eco-
friendly, many companies are “going green” not only because they believe in not wasting or degrading precious resources but also because it

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 42/49

has become a value embraced by their employees and even their customers. Thus, in many ways, the environment, thought of on many
different levels, is becoming an important stakeholder.

Discussion Questions

1. Who are the stakeholders in your life? Which of them are important, and which have you never thought about until now?
2. Who are the stakeholders in a politician’s life? Do you believe that the most important stakeholder—the voter—is often
ignored? Why might this be so? Which stakeholders are given most attention? Why?

3. Investment brokers, by their very nature, invest their clients’ money where they believe returns will be greatest given the
risk involved. Who are their stakeholders? Is it just the clients they serve? If not, are all of them equally served? If not, why
not?

4. Health-insurance companies have come under �ire recently for raising premiums of their subscribers by substantial
amounts. They are accused, especially by those whose premiums have been raised, of catering to only themselves and their
stockholders. Do they serve other stakeholders? If so, why aren’t they perceived as serving other stakeholders?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 43/49

Summary

Strategic management is a complex process that is fundamental to a company’s ongoing and future success. It includes both strategic
formulation (planning) and implementation. Successful companies use feedback from their planning and operations to improve the decisions
they make the next time around.

Strategic planning is the way of deciding what strategy the company should pursue in order to be more successful in the future. Some
companies, especially small companies or those run by a founder or autocratic CEO, typically don’t do strategic planning. In a changing world,
making decisions without good data, analysis, and the inputs of those who will have to implement the strategy is foolhardy. Strategic planning
is a structured and proven process for choosing the best strategy for a company to follow and making good strategic decisions. Without
competitors, a company wouldn’t need a strategy.

Competition is a capitalist society’s way for consumers to tell producers what they need and want to buy. A company and its competitors
comprise an industry and serve markets comprised of groups of customers. Markets are often confused with industries yet are very different:
the former buy products and services while the latter produce them.

Companies compete in many ways—on price, through differentiating by making it easier for customers to buy, or through partnering with
other companies. Competition has now become global; many foreign companies have the advantage of very low manufacturing costs and are
increasingly taking over the manufacturing function of domestic companies.

Strategic thinking is a fundamental driver of good strategic planning and decision making. Strategic thinking involves having as accurate a
perception as possible of a company’s external environment. The extraordinary pace of change is making the job of strategic thinking more
dif�icult and urgent. Doing strategic planning without strategic thinking leads to poor strategies and strategic decisions.

The outputs of strategic thinking, coupled with a candid assessment of the company itself and the resources at its disposal, form the basis for
arriving at strategic issues—the most pressing issues facing the company at that time—and what strategic alternatives (or alternative
futures) the company should consider before deciding on the strategies it should pursue over the next three or so years. It’s the logical
framework of a strategic analysis and of strategic planning for determining the best strategy a company should pursue.

The strategies that companies follow to compete effectively include concentration, innovation, differentiation, low–cost leadership, focus or
specialization, �inding a “blue ocean,” acquiring or merging with another company, forming strategic alliances, diversifying into another
industry or segment, retrenchment, and divesting.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 44/49

Although similar on the surface, strategies differ from business models; a strategy is how a company actually competes, whereas a business
model states how a company attracts customers, how it expects to make money, and how it will grow and includes its strategy.

“Success” means doing well on a set of performance–related measures and is different for every company. Success criteria include revenues,
NIAT, pro�it ratios, shareholder value, market share, developing a competitive advantage, brand value and, for some companies going through
hard times, their very survival.

A corporation owes some measure of duty to its stakeholders. These include stockholders and investors, creditors, employees, customers,
host communities, and the environment. Ideally, a corporation should ful�ill its duty to all its stakeholders; in practice this is rarely the case.
Employees, customers, host communities, and the environment are the stakeholders most likely to have their interests ignored.

Concept Check

Key Terms

acquisition strategy Involves buying another company to take full control of it (anywhere from a majority 51% stake to an outright 100%
ownership).

applied research Takes something already discovered and patented and �inds ways of commercializing it (part of the “R” in R&D).

basic research Focuses on discovering new things and processes unimagined before and is very costly with uncertain outcomes (part of the
“R” in R&D).

being acquired strategy A special case of a divestiture strategy where the whole company is divested (i.e., sold to another company or
person). It is the opposite of an acquisition strategy.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 45/49

blue ocean An unserved market. The name stems from an analogy where a “red ocean” represents a bloody shark–feeding frenzy all going
after some prey (too much competition), whereas a “blue ocean” is free of any predators except you—no competition, no blood.

blue–ocean strategy A strategy that involves �inding a market space that is not served at all, where the company is the only provider of a
product or service and has no competitors; such a market space is called a blue ocean.

book value The value of a company asset shown on its balance sheet (which might have been depreciated or amortized); this may differ from
what the same asset might fetch if sold on the open market (market value).

brand Represents a unique set of promises that a company warrants to its customers and that customers in turn expect from a company.
Carefully crafted, a brand is used to position a company in the consumer’s mind (safety, taste, performance, power, reliability, etc.). A strong
brand is an indication of a successful differentiation strategy.

brand equity Refers to the power of a brand to in�luence purchases and loyalty. It can increase, remain the same, or decline over time. The
main reasons for its erosion are competitors duplicating the quality of a brand so that it is no longer unique or a company failing to perform
in ways that the brand promises.

business model Describes the way in which a company does what it does to deliver customer value. It should describe how it gets customers,
how it will make money, and how it will grow.

concentration strategy Involves some combination of producing an existing, improved, or new product or service for an existing, expanded,
or new market. Includes an innovation strategy and a technology strategy (both geared toward new–product development).

conglomerate–diversi�ication strategy Producing a brand new product or service for a brand new market. A seldom–used form of a
concentration strategy.

core competence A capability that gives a company a strategic or competitive advantage over its competitors.

differentiation Developing a product that is unique from or superior to the product offered by the competition, and, as a consequence,
having a strong and distinctive brand, which enables companies to charge more for their products because, in the consumer’s mind, they are
offering something no one else is offering (one of Michael Porter’s three generic strategies).

differentiation strategy The development of a product that is unique from or superior to the product offered by the competition.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 46/49

diversi�ication strategy A strategy to enter another industry or segment, which could be related or unrelated to a company’s current
industry. Companies can do this through internal R&D or through acquisition of a company already in the new industry.

divestiture strategy A strategy to sell off a division or major assets of the �irm.

focus strategy Targets a very small market (often called a niche market) and, in so doing, avoids competing with large competitors that are
not interested in serving such a small market.

free market A market in which the state does not regulate or interfere with the economy, apart from overseeing property ownership and
private contracts.

generic strategies First introduced by Michael Porter in the early 1980s as ways for a company to achieve a competitive advantage and
above–industry–average pro�its. They are differentiation, low–cost leadership, and focus or niche strategies.

globalization Describes the process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through communication,
transportation, and trade. It is typically identi�ied as being propelled by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and
biological factors. The term can also refer to the transmission of ideas, languages, or popular culture across national boundaries. Any facet of
life that has undergone this process can be considered to be globalized.

hypercompetitive industries Industries in which technological changes are occurring so rapidly that changes in market share are �leeting
and temporary.

innovation strategy A product–development strategy that requires research and development (R&D) and focuses on introducing
technologically advanced products or processes.

industry A collection of �irms that provides similar products or services to the same customers.

internal analysis Knowing, analyzing, and understanding everything about the company itself, especially what makes it a strong competitor.

joint venture (JV) Requires the formation of a new corporate entity (referred to in the literature as a “child”) jointly owned by two
companies (referred to as “the parents”). It is a kind of strategic alliance that enables the two parents to accomplish more than just having an
agreement between them.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 47/49

key strategic issues A synthesis of both the external and internal analyses that focuses the company’s attention on the most important issues
it faces.

low–cost leadership A strategy that gives a company the lowest costs in its industry. One of Porter’s three generic strategies.

maquiladoras Duty–free zones in large cities along the U.S.–Mexico border that contain low-cost-labor-manufacturing plants owned mostly
by U.S. and Japanese companies.

market The collective name given to the buyers of the products or services produced by an industry.

market–development strategies Penetrating an existing market, expanding into related markets, or �inding new markets. Part of a
concentration strategy.

market share A �irm’s annual sales as a percentage of the annual sales of its industry or segment (really “industry share” but universally
known as “market share”).

market value The value that any company asset might fetch if sold on the open market; this value may differ from that carried on the
company’s books (book value).

mental model What we know or think we know about something, which can be modi�ied or updated as we come to learn more about it over
time. Everyone has a mental model about everything but may not realize it.

merger strategy This strategy combines two companies, but through making joint decisions. Mergers succeed only when the cultures of the
two entities are similar and both parties feel that merging would be in their mutual interest. A merger strategy is often used synonymously
with an acquisition strategy, which is very different.

mixed economy A free market but where substantial state intervention (regulation) exists to protect the public interest.

model A way of codifying a complex activity in a way that is at once easy to explain, understand, and learn—and gives someone a “road map”
as to how everything �its together.

monopoly When a particular �irm is the only company in an industry and can charge any outcomes price it likes, since customers cannot get
the product from anyone else.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 48/49

net pro�it after taxes (NIAT) On the income statement, the amount that is left after all allowable expenses (including depreciation and
amortization, which are accounting artifacts and not real expenses) have been deducted (often also referred to as “the bottom line”). Income
statements are typically produced quarterly or annually.

net pro�it margin (NPM) A �inancial ratio calculated by dividing NIAT by revenues.

niche market A small subset of a larger market that has particular needs and which large competitors avoid because it is too small to be
worth their time to serve.

operational decisions Made when doing operational planning and involve deciding what has to be done (programs, activities, tasks,
projects), who will do it, who is accountable, what amount of budget is allocated, and a deadline for completing it.

product–development strategy Continuing to produce existing products or services, improving them over time, or introducing new
products, all for the same market. Part of a concentration strategy.

retrenchment strategy A strategy re�lecting a conscious decision to become a smaller competitor in the industry.

return on equity (ROE) A �inancial ratio calculated by dividing NIAT by total stockholders’ equity.

shareholder value A computed value based on a company’s projected cash �lows for the next 10 years, discounted to the present time using
discounted–cash–�low (DCF) analysis and an appropriate discount rate, and subtracting from the result all current debt.

stakeholders Individuals and groups that can impact a company’s strategic outcomes and who have a vested interest in and power over a
company’s performance. Or groups of people to whom a company owes some form of duty, including investors, creditors, employees,
customers, host communities, and the environment (the public interest and the future of the planet).

strategic alliance Two �irms partnering for their mutual bene�it but retaining their distinct corporate identity. Strategic alliances vary in
their level of integration and commitment, ranging from simple contracts to joint ventures and owning minority stakes in other companies.

strategic alternatives Bona �ide strategic options (more like alternative futures) from which a company can choose the best one. They
consist of strategies, strategic intent, programs, and how they might be �inanced.

strategic decisions These differ from operational or tactical decisions primarily in their complexity and consequences, which are more
substantial for the organization.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch01,sec1.1,sec1.2,sec1.3,sec1.4,sec1.5,sec1.6,sec1.7,sec1.8,sec1.9,ch01summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c5-5508… 49/49

strategic management Steering and managing a company to be successful over time—not just for one year, but also year after year. Strategic
management involves both strategy formulation and strategy implementation.

strategic-management model A reproducible series of activities that if followed would enable a company to formulate and implement
strategies (i.e., do strategic management). The one used in this book is shown in Figure 1.1.

strategic planning The process by which a company develops a strategy to achieve certain purposes (what it considers “success”).

strategic thinking A continual activity that seeks to �ind a better strategy and business model, including a market space that is not currently
served and has no competitors (blue ocean). This cannot be done without knowing and understanding what is changing in a company’s
external environment and what the future might hold.

strategy How a company actually competes.

strategy formulation Otherwise known as strategic planningand a complex process in its own right, involves (1) strategic thinking(which
includes external analysis), (2) internal analysis, (3) determining key strategic issues, (4) developing viable strategic alternatives, and (5)
choosing the best strategy using as criteria whatever the company de�ines as “success.”

strategy implementation Involves executing the strategies successfully and enabling the company to achieve its vision and meet its
objectives.

supply chain Includes all companies from whom the �irm buys parts or materials in order to make or assemble their product and the
companies that supply those companies, and so on back to the raw material. Includes only the part of the value chain “upstream” of the
company (toward the raw materials).

technology Both the abstract and concrete tools—such as knowledge, skills, and artifacts—that can be used to create, produce, and deliver
products.

technology strategy Focuses on developing new, or improving existing, technologies.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 1/54

Chapter 2

Leadership, Governance, Values, and Culture

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 2/54

moodboard/SuperStock

Learning Objectives

By the time you have completed this chapter, you should be able to do the following:

Understand the differences and similarities between leaders and managers.
Know why strategic success depends on �inding, developing, and evaluating capable leaders.
Appreciate the value and necessity of creating a corporate vision.
Appreciate the value of having an overarching purpose for any organization.
Compare the roles and responsibilities of top management and the board of directors.
Appreciate that how a company is organized depends on the strategy it is pursuing.
Realize the importance of corporate values and culture and the extent to which they can enable or hinder
strategy implementation.
Understand that organizational change is inevitable and desirable if a corporation wants to improve its
competitiveness and performance.

