management school of thought
Post on 06-Apr-2018
229 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
1/36
1
ABSTRACT.
Over the last thirty years, strategic management has become established as a
legitimate field of research and managerial practice (Shrivastava, 1986). In the
evolution of strategy research, a diversity of partly competitive and partly
supplementary paradigms have emerged. To provide an unequivocal definition
supplementary paradigms have emerged. To provide an unequivocal definition would
mean ignoring the versatility of strategic management. The choice of a definition and
the application of specific strategic management techniques is greatly dependent on
which paradigmatic schools of thought in strategic management one prefers. In this
book, we will therefore review the various schools of thought and their contribution to
the theory and practice of strategy.
A school of thought is understood to be the range of thought of a specific group of
researchers, which has crystallized within the field of strategic management (Brown,
1993). In other words, a school of thought can be seen as an institutionalized
paradigm. Besides reflecting on the variety of schools in strategy, we will also sketch
out new promising directions in strategy research and practice. Although some
strategy scholars have argued that the achieved multiformity in schools of thought
signifies an enrichment of the research within the field of study (cf. Mahoney, 1993),
other scholars from related disciplines complain about the lack of consistency and
coherence (Camerer, 1985). In particular, they argue that the field of strategic
management is extremely fragmented and that here is no agreement concerning the
underlying theoretical dimensions nor the methodological approach to be employed.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
2/36
2
In response, many strategists have advocated increased integration of theories within
the strategy field.. Mintzberg (1990; 1998) has identified ten schools of strategy
theory. Among the ten schools three namely the design school, planning school, and
the Positioning school are prescriptive and the other seven namely the Entrepreneurial
school and the Cognitive school, the Learning school , the Cultural school, the
Environmental school and the configuration school are descriptive.
I will like to give a brief introduction of all the ten schools in this paper,
THE DESIGN SCHOOL
This school is defined by the Havard business School General Management
Group(1965) textbook Business Policy:Text and case. Conceptually this has a
simple two-stage approach : (1) from close examination of a company,determine its
internal capabilities(its strength and weakness ) and its external possibilities ( its
opportunities and threats); then (2) Establish Fits between internal and external
aspects.
THE PLANNING SCHOOL
The Planning school has or contains most of the assumptions of the Desighn school
but the planning school as a whole fits into the overall trend of management and
business practices that is formal procedures, formal thinking, formal practices and
formal analysis. That is with the planning school distinct steps and procedures are
followed.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
3/36
3
THE POSITIONING SCHOOL
The Positioning school largerly deprives from Micheals Porters two landmark books
Competitive Strategy (1980) and Competitive Advantage (1985), sees strategic
management as the process of selecting from a generic strategies and implementation
as the following-through of business logic of that generic strategic. Most notable of
this school has been one simple and revolutionary idea for better or for worst. It talk
about strategies as a position in the economic marketplace-are desirable in any given
industry: ones that can be defended against existing and the future competitors.
THE ENTERPRENURIAL SCHOOL
The entrepreneurial school ideology as (a) being based on a dialect worldview but (b)
being based on the investment in specific uncertainties. The entrepreneurial school
centers its process on the Chief Execution. That shifts strategies from precise design,
planning or positions to visions or perspectives.
THE COGNITIVE SCHOOL
To understand how strategies are formed there is the need to probe into the minds of
the strategist?
Another, branch of this school has accepted a more constructivist and an interpretative
approach of the strategy view or process.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
4/36
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
5/36
5
companies in them can occupy, so the must therefore shape the strategies available to
those companies or else be selected out. The environmental school deserves the
attention of the details it throws on the demand of the environment.
THE CONFIGURATION SCHOOL
This school has two main sides (1) describes the organization and its surrounding
context as configuration and (2) describes the strategy-making process as
transformation.
Currently this school enjoys the most extensive literature and practice.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
6/36
6
INTRODUCTION
Among the schools of thought seven are descriptive in nature whereas the Positioning,
Design and Planning schools of thought of the strategic management schools of
thought are prescriptive in approach.
I am interested in the planning school because of its unique approach to strategy and
its widespread nature it has earned for itself for the past years.
