Programming for an eclectic community of film goers, Lisa must strike a good balance of interesting documentaries, local shorts and cinematic treats. As she says in her wry, knowing manner, not all gay men like Kylie and not all lesbians love Melissa Etheridge, and there has been an ever-changing queer community to cater for over the years.

As with other major film festivals,  Lisa faces some of the current challenges such as finding ways to appeal to a younger audience and how to create film events that will draw people out of their home cinema environments.

Watch on for more revelations, including why Lisa hopes that in 20 years – despite all the joys and challenges of her job – there won’t even be a need for queer film festivals.

The Melbourne Queer Film Festival ran from March 14-24th 2013 and will return around the same time next year.

_______________

Coburg Drive-In, Adele Psarras, 2012

The Programmers is a semi-regular series of video interviews with film programmers in Melbourne who are helming festivals, film nights, micro-cinemas, outdoor events and otherwise independent and eclectic programming (and doing a damn fine job of it.)

1.Explain the concept and characteristics of logical incrementalism .

2.What are the three key elements which affect how strategy is developed in an organisation?.

3.Identify and explain the difference between the four strategy development routes.

4.Discuss the issues that will impact on the continuity of an organisations strategy.

Part b: Refer Text Book.

5.What  influences strategy development at Google and the strengths and weaknesses of their approach?

Question two, Part a:

1. Logical incrementalism is the evolution of strategy as a result of experimentation and consensus (Johnson, Whittington & Scholes, 2011). Logical Incrementalism allows strategy to be synthesised and coordinated into a single coherent direction by using as many known multi-dimensional inputs as possible in the conceptualisation process to shape the overarching goals (Kippenberger, 1998). This means incrementalism is relevant in a market that has a high degree of dynamism and where financial and other resources are neither rich nor abundant. It allows leaders to shape overarching goals that encourage creativity in their execution. This decision making style allows for the most informed decision possible, whilst not locking the decision in until the last practicable moment. The immediacy of the decision to the execution allows the strategist to anticipate the uncertain, the known unknowns rather than trying to guess at the unknown unknowns (Rumsfeld, 2002).

Image via Wikipedia

The focus on including as many variables as possible being generated and analysed by the stakeholders means it incorporates and underpins elements of a risk management approach to strategy creation. This is achieved by experimentation until the best possible options are found, which allows early identification of possible issues. It creates awareness and encourages convergent behaviour within the organisation because the stake holders understand the possible benefits and consequences. The small step of incrementalism gives time for behavioural adaptation and avoids the alienation created by the culture destruction of comprehensive changes. The consultative style required creates stakeholder engagement with the emergent strategy. This means it has a built in understanding which allows adaptive adjustment after any internal or external shocks.

2. The elements through which intended strategy can be developed include strategic leadership. This involves an individual or small team creating the strategy. There is a balance between organisational adaptability, flexibility and providing overarching direction in the chaos and inhibiting individual motivation, creativity and engagement (Johnson, Whittington & Scholes, 2011). Strategic planning systems are another element and are the structured procedures used to create strategy. This is suitable for an organisation with centralised power in a stable environment. It requires decisions to be made on unknowns because it looks at longer time frames (3-5 years) and relies on managers “knowing all” (Obeng & Ugboro, 2008). The final way strategies are materialised is an externally imposed strategy. This is when an exogenous entity, such as governments, parent companies, receivers or venture capitalists forces their own agenda on the company’s strategy (Johnson, Whittington & Scholes, 2011).

3. Whilst Incrementalism is underpinned by the learning aspect of the strategy development framework the political process for strategy development considers the determinates of successful engagement and manipulation of the process by diverse human agendas. It acknowledges that factional tension within the organisation will be a powerful driver of the overall strategy development. Depending on the dominance of the stakeholders these power plays will be an amalgam of compromises. They will be generated by personal experience, competition for resources, relative influence and access to information. Strategy informed by prior decisions identifies that all strategy development emerges and is influenced by the constraints from which it was created. No organisation creates strategy in a bubble; it is collective collaboration of people and resources. The history, richness and synergy of the people and resources will create path dependencies and a culture that will adapt and be adapted by the development of strategy. The last option is the organisational system for the creation of strategy. This identifies that strategy can be created within the organisation surrounded by a local context. It will be created from a combination of culture and environment at a grass roots level. This approach has a strong focus on endogenous and localised issues which will be seen from within the paradigm of the creator: for example marketing, sales, finance, human resources, etc. This means the creator may not have considered the integration implications for the whole organisation. This may have unexpected ramifications and consequences. In turn this may alienate stakeholders that have had no influence on the strategies creation (Johnson, Whittington & Scholes, 2011).