This chapter will focus on the roles of power, leadership, organizational culture, and attitudes toward innovation as they relate to strategic
planning and management. The importance of leadership, the roles of top management and the board of directors, values and culture, and
organizational change all affect the quality of strategic planning and are in turn affected by it.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 3/54

All types of executives have the power to
coerce others into doing what they want. True
leaders often use in�luence rather than
authority to get people to do what they want
them to do.

George Doyle/Stockbyte/Thinkstock

2.1 Strategic Leadership and Developing a Vision

In articles in the business press and the literature, the words manager, leader, executive, and
administrator are often used interchangeably. Consider, however, the implied judgments in the
descriptions of a person as “a real leader” versus “just a manager,” and it becomes evident that
the terms are different. Ackoff and Pourdehnad (2009) try to capture the differences as
follows:

An administrator is one who manages others in the attempt to accomplish a goal by
the use of certain methods, both of which are speci�ied by a third party.
A manager is one who oversees others in the attempt to accomplish a goal by the use
of certain methods speci�ied by the manager.
A leader is one who conducts and directs others in the voluntary attempt to
accomplish a goal by the use of certain methods, both of which are chosen or approved
of by the leader’s followers.

Although all types of executives have the authority to coerce others into doing what they want
done, leaders more often use in�luence rather than authority to get others to do what they
want them to do and rely more extensively on interpersonal communication and the strength
of their relationships with others to effect change.

From this, one might assume that the only person who creates a vision is the individual at the
apex of an organization, such as CEO of the company or the president of a country. This is certainly not the case. At any level and in any sphere
of life, anyone who can visualize a better state of affairs and can persuade others that such a vision makes sense has demonstrated leadership
qualities. Anyone who has suggestions for change and improvement demonstrates leadership qualities to the extent that they are able to
persuade others involved of the merits and bene�its of such changes. By contrast, managers charged with just implementing change and
achieving a set of performance objectives don’t need to be leaders even though what they do is nonetheless critical to a company’s success.

Earlier, we used the phrase strategic leadership, but what makes leadership “strategic”? Recall from Chapter 1 that a strategy is required
only to combat competition. In the same way, “strategic leadership” involves developing an outlook and strategy that will position the
company to become a stronger competitor, in both the short term and the long term. Whereas leadership may be required in implementing

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 4/54

changes or improvements to parts of the organization, strategic leadership determines the long-run survival and success of the entire
company.

Power in an Organization

Leaders often use communication to exact a range of pro-social in�luence tactics to gain others’ compliance. Leaders have the power to
in�luence or affect the people around or under them. This is true regardless of whether they have been appointed to leadership positions.
There are �ive types of power in an organization.

Legitimate power is the authority obtained through the occupation of a position in the company. The higher the position an individual
occupies, the more authority and legitimate power he or she holds. Expert power is based on the unique experience, competence, and
expertise possessed by a leader. For example, a group surviving a crash on a mountainside would willingly follow the member with survival
knowledge and skills. Referent power is derived from the appreciation, high regard, and loyalty of a leader’s followers and is a direct result
of the leader’s character. Leaders who have the ability to give or withhold meaningful incentives hold reward power. These can take the form
of tangible rewards such as pay raises, bonuses, or preferred job assignments or intangible rewards like verbal praise or respect. A leader or
manager to who is in a position to punish a subordinate is said to have coercive power. This could take the form of �iring someone, denying a
raise or bonus, or reassigning the person to an undesirable location (Jones & George, 2007).

Mission and

Vision Statements

Companies—indeed any kind of organization—need mission and vision statements. Like many terms in the business lexicon, these too are
misunderstood and often misused.

Mission Statements

A mission statement is a concise statement of a company’s reason for being, what it actually does, and for whom. It should contain what
products and services the company produces for which target market, as well as how it considers itself different or unique. It should not
contain statements of values, strategies, or objectives (although many companies make this error), but could contain the company’s customer
value proposition.

A mission statement answers the questions, “What do you do?” and “What is your raison d’être (reason for being)?” For many companies, the
answer doesn’t change over many years, while for others in fast-moving industries when the strategies themselves are changing, it does.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 5/54

Periodically, therefore, a company needs to check that its mission statement is still valid. The ideal time to do this is at the end of the annual
strategic-planning process.

When crafting a mission statement, care should be taken in how broadly or narrowly the company might be characterized. For example, a
business could conceive of itself as a real-estate company or as a residential real-estate company, the latter precluding any work or
involvement in commercial or industrial real estate. It could be an apparel store or a casual-apparel or sporting-apparel store, the former
being broader and the latter ones more restrictive in the kind of apparel sold.

If in the course of conducting the strategic analysis, a company was to decide to go national from being a regional retailer and if the existing
mission statement characterized it as being regional in scope, then clearly the mission statement would need to be modi�ied and aligned with
the new reality. It is for this reason that attention to both the mission and vision statements is paid at the end of the strategic-planning
process.

The following two examples illustrate poor mission statements:

“Pro�itably expand through a commitment to customer service, superior quality, and creative solutions.”

You would never guess that this is the mission statement for a company that manufactures and distributes agricultural equipment. Missing
from the mission statement is what the company does, for whom, its geographic scope, and so on.

“Be considered the best by customers, employees, and stakeholders.”

This mission belongs to a producer of car parts. The mission statement is troubling because it is very generic. Many, if not most, companies
strive to be the best; thus, the mission does not differentiate the company from other �irms.

The following is an example of a good mission statement, taken from an insurance company:

“Our mission is to equip individuals and organizations to manage �inancial risk. We provide products and services that are designed to
speci�ically target the ever-changing risk exposures our clients face. We increase value for our stakeholders through superior customer
service and consistent operating results.”

Vision Statements

Does a strategic leader simply conjure up in isolation a vision for the company? Do effective leaders rely on others in the organization to
support the development of a realistic vision? Let’s examine the nature of vision statements and the strategies organizations utilize to create

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 6/54

them. A vision statement is a concise expression of where the organization would like to see itself in the next 5 or 10 years. What makes an
effective vision statement rather than one that just sounds good? In order to know whether the vision has been achieved, it makes sense to
use some quantitative measure in the statement. For example, it could include “become a billion-dollar company by 2017,” or “be doing
business in 25 countries by 2017.” It is imperative that the strategy and vision must be completely aligned, which is why an organization
should review and, if necessary, revise the vision statement after deciding on the strategy and strategic direction in case the latter has been
changed. Ideally, the vision statement should be concise, inspiring, memorable, and achievable—a tall order, but not impossible.

Leaders who are visionary can, through collaborating with other top managers and their board of directors, craft a good vision statement that
embodies their vision and makes sense to all of the company’s stakeholders. Getting everyone’s agreement takes time; however, it is as a
result of such collaboration that the vision becomes truly shared and owned by everyone.

Discussion Questions

1. Imagine a leader that is visionary but has no followers—is the person still a leader? How are followers recruited?
2. Consider the following leaders. For each one, state the source or sources of their power, and explain the reasons for your
choice:

Mahatma Gandhi
John F. Kennedy
Queen Elizabeth of England
Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft
The professor of your strategic-management course

3. Are most CEOs and presidents today “strategic” leaders? Why or why not?
4. Why do organizations �ind it dif�icult to develop a good vision statement?
5. Vision statements typically look 5 or 10 years into the future. Name an organization (or an industry) where a vision
statement might be developed for 20 or more years, and one where less than a year might make sense.

6. Many companies have vision statements purely for PR purposes—they sound really good. How can you tell the difference
between the PR kind and the genuine thing?

7. If a company has a good vision statement, why is a mission statement necessary?
8. Should every employee in the company be able to recite the mission statement? The vision statement? Both? Why?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 7/54

Leaders may create change, but managers implement change.
Managers adopt the leader’s vision as their own.

altrendo images

2.2 Leaders Versus Managers

Warren Bennis, a pioneer in the contemporary study of leadership, once said,
“Managers do things right; leaders do the right thing” (Bennis & Nanus, 1985,
front of book jacket). Bennis’s words echo a common saying in business that
“leaders create change while managers implement change.” The way that
leaders create change is by creating a vision for the corporation (or indeed,
any organization) and then “selling” the bene�its of that vision to the rest of
the organization. To the extent that they succeed, they create followers and
motivate or in�luence them to put their best efforts to making the vision a
reality. The leader’s vision then becomes their vision. One test of leadership is
whether, in fact, the leader has any followers. Who, indeed, has the leader
succeeded in in�luencing?

Robert Allio has written on the differences between leaders and managers.
The key differences he describes are summarized in Table 2.1. He further
provides �ive prescriptions for improving the quality of leadership. Allio

contends that good leaders must have good character. Integrity is an essential leadership virtue. While there’s no single best way to lead,
leaders must develop a personal style that balances managing with leading. Leaders win when they commit to collaboration. They cannot go
it alone. Adaptability makes longevity possible, so leadership entails adroit adaptation. Lastly, leaders are self-made, and good leadership
requires constant practice (Allio, 2009).

Table 2.1: Leaders vs. managers

Leaders Managers

Take the long view Take the short view

Formulate visions Make plans and budgets

Take risks Avoid risks

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 8/54

Explore new territory Maintain existing patterns

Initiate change Stabilize

Transform Transact

Empower Control

Encourage diversity Enforce uniformity

Invoke passion Invoke rationality

Act morally Act amorally

Source: Robert J. Allio. (2009). Leadership—the �ive big ideas. Strategy & Leadership, 37(2).

Is it dif�icult to be a leader? The list of attributes in Table 2.1 might appear daunting to a junior person in the organization. To someone who
seeks out challenges, learns from experience, works well with others, takes the initiative, and in other ways “practices” leadership, it’s a
natural progression to positions of leadership with ever-increasing responsibility and visibility.

Communication and Effective Leadership

Although personality, business acumen, legitimate power and authority, and expertise may all be factors in leadership ability, communication
competence is central to the practice of in�luence and leadership in organizations. Without the ability to relate to others at work through
interactions, in�luence and leadership are virtually impossible. A foundation of strong relational and communication skills is critical to the
ability to inspire motivation within others and to encourage the pursuit of organizational vision.

Impression Management

Leadership effectiveness and communication satisfaction within organizations rely heavily on perceptions of individuals in formal or informal
leadership positions. Thus, strong leaders are able to manage others’ perceptions and have a heightened degree of self-awareness. They must
be aware of what is appropriate and expected in a given situation, possess the skills to deliver it, and demonstrate the motivation for
accomplishing excellence.

Effective Message Content

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8c… 9/54

Good leaders pay a great deal of attention to the content of their messages. They approach their leadership communication as a goal-directed
activity, rather than mindlessly. They craft their messages strategically so as to provide others with a clear, concrete sense of their vision. The
content of their formal and informal messages should be motivational and inspirational and succeed in convincing others that behaving
consistently with the leader’s (or organization’s) vision is truly in their own best interests. Needless to say, leaders must also have
unquestionable ethics and engage in this type of in�luence carefully and thoughtfully.

Strong Message Delivery

Effective message delivery, often referred to as charisma, is central to leadership effectiveness. Numerous research studies point to the
importance of message exchanges that foster a sense of “connectedness” among communicators. Although connection can be dif�icult to
de�ine, studies have isolated factors such as smiling, appropriate touch and diminished physical distance, making eye contact, removal of
physical barriers (for example, sitting on the same side of a table or desk with the other communicator and avoiding the use of lecterns
during public presentations or meetings), engaging in some degree of self-disclosure, and using animated facial expressions as important to
reducing the psychological distance between people.