In respect to this, I would like to take some time to review some of it related literature,
examined its models and approaches, contributions and limitations and make some
useful suggestions and recommendations for both strategists and scholars in a whole.
In this paper, it is to be made clear that the main point is a comparison of the planning
school as a prescription school against other prescription schools of thought
Of all the schools talked about earlier, the planning school became a very important
issues and challenged the other prescriptive schools. The planning school seems to
be against the idea of strategies being a form of knowledge. By capturing the
business desires in the form of programmatic goals and objectives and assuming that
all other steps are infallible, strategy simply disappear. Hence this school denies the
existence of uncertainty in any form and is almost a meta-strategy of placing trust in
the formal planning process.
This school marks the beginning of the point where business models really took off,
by the applying of risk management techniques to abstracted statistical model of the
firm.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
7/36
7
Literature review
This school has been dealt with or researched into by many distinctive scholars,
researchers and academicians. Their literature they worked into conveyed around the
main or center theme of this school.
Over the past three decades, a variety of approaches, perspectives, models and
methodologies have been developed and used as the basis for the planning school. At
this point, I will have a look at some of the scholarly works and contribution in
various forms which give association to the planning school.
The Planning School views strategic formulation as a formal process in which a
thorough set of procedures are followed from which derives a situation analysis in
order to formulate the appropriate strategy.
The need for a systematic process of strategic formulation which embraces the firms
vision and creativity permitting a greater flexibility of strategic decisions in response
to the environmental surprises has been supported by (Burgelman and Grove, 1996;
Eisenhardt, 1989).
The Ansoffian Strategic Planning model, which we will use as our candidate model
representing the Planning School, adds dynamism to its functionality in three forms;
Strategic Learning, Strategic Posture Management, and a robust system of
environmental scanning, thus answering the critics claims of invariability and
environmental predictability.
The Planning School gains support from such advocates as (e.g. Ansoff, 1965;
Andrews, 1971; Ansoff, Antoniou and Lewis, 2004; King & Cleland, 1978)
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
8/36
8
Simon (1993) states in his study that effective strategic planning calls for anticipating
the future, scanning the environment for present and prospective competitors and
novelties, and developing skills to generate alternatives in order to implement new
plans.
Planning Schools forecasting strengths enables it to identify threats and to address
them well firm.
Figure 1 Planned management
Ansoffs Strategic Success Paradigm states that for optimal financial success, the
aggressiveness of the firms strategy must match the environmental turbulence level
(Ansoff, 1965). This portion of the Strategic Success Paradigm was borrowed from
the concept of organization-environment matching found in the Requisite Variety
Theorem by W.R. Ashby which states, in order to succeed in its environment, an
organization must match the complexity of its response to the complexity of the
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
9/36
9
environment (Ashby, 1956). Ansoff considered formal, logical, comprehensive
planning to be beneficial in all types of environmental conditions not simply high
levels of discontinuity. Camillus supports Ansoff when he stated that the single most
important common thread that runs through all synoptic formal approaches is the
reliance on an analytical framework that is perceived to be logical and comprehensive
(Camillus, 1982).
In practice, the planning school begins with an objectives-setting stage followed by
an external audit and an internal audit stage which achieved by relying on nard
data. Whereas the design school of thought repackages dialectic knowledge as if
these were science, the planning school tries to close the gap between traditional
business theories and business practice and the new world of risk management. To
do this it needs to abstract a model of how business work, and then use that to run the
figures for different scenarios. Despite the claim formality of the preceeding stages,
the methodology of objective-setting remains unspecified because it is inherently
dialectic- a negotiation between hard data and the formal planning theories or
processes.
It seems that the Planning School is againstthe idea of strategies being a form of
knowledge (perhaps as they are inherently uncertain). By capturing the business
(supposed) desires in the form of programmatic goals & objectives, and assuming that
all other steps are infallible, strategy simply disappears. Hence, this whole School
denies the existence of uncertainty in any form, and is almost a meta-strategy of
placing trust in the formal planning process.The diagram below shows the planning
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
10/36
10
school knowledge tree:
Figure 2 the planning school knowledge tree
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
11/36
11
THE CONTENT.