4. The capacity of an organisation to achieve continuity of its strategy is contingent on many factors. This is referred to in literature as its ambidexterity. It identifies the organisations capacity to tolerate the ambiguity of the “dual searches for certainty and flexibility”. This contradiction will be displayed by the organisations aptitude at efficiently exploiting its current resources whilst having the flexibility to explore new opportunities (Bodwell & Chermack, 2010). This could manifest itself in the organisational structure by running different structures in different aspects of the organisation. It will be tightly controlled and hierarchical whilst trying to exploit its current resources and flexible and flat in the exploratory areas such as taskforces and teams. Within each team the acceptance and encouragement of diversity allows well managed cognitive dissonance to become a force for creativity. The implications for leadership include the required capacity to tolerate and encourage a diversity of opinions and the aptitude to make the balance between the two systems and champion the learning created. These capabilities ensure the stability and progress of the strategies of the organisation.

Part b:

Underpinning Google’s strategy development is a combination of strategic leadership and incrementalism. This strategy is rooted in their history and been allowed to continue because of their high profitability. It has been developed by creating a two tier structure where the directors are removed from the shareholders. This allowed the directors a degree of creative freedom that gave rise to a flatter more autonomous, team based structure than American shareholders would normally have been comfortable with (Johnson, Whittington & Scholes, 2011). This creates a cultural platform that attracts the best American people which drives the strategy creation process. The managers are then given broad overarching goals (organise the world’s information) and the space is then allowed for strategy to emerge (Bodwell & Chermack, 2010). The strategies created need to be embraced collectively so they are peer reviewed before they are accepted. The computing focus within the company means the peer review will be assisted by artificial intelligence and include data analysis (Claburn, 2006). There are many projects created and released in a ‘buggy’ beta form, ‘fixed’ from consumer input and ‘killed’ if there is not enough end user interest or uptake (Techcrunch, 2010). While the strategies seem to be a very lightly controlled incrementalist attitude toward strategy development this just means the company has focused on other aspects of the business to retain control. Therefore many of the backend systems are ‘formulaic and rigid’. For example: they have maximum teams of six, deadlines are extremely short and every aspect of the organisation possible is measured and systemised. The company’s strategic development style has come at a cost. The overall strategic direction and accountability can get lost within the organisation. At this stage it has only had bizarre consequences such as the patent for the name Google not being renewed in Germany. In the longer term as the company moves into other aspects of computing it may have more dire outcomes?  The high failure rate of projects within the organisation sometimes forces the company to create expensive patches, for example buying You Tube ($1.65 billion) to overcome the failure of Google Video. Also by sticking with strongly American cultural norms the company has upset the Chinese government and potentially alienated large potential markets such as China. Whilst the current approach has many weaknesses it allows for an inbuilt risk management attitude. It ensures that the failures are only a small percentage of the business and allows for the organisation to retain its ambidexterity. The deep level of knowledge and learning created by the incrementalism strategy has allowed the company to exploit it resources very effectively. This creates rising quarterly profit and earnings per share. While effected by many things the success and potential of the strategy is reflected in the share price. The initial public offering for Google was $US85, Google is currently trading at $US 598.67 (Google, 2011).

 Bibliography

Bodwell, W,  Chermack, T 2010, Organizational ambidexterity: Integrating deliberate and emergent strategy with scenario planning, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 77, no. 2, pp.193-202, viewed 22 October 2011, (ScienceDirect)

Claburn, T 2006, ‘Google Revealed’, InformationWeek, 28 August, p. 34.

Google.com 2011, ‘Google Inc.’, Google Finance, viewed 23 October 2011, < http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOG&#62;

Johnson, G, Whittington & R, Scholes, K, 2011, Exploring Strategy, Prentice Hall, London.

Kippenberger, T 1998, Logical incrementalism, Strategy & Leadership, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 26 – 27, viewed 21 October 2011, (Emerald Insight).

Obeng, K, Ugboro, I 2008, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 420-439, viewed 22 October 2011, (ScienceDirect).

Rumsfeld, D (Secretary of Defense) 2002, DoD News Briefing – Secretary Rumsfeld and Gen. Myers, Pentagon, Washington, February 12.

Techcrunch.com 2010, ‘There’s No Success Like Failure: Google’s Biggest Product Flops’, viewed 27 October 2011, < http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/18/is-google-me-nex/&#62;.

Two Pages, 12 Point, 1.5 spacing.

Question one, Part a:

1.Why is organisational history important in the development of strategy?.

2.What are the key considerations in strategic decision-making? Justify your considerations.

3.Explain the concept of strategic drift and detail the five key causes.

4.What does the term ‘legitimacy’ mean and why is it important for organisations. 2

Part b: Refer text book.