Communicator Style

Communication researcher Robert Norton identi�ied nine primary communicator styles that nearly 30 years of research have consistently
supported. When applied to leadership, they give some insight into the repertoire of communication behaviors available to foster leadership
and encourage in�luence. As you read about each, consider the situations in which they would be most appropriate. Remember, although an
individual may have a primary communicator style, people can “borrow” habits from each of the styles. The most competent communicators
are �lexible and adaptive in their approaches to different situations.

Types of Leaders

An animated leader relies primarily on nonverbal behaviors such as gestures, eye contact, and facial expressions to motivate
others. An individual who �its this pro�ile but is not able to draw on behaviors associated with the other styles will lack
in�luence in contexts other than face-to-face communication.

An attentive leader relies primarily on listening skills in his/her relationships with others to exert in�luence. Through both
verbal (asking questions, paraphrasing, and validating others’ positions) and nonverbal (eye contact, head-nodding, and
leaning forward) means, attentive communicators illustrate that they value individuals and their ideas. Attentive leaders must

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 10/54

be careful to not only listen to others but also actually incorporate their perspectives into organizational strategies and plans to
maximize the leader’s credibility and impact with others.

Contentious leaders are argumentative and challenging in their communication with others. They may enjoy playing the
“devil’s advocate” and will often challenge others to prove or support their positions. Although the contentious communicator
can be challenging to work with, this style can be used to enable transformation and to encourage others to think “outside the
box.” Their style and interactions with others focus on asking questions, raising the bar, and being intellectually stimulating.

Similar to the contentious leader is the dominant one. However, instead of questioning and challenging others, dominant
leaders take charge of conversations and speak in a strong manner. They tend to communicate more frequently than others in
meetings and conversations. This style suits the transactional, authoritative leader, but can be dangerous for leaders operating
in more democratic environments.

Dramatic leaders make their points both verbally and nonverbally in “�lowery” and exaggerated ways. They will use narratives
and expressive language to convey their positions. They may even rely on poetry or literature and dramatic quotes from others
to drive home their point.

The friendly leader in�luences others through the frequent delivery of positive feedback and praise.

Open communicators express emotion and self-disclose their own experiences (both positive and negative) as a way of
inspiring and in�luencing others.

The impression leaving communicator �inds ways to deliver memorable messages that others think about after the
conversation is over.

And �inally, relaxed leaders are calm and understated in their approach. They will rarely reveal anxiety or nervousness and
react un�lappably under pressure. They exude con�idence and calm.

Summary

Effective leaders understand that impression management, strong message content, and effective delivery are central to their
ability to in�luence others. Further, they recognize that there is not one perfect communicator style for a leader. Strong leaders

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 11/54

are adept at analyzing people and situations and selecting a message, a delivery style, and a personal style that best �its the
circumstances.

Questions for Critical Thinking and Engagement

1. What are some strategies leaders can use for managing others’ impressions of them? What are some speci�ic ways you
already practice these impression-management strategies in your personal and professional life?

2. Consider each of Norton’s communicator styles as they relate to leaders and leadership. Identify at least two situations in
which each style would be appropriate, and two situations in which each style would probably be ineffective. Explain.

3. What is the difference between a goal-directed message and a mindless message? Explain your perspective. Why is goal-
directed communication more desirable for leaders than mindless communication?

While experience is certainly a valuable contributor in the development of a leader, some key personality traits can typically be found in those
in leadership positions at various levels. The �irst of these is vision—the ability to see the “big picture,” imagine likely futures, and infuse that
vision with passion. Integrity is a requisite trait because it is impossible to in�luence others without gaining their trust. Communication skills,
compassion, and charisma are needed to articulate the vision and persuade others to embrace it. Leaders demonstrate strong moral and
ethical principles, giving attention to all stakeholders, not some at the expense of others. A commitment to collaboration encourages everyone
to work together to achieve a vision. A less obvious trait of leaders is humility. Effective leaders typically give others credit for an
organization’s success but will accept responsibility for poor results.

Max de Pree, the longtime chairman and CEO of the Herman Miller of�ice-furniture company, personi�ied the concept of servant leadership.
He characterized the art of leadership as “liberating people to do what is required of them in the most effective and humane way possible.”
This puts the leader as the “servant” of his followers by removing obstacles that prevent them from doing their jobs, thus enabling them to
realize their full potential (O’Toole, 1989, xviii–xvix).

The importance of humility also �igures prominently in the concept of Level 5 leadership developed by Jim Collins. His research examined
how companies were able to transition from being merely “good” to “great.” He concluded that a leader builds “enduring greatness through a
paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will” (Collins, 2001, p. 20). Table 2.2 further elaborates on humility and will as they
pertain to leadership. Many CEOs are egocentric, however, and may take every opportunity to be the face of the company and be quoted in the
press. Ironically, the companies they lead often don’t perform as well as their bluster might indicate. So where might you �ind a Level 5

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 12/54

leader? “Look for situations where extraordinary results exist but where no individual steps forth to claim excess credit. You will likely �ind a
potential Level 5 leader at work” (Collins, 2001, p. 37).

Table 2.2: Summary of the two sides of level 5 leadership

Professional Will Personal Humility

Creates superb results, a clear catalyst in the transition from
good to great.

Demonstrates a compelling modesty, shunning public adulation;
never boastful.

Demonstrates an unwavering resolve to do whatever must be
done to produce the best long-term results, no matter how
dif�icult.

Acts with quiet, calm determination; relies principally on
inspired standards, not inspiring charisma, to motivate.

Sets the standard for building an enduring great company;
will settle for nothing less.

Channels ambition into the company, not the self; sets up
successors for even greater success in the next generation.

Looks in the mirror, not out the window, to apportion
responsibility for poor results, never blaming other people,
external factors, or luck.

Looks out the window, not in the mirror, to apportion credit for
the success of the company—to other people, external factors,
and good luck.

Source: Jim Collins. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap . . . and others don’t. HarperCollins Publishers.

Discussion Questions

1. Managers are often promoted to more senior positions with substantial leadership mandates. What problems might they
encounter in their �irst year in the new position?

2. Do you have what it takes to be a Level 5 leader? Why or why not?
3. Recount an experience you may have had that leads you to believe that you have leadership potential.
4. What do you think a company should do to develop potential leaders when it has no budget for it?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 13/54

There are considerable advantages derived from developing
leaders internally. Hiring a candidate externally can often come
at a higher cost than promoting internally.

g_studio/istockphoto/Thinkstock

2.3 Developing and Evaluating Leaders

Studies have shown that there are considerable advantages to developing leaders internally instead of hiring from outside (Brant, Dooley, &
Iman, 2008). While the talent pool of applicants can be impressive, external hires for leadership positions often fail. By the end of �ive years,
two-thirds have failed. By contrast, the leaders of 10 out of 11 “good-to-great” companies studied by Collins in his book of the same name
came from inside the company. The companies he examined in comparison turned to outsiders six times as often yet failed to produce
sustained great results.

In addition to having a higher risk of failure, recruiting external candidates for
leadership positions is more costly. Direct costs include search fees, interview
costs, signing bonuses, relocation, and severance packages among others. By
contrast, internal-development costs are far lower, comprising training,
education, program administration, and relocation costs involved with
rotating assignments.

Finally, an organization that practices internal promotion is more likely to
retain high-potential talent. Executive retention is positively correlated with
formalized succession programs. In companies having an executive turnover
rate of 1–5% annually, 84% had formal development programs. At those
companies reporting turnover rates of 6–10%, 24% had succession programs.
Of businesses experiencing turnover rates of 11–20%, only 11% had
succession programs.

Developing the next generation of leaders is one of the most dif�icult
challenges for a company. Companies committed to promoting from within
can take certain measures to increase the prospects of success (Allio, 2009). First, they must have a good talent pool, which means hiring
people with leadership potential in the �irst place. The organization must have a leadership-developmental program that intentionally puts
these people in challenging situations and as members of crossfunctional teams. A good development program obtains feedback about them
and their performance from those that see them in action (Fulmer, Stumpf, & Bleak, 2009). For example, GE is known for its strong entry-level
leadership development, which offers experience in communications, engineering, �inance, information technology,
manufacturing/operations, and sales/marketing, as well as a range of programs speci�ic to GE’s various brands (GE, n.d.).

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 14/54

While there are clear advantages to promoting from within and signaling to current managers that the career path in the company goes right
to the top, there are circumstances in which hiring a CEO from outside makes more sense. For instance, there are occasions when a business
requires a transformational leader to shake up a structured, risk-averse enterprise, as was the case with aerospace conglomerate Allied-
Signal, or to revitalize a company by taking it in a completely different direction, as IBM recruited Louis Gerstner to do.

Hiring People with Leadership Potential

Multinational producer of polymer products W. L. Gore & Associates valued people who showed initiative and leadership and were team
players. To select suitable candidates it employed a novel recruiting system. Applicants for a job came to the company expecting to undergo
several interviews before being selected or turned down. Instead, they were told on arrival to “look around.” Those who were nonplussed,
kept looking at the clock, and asking who was going to interview them were shown the door. Others who were curious and got up to walk
around and see what was happening, then offered to help and rolled up their sleeves, were immediately hired (Hamel & Breen, 2007).

Hiring future leaders is not as easy as it sounds. Imagine you are interviewing someone for a middle-management job, such as a project
manager. The person could be very well quali�ied for the position, but how do you assess his or her leadership potential? There are a few
things that almost every employer looks for in an applicant when recruiting potential leaders.

An obvious indicator is experiences in the applicant’s resume where he or she made a difference. As important to having achieved something
tangible is the way it was accomplished, such as taking initiative, leading a group, or otherwise demonstrating leadership qualities.
References can provide information about the extent to which the person was assigned to do something important and delivered results that
met or surpassed expectations. They can also reveal whether teammates would work with that person again. In other words, a reference is a
source that can help ascertain if the candidate has a record of successfully completing assignments and being unafraid to take on more
challenging ones. During the formal interview, some employers put applicants into various calculated situations to see how they would
respond. Such “mock simulations” can be very revealing. Finally, following the old adage, “it takes one to know one,” several people currently
in leadership roles should interview the applicant to provide a balanced and complete picture before actually hiring the person. Allio advises
that candidates for future leaders possess three attributes: (1) motivation and a need to achieve, (2) attitude and the ability to inspire, to
evince optimism in the face of adversity, and (3) morality—the possession of positive values and benevolent motives (Allio, 2009).

By no means should all hiring decisions take into account leadership potential. Some people, as a result of their temperament, interests, and
experience, are more interested in playing a supporting role on the team; they lack the motivation or even interest to lead. There are many
roles within an organization that do not require leadership competency. One important purpose of recruiting, however, is to keep the
potential-leadership pipeline full.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 15/54

Developing Leaders

Good leadership depends primarily on what leaders do; thus, it is imperative that managers with leadership aspirations �ind ways to
demonstrate their leadership abilities and actually practice what they’ve read in books. No amount of listening to lectures or attending
leadership courses can realistically be expected to transform people into leaders. The only way to do so, it would appear, is to create
opportunities in which people can practice being leaders.

Effective Leadership Development

Some companies know how to develop leaders. General Electric Co. (GE) has for years been considered one of the best incubators of
leadership talent because its alumni have gone on to lead many other companies. The �irst step is to develop a short list of individuals with
the most potential as future leaders. Their development is then carefully monitored as they are given one challenging assignment after
another. Each assignment is documented (including team composition, objectives, timeframe, and budget) and formal feedback sought from
group members and others that might have interacted with the group. The feedback is then examined and discussed with the individual, with
special emphasis on what was done well and lessons learned. Because of this kind of attention to detail and the number of individuals
involved, leadership development is managed as a program, with an experienced manager in charge. Individuals who build on their
experience in this way and increase their stature with the organization become automatic candidates for senior management positions as
they open up.

In another example, Nike implemented Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership Challenge (Kouzes & Posner, 2008) to develop senior managers for
the apparel side of its business. This model involves modeling behavior, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the current process, enabling
and empowering others, and encouraging the “human” aspects of leadership (such as celebrating community and recognizing individual
accomplishments).