THE EVOLUTION OF THE PLANNING SCHOOL IN PERSPECTIVE.
Strategy Formation as a formal ProcessThe difference of the planning school has to do with its approach to strategy
formation. The evolution of the planning school can be tracedhow it came about,it
models and approachesthrough several phases. These represent distinct bodies of
literature that converged around the central themes of this school.
The main focus of the planning school is its basis in prescriptive rather than
descriptive. The prescriptive schools is contend that strategy is deliberate and should
follow a formal planning pattern, whiles the descriptive school seeks to counter that
argument by describing strategy as emergent pattern in action. According to the
planning school, strategies emerge as a formal process.
Both Planning and Design School emerged from similar mid-1960s academic
business contexts, and so share many features. Their most significant difference is that
the other Design School implicitly requires an imaginative step (to devise candidate
strategies): however, what the scientistic business theorists behind the Planning.
School really wanted was for business to function like a machine - and there was
hence no room for creativity. Everything Must Be Automatic - There Must Be No
Choice.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
12/36
12
The Strategic Planning Model
I was in a warm bed, and suddenly I m part of a plan. Woody Allen in Shadows
and Fog
There are various strategic planning models. Every textbook and strategic
management consultants have their own model. It has mostly be reduced to the
SWOT model, it is sort for because it has been divided into various steps and
procedures with checklist and techniques and it give an inside into the setting of
objectives in the front of organizations and the elaboration of their budget and
operating plans on the back end. There are various diagrams for the elaboration of the
SWOT model but for the context of this paper we will use the summarized diagram
from Gorge Steiners book Ten Management Planning(1965) is in figure three
below.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
13/36
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
14/36
14
THE OBJECTIVES-SETTING STAGE. In place of thinking about values in the
design school, proponents of the planning school developed extensive
procedures to elaborate and, quantifying the goals of the organization to make sure if
the layout plan have been achieve. Scholars over the years have made a distinct
difference between those models that separate the goals from the objective and those
that combine them.
THE EXTERNAL AUDIT STAGE. Once the objectives have been set, the next two
stages, as in the design school model, are to assess the external and the internal
conditions of the organization. We refer to these as audits. A major factor in the
auditing stage is the external environment or conditions. The external environment is
the set of condition that are outside the firm which can affect its future conditions. To
be able to know the future of the external environment the planner need to forecast
well and if there is the inability to predict than you cannot plan that is there will be the
inability to plan. Thus "predict and prepare" (Ackoff, 1983:59) became the motto of
this school of thought. In order to control the environment various approaches ahs
been used throughout the recent years ranging from simple to complex approaches
most popular of them is the scenario building approach.
THE INTERNAL AUDIT STAGE : regularly with the planning approach, the need
to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses was also subjected to extensive
de-composition. The assessment ofdistinctive, competences is necessarily judgmental,
through the use of formalized technique generally gave way to simpler checklists and
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
15/36
15
tables of various kindswhat Jelinek and Amar have referred to as "corporate
strategy by laundry
THE STRATEGY EVALUTION STAGE: This stage, does the evaluation of the
strategies. This process of evaluation has to do with the elaboration and qualification,
techniques abound , ranging from simple ,early one which focus on the return on
investment to lately develop techniques such as competitive strategy valution,risk
analysis, the value curve, and the various methods or procedures corresponding
with the calculation of shareholder value. Another assumption of the evaluation
stage is that strategies are not evaluated so much as delineated , at a specific point in
time. Strategies must be evaluated so that one can be selected.
THE STRATEGY OPERATIONALIZATION STAGE. In this stage the planning
process has pass through the restricted strategy formulation and open it self to
implementation. Strategy formulation is open-ended, divergent process (in which
imagination can flourish), whiles the implementation should be a more closed-ended
and convergent. Because in the planning process strategy follows a more formalize
structure the implementation provides a freedom too decompose, elaborate, and
rationalize, down ever widening hierarchy. For an effective strategy implementation
all strategies much be divided into sub strategies. As Steiner has stated: "All strategies
must be broken down into sub strategies for successful implementation" (1979:177).