5.Using the cultural web framework analyse Club Med’s culture before 2000.

6.Using this analysis then explain the reasons for Club Med’s success between the 1950’s and 1990’s.

Question one, Part a:

1. Historical inputs are recognised and understood by the phrase “the way we do things around here” or the way business is now. History is the fusion and creation of internal and external cultural factors from the past that define the paradigm and the context through which strategies have been developed by decision makers within the company. History is the antecedents to strategy development that include embedded, stories, symbols, power, structure, controls, rituals and routines (refer appendix 1). Identifying historical context has the benefit of allowing businesses to develop strategies while avoiding recency bias and as a reference point to legitimise future strategies based on past successes. It allows business to develop strategy scenarios based on adaptations of past situations with different variables and to innovate based on historical competencies. This combination of historical actions, thoughts and procedures form a path dependency. This is the confine through which strategy develops and impacts on subsequent outcomes or the way business wants to be (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011). Historical path dependency may leave business in a difficult position as it tries to balance between holding onto skills, core values and stakeholder confidence as the dynamism of the business environment increases at an increasing rate (Reuters, 2011). The ability to make the balance between historical competencies and adapt them to future benefits will impact on the successful outcomes, or otherwise, of future strategic choices (Chi, Kilduff & Gargeya, 2009). Strategy is not a standalone entity but is emergent synthesis from a combination of historical and future contingencies, attitudes, capabilities and environmental issues.

2. The key considerations in strategic decision making include: the business strategy which identifies how a business will situate itself in comparison to the opposition. This will drive the strategic direction of the business as identified by tools such as porters generic strategies (refer appendix 2). The choices identified will influence the strategic directions such as the scope, portfolio matrix and corporate/strategic business unit relationship. These factors can be researched with the help of approaches such as Ansoffs corporate strategies (refer appendix 3). The outcomes created with Ansoffs model can be implemented with three strategic methods; organic development, mergers and acquisitions and strategic alliances. The key considerations in strategic decision making can then follow a systematic and well researched decision making process which allows confidence that all major aspects of a decision about the future have been examined. This analysis is a risk mitigation process that allows stake holder confidence in the decision making process for strategy creation.

3. Strategic drift is the misalignment of strategy with environmental change. The key causes of strategic drift will be created if the business has been successful and is reluctant to change its winning formula. This could be driven by historical stakeholder expectations and successes which mean strategy will be anchored in these expectations.  This can allow these expectations to become core rigidities which make the company more inflexible. Sanctioning by stakeholders of these rigidities make it difficult to change direction as the environment changes. These changes may not be easy to identify as business financial performance may not initially be affected, but will lead to a sudden decrease in performance (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011).

4. Legitimacy means something that has the quality of being “In accordance with established rules, principles, or standards”(Dictionary.com, 2011). Legitimacy in an organisational context is the normative behaviours, actions and compliance with regulations that is designed to meet the expectations of various stakeholders. Legitimacy enables consensus which allows a business to secure support and engagement with strategies. This engagement allows organisations to access funding, suppliers, consumers and other stakeholders which enables implementation of ongoing strategies (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011).

Part b:

5. Club Med’s embedded stories include that it was created to “make people smile again” after World War II. It was designed as an “antidote for civilisation” and to be a “gathering place for people hurt by modern society”. The symbols created by club med include the trident that is demonstrated on page one, but also less obvious ones that include villages that are isolated from the local environment, limited amenities, enforced socialisation and a reputation for “Sea, sex and sun”. The practical power of the organisation seems very decentralised. The nature of employing people “in the image” of the founders means the general managers knew intimately the norms created by the founders. These expected norms were used as control mechanisms so general managers were able to achieve the standards required without having to be directly supervised. The effectiveness of this control is reflected by the burn out rate. Many employees were unable to last over the age of forty five because of the 24/7 stressful nature of the work. The rituals in the organisation for the general managers include constant interaction with clients, their pay-off  being able to access administration positions. For consumers’ rituals and routines include: maximum tables of eight to promote social engagement, banning professional jargon and social origins, no money used within the village and shared bathrooms (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011).

6. A powerful cultural web is the underpinning of Club Meds financially successful pre 1990 culture. The founders of Club Med initially identified a market and created a positive story under the trident banner that no one else had considered. The power of Club Med was its first mover status in the tourism market and it was able to scale quickly enough to dominate the space. General Managers were with the consumers twenty four hours a day so the company was able to understand its clients and their needs deeply. The decentralised structure allowed each site to create rituals and norms to cater for these needs appropriately within the frame work provided. The company was able to supply an integrated experience that was an all inclusive break from the post war privations. Subsequent adaptations and extensions of service and location followed a consistent theme. Club Med’s systems and strategies reinforced its dominant position in the consumers mind. Through the application of expected norms for staff the company created the controls, which when aligned with consumer expectations, in a holiday hungry market, it made the business successful. While rapid expansion brought risk; all changes were adaptations on the past models of successes. This created a successful paradigm in a macro environment that was evolving with moderate dynamism. In 1991 Operation Desert Storm created a macroeconomic shock to a path dependent organisation. The halcyon days were over.