There are two more ways to develop leaders that complement a formal development program: Current leaders should be careful to model the
behavior they expect potential leaders to emulate. Potential leaders should try to �ind a mentor, either in the same company or outside it, to
help their development. Following model examples and having a mentor are immeasurably useful but are often overlooked aids to leadership
development.

Leadership-Development Pitfalls

Not all leadership-development programs produce desired results. According to Douglas A. Ready, a researcher on leadership-development
efforts, organizations that experience dif�iculties implementing a successful development program or fail entirely manifest three

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 16/54

“pathologies” (Ready & Conger, 2003).

Some companies display a control, ownership, and power mentality. This is characterized by a reluctance of those in positions of authority to
give up control, to relinquish ownership of resources, or to share information. Identifying potential candidates and the right opportunities to
develop them is seen by these kinds of managers as threatening, especially in large, complex organizations. This leads to reluctant or even
zero cooperation with leadership-development programs.

Another pitfall is the “productization” of leadership development. This means creating a new program based on the latest management fad or
the magical new offering promoted by a management-consulting �irm, without regard to whether it has anything to do with the corporation’s
strategy or future needs. To make matters worse, in tough economic times the leadership-development program is viewed as a cost and often
curtailed. Over time, the disjointed efforts produce nothing of value.

Some organizations make the mistake of applying the wrong metrics. When the human-resources department promises an increased ability
to deliver leadership-development programs at lower-than-expected costs, perhaps by using more e-learning technologies and new
methodologies, the touted results sound impressive. In this situation it’s likely that the right questions aren’t being asked. In order to measure
the value of a leadership-development program, one needs metrics that can provide answers to questions such as, “Are we better able to �ill
key jobs when they arise?” “To what extent are potential leaders knowledgeable about and committed to our strategic direction?” Short-term
savings may have long-term costs.

Evaluating Leaders and

Succession Planning

The most common measure to judge the effectiveness of leadership for a corporation, and in particular the CEO, is the company’s
performance. Measures include beating its revenue and NIAT forecasts and achieving an increase in the corporation’s stock price. How do we
know this? The CEO’s compensation package is designed to motivate achieving such performance for the corporation. Raises and bonuses are
awarded only when the corporation performs at levels that meet or exceed expectations. Performance objectives and incentives are speci�ied
in the contract when the CEO is hired.

A recent case con�irms the above measures and also illustrates the fragility of using such measures. In 2010, CBS Corporation’s CEO Leslie
Moonves received a total compensation package worth an extraordinary $57.7 million. Beyond his base salary of $3.5 million, he was
awarded a $27.5 million bonus and nearly $23 million in stock and option awards. The company also provided an additional $3.4 million for
his pension fund and reimbursement for taxes paid in New York. CBS justi�ied the nearly 34% increase in compensation from 2009 saying
that Moonves’s leadership resulted in extraordinary growth in shareholder value and outpaced both the industry and the company’s internal

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 17/54

CBS Corporation’s CEO Leslie Moonves received
$111.6 million in compensation in 2010.
During his tenure, CBS share price nearly
doubled and its revenue grew by 8%.

Associated Press/Reed Saxon

targets. CBS’s share price nearly doubled during 2010, and its revenue climbed 8% (James,
2011).

Viewed in isolation these performance metrics indeed appear impressive; however, the
resurgence of advertising revenue in 2010 simply lifted the company to where it had been
three years earlier. Its total revenues of $14 billion were largely unchanged when compared to
2007, before the recession. Moreover the company’s operating income of $1.8 billion was
much less than the $2.6 billion in 2007. Shareholders may question whether such lavish
compensation is warranted for only one year of performance.

Time and again, CEOs receive generous rewards for upsurges in company performance but
are rarely penalized when corporate performance declines or cannot be sustained. For
example, Robert Nardelli, CEO of Home Depot, stepped down in January 2007 and took with
him a $210 million severance package amid shareholder criticism about his “generous”
compensation package relative to the stock’s weak performance, slowing pro�its, and a
regulatory probe about its options practices. On the announcement of Nardelli’s resignation,
the company’s share price actually jumped 3% (Kavilanz, 2007). At the company’s �inal
shareholder meeting before he resigned, he was the only director present, revealed no
information, and allowed shareholders to speak for only one minute each (Nocera, 2006).

These examples illustrate that one measure to evaluate CEOs should be corporate success over
an extended period of time. Another is the state and condition of a company at the end of a
CEO’s tenure. For example, when CEO Carly Fiorina was forced out at Hewlett-Packard in
2005, the company’s stock price had declined by 50% during her tenure, and HP was still

trying to digest the 2002 acquisition of its biggest competitor, Compaq, a move that was widely seen as a failure (Portfolio’s Worst, n.d.).

When long-time CEO Michael Eisner resigned in March 2005, a year before his contract was due to expire at Disney, the company’s
performance had deteriorated on several fronts. Broadcast network ABC, acquired by Eisner, had lost market share over seven years. Disney
had failed in a highly publicized attempt to build a historic American theme park near a civil-war battle�ield. The company was widely
criticized for the disastrous hiring of Michael Ovitz as his designated successor, who lasted just 16 months and cost the company $90 million
in addition to stock options. Uncharacteristically, Disney had experienced a string of box-of�ice movie �lops starting in 2000, while over that
same �ive-year period the board of directors had approved compensation packages for him totaling $737 million (Gross, 2002).

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 18/54

In contrast, Steve Jobs, who relinquished operational control of Apple Inc. shortly before his death in 2011, left behind a company that he had
led from near marginality in 1997 to being the largest high-tech company in the world. In place at the time of his departure were a successor
and an innovative-design culture that will endure well into the future. The robust state in which he left the company re�lects his performance
as a leader and stands in stark contrast to Fiorina’s and Eisner’s leadership performances. A leader’s legacy really is important.

Succession Planning

The quality of a leader’s successor also re�lects on how people judge the leader. Is there a smooth transition at the top? Succession planning,
especially at the top of an organization, is vital. It is too late to think about it when a CEO announces his resignation, even when the transition
date is a few months away. The time to think about succession planning is years before the actual event. In other words, it should be done on
an ongoing basis.

Good succession planning requires that a leadership pipeline be full at all times. This can be quite challenging especially for large
corporations that employ over 10,000 people. There are four principal reasons why it is dif�icult to maintain a leadership pipeline (Brant,
Dooley, & Iman, 2008):

Inadequate criteria. When asked to recommend individuals in their unit who had leadership potential, managers’ recommendations may be
based on criteria that re�lect local values but do not match standards used in other functions or parts of the company.

Assessing potential vs. performance. Sometimes leaders �ind it dif�icult to distinguish between current performance and evidence of perceived
ability to handle a more responsible role.

Inadequate data to make an informed decision. Decisions about leadership potential may rely too heavily on performance-appraisal scores
that are high and fail to distinguish between candidates. The assessments suffer from “leniency” and have less to do with raters’ ability to
make accurate judgments than with their willingness to be candid.

Over-reliance on traditional training. Leaders felt that traditional training methods, such as membership in cross-functional teams, were
inadequate.

To ensure that potential leaders and successors are being developed, leaders should establish criteria for identifying talent throughout the
corporation. Standard terminology is important so that everyone knows what is meant and what one is looking for and why. Identifying
promising candidates for a leadership-development program should be company-wide and begin with recruiting. A system needs to be
developed that formalizes feedback data about a particular person after a given assignment so that multiple evaluations can be aggregated.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 19/54

This process will help identify the employee best suited to a particular position from among all the potential candidates. Finally, an aggressive
schedule of assignments consistent with the company’s strategy options and business model should be devised to test these talented people
for their developmental bene�it as well as the company’s interests. If a company’s management doesn’t have the skills to create such a
leadership pipeline, it should engage consultants with the necessary experience and expertise.

Discussion Questions

1. What would you do to discover whether an applicant for a job in your company had leadership potential before hiring that
person?

2. If you were asked to develop a score sheet for interviewing managerial candidates to assess leadership potential, what
would it look like?

3. Why do many companies persist in hiring senior and executive positions from outside despite research �indings that
people promoted from within do better and are less costly?

4. Are formal leadership-development programs a cost or an investment? If the latter, how might you calculate a return on
that investment?

5. When obtaining feedback on an individual already in a leadership-development program, whose feedback is more
important—that of the person’s supervisor, teammates, direct report, or customers?

6. Design a feedback form to capture information you would �ind useful in assessing and developing someone’s leadership
potential.

7. What principal elements of a potential leader’s performance in a developmental assignment should the company really
look for?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 20/54

2.4 Purposes of Organizations

Section 1.5 discussed a number of measures of “success” for a corporation. This section examines how it is important for an organization to
have an overarching purpose, something that goes beyond the “bottom line,” shareholder value, and other traditional measures of success.
While companies can certainly function without one, the publicly stated underlying purpose motivates employees, attracts people to work at
such companies, and generates positive public relations.

Consider the following examples of companies’ purpose statements. Notice that they are brief, catchy, and to the point.

Theme Park: Our purpose is to bring people joy.

Consumer Products Company: Our purpose is to �ind creative solutions.

Electronics Company: Our purpose is to improve others’ lives through technology.

Pet Products Company: Our purpose is to better the lives of both pets and those who love them.

Some purpose statements are included in companies’ mission statements, while other organizations’ statements of purpose are their vision
statements.

Notice that these overarching purposes don’t mention pro�it, shareholder value, market share, or even the products the companies produce.
They are bigger than that. They motivate employees because they express values with which employees identify. Statements of purpose differ
from vision statements in that they convey core values of the company now and in the future, whereas vision statements describe a future
state that companies are trying to achieve 5–10 years into the future.

Purposeful Behavior

Organizations that have a clear, overarching purpose are more likely to appeal to all their stakeholders and not just a subset. Purposeful
behavior is performed by an organization consistent or aligned with a common purpose that is meaningful and important to that
organization’s stakeholder groups. For example, to specify “increasing shareholder value” as the company’s purpose aligns primarily with the
interests of management and investors and not with those of employees (unless they happen to participate in an Employee Stock Ownership
Plan). According to Paul Ratoff (2007), four conditions must be present for an organization to demonstrate purposeful behavior:

The larger purpose must be clearly stated.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 21/54

Stakeholder interests must be aligned with that purpose.
The company’s strategies must be aligned with its purpose.
The results achieved must be measured and stakeholders informed of progress.

Not only is having a larger purpose good for any company but also if more companies would consciously choose to achieve something larger
than their mission statements would suggest, businesses might then be better corporate citizens. More people would be passionate about
their work, and organizations could become more productive as a result and make contributions to the betterment of society.

Discussion Questions

1. Develop an overall purpose for a high school and one for a college/university. What would be their similarities or
differences?

2. Can any organization have a purpose? Can different levels in an organization each have a purpose (e.g., a department or
functional unit within a corporation)?

3. Where do overarching purposes come from? If you had to develop one for an organization, how would you go about it?
How would you know when you had the “right” purpose?

4. Many companies have mission and vision statements and strategies. Does having an overarching purpose make a
difference? In what way?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 22/54

2.5 Governance and the Role of the Board of Directors

Privately held and publicly held companies are governed differently. They do share one similarity and that is that all decisions made and
actions taken bene�it the owner(s) of the company. We now take a closer look at the main differences.

Privately Held Companies

Privately held companies are governed or run by either one person, as in the case of a startup entrepreneurial venture, or a group of people in
a larger company, like a top-management group. An autocratic CEO will make all decisions of consequence for the company whether the top-
management group is consulted or not. A democratic or participative leader will make decisions only with the consensus of the other top
managers. Typically, in privately held companies, the CEO and often some key managers are the owners of the company, so decisions that
bene�it the company also automatically bene�it them as owners.

In cases where outsiders have invested capital in the company, the investor receives a negotiated percentage share of the equity in return as
well as a seat on the board of directors. This gives the investor a say in making strategic decisions as a way to safeguard the investment. In
these cases, such a board shares the governance of the company with the CEO and the top-management team. The CEO makes decisions only
after consulting with such a board.