In develop a hierarchy for the strategy implementation the different time perspective
should be taken into consideration with a long time comprehensive strategic plan
been on top followed by medium term plans which gives rise to shortterm operating
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
16/36
16
plans. Paralleling this is a hierarchy of objectives, a hierarchy of budgets, and a
hierarchy of sub strategies (corporate, business, and functionalin this school usually
seen as positions rather than perspectives), and a hierarchy of action programs.
SCHEDULING THE WHOLE PROCESS. Following the process is not the only
thing which is needed to b carried out there must be a schedule or timetable to outline
the sequence in which they are carried out. Steiner in his book which he wrote in 1979
says the front of his whole model an initial step , called the plan to plan
model an initial step, called the "plan to plan
Sorting Out the Hierarchies
Putting all the all theses together you get a comprehensive strategic planning. The
hierarchy model shows these four main components , one for objectives, one for
budgets, one for strategies and one for programs. On one side are strategies and
programs under the label action planning These are concerned with making decisions
before the fact in order to drive behavior. On the other side are objectives and budgets
labeled performance control, since these are designed to assess the result of the
behavior after the fact
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
17/36
17
.Figure 3 The Four Planning Hierarchies
Premises of the Planning School
1. Strategies result from a controlled, conscious process of formal planning
decomposed into distinct steps, each delineated by checklists and supported by
techniques.
2. Responsibility for that overall process rests with the chief executive in principle;
responsibility for its execution rests with staff planners in practice.
3. Strategies appear from this process full blown, to be made explicit so that they can
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
18/36
18
then be implemented through detailed attention to objectives, budgets, programs, and
operating plans of various kinds.
RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLANNING SCHOOL
In recent times there has been newly developed model about the planning school
which focus more on its application. It has been categorized into two main distinct
that isscenario planning and strategic control.
SCENARIO PLANNING
The scenario is a tool in strategic formulation which has the assumption that if you
cannot predict the future than you have to speculate upon variety of them you might
open up your mind and perhaps find the right one. In scenario building they open the
planners perspective to a variety of possible outcomes, so in a whole the exercise
may be seen as one of a stimulating creative activity. In these respects, scenario
building might be described
asplanners at their best, rather than planning per se, because the intention is not to
formalize strategy making so much as improve however managers do it.
STRATEGIC CONTROL
It is about keeping organization on their intended strategic track, what Simons
referred to as the cybernetic view(1988). Strategic control is seen as the means of
review and accept proposed control. In their bookStrategies and Styles: The Role of
the Center in Managing Diversified Corporations, Goold and Campbell (1987) treat
strategic control in this way, as one of three strategy-making styles available:
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
19/36
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
20/36
20
Strategic control has to broaden their scope beyond strategic planning. Stratefy needs
to be effective and efficient, as it will be shown in the matrix below,
Figure 4 Matrix on broadening strategic control
PLANNING UNPLANNED TROUBLES
Strategic planning has ran into trouble in the early 1980s when activity was cut back
in many companies. Business week in 1984 reported that few of the strategies
planners plan are implemented successfully. Igor Ansoff, wrote in 1977, twelve years
after the publication of his key book Corporate Strategy, that "in spite of almost
twenty years of existence of the strategic planning technology, a majority of firms
today engage in the far less threatening and perturbing extrapolative long range
planning Mintzberg (1994) documented the evidence that piled up against the
process, including stories in the popular press and empirical findings from the
research, which contains a long string of studies that set out to prove that strategic
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
21/36
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
22/36
22
planning tools.
5. Planning processes failed to develop true strategic choices. Planners and
executives rush into accepting a strategy that they seen satisfied instead of putting
much effort to search for real ones , analyze and come up with alternative strategies
before taking decisions
6. Planning neglected the organizational and cultural requirements of strategy. In
strategy formation the company ignores the internal environment which is critical to
strategy implementation and focus much on the external environment.