Result: 8/10

Bibliography

Chi, T, Kilduff, P, Gargeya, V, 2009, ‘Alignment between business environment characteristics, competitive priorities, supply chain structures, and firm, business performance’, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 58 No. 7, pp. 645-669, viewed 9 September 2011, (Emerald Group Publishing).

Dictionary.com, 2011, Legitimacy, viewed 10 September 2011, < http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/legitimacy&#62;.

Johnson, G, Whittington & R, Scholes, K, 2011, “Exploring Strategy”, Prentice Hall, London.

Marketingteacher.com, 2011, Generic Strategies – Michael Porter (1980), viewed 10 September 2011, < http://marketingteacher.com/lesson-store/lesson-generic-strategies.html&#62;.

Reuters.com, 2011, Market volatility dampens small business growth, viewed 9 September 2011,

<http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/17/us-column-cohen-markets-idUSTRE77G5F920110817&#62;.

Oxfordcollegeofmarketing.com, 2011, From objectives to strategy, viewed 9

September 10, 2011, <http://blog.oxfordcollegeofmarketing.com/?cat=19&#62;

Appendix 1

(Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011)

Appendix 2

(Marketingteacher.com, 2011)

Appendix 3

(Oxfordcollegeofmarketing.com, 2011)

Result: 8/10

o      What is a strategic gap and how can it be identified?

o      Explain the concept of unique resources, give examples, justify your choice and explain why these are important.

o      Explain how critical success factors are identified? What role they contribute to the analysis of strategic gaps?.

o      Explain the concept of core competencies, give examples, justify your choice and explain why these are important.

Part b.

o      Assess the resources and competencies of Dyson, noting which are threshold and which are distinctive.

Question Three: Part A:

o       Strategic Gap

A strategic gap is defined by Johnson, Whittington and Scholes as:

“Opportunities in the environment that are not being fully exploited by competitors” (2011, p. 73)

Interest in identification of the “strategic gap” gained prominence in literature in the 1940s, peaked in the 1990s, but has since started to decline (Ngram, 2011). As the intensity of competition has increased markets have become unwilling to accept and pay a premium for homogenous products and services. This has created market fragmentation, increased the pace of innovation, and as products in each segment have become homogenised, forced companies to identify and compete for smaller niches. The resulting reduction in profitability in the larger markets has meant new and existing players need to evolve products and services or create new markets to remain viable.

The purpose of the tools of strategic gap identification is a systematic way to allow manager to “think outside the box”. It is used to identify evolutionary and disruptive strategies to retain competitive advantage by identifying as yet unfulfilled consumer needs (Mang, 2000). Identifying strategic gaps was popularised by academics such as Ansoff who created the Ansoff product-market matrix (refer Appendix A). Ansoff matrix identifies gaps using a demand side view and includes:

Product development; new product development

Market penetration; such as growing market share or increasing product usage

Market development; creating new markets for existing products

New product development; this may include brand extensions and creating original products for existing markets (Watts, Cope & Hulme, 1998).

Porter advanced the theory by creating the five forces model (refer Appendix B) which identifies supply side, demand side, alternatives, overall industry attractiveness and their relationship. These assist planners in identifying strategic gaps. Porter’s five forces include:

Threat of new entry; looking at the industry broadly, the greater the availability of capacity, the lower the ease of entry. The higher the competition intensity the lower the ability to make profits, which makes the industry less attractive.

Suppliers; a lack of intense competition, high switching costs and low availability allow the supply side to dictate terms making the industry less attractive.

Buyers: low switching costs, low differentiation, few purchasers and low marginal costs allow buyers to be more prices sensitive, giving the demand side more power and making the industry less attractive.

Substitutes: similar outcomes, achieved by different means, these keep a dampener on profitability and make an industry less attractive (Porter, 2008).

The current idea created by Kim and Mauborgne is called”blue oceans thinking” (refer Appendix C) looks at the demand side and tries to identify customer expectation and demands that haven’t currently been exploited. They use a grid format similar to Porters, it identifies:

Eliminate: which areas can the task not be completed without?

Reduce: which areas can be achieved at below industry standard?

Raise: which areas can be achieved at above industry standard?

Create: what has the industry never invented before? (Sheehan, Vaidyanathan, 2009).

The strategic