Main points articles Strategy and Management
Table of Contents
Week 1..............................................................................................................................................3
Collis, D. J., & Rukstad, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your strategy is? Harvard Business
Review, 86(4), 82–90..................................................................................................................3
Dodd, D., & Favaro, K. (2006). Managing the right tension. Harvard Business Review, 84(12),
62–74.........................................................................................................................................4
Montgomery, C. A. (2008). Putting leadership back into strategy. Harvard Business Review,
86(1), 54–60...............................................................................................................................5
Week 2..............................................................................................................................................5
Ofek, E., & Wathieu, L. (2010). Are you ignoring trends that could shake up your business?
Harvard Business Review, 88(7/8), 124–131..............................................................................5
Rumelt, R. (2011). The perils of bad strategy. Mckinsey Quarterly, 1(1), 30–39........................8
Week 3..............................................................................................................................................9
Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for
strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135.....................................9
Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard Business Review, 82(3), 68–78....9
Miller, D. (1992). The icarus paradox: how exceptional companies bring about their own
downfall. Business Horizons, 35(1), 24–35..............................................................................10
Week 4............................................................................................................................................11
Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1988). First-mover advantages. Strategic
Management Journal, 9, 41–58...............................................................................................11
Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1998). First-mover (dis)advantages: retrospective
and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 19(12), 1111–1125.. 11
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business
Review, 82(4), 74–81................................................................................................................12
Week 6............................................................................................................................................13
Pisano, G. P., & Teece, D. J. (2007). How to capture value from innovation: shaping intellectual
property and industry architecture. California Management Review, 50(1), 278– 296...........13
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). The art of standards wars. California Management Review,
41(2), 8–32...............................................................................................................................13
Dyer, J. H., Kale, P., & Singh, H. (2004). When to ally & when to acquire. Harvard Business
Review, 82(7-8), 108–15..........................................................................................................14
Week 7............................................................................................................................................15
,Ghemawat, P. (2007). Managing differences: the central challenge of global strategy. Harvard
Business Review, 85(3), 58–68.................................................................................................15
Birkinshaw, J., Bouquet, C., & Ambos, T. C. (2007). Managing executive attention in the global
company. Mit Sloan Management Review, 48(4), 39–45.........................................................15
Tushman, M. L., Smith, W. K., & Binns, A. (2011). The ambidextrous ceo. Harvard Business
Review, 89(6), 74–80................................................................................................................16
, Week 1
Collis, D. J., & Rukstad, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your strategy is? Harvard Business Review,
86(4), 82–90.
Summary HBR: Can you summarize your company’s strategy in 35 words or less? Would your
colleagues express it the same way? Very few executives can honestly say yes to those simple
questions. The thing is, companies with a clear, concise strategy statement—one that employees can
easily internalize and use as a guiding light—often turn out to be industry stars. In this article,
Harvard Business School’s Collis and Rukstad provide a practical guide for crafting an effective
strategy statement and include an in-depth example of how the St. Louis–based brokerage firm
Edward Jones developed one that has generated success.
Any strategy statement must begin with a definition of the objective, or the goal that the strategy is
designed to achieve. Since most firms compete in a more or less unbounded landscape, it is also
crucial to define the scope, or domain, of the business. Perhaps most important, companies need to
have a clear sense of advantage—that is, the means by which the business will achieve its stated
objective.
Defining the objective, scope, and advantage requires trade-offs. If a firm pursues growth or size,
profitability will take a backseat. If it chooses to serve institutional clients, it might ignore retail
customers. If it derives its competitive advantage from scale economies, it will not be able to
accommodate idiosyncratic customer needs.
Before developing your strategy and crafting your statement, you’ll want to carefully evaluate the
industry landscape. This includes segmenting customers and identifying unique ways of delivering
value to the ones the firm targets. It also calls for an analysis of competitors’ current strategies and a
prediction of how they might change. The key is to find the sweet spot where the firm’s capabilities
and customers’ needs align in a way that competitors cannot match.
The value of rhetoric should not be underestimated. A 35- word statement can have a substantial
impact on a company’s success. Words do lead to action. Spending the time to develop the few words
that truly capture your strategy and that will energize and empower your people will raise the long-
term financial performance of your organization. They identified three critical components of a good
strategy statement – objective = ends, scope = domain, and advantage = means.
Rather, it is the single precise objective that will drive the business over the next five years or so. A
firm’s scope encompasses three dimensions: customer or offering, geographic location, and vertical
integration. Clearly defined boundaries in those areas should make it obvious to managers which
activities they should concentrate on and, more important, which they should not do. The complete
definition of a firm’s competitive advantage consists of two parts. The first is a statement of the
customer value proposition. Any strategy statement that cannot explain why customers should buy
your product or service is doomed to failure. The second part of the statement of advantage captures
the unique activities or the complex combination of activities allowing that firm alone to deliver the
customer value proposition.