7. Single-point forecasting was an inappropriate basis for planning in an era of
restructuring and uncertainty. Companies still tended to rely on single- point
forecasting. Scenario-based planning was the exception rather than the rule. Planning
assumptions which are base on a single future one which has a slight difference from
the past trends of the organization.
THE FALLACIES OF STRATEGIC PLANNING
An expert has been defined as someone who avoids all the many pitfalls on his or her
way to the grand fallacy. Here will consider the fallacies of strategic planning in three
ways. Our critique is base on strategic planning not planning.
THE FALLACY OF PREDETERMINATION. To engage in strategic planning, an
organization must be able to forcast the course of its environment, control it and
simply assume its stability
Igor Ansoff wrote in Corporate Strategy in 1965 that "We shall refer to the period for
which the firm is able to construct forecasts with an accuracy of, say, plus or minus 20
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
23/36
23
percent as the planning horizon of the firm. The truth of forecasting is that, in fact
whiles certain repetitive patterns may be predictable. The forecasting of uncertainty
such as the change of technology or technological breakthrough and prices increase.
According to Spiro Makridakis, a leading expert in the field, "practically impossible."
And prepare to react to it accordingly. The only hope for planning is to accept the
present trends and hope for the best in the future
THE FALLACY OF DETACHMENT, Marianne Jelinek developed the interesting
point in her book, called Institutionalizing and Innovation,that strategic planning
has been to the executive suite. It is through administrative systems that planning and
policy are made possible, because the systems capture knowledge about the t a s k .
Therefore manager must manage by remote control. The trick, of course, is to get the
relevant information up there, so that those senior managers "on high" can be
informed about the consequences of those details "down below," without having to
enmesh themselves in them. And that is supposed to be accomplished by "hard
data"quantitative aggregates of the detailed "facts" about the organization and its
context, neatly packaged for immediate use.
THE SOFT UNDERBELLY OF HARD DATA
The belief that strategic managers and their planning systems can be detached from
the subject of their efforts is predicated on one fundamental assumption: that they can
be informed in a formal way.
The world information must be reduced to a firms data, hardened and aggregated so
as to be supplied in a more simple form. In other words, systems must do it, whether
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
24/36
24
they go by the name of management information systems which deals with hard data
proves to have a decidedly soft underbelly
I.Hard information is often limited in scope, lacking richness and often failing to
encompass important noneconomic and no quantitative factors. Information which
are important to strategy planning never does become hard data. Therefore manager
spend time to create their own information system putting together a network of
contacts and informers of all kinds
2. Much hard information is too aggregated for effective use in strategy making. The
obvious solution for a manager overloaded with information and pressed for the time
necessary to process it is to have the information aggregated. Often is not the great
deal of information lost in aggregate but rather the essence .
3.Much hard information arrives too late to be of use in strategy making. Information
takes time to "harden": time is required for trends and events and performance to
appear as "facts," more time for these facts to be aggregated into reports, even more
time if these reports have to be presented on a predetermined schedule, strategy
making has to be dynamic, reacting to unfolding events, manager does not need to
waste time for the information to be harden before they act whiles competitor capture
the minds of valuable customers.
4. Finally, a surprising amount of hard information is unreliable. Soft information is
supposed to be unreliable, subject to all kinds of biases. Hard information, in contrast,
is supposed to be concrete and precise; it is, after all, transmitted and stored
electronically. Something is lost in the process of quantification before it is been
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
25/36
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
26/36
26
Figure 5 The formalization edge
CAPITAL BUDGETING VERSUS STRATEGY FORMATION
Capital budgeting is an established procedure by which unit managers (division heads,
functional managers to approve cost and benefits so that management can
compare and rate them and accept what the organization is able to fund.
One of the early studiesan intensive probe into the process in one large divisional
zed firmfound that the senior management had a propensity to approve all the
projects that reached its level. "The important question," wrote the author, "was
whether that group of officers which possessed the power to move proposals through
the funding process chose to identify a particular proposal for sponsorship," because
once that happened, proposals had more or less free passage (Bower, 1970)
In recent study Marsh et al. looked carefully at three firms considered "sophisticated"
in their use of capital budgeting, and found all kinds of problems. The procedure
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
27/36
27
manuals "proved quite hard to locate!"