Publicly Held Companies

To explain how publicly held companies are governed differently, one has to appreciate what being a public company means. A public
company is one whose shares can be publicly traded on a U.S. stock exchange and that is regulated by the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) to ensure accurate and responsible �inancial reporting. The SEC was formed to protect investors, maintain fair,
orderly, and ef�icient markets, and facilitate capital formation. An organizing principle is that every investor, ranging from a big corporation
to a private individual, deserves to be informed about each investment they purchase or possess. To this end, the SEC mandates that public
companies share important �inancial and business-related information with the public. Only when equipped with prompt, thorough, and
accurate information can people undertake wise investment decisions (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission).

The SEC is responsible for monitoring important participants in the securities arena, including securities exchanges, securities brokers and
dealers, investment advisors, and mutual funds. The SEC’s foremost priorities are to advocate for the transparency of market-related
information, promote honest business, and prevent fraud.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 23/54

When a company “goes public,” it means that
the general public can purchase, sell, and trade
shares on several stock exchanges, like the
New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ.

Scott Barrow, Inc./SuperStock

Once a company “goes public,” it means that the public can purchase and trade its shares on
one of several stock exchanges such as the NYSE or NASDAQ. In carrying out its
responsibilities, the SEC also oversees the public-accounting profession and the rules it
creates, the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) to promote honest and uniform
reporting by public companies as a basis for investors to buy or sell shares. In fact, the SEC
requires that the �inancial statements and computer systems of public companies be audited
by a CPA �irm every year to guarantee the information as a basis for decision making
(Abraham, 1978).

In addition, the SEC requires all publicly held companies in the United States to have a board
of directors to ful�ill a �iduciary duty to the company’s shareholders. That duty is to act solely
on behalf of the shareholders and in their best interest. Why was this found to be necessary
when a capable CEO and management team exist to make the key strategic and operational
decisions for the company?

The truth is that publicly held companies typically have shareholders that number in the
hundreds of thousands or millions, and the visceral connection that owners, managers, and
investors enjoy in a small company is lost. People buy shares in a public company for
monetary gain, nothing else. Their objective is to receive either regular dividends for current
income or capital gains when the value of the company rises over time. As a result, top
managements of companies have come to make decisions and take actions that bene�it
themselves more and not the larger group of shareholders. For example, they pay themselves
high salaries, high bonuses, and high severance packages, oftentimes without regard to the
way the company performs. They have come to behave sel�ishly in this way not out of any ill
will toward shareholders, but rather because they can.

According to a New York Times study of executive pay, the median pay in 2010 for CEOs was $10.8 million, a 23% gain from 2009 (Joshi,
2011), 343 times the median pay of American workers in nonsupervisory positions (AFL/CIO, n.d.). One view for this disparity is that few
people have the talent and ability to lead large, often global public companies successfully, which means they are in short supply and so
command generous compensation packages.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 24/54

While it may be true that capable leaders are in high demand, one of the insidious reasons for CEOs’ large compensation packages is the
reinforcing cycle that sets and approves such pay. A board’s compensation committee often engages a human-resources-consulting �irm to
determine whether the salary and compensation proposed is in line with what is paid other CEOs. The response in virtually all cases is that it
is. The board is thus supported with evidence when it gives the CEO the salary and compensation package negotiated. The CEO contract often
includes a de�ined employment period like �ive years, stock, bonuses, severance packages, and other bene�its. The next time a CEO is hired,
the cycle is repeated, the one certainty being that the size of the total compensation package always increases and never decreases.

The SEC must have recognized this tendency to reward insiders a long time ago, and so requires public companies to have a board of directors
elected by the shareholders at their annual meeting. The role of the board is to represent shareholder interests and oversee the strategic
decisions that the CEO and management team take and, when necessary, to reclaim decision-making power and make the crucial decisions
itself. This is most evident when the company is trying to acquire another company or fend off an unwanted takeover attempt. In both
situations it is the board that takes the lead in deciding what to do.

Boards of directors are comprised of three types of directors (Hitt, Ireland, & Hoskisson, 2007):

Insiders—the �irm’s CEO and other top-level executives
Related outsiders—individuals not involved with the �irm’s day-to-day operations but who have a relationship with the company such
as a major stockholder
Outsiders or independents—individuals who have no relationship to the �irm at all

Boards of directors are required to have three standing committees to help them to ful�ill their obligations: The Audit Committee is
responsible for hiring and reviewing the performance of the independent public accountants that audit the company’s �inancial systems and
reports. The committee safeguards the reliability of the accounting operations and monitors and inspects any notable changes in accounting
policies. In addition, it helps the company comply with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Compensation and Bene�its
Committee is responsible for determining compensation packages for the CEO, president, key top managers, and board members. In
addition, it oversees pension and other welfare policies for all employees. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is
responsible for recommending candidates for the board, overseeing the performance of the board and its committees, and reviewing the
organization’s plans for executive succession. These three standing committees are legally required of all public companies.

Corporate boards of directors may choose to establish other committees. A strategic-planning committee is not mandated but may be
created by some boards. Its role is to keep the board informed about strategic decisions the company might take and to make sure that the
board’s input is taken into account in the company’s strategic-planning process. A public-policy committee is not a legal requirement but

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 25/54

Boards of Directors are required to have three standing
committees: an Audit Committee, a Compensation and Bene�its
Committee, and a Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committee. These committees will report directly to the board.

Kablonk/SuperStock

many boards choose to have one. These bodies oversee the company’s efforts
at protecting the environment, promoting health issues, and other public
policies that might affect the company.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) introduced new standards of accountability for
the boards of publicly traded companies. Under the Act, directors are directly
responsible for internal control, and penalties, including large �ines and even
prison sentences, are enforced for accounting crimes. After the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act was passed, the New York Stock Exchange and the American
Exchange required independent directors to head the major standing
committees (Petra, 2005). Today, boards of directors of companies trading on
those exchanges are required to have a majority of the board be independent
and the audit committee to be composed entirely of independent directors
(Hitt, Ireland, & Hoskisson, 2007). Even so, in some cases, the CEO is powerful
enough to offset the independence of the board. Some companies have
countered this with efforts to prevent the same person being chairman of the
board and CEO concurrently (Lorsch & Zelleke, 2005).

The downside to having more independent directors is that they have, by de�inition, less information about the day-to-day operations of the
company. But the issue is a red herring; they can get all the information they need from interactions with and requests of the insider
directors, who are on the board because they can share with the board all the strategic, �inancial, and operational information the board
needs.

With all of these committees and regulatory bodies in place, it’s easy to see how governing a publicly held company is more complicated than,
and substantially different from, governing a privately held company. In later chapters, the strategic-management process will be described in
more detail in a way that applies equally well to both kinds of company. The emphasis will be placed on what the management team must do
to make and act on its strategic decisions. Bear in mind that, for public companies, the board plays a critical role in overseeing and sometimes
taking control of what management does.

Discussion Questions

1. Discuss some ways in which a board of directors might maintain its independence from management.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 26/54

2. Sometimes, stockholders are not satis�ied with a company’s �inancial performance, how the company is being managed,
and even how effective the board is. What can they do about the situation, especially when some stockholders hold few
shares in the company?

3. In the case of very large corporations, institutional stockholders hold substantial blocs of stock in the company. Is it
possible that they wield too much in�luence in stockholder voting? Should this be cause for concern on the part of a small
stockholder?

4. Shareholder “activists” who hold stock in many companies are particularly vocal about “keeping corporations honest” and
ethical and making sure they represent all stockholders’ interests. Often, such dissatisfaction takes the form of coming up
with an alternative slate of directors to be voted on at the annual general meeting, thus making the process very political.
Is this a good thing for corporations and their stockholders?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 27/54

Functional organizations are usually led by a CEO, with
positions for a VP of Finance, VP of Marketing, VP of
Production, VP of Human Resources, VP of Research and
Development, and possibly a VP of Engineering.

Comstock/Getty Images

2.6 Organizational Designs and Strategy

The process of organization involves deploying resources to achieve strategic objectives. It entails dividing the workforce into speci�ic
departments and jobs, identifying formal lines of authority, and creating mechanisms for coordinating diverse organizational tasks.
Organizational design is thus a major determinant of whether the strategy can be implemented effectively. Strategy execution depends on
competent people who have the resources and the knowledge, and who know what to do and how their jobs relate to everyone else’s.
Additionally they require information where and when they need it. How the company is staffed and organized becomes critical. Over time, as
the organization grows, the dif�iculties of implementing the strategy increase. For example, as it grows to become an international
organization, or broadens its product line, or acquires other companies, of necessity will its organizational design evolve. While details about
executing strategies come later in the book, this section introduces the different kinds of organizational design and the reasons each one is
effective.

Functional Organizational Design

The functional organizational design is the most common design used by
business single-companies (Figure 2.1). It groups employees together
according to discrete functional activities in the belief that the work will be
done more effectively. Employees of small companies organized this way
generally aren’t aware they are using a speci�ic “design” because it happens to
be so common.

Functional organization designs are variants of the following structure. At the
top of the hierarchy sits the CEO or president. In public companies this
includes the chairman of the board of directors and of�ice of legal counsel.
Below the CEO are a number of vice presidents, each responsible for one or
more functional areas. Some companies have a chief operating of�icer (COO)
or executive VP, who has the authority to act as CEO in the latter’s absence.
That executive sometimes oversees the functional vice presidents. Reporting
to most vice presidents are C-level of�icers, with responsibilities for their

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 28/54

functional area. Examples include the CFO (chief �inancial of�icer), CMO (chief marketing of�icer), CTO (chief technology of�icer), and newer
ones like CIO (chief information of�icer) and CSO (chief strategy of�icer). Figure 2.1 illustrates the basic functional organization design.

Figure 2.1: Functional organization design

The principal disadvantage of this form of organizational design is that it discourages horizontal communication, that is, across functions. For
example, a situation might arise in which a company’s marketing department advertises the bene�its of a particular product and delivers a
dramatic sales increase only to discover it could not ful�ill the new orders because production wasn’t prepared to keep up with demand. In
another scenario, efforts to cut manufacturing costs might dictate automating part of the production process, but if the �inance department
had not been informed of this possibility and set aside funds accordingly, the company might not have the money to fund the initiative. To get
around this, a company might form cross-functional teams composed of members from each affected functional area. Special task forces
might also be established to tackle a problem that only occurs once such as business-process reengineering. Cross-functional teams are rarely
fulltime activities, but must be done in addition to members’ regular jobs and responsibilities.

Matrix Organizational Design

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 29/54

A matrix organizational design is usually
preferred when a company produces distinct
brands or product lines. For example, Proctor
& Gamble has 96 brands of products, including
Tide detergent—one of its most popular
brands.

Associated Press/Mark Lennihan

Whereas a functional organizational design is the most common design used by companies,
matrix organizational designs are preferred when a company encounters a more speci�ic
set of circumstances or challenges. Companies that serve the functions described in the
following sections may consider using a matrix organizational design.

Many Projects for Clients

Companies that provide consulting services or perform research for multiple clients may
choose a matrix organizational structure. An example of this is the RAND Corporation, a
“think tank” in Santa Monica, California, that undertakes research and policy projects for all
agencies of the federal government, especially the military, as well as state and local
government. RAND is organized by intellectual discipline and by project teams that propose,
carry out, and report on particular contracts for individual clients. In effect, any member of
the professional staff working there has a “home”—say, in the economics or computer-science
group—and works on one or more projects. Most individuals have two or more overseers; but
the department head is more of a resource than a manager, thus removing a potential con�lict.
Figure 2.2 represents a simple matrix organizational structure.

Producing Distinct Brands or Product Lines

A large enterprise that produces many established brands for discrete markets may be suited
to a matrix design. Proctor & Gamble, one of the largest and most innovative consumer-
product corporations in the world, produces no fewer than 52 brands of beauty and grooming
products such as Tampax, Gillette, Oral B, Crest, and Pert, and 46 brands of household-care
products such as Tide, Bounty, Pampers, and Comet (Proctor & Gamble, n.d.). Organizationally, every brand is called a global business unit
(GBU), which exclusively targets consumers, brands, and competitors worldwide. The GBU is also in charge of the innovation pipeline,
pro�itability, and shareholder returns. Market-development organizations (MDOs) are responsible for being aware of the buyers and sellers in
every market area Proctor & Gamble competes in, as well as incorporating new GBU-driven work�lows into the individual business plans
operating in each country. Lastly, Global Business Services (GBS) manages Proctor & Gamble talent and expert partners with the goal of
providing business-support services at the lowest costs possible.