Table of Contents
Week 1..............................................................................................................................................3
Collis, D. J., & Rukstad, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your strategy is? Harvard Business
Review, 86(4), 82–90..................................................................................................................3
Dodd, D., & Favaro, K. (2006). Managing the right tension. Harvard Business Review, 84(12),
62–74.........................................................................................................................................4
Montgomery, C. A. (2008). Putting leadership back into strategy. Harvard Business Review,
86(1), 54–60...............................................................................................................................5
Week 2..............................................................................................................................................5
Ofek, E., & Wathieu, L. (2010). Are you ignoring trends that could shake up your business?
Harvard Business Review, 88(7/8), 124–131..............................................................................5
Rumelt, R. (2011). The perils of bad strategy. Mckinsey Quarterly, 1(1), 30–39........................8
Week 3..............................................................................................................................................9
Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for
strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135.....................................9
Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard Business Review, 82(3), 68–78....9
Miller, D. (1992). The icarus paradox: how exceptional companies bring about their own
downfall. Business Horizons, 35(1), 24–35..............................................................................10
Week 4............................................................................................................................................11
Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1988). First-mover advantages. Strategic
Management Journal, 9, 41–58...............................................................................................11
Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1998). First-mover (dis)advantages: retrospective
and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 19(12), 1111–1125.. 11
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business
Review, 82(4), 74–81................................................................................................................12
Week 6............................................................................................................................................13
Pisano, G. P., & Teece, D. J. (2007). How to capture value from innovation: shaping intellectual
property and industry architecture. California Management Review, 50(1), 278– 296...........13
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). The art of standards wars. California Management Review,
41(2), 8–32...............................................................................................................................13
Dyer, J. H., Kale, P., & Singh, H. (2004). When to ally & when to acquire. Harvard Business
Review, 82(7-8), 108–15..........................................................................................................14
Week 7............................................................................................................................................15
,Ghemawat, P. (2007). Managing differences: the central challenge of global strategy. Harvard
Business Review, 85(3), 58–68.................................................................................................15
Birkinshaw, J., Bouquet, C., & Ambos, T. C. (2007). Managing executive attention in the global
company. Mit Sloan Management Review, 48(4), 39–45.........................................................15
Tushman, M. L., Smith, W. K., & Binns, A. (2011). The ambidextrous ceo. Harvard Business
Review, 89(6), 74–80................................................................................................................16
, Week 1
Collis, D. J., & Rukstad, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your strategy is? Harvard Business Review,
86(4), 82–90.
Summary HBR: Can you summarize your company’s strategy in 35 words or less? Would your
colleagues express it the same way? Very few executives can honestly say yes to those simple
questions. The thing is, companies with a clear, concise strategy statement—one that employees can
easily internalize and use as a guiding light—often turn out to be industry stars. In this article,
Harvard Business School’s Collis and Rukstad provide a practical guide for crafting an effective
strategy statement and include an in-depth example of how the St. Louis–based brokerage firm
Edward Jones developed one that has generated success.
Any strategy statement must begin with a definition of the objective, or the goal that the strategy is
designed to achieve. Since most firms compete in a more or less unbounded landscape, it is also
crucial to define the scope, or domain, of the business. Perhaps most important, companies need to
have a clear sense of advantage—that is, the means by which the business will achieve its stated
objective.
Defining the objective, scope, and advantage requires trade-offs. If a firm pursues growth or size,
profitability will take a backseat. If it chooses to serve institutional clients, it might ignore retail
customers. If it derives its competitive advantage from scale economies, it will not be able to
accommodate idiosyncratic customer needs.
Before developing your strategy and crafting your statement, you’ll want to carefully evaluate the
industry landscape. This includes segmenting customers and identifying unique ways of delivering
value to the ones the firm targets. It also calls for an analysis of competitors’ current strategies and a
prediction of how they might change. The key is to find the sweet spot where the firm’s capabilities
and customers’ needs align in a way that competitors cannot match.
The value of rhetoric should not be underestimated. A 35- word statement can have a substantial
impact on a company’s success. Words do lead to action. Spending the time to develop the few words
that truly capture your strategy and that will energize and empower your people will raise the long-
term financial performance of your organization. They identified three critical components of a good
strategy statement – objective = ends, scope = domain, and advantage = means.
Rather, it is the single precise objective that will drive the business over the next five years or so. A
firm’s scope encompasses three dimensions: customer or offering, geographic location, and vertical
integration. Clearly defined boundaries in those areas should make it obvious to managers which
activities they should concentrate on and, more important, which they should not do. The complete
definition of a firm’s competitive advantage consists of two parts. The first is a statement of the
customer value proposition. Any strategy statement that cannot explain why customers should buy
your product or service is doomed to failure. The second part of the statement of advantage captures
the unique activities or the complex combination of activities allowing that firm alone to deliver the
customer value proposition.