"Hard-to-qualify costs and benefits were excluded from the financial analysis."
Broms and Gahmberg found evidence of capital projects in some Finnish nd Swedish
firms "regularly miss[ing] the mark" (e.g., requiring 25 percent are turn on investment
while consistently getting about 7 percent). These authors referred to "this
self-deception," these "mantras" as "socially accepted fact
Capital budgeting, therefore, appears to be a formal means not to plan strategy but to
put up a form of structure that considers the projects and to inform senior
management about them. Capital budgeting take the place of the context of existing
strategics. Capital budgeting is a disjointed process, or, more to the point, a
disjointing one
Figure 7 Planners around strategy making
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
28/36
28
THE GRAND FALLACY OF "STRATEGIC PLANNING." Thus we arrive at the
grand fallacy of strategic planning, a composite, in fact, of the three fallacies already
discussed. Because analysis is not synthesis, strategic planning has never been
strategy making. Analysis may follow and elaborate synthesis, by decomposing and
formalizing its consequences. Analysis cannot be substituted for synthesis. We can
conclude that strategy planning has been misnamed rather should have been called
strategy programming.
The Context and Contribution of the Planning School
There is, however, no need to throw out the strategic planner baby with the strategic
planning bathwater. Planners has a very important role to play in strategy formulation.
It can be seen in figure 6 above.
THE UPSIDE OF TOOLISM
1.Every tool carries a set of strengths and weaknesses. Success requires
understanding the full effectsand side effectsof each tool, then creatively and
using them at the right time
2. Tools should be judged by their utility, not by their novelty.
3. Tools exist for the benefit of people, not vice versa. Management tools are credited
by their advocates with saving corporationsalmost as loudly as they are blamed by
their critics for destroying them. The truth is neither the people makes company fail or
succeed. Planners can also act as catalysts, not to promote formal planning as some
kind of imperative, but to encourage whatever form of strategic behavior makes sense
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
29/36
29
for a particular organization at a particular point in time when necessary planner can
carry out formal planning to as a means of program and when strategies come up can
be codify, elaborated and translated into ad hoc programs and routine plans and
budgets and use them on purpose of communication and control. Some of the roles
involved are analytical in nature. That is organization must be able to distinguish
between left-handed and right handed planners, encourage creativity and creative
thinking. The right-handed planners are mostly concerned with more formal kinds of
strategy analysis and particularly with the strategic programming of clear strategies
CASE STUDY
THE TOYOTA AUTOMIBLE COMPANY
Evolution of Toyota
The roots of the Toyota Manufacturing company can be traced back to Sakichi
Toyoda, a tinkerer and inventor, who lived around the late 1800s in a farming
community outside of Nagoya. As a boy, Toyoda learned carpentry from his father
and started designing and building wooden spinning machines. In 1894 he began to
make manual looms that were relatively cheaper and more efficient than existing
looms. Toyoda developed an automatic power looms with the motive to relieve his
grandmother and other friends from the hard spinning and weaving work.
Among his inventions was a special mechanism to automatically stop a loom
whenever a thread broke. This invention led to the concept of jidoka-automation with
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
30/36
30
a human touch.
If Sakichi Toyoda put his mark on the industrial world through loom making,
Just-In-Time was his son Kiichiro Toyoda's contribution. His ideas were influenced
materialize by a study trip to Ford's plants in Michigan(U.S.A) to see the automobile
industry Kiichiro was also inspired by the U.S. supermarket system of products been
replace us its finishes from the shelves.
Toyota now (1900-date)
It is admitted that there is something unique about Toyota. The giant Japanese
automobile manufacturer company recently has the fastest product development
process in the world. New cars and trucks take 12 months or even less to design,
while competitors typically require two to three years. Toyota has phenomenal quality
levels that rivals can only imagine of.