Figure 2.2: RAND Corporation matrix organization

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 30/54

Managing International Operations

Large multinational corporations with business interests in many countries may be organized in a matrix structure. The organizational
matrix could be two-dimensional; think of a spreadsheet in which product managers are column headings and country managers are row
headings, or even three-dimensional with the third dimension being disciplines like chemists, engineers, statisticians, computer scientists,
and so forth. Proctor & Gamble has re�ined an incredible organizational design for what is a very complex organization, but most such

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 31/54

organizations experience many dif�iculties. Even simple organizations that market only a few products internationally have con�licts with
country managers. It is not uncommon for managers employed by international corporations to complain that, although they know their own
domestic market and how to run the local of�ice better than the executives at the home of�ice, they still get told how to do their job.

Divisional Organizational Design

Much like functional and matrix organizational designs, the divisional organizational design works better for some companies and
industries than others. A divisional organization is most effective when a company is in several businesses. A company with a broad product
line or that serves several vertical markets could still be in one business. Honeywell International is an example of a business with a divisional
organizational design. Honeywell is an enormous conglomerate that has evolved through numerous mergers and acquisitions. It does
business in a variety of industries ranging from defense contracting to consumer products with divisions dedicated to aerospace, automotive
products, specialized materials, and research and development among others.

The test to determine if a divisional organizational structure is the best choice for a company is whether each of the businesses has quite
different customers, competitors, and strategies and therefore needs to be run by a separate manager. In such a case, one would �ind many
functions such as engineering, sales, and manufacturing duplicated in each business. In a diversi�ied or multi-business company (discussed in
Chapter 11), its different businesses can be divisions that still retain the corporate name and have developed organically or “subsidiaries”
that have different names as a result of having been acquired.

The divisions or subsidiaries are considered “line departments” as they continue the chain of command up to the CEO and overall board of
directors. Staff departments such as human resources, labor-relations, �inance, and legal counsel exist at the corporate of�ice and serve all
divisions and subsidiaries. An international department would coordinate the operations of each division in different countries, allowing for
contacts that one division had developed to be accessed by the other divisions. As you may well imagine, divisional organizations, while
simple in concept, can become complex in an international corporation.

Figure 2.3: Divisional organization

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 32/54

Discussion Questions

1. Describe how a small company’s organization might change from a functional organizational design to one that might
better support a new product it had just developed for a new market.

2. Imagine you are working for a company that had a matrix form of organization, and you had progressed to being one of the
project managers. The client for your project suddenly changed the terms of your project, and you needed more support in
computer modeling as a result. The department head for computer science claims that the person already on your project
could handle the extra load, but you feel you need an additional person. How might you resolve this con�lict?

3. As an international company expands to a particular country, would you hire someone from that country to run the of�ice
there but train them in the company’s culture and products, or have someone set up shop in that country from the home
country and have him learn about the market in that country? Discuss the reasons for your choice.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 33/54

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 34/54

2.7 The Role of Top Management

As the name implies, a corporation’s top management is the group that runs the company under the guidance of the CEO. Depending on the
management style of the CEO, the relationship could be highly participative and democratic, so strategic decisions are made jointly. However,
if the CEO is more dogmatic or autocratic, top managers may be asked for their input but would not be involved in making any strategic
decisions.

Composition and Authority

In a functional organization, the top-management team typically comprises all of the vice presidents and C-level executives. In a matrix
organization, it would include the department heads and key staff directors and sometimes the managers of large and critically important
projects. In a divisional organization, it would comprise key staff directors and all divisional and subsidiary presidents. The same would hold
true in international organizations. Country managers are usually not members of the top-management team. Having said that, some global
organizations are extremely complex, conducting purchasing, manufacturing, R&D, and sales and marketing in different countries. For these
corporations, like the Proctor & Gamble example cited earlier, the key executives in their top-management teams could be located in different
countries.

The degree of decision-making authority varies also with the kind of organizational design followed. For example, in a functional
organization, a vice president or C-level executive has authority only in the functional area in question. A vice president of marketing can
decide tactical questions only in areas including marketing, customer relations, sales, advertising and promotions, and market research. On
the other hand, a divisional president acts like a CEO within the division in question, overseeing all business activities of the division. In that
structure, however, all functional areas of the division must be compatible with their corporate counterparts.

Building Capability

Decisions are not easily compartmentalized into “strategic” and “tactical” or non-strategic. Implementing a strategy doesn’t mean just doing
the tasks that have always been done and in the same way as before. Strategy implementation over time becomes more demanding as
competition intensi�ies. For that reason, top management must do more than simply keep the company running.

To build the necessary capabilities required for effective strategy implementation, the company must continually recruit the kinds of people it
needs and train others in newer systems, processes, products, and technologies. It must develop and keep full a pipeline of potential

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 35/54

General Electric develops future
management by cross-training employees
—sending new hires and longtime
managers to their Leadership
Development Center for executive
training.

Associated Press/Paul Sakuma

management and leadership talent that can �ill higher-level positions as they become available. It must strive to develop a core competence if
it doesn’t have one already or strengthen the one it has. If it does not, the business will erode over time. Part of building capability is to push
decision-making authority down to lower-level managers so they can prove themselves worthy of taking on more responsibility (Thompson,
Strickland, & Gamble, 2004).

Top management must also be effective at evaluating and developing managers and supervisors at lower levels. It becomes a top-
management issue in larger companies where internal demand for good managers and leaders is high and the positions varied. In such a
corporation, potential leaders need to be cross-trained in different functional areas or different brands, product lines, or countries as well as
develop their problem-�inding and -solving capabilities.

Case Study
How GE Develops Its Future Management Needs

General Electric (GE), a highly diversi�ied global corporation, is one of the best
managed companies in the world judging by the results it, along with its divisions
and subsidiaries, has achieved over time. It has pioneered leadership-development
methods that have been widely emulated. The critical �irst step is to recruit people
with high leadership potential. The corporation then goes to great lengths to
develop that potential. GE’s leadership development includes cross-training for
sustained periods of time, not only to provide managers with broad experience, but
also to develop relationships and learn best practices.

When �illing key positions, the selection criteria include “the four Es”: enormous
personal energy, the ability to motivate and energize others, edge (a GE code
meaning the ability to make tough decisions quickly—yes or no, not maybe), and
execution or carrying things to fruition. One trait executives look for when assessing
managers is pro�iciency at what GE calls “workout” by which is meant an ability to
confront issues as they come up, diagnose the root causes, and bring about
resolution so that the company can move forward.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 36/54

Each year roughly 10,000 newly hired and longtime managers are sent to GE’s Leadership Development Center, one of the
world’s top corporate training centers, for a three-week course on six-sigma quality. Six-sigma quality training, which focuses
on removing the causes of errors and defects, improving cycle times, and decreasing expenditures, is a prerequisite for
promotion to any professional and managerial position at GE and any stock-option award.

Finally, GE has developed a grading system for evaluating its 85,000 managers and professionals every year, placing them into
one of �ive tiers: the top 10%, the next 15%, the middle 50%, the next 15%, and the bottom 10%. Everyone in the top tier gets
stock options, no one in the fourth tier gets any, and those in the bottom 10% are weeded out of the company. The CEO
personally reviews the performance of the top 3,000 managers. According to Jack Welch, GE’s CEO from 1980 to 2001, “The
reality is, we simply cannot afford to �ield anything but teams of ‘A’ players” (Thompson, Strickland, & Gamble, 2004).

Discussion Questions

1. What steps might be taken if one or more members of the top-management team were suspected of withholding
information or pursuing a hidden personal agenda?

2. Members of the top-management team were appointed to their positions because of their leadership and take-charge
abilities yet must behave more like team players when helping to make strategic decisions. How might such a seeming
disparity be handled?

3. As CEO of a company, how would you handle high turnover in your top-management team? How could you or should you
in�luence such change?

4. Would a top-management team be better if its members had experiences with other companies before having been
promoted internally? Why or why not?

5. Sometimes, a former CEO becomes a member of the top-management team by way of his company having been acquired.
Is adjusting to this new role easy? What problems, if any, might it present for existing team members?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 37/54

Amgen’s list of corporate values includes being science-based
and intensely competitive, while ensuring quality, encouraging
patient creation, team spirit, and trust and respect for each
other.

Associated Press/Reed Saxon

2.8 Organizational Values

According to authors Thompson, Strickland, and Gamble (2004, p. 27), a company’s values are “the beliefs, traits, and behavioral norms that
company personnel are expected to display in conducting the company’s business and pursuing its strategic vision and strategy.” In some
organizations, such norms are democratically derived and clearly stated, if not rigorously followed. In many other organizations, no explicit
values statement exists. Does it matter? In today’s business world, whether a formal statement of organizational values exists, individual
executives may feel at liberty to behave any way they want. It is more the rule than the exception that money and greed are what drive such
behavior.

The corporate graveyard is littered with companies whose executives acted
unethically and when caught brought the company down with them. The high
pro�ile cases of Enron, Arthur Andersen, WorldCom, Adelphia
Communications, Qwest, and Tyco International, are but a few examples.
Enron, for example, had publicly stated values of respect, integrity,
communication, and excellence; yet its executives violated every one of them.
The values were not suf�iciently ingrained to prevent the unethical, even
criminal, behaviors that were eventually exposed. In fact, corporate
corruption is widespread. According to a 2011 survey conducted by the Ethics
Resource Center (2011), 45% of U.S. employees observed wrongdoing within
their organizations. We can assume that public exposure of these incidents
would erode consumer perceptions of credibility and trust in those companies
—and that would be disastrous for brand reputation.

Stop and think for a moment about all the places where you shop or do
business and why you do. Which ones get your patronage because of how they treat you? Do you buy their products because of their generous
return policy? Is it the company’s commitment to preserving the environment that attracts you? Companies that actually hold themselves to
meaningful norms and values derive signi�icant bene�its from how their customers and the world at large regard them.

What should a statement of values contain? Ideally it should summarize the culture and state how the company wants everyone to behave.
For instance, Yahoo! pursues values of excellence, innovation, customer respect, teamwork, community, and fun. Curiously, at the end of its list
of values, there is another list of 54 things it doesn’t value, including “bureaucracy, losing, good enough, arrogance, the status quo, following,

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 38/54

formality, quick �ixes, passing the buck, micro managing, 20/20 hindsight, missing the boat, playing catch-up, punching the clock, and
‘shoulda coulda woulda'” (Thompson, Strickland, & Gamble, 2004, p. 30).

The values statement should state as accurately as possible what the values are and what is meant in observing them. This is hard to do if the
company wants buy-in from all the employees. The language should be concise and clear. Typically the key values are fewer than 10 in
number; a longer list would fail to get people’s attention and would intimidate rather than motivate them to model the behaviors. More
importantly, everyone from the CEO on down should model the behaviors and attitudes set forth. People should not only be accountable to
the company but also to themselves. This means that the company should be extremely careful in hiring people. Fortunately, companies do
exist that “do well by doing good.”

Commonly Held Corporate Values

The following are commonly held company values:

Accountability
Celebrating company and personal achievements
Citizenship
Community
Compassion
Continual improvement
Continual learning
Creating shareholder value
Credibility
Customer service
Doing the “right” thing
Embracing change
Empowerment
Entrepreneurial spirit and innovation
Environmental stewardship
Excellence
Getting it right the �irst time
Passion
Personal renewal
Quality

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 39/54

Respect for people and self
Safety
Taking care of people
Teamwork
The customer is always right
Tolerance for risk
Trust
Uncompromising integrity

Which values should be on your company’s statement? Which ones match its vision, strategy, and brand and should therefore
be adopted? Which ones are paramount? Which ones does everyone agree on?

Discussion Questions

1. Can a company be successful without a formal values statement? Discuss.
2. Describe a process you would use to develop a statement of values to which everyone in the company subscribes.
3. What would you do—indeed, what can you do—if you notice someone in the company violating a strongly held company
value (anything from padding an expense report to overbilling a customer to lying)?

4. Is the initial employee contract an individual signs on joining the company enough to guarantee honest behavior? How
might a company monitor employee behavior and become aware of violations?

5. How can you ensure that all employees really understand and accept the company’s values statement? Would they know
what “integrity” and “accountability” mean in this context, and how might you explain these?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 40/54

2.9 Organizational Culture

The values statement sets forth what is expected of employees, and in turn, what they can expect from the company. When observed, the
shared values contribute to the organizational culture of a workplace. Much has been written about what corporate culture is. Kilmann,
Saxton, and Serpa state that culture “is de�ined as the set of key values, beliefs, understandings, and norms shared by members of an
organization” (1986, p. 87). Because of this last characteristic, norms, it is incumbent on top managers to have a thorough understanding of
the company’s culture and evaluate the extent to which the culture can become a strategic enabler or hindrance (Prahalad, 2010). Consider,
for example, Microsoft and Apple or United Airlines and Southwest airlines—two sets of organizations with vastly different cultures rooted in
different values. Apple and Southwest are two organizations that have differentiated themselves from their competitors. Their cultural
differences in the areas of values, beliefs, and vision are evident in their business practices, products, and services.

Culture has the ability to enhance or impede the implementation of a particular strategy. Just as form follows function, so also does structure
follow strategy. Changing the structure involves changing the culture (Schein, 2010). Many failures in corporate strategy can be traced to a
new strategy being imposed on the organization without considering whether the culture should also be changed. Sometimes a new strategy
proves impossible to implement because the culture will not change. As an example of this, for years before General Motors actually went
bankrupt, it resisted manufacturing and selling smaller, more fuel-ef�icient cars primarily because executives’ bonuses were still based on
selling the large gas-guzzlers that commanded high pro�it margins.

Jerome Want has laid out a hierarchy of corporate cultures, in order of least desirable to most desirable (Table 2.3). The last two, Service and
New Age, are considered high-performing cultures.

Table 2.3: Hierarchy of corporate cultures

Culture Characteristics Some Examples

Predatory Punitive, alienating, exploitive WorldCom, Enron, Global Crossing, HMOs

Frozen Gridlock, denial, authoritarian, unresponsive to change Telecoms, airlines, Kmart, cable companies,
steel industry

Chaotic Fragmented, unfocused, no mission AOL, advertising, software industry

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 41/54

Bill Cobb/Superstock

Political Balkanized, retaliatory Universities, large partnerships, law �irms

Bureaucratic Procedural, rigid, regimented, authoritarian, demands
conformity

Utilities, government agencies, insurance
companies, banks

Service Customer focus, quality, authoritative focus, responsive to
change

Harley-Davidson, Edward Jones, Jet Blue,
Target, Westin Hotels

New Age Creates change, innovative, egalitarian, consensual, long-term
focus, entrepreneurial

Southwest Air, Nucor, Google, Johnson Controls,
Patagonia

Source: Jerome Want. (2006, p. 86). Corporate culture: Illuminating the black hole—Key strategies of high-performing business culture. New York, NY: St.
Martin’s Press.

At times, strategic changes implemented by top management can have an effect on the organizational culture as a whole. There are many
common strategic changes that companies undergo that require the corporate culture also to change. High-growth companies will eventually
make a transition to maturity and slower growth. The primary emphases of the organization then shifts from market share and sales
commissions to cost cutting and cost savings. Companies that have declining or �lat pro�its may be obliged to turn to lowering costs in all
phases of their operations and develop a low-cost mentality. When a company is in the midst of a turnaround, losses have �inally been
stemmed, operations stabilized, and the new strategy has begun to take effect, a new culture will be vital to sustaining the progress.

Some companies may make a strategic decision to be innovative as a way of
keeping up with the competition. This transition can be dif�icult because an
innovative culture demands a different style of managing—one that rewards
failure instead of punishing it (Sutton, 2009).

Unless done carefully, people in organizations, and especially cultures that
have evolved over time, resist change. The way to succeed is to get those who
must change involved in the change process from the very beginning. They
should be told what the problem is or why the change is necessary and be
given an opportunity to come up with solutions. Any change forced on them
will produce resistance, either overt or tacit. The change process should be
planned carefully with participation by all affected. Implementation should
take place in stages and be accompanied by any necessary education or

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 42/54

Southwest Airlines’ corporate culture is considered New Age
because it creates change and is innovative, customer oriented,
and has a long-term focus.

training and support. The process may be smoothed with the assistance of a
skilled consultant.

The extent to which a strategic alternative �its with the existing corporate
culture, or the extent to which a company’s culture might be required to change, are key criteria in choosing the best strategy. Changing the
culture is very dif�icult to do and so should be taken into account when making strategic choices. This is discussed in Chapter 6, when we
consider how to decide which of several strategic alternative choices to adopt.

Case Study
Culture Change at the Paci�ica Corporation

Some years ago during a strong real estate market, the Paci�ica Corporation acquired a real estate development company
through a leveraged buyout where most of the purchase price was �inanced through debt. For this reason, the CEO was under
intense pressure to repay much of the debt very quickly. To do so would require doubling the company’s sales the very next
year.

This would be quite a challenge under the best of circumstances, but was this company that had been acquired prepared to
deliver the results needed? In the preceding three years it had purchased no new land on which to build homes and was
coasting on money made from selling houses built on existing lots. Employees were in the habit of arriving late, taking long
lunch breaks, and leaving early. The acquisitions manager responsible for �inding new parcels of land to buy was routinely out
of the of�ice �ive days a week. When confronted, he could not produce a list of parcels on which the company might bid, had no
records of contacts or meetings attended, and had never held debrie�ing meetings to recommend parcels to bid on at what
price. No one had held him accountable. “Country club” would best describe the culture existing when the company was
acquired. The CEO engaged a consultant to help him change the culture in a hurry and get the company to double sales in one
year.

The consultant held a series of meetings with the staff to lay out the problem and to discuss possible solutions. These meetings
and an accompanying survey revealed the following attitudes:

Company operating nowhere near its potential (average assessment 46%)
An absence of trust

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 43/54

No incentives in place
No strategy or direction
No one cares (so why bother?)
An absence of information about economic changes

As a consequence of having been asked, the employees’ attitude toward attending workshops and changing the way work was
done markedly improved. Land parcels were identi�ied, bids placed, and several bought. The process of getting permits and
utilities to the parcels was accelerated. An economic expert was brought in, and the group became educated about how to
obtain forecasts and assess what they meant for the business. Alternative strategies were debated and decided and reward
systems put in place. The culture was now decidedly collaborative. By mid-year, solid progress had been made, and everyone
knew what was expected of them.

Before the transition was complete, however, �ive original managers, including the acquisitions manager, were replaced. The
CFO was let go when it was discovered he had no idea how to budget. For six entire months, he had fooled the CEO into
believing that everything was on track. Whenever he was asked if expenses were “on budget,” the CFO would say, “Yes,” and
people believed him. After about six months, the consultant remarked that costs had skyrocketed and asked, “Is everything still
on track with the original budget that was set?” The real answer was “no”: Every month, as costs had outpaced the set budget,
the CFO had simply raised the budget to match expenses. Rather than taking action to decrease costs, he had consistently told
everyone that things were “on budget.”

Paci�ica did double its sales that �irst year of new ownership, primarily because its culture was turned around. The footnote to
the story is that the CEO shrewdly sold the company a few years later, shortly before the real-estate market took a downturn.

Discussion Questions

1. Every four years, Americans vote for who gets to be president of the United States. In cases where a new president
represents a change in political party, what sort of culture change has to take place in the Executive Branch of government?
How is it done?

2. Can an organization with a bureaucratic culture ever change? Why or why not?
3. Some companies replace their CEO as a way of changing their culture quickly. Is this a good idea? Why or why not?
4. How exactly does an organization realize that its culture is the reason its strategy is not working? If you, as someone
working in the company, noticed this, what would you do?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 44/54

5. A company needs to change its culture. Which is better—replacing enough people to sever continuity with the old culture,
or going through a culture-change process?

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 45/54

Car manufacturer Toyota started a suggestion box for
employees to generate ideas. Toyota reads every employee
suggestion and thanks them, encouraging them to suggest
another.

Associated Press/Ed Reinke

2.10 Managing Organizational Change

Change management is “a systematic approach to dealing with change, both
from the perspective of an organization and on the individual level . . .
proactively addressing adapting to change, controlling change, and effecting
change” (Change-Management-Coach.Com, n.d.a.). It is “the coordination of a
structured period of transition from situation A to situation B in order to
achieve lasting change within an organization” (Change-Management-
Coach.Com, n.d.b). These are two of many de�initions; together, they effectively
and concisely de�ine a complex process.

To keep pace with external changes going on and to compete effectively,
organizations must embrace change. Given the complexity of today’s large and
international corporations, managing such continual change is dif�icult. Not to
do so, however, would be to lose competitive viability and market share, thus
corporations have no option but to accept the need to change. Section 1.4
discussed the accelerating pace of change to which all organizations are
subject. More than being reactive, corporations need to change proactively to
get ahead of their competitors and survive competitive pressures in the long
term.

Why Organizational Change Is Necessary

Organizational change is dif�icult because, unless handled properly, it poses a threat to the status quo and creates immediate resistance.
Changes can impact every aspect of organizational life including strategies, culture, structure, control systems, and groups and teams. Vital
processes such as communications, motivation, and leadership are also affected. Resistance to change can take many forms, both passive and
active, such as blaming others, poisoning the culture, and so on.

Prerequisites to change include recognizing that there is a problem, identifying it correctly, and �iguring out how to resolve it. The problem
might be something simple such as taking too long to pay vendors, or it could be more complex and dangerous like losing one’s lead in
innovation. Perhaps something is not happening the way it should or performance is deteriorating in some way. The need to improve

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 46/54

performance and lower costs is unrelenting. The more urgent motivation for change stems from a strategic consideration. A company might
need to develop a new technology, adopt a new production process, enter a new market, develop a core competence, or take other vital
actions to improve the company’s position in the market, its market share, and performance on other key indicators. In such cases, the status
quo is not an option; change is inevitable.

Companies that can manage change, therefore, are ahead of the game. Researchers believe that the highest-performing organizations are
those that are constantly changing and have become experienced at doing so (Jones & George, 2007). These organizations’ cultures are either
innovative, adaptive, or both. They have learned to identify goals and ways of achieving those goals as a result of participative discussions and
then pursued them enthusiastically. Any attempt to force doing something or how to do it on a work group will be met with resistance
thereby jeopardizing the change process or even preventing it.

Implementing Change

Managers introduce and implement change from either the top down or the bottom up. Top-down change is autocratic; the need for change
and how it is to be implemented is decided at the top of the organization and relayed to those lower down in the hierarchy to implement. Top-
down change is valuable when the company needs to act quickly and decisively. It is typically instigated by the CEO. It works because
managers at each level of the hierarchy have the authority to tell their staffs what to do and what results are expected. For example, the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is widely recognized as an autocratic, top-down style organization. Airport TSA of�icers must
react and carry out mandates from the agency’s top leaders and have very little to no involvement in change (Jamieson, 2011).

Bottom-up change is more gradual, complex, and evolutionary, but no less effective. More than top-down change, it gets everyone involved,
con�irms to workers that the “higher-ups” are listening to their ideas and sometimes acting on them. This sense of being a participant in the
process minimizes resistance to change. Who else is in a better position to see the need for change or how something can be done better or
more ef�iciently than front-line workers? Bottom-up change can originate anywhere in the organization. For example, Google gives its staff
freedom, time, and resources to work on their own ideas and innovations that might be of interest to consumers. In fact, the company reports
that about 50% of its new products and features are the outcome of “personal project” time. Instead of change and innovation being created
at the top, with lower level employees carrying out the plan, new ideas emanate from the ground up. In some traditional organizations that
encourage bottom-up innovation, progress is critically evaluated at each stage of development through a “stage-gate” process where progress
is critically evaluated and the project may be terminated at any stage (Cooper, 1993).

Monetary rewards for coming up with ideas, especially in innovative companies, are relatively uncommon because such behavior is expected
as part of a person’s job. Moreover, if the idea results in a successful product line or business within the company, there is the potential for the

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 47/54

creator of the idea to be put in charge of that product line or division. In other words, it can be a fast track to promotion (Block & MacMillan,
1993).

Many companies also have suggestion schemes. If no one reads the suggestions and gets back to the idea-generator, however, people will
eventually stop suggesting ideas. Suggestion boxes have been known to gather dust from disuse. Toyota, on the other hand, has become
famous for reading every single suggestion and replying one way or the other to the senders, thanking them for submitting the idea and
encouraging them to submit others.

