Summary:
Theory lectures Strategic Management
PROFESSOR: ELVIRA HAEZENDONCK
Gino Aytas | 1MA IB | Academic year 2021 – 2022
Version 2 | 28-11-2021
,Practical information:
The grading of this course consists out of 2 elements. An individual open book exam
which represents 75% of your final grade and group assignments which represent 25%.
1. Introduction
In this course we will be focussing on 4 main area’s.
It is important to ask ourselves what strategy is exactly. An important first note is that
strategy is not the same as tactics.
• Strategy is the overall design and philosophy to plan for deploying resources to
establish a favourable position and reach success.
• Tactic is a scheme for a specific manoeuvre
Strategic decisions can be characterised as
being important, not easily reversible and
involving a significant commitment of
resources. A tactic is much more short
term. In any organisation there is being
thought about the broad strategy. It
supports the company on 3 levels. This
allows a company to start from a strategy
that they will put into action.
This hierarchy pyramid displays this, with
the strategic plan at the top, going down
into actions and objectives.
Strategic plans are long term whereas
action plans are more short term,
translating the strategic goals into clear
objectives for each business segment in the
company.
PAGE 1
,But what is needed for a strategy to be
successful?
Strategy links the firm and the
environment.
Our frameworks will
address on the one hand
Corporate Strategy and on
the other Business Strategy.
Lets look at a few examples
where these components of
success have been put into
practice.
There are different opinions on how
a strategy is realized, some say it is
designed from the ground op where
others say it is a dynamic process
that is continuously evolving
depending on external and internal
forces.
Mintzberg is of the opinion that in
an ideal scenario it is a bit of both,
where you have to design a solid
strategy that is able to adapt to the
environment.
2. Class 1: Concepts and schools of thought
In this part we will be looking at then different schools of thought regarding strategy
formation.
1. Design School 6. Learning School
2. Planning School 7. Power School
3. Positioning School 8. Cultural School
4. Entrepreneurial School 9. Environmental School
5. Cognitive School 10. Configuration Process
PAGE 2
, 2.1. DESIGN SCHOOL
The design school sees strategy formation as a process of conception. The strategy seeks
to attain a match between internal capabilities and external possibilities. The senior
management would formulate clear and simple strategies which where communicated to
the staff so they could implement them.
The strategy is solely conceived at the top of the
company and then put into action, this is where strategy
formation stops. This is a rather inflexible approach.
Here we see a visualization of how this process operates.
At the top we have a study of our internal and external
appraisal, which allows the CEO to create a strategy to
be implemented.
This school had some major criticism and downsides:
• Does every CEO put in conscious thought based
on internal capabilities and external possibilities?
• The CEO is solely responsible for the strategy
• The model of strategy is simple and informal
• The design process is already completed when a strategy appears to be fully
formulated as envisioned
• Focus on SWOT, bypassing learning
There are also some pro’s to this school:
• One brain is able to handle all of the information relevant for strategy
• The brain is able to have full knowledge of the situation
• It is predictable and stable
• The organization must only cope with the articulated strategy, which is easy
2.2. PLANNING SCHOOL
The planning school sees strategy formation as a formal process. This is once again very
prescriptive and is fully thought out from the beginning but in contrary to the design
school is decomposable into distinct steps. This means that staff and planners replaced
senior managers as the key players in the process.
2.3. POSITIONING SCHOOL
The positioning school sees strategy formation as an analytical process. It utilizes SWOT
and other frameworks to determine the position that the firm should follow and stick to
with its strategy.
Here planners became analysts, which proved especially lucrative to consultants who
could sink their teeth into hard data and so promote their findings to companies.
PAGE 3
Theory lectures Strategic Management
PROFESSOR: ELVIRA HAEZENDONCK
Gino Aytas | 1MA IB | Academic year 2021 – 2022
Version 2 | 28-11-2021
,Practical information:
The grading of this course consists out of 2 elements. An individual open book exam
which represents 75% of your final grade and group assignments which represent 25%.
1. Introduction
In this course we will be focussing on 4 main area’s.
It is important to ask ourselves what strategy is exactly. An important first note is that
strategy is not the same as tactics.
• Strategy is the overall design and philosophy to plan for deploying resources to
establish a favourable position and reach success.
• Tactic is a scheme for a specific manoeuvre
Strategic decisions can be characterised as
being important, not easily reversible and
involving a significant commitment of
resources. A tactic is much more short
term. In any organisation there is being
thought about the broad strategy. It
supports the company on 3 levels. This
allows a company to start from a strategy
that they will put into action.
This hierarchy pyramid displays this, with
the strategic plan at the top, going down
into actions and objectives.
Strategic plans are long term whereas
action plans are more short term,
translating the strategic goals into clear
objectives for each business segment in the
company.
PAGE 1
,But what is needed for a strategy to be
successful?
Strategy links the firm and the
environment.
Our frameworks will
address on the one hand
Corporate Strategy and on
the other Business Strategy.
Lets look at a few examples
where these components of
success have been put into
practice.
There are different opinions on how
a strategy is realized, some say it is
designed from the ground op where
others say it is a dynamic process
that is continuously evolving
depending on external and internal
forces.
Mintzberg is of the opinion that in
an ideal scenario it is a bit of both,
where you have to design a solid
strategy that is able to adapt to the
environment.
2. Class 1: Concepts and schools of thought
In this part we will be looking at then different schools of thought regarding strategy
formation.
1. Design School 6. Learning School
2. Planning School 7. Power School
3. Positioning School 8. Cultural School
4. Entrepreneurial School 9. Environmental School
5. Cognitive School 10. Configuration Process
PAGE 2
, 2.1. DESIGN SCHOOL
The design school sees strategy formation as a process of conception. The strategy seeks
to attain a match between internal capabilities and external possibilities. The senior
management would formulate clear and simple strategies which where communicated to
the staff so they could implement them.
The strategy is solely conceived at the top of the
company and then put into action, this is where strategy
formation stops. This is a rather inflexible approach.
Here we see a visualization of how this process operates.
At the top we have a study of our internal and external
appraisal, which allows the CEO to create a strategy to
be implemented.
This school had some major criticism and downsides:
• Does every CEO put in conscious thought based
on internal capabilities and external possibilities?
• The CEO is solely responsible for the strategy
• The model of strategy is simple and informal
• The design process is already completed when a strategy appears to be fully
formulated as envisioned
• Focus on SWOT, bypassing learning
There are also some pro’s to this school:
• One brain is able to handle all of the information relevant for strategy
• The brain is able to have full knowledge of the situation
• It is predictable and stable
• The organization must only cope with the articulated strategy, which is easy
2.2. PLANNING SCHOOL
The planning school sees strategy formation as a formal process. This is once again very
prescriptive and is fully thought out from the beginning but in contrary to the design
school is decomposable into distinct steps. This means that staff and planners replaced
senior managers as the key players in the process.
2.3. POSITIONING SCHOOL
The positioning school sees strategy formation as an analytical process. It utilizes SWOT
and other frameworks to determine the position that the firm should follow and stick to
with its strategy.
Here planners became analysts, which proved especially lucrative to consultants who
could sink their teeth into hard data and so promote their findings to companies.
PAGE 3