Toyota has turned operational excellence into a strategic weapon not merely through
tools and quality improvement methods but a deeper business philosophy rooted in
understanding of people and what motivates them. Its success is ultimately based on
its ability to develop leaders, build teams, and nurture a supportive culture, to devise
strategy, to build deep supplier relationships, and to maintain a well planned
organization policies and structure
Toyota invented Lean Production in the 1940s and 50s. The company focused on
eliminating wasted time and material from every step of the production process (from
raw materials to finished goods).The result was a fast and flexible process that gives
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
31/36
31
the customers what they want, at the right time and in the right quality that the
customers want at an affordable cost. Toyota improved production by:
What Made Toyota TheWorlds Best Manufacturer?
After the Second World War Toyota develop a Toyota production system to help
produce a variety of vehicles on the same assemble line for its customers unlike its
major competitor GM and Ford who depended much on mass production and
economics ofscale. Toyotas market was very small but it had to produce a variety of
vehicles on the same assembly line to satisfy customers. The solution: making the
operations flexible. This resulted in the birth of TPS.
TPS borrowed some of its ideas from the United States. The core idea of the Just in
Time (JIT) system came from the concept of the pull-system, which was inspired by
American supermarkets. In the pull system, individual items are replaced as each item
begins to run low on the shelf.
Applied to Toyota, it means that the first step in the process is not completed until the
second step uses the materials or supplies from Step 1.
At Toyota, every step of the manufacturing process uses Kanban to signal to the
previous step when its part needs to be replenished.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
32/36
32
Toyotas unique problem solving plan;
Level of Problem Corresponding Level of Countermeasure
There is a puddle of oil on the shop floor. Clean up the oil.
Because the machine is leaking oil. Fix the machine.
Because the gasket has deteriorated. Replace the gasket.
Because we bought gaskets made of inferior material. Change gasket
specifications.
Because we got a good deal (price) on those gaskets. Change purchasing policies.
Because the purchasing agent gets evaluated on short-term cost savings. Change
the evaluation policy for purchasing agents.
The company, aside from broadly defining customers to include internal and external
clients, Toyota also adoptsa well formal structured plan to problem solving, which
became a cornerstone for continuous improvement
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
33/36
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
34/36
34
fit into their business situations and apply them.
I finally conclude that no single school holds the key to business success, even not the
Planning school which have discuss in this paper
Nevertheless they hold useful tools that could aid strategists in various situations and
conditions. Implies that, they are subjective and conditionalitys so the crucial aspect
is left with the smartness of the planner or the strategist. After all, what might be good
for the goose might not be good for the gander! In other words what might be good
for one company made not be good for another?
.
.
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
35/36
35
REFERENCES
1. "The Science of 'Muddling Through'" Charles Lindblom, PublicAdministration Review, Vol. 19, No. 2 (Spring, 1959),
2. Andrews.K.R (1971) The concept of corporate strategyDow-Jones Irwin. Homewood IL
3. Ansoff , Antoniou and lewis, (2001) strategicmanagement:introduction to the ansoffian Approach - xanedu press:
Michigan
4. Ansoff H. I (1965) The firm of the future, Harvard Business Reviewsept. Oct.
5. Burgelman R. A and Grove, A (1989) strategic dissonance,California Management Review 38(2)
6. Corporate Strategy. H. Igor Ansoff, ( 1964)7. Eisenhardt, K.M (1989) Making fast strategic decisions in high
velocity environment, Academy of management
Journal.32.pp543-559
8. King , W. R and Cleland, D. I (1978) Strategic Planning and policyVan nostrand Reinhold: New York
9. Mintzberg, H., and James, R., eds., The Strategy Process(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1988:82-93).
10. Simon . H. A (1993) Strategy and organizational Evolutionstrategic management journal vol.14 pp 131-142
-
8/3/2019 Management School of Thought
36/36
11. Strategy safari: a guided tour through the wilds of strategicmanagement Henry Mintzberg, Bruce Ahlstrand, Joseph Lampel,
Business and Economics (2005)
12. Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of apendulum Rumelt, Schendel et al.., 1994 Journal of Management.
13. Tom Elfring, Henk W.Volberda, School of thought in strategicmanagement fragmentation , integration and synthesis
14. www.google.com
http://www.google.com/http://www.google.com/http://www.google.com/
top related