Managing change demands a high degree of communication and coordination among all organizational units. A new technology may require a
change in product design, production, and other functional areas. All activities related to the adoption of the new technology must be
coordinated, as must all the other change processes that may be ongoing. Change can quickly become a way of life in organizations that
embrace change and want to become stronger competitors. As Hiroshi Okuda, Chairman of Toyota Motor Corporation, has said, “Failure to
change is a vice” (Miller, 2003).

Case Study
Bottom-Up Suggestions at Toyota

Toyota implements more than 700,000 improvement ideas each year worldwide. That number is incredible, considering that
Toyota has been pursuing its mission of decreasing cost and increasing quality for almost 50 years. If every idea were to save
Toyota a mere $100, the total would result in a staggering $70 million.

As Toyota cuts production costs by implementing ef�icient practices on the shop �loor and beyond, customers bene�it from the
savings via price reduction. Between 2000 and 2003, the company proved itself a �ierce industry competitor by adding even
more features to popular vehicle models while simultaneously reducing prices.

For every idea that saves the company money, Toyota rewards the employee in cash. The greater the cost savings, the greater
the employee reward, with bonuses ranging from $5 to $2,000 per idea. After the employee submits a form outlining the idea, a
supervisor assesses it, the reward is calculated, and money is added to the employee’s paycheck. This process has been honed
over 50 years.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 48/54

Most employee rewards are in the $5 range. Bonus funds are taken from the training budget, since Toyota believes that self-
generated improvement is more effective than traditional classroom training or lectures. Because the money is not taken from
the improvement budget, pressure to generate high savings is absent. Toyota’s philosophy is that with quality training and
education, good ideas and savings will automatically result.

Because employee ideas are generated and submitted during breaks and after work, rather than “on the clock,” the bonuses
provide Toyota a way to appreciate employees who spend their personal time on company advancement.

Discussion Questions

1. You are in charge of a small company and want to institute many changes. Compare the approaches of telling your
employees what you want them to do versus asking them for their ideas before deciding on what to do.

2. You are interviewing for a job in a company. How would you discover whether it had an innovative or adaptive culture? If it
didn’t, would that be a deal breaker for you? Why or why not?

3. A company is considering whether to install a new technology into its production process. Top management wants to do
this because of large savings estimated to accrue in future years, but the functional departments of engineering and
production say the dif�iculties of doing so are huge, and it should not be done. Suggest a way out of this impasse.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 49/54

This video summarizes many of the main themes and
concepts of the chapter, most notably the difference
between various leadership styles.

Different Leadership Styles
Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to
obtaining a connection from the pool. This may have
occurred because all pooled connections were in
use and max pool size was reached. – The License
for this video has expired. Please contact your
Instructor

Summary

An understanding of the human side of corporations is essential to managing
strategically. Strategic planning and strategic management are the principal
drivers of change.

Leaders create change; managers implement change. Leaders are visionary, while
managers get things done through other people. Both are responsible for getting
things done, but leaders see where change is needed and the direction in which
the company should go. Companies run leadership-development programs to
identify, develop, and evaluate potential leaders and ensure that a quali�ied person
will be available to �ill a leadership role when needed. Leaders are best trained in
the crucible of experience rather than by attending courses.

Leaders’ power stems from legitimate authority due to their positions in the
company, specialized knowledge, respect and charisma, and the ability to bestow
or deny rewards. Strategic leaders are most concerned with the company’s long-
term ability to endure and prosper. They take the lead in creating a vision
statement that articulates where the company should be 5 to 10 years in the future
and are responsible for motivating the company to achieve the vision. Vision
statements should be concise, inspiring, memorable, and achievable.

The effectiveness of a CEO is measured by corporate success over an extended
period, the state of the company at the end of the CEO’s tenure, and the
preparedness of the CEO’s successor and succession plan. CEO’s compensation packages tend to emphasize short-term results except for the
stock they are given.

Organizations need an overarching purpose other than pro�its, market share, shareholder value, or traditional measure of corporate success.
A purpose statement can motivate employees by expressing values with which employees readily identify (e.g., to save and enhance lives).
Employees are more inspired to work for a company whose raison d’etre expresses their own values than they are to achieve traditional
measures.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 50/54

Companies are governed by CEOs and their top-management teams. Public companies are required to elect a board of directors to represent
the interests of stockholders. Boards of public companies are further required to have an audit committee composed of independent
directors, a compensation and bene�its committee, and a nominating and corporate governance committee. Boards are comprised of inside
members (the CEO and key executives), related outsiders, and independent members. Keeping the board informed and being responsive to its
wishes regarding strategic direction is a challenge for the chairman and CEO.

As a company evolves and expands, its organizational design also evolves. In other words, structure follows strategy. Unless the company is
organized appropriately, it will not be able to execute its strategies effectively. There are three basic forms of organizational design. Functional
organization is the most common for single-business companies. A matrix organization may be suitable when a company handles many
projects or brands and may conduct business in several countries. Divisional organization is primarily for diversi�ied companies and
conglomerates.

Besides the CEO and president, top-management teams in a functional organizational design typically consist of all vice presidents and C-level
of�icers. In a matrix organization, top management includes department heads and key staff directors. In a divisional organization, key staff
directors and all divisional and subsidiary presidents are members of the management team.

Top-management teams are involved in strategic planning and making strategic decisions for the whole corporation. In addition, as the
company’s leadership pipeline is a resource for top executives, they have an obligation to keep it full and give those in it as much cross
training as possible.

How people behave in a company and how they treat customers and suppliers is of the utmost importance. Company compliance with all laws
and regulations is imperative. Not doing so could be fatal to the enterprise. The company has to treat people fairly, motivate them to be good
and to do good. Thus promoting values and making them explicit and modeling them are critical. A culture based on good values will endure,
because it will attract people who share those values.

Organizational cultures are built values or “how we do things around here.” Once established, cultures are self-perpetuating and therefore
hard to change. When a new strategy is chosen or changing times demand different goals, implementation is hindered if the culture doesn’t
change appropriately. Innovative and adaptive cultures are, by their nature, used to constant change and are the kind of cultures companies
should strive to develop when their environment and competition is changing rapidly.

In order for a company to transition from its current state to a desired new state, myriad changes may be necessary, and they have to be
managed well. The single biggest mistake is not giving those who will be most affected by the change an opportunity to participate in

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 51/54

effecting the change. Excluding front-line workers from the process leads to resistance, both passive and overt, making the change process
more costly and even impossible. If there’s a problem, it must �irst be identi�ied before a solution can be crafted. If change is required that is
not a direct response to a problem, the reason for the change must be clearly explained before being implemented.

Sometimes change is dictated from the top down. This is particularly true if the issue is urgent, as top-down change can be implemented
rapidly. Bottom-up changes take longer but involve those most affected by the change, thus minimizing resistance and increasing the chances
of successful implementation. Suggestion schemes can be useful but only if suggestions are read and contributors receive a response.

Concept Check

Key Terms

administrator One who directs others in the pursuit of ends by the use of means, both of which are determined by a third party.

audit committee A standing committee of the board of directors responsible for hiring and reviewing the performance of the independent
public accountants that audit the company’s �inancial systems and reports, for ensuring the integrity of its accounting practices and controls,
and for reviewing signi�icant changes in accounting policies. In addition, it helps the company comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

bottom-up change A change process that can begin with anyone in the company (and need not travel upward more than one or two levels),
gets results gradually over time, and involves employees, thus minimizing their resistance to change.

change management A structured approach to rearranging and transforming individuals, teams, and organizations from a present state to a
desirable future state. This organizational process aims to cultivate a business environment in which employees can accept and welcome
workplace changes.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 52/54

C-level of�icers Executives that are on a par with vice presidents in the organizational hierarchy. “C-level” is shorthand for CFO (chief
�inancial of�icer), CMO (chief marketing of�icer), CIO (chief information of�icer), CSO (chief strategy of�icer), and so on.

coercive power The ability of a leader or manager to punish a subordinate; this could take the form of �iring someone, denying a raise or
bonus, or reassigning the person to an undesirable location.

Compensation and Bene�its Committee A standing committee of the board of directors responsible for determining compensation
packages for the CEO, president, and key top managers and board members, and pension and other welfare policies for all employees.

corporate culture The framework of core ideals, beliefs, and standards shared by members of an organization.

division A strategic business unit of the company that nevertheless does business using the corporate name.

divisional organizational design A design that is most common in diversi�ied companies, where each division or subsidiary has its own
president and functional organization but reports up the chain of command to the CEO.

expert power Power attributed to the unique experience, competence, and expertise possessed by a leader.

functional organizational design A design that groups employees together according to discrete functional activities in the belief that by so
doing the work will be done more effectively.

governance The mechanism by which a company is steered, managed, and safeguarded. Public companies must be governed by a board of
directors as well as by a CEO and top management.

insider A member of the board of directors with substantial day-to-day experience of running the company, like the CEO and certain other
top-level executives appointed by the board.

leader One who conducts and directs others in the voluntary attempt to accomplish a goal by the use of certain methods, both of which are
chosen or approved of by the leader’s followers.

leadership pipeline A cadre of highly developed potential leaders capable of �illing slots in the organizational hierarchy as and when they
become vacant; ideally, this pipeline should be “full” at all times.

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 53/54

legitimate power The authority obtained through the occupation of a position in the company; the higher the position, the more power and
authority the individual holds.

level-5 leadership A leader that builds enduring greatness (for the company) through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and
professional will.

manager One who oversees others in the attempt to accomplish a goal by the use of certain methods speci�ied by the manager. (A more
general de�inition is someone that gets work done through others.)

matrix organizational design A design with both vertical (skills or disciplines) and horizontal chains of command (such as projects, distinct
brands or product lines, or countries).

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee A standing committee of the board of directors responsible for reviewing possible
candidates to join the board and recommending nominees for election, overseeing the process for performance evaluations of the board and
its committees, and reviewing the company’s executive-succession plans.

organizing The deployment of organizational resources to achieve strategic objectives.

outsider or independent A member of the board of directors that has no relationship to the company at all.

overarching purpose A statement that is bigger than pro�it or shareholder value or market share, or even the products the company
produces. It motivates employees because it expresses values with which employees identify.

public company A company whose shares can be publicly traded on a U.S. stock exchange and that is regulated by the SEC to ensure accurate
and responsible �inancial reporting.

public-policy committee An optional committee of the board of directors responsible for overseeing the company’s efforts at protecting the
environment, health issues, and other public policies that might affect the company.

referent power Power that is derived from the appreciation, high regard, and loyalty of a leader’s followers and is a direct result of the
leader’s character.

related outsider A member of the board of directors not involved with the �irm’s day-today operations but who may have a relationship with
the company (for example, a major stockholder).

1/3/2018 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT450.12.2?sections=ch02,sec2.1,sec2.2,sec2.3,sec2.4,sec2.5,sec2.6,sec2.7,sec2.8,sec2.9,sec2.10,ch02summary&content=content&clientToken=833c7e2a-d8… 54/54

reward power Based on the ability to give or withhold tangible rewards (like pay raises, bonuses, preferred job assignments) or intangible
rewards (like verbal praise or respect).

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) A United States federal agency that enforces federal securities laws and oversees key
participants in the securities world, including stock brokers and dealers, investment advisors, and mutual funds.

servant leadership A form of leadership that focuses on removing obstacles that prevent employees from doing their jobs, thus enabling
them to realize their full potential.

stock exchange An independently run exchange that enables the stock of public companies to be bought or sold at a price dictated by
demand and the performance of those companies.

strategic leadership Involves developing an outlook and strategy that will position the company to become a stronger competitor, in both
the short term and the long term.

strategic-planning committee An optional committee of the board of directors responsible for keeping the board informed about strategic
decisions the company might take and for making sure that the board’s input is taken into account (for example, in the company’s annual
strategic-planning process).

top management Typically comprises all the vice presidents and C-level executives in a functional organization, the department heads and
key staff directors in a matrix organization, and key staff directors and all divisional and subsidiary presidents in a divisional organization.

top-down change Change instigated by the CEO when the company needs to act quickly and decisively.

transformational leader A leader that satis�ies the higher needs of the followers and who interacts with followers to raise the organization
to a higher moral plane.

vision statement A concise statement of where the organization would like to see itself 5 or 10 years (sometimes longer) in the future.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Strategic Planning ”

Get high-quality paper

Guarantee! All work is written by expert writers!

Still stressed from student homework?

Get quality assistance from academic writers!

Order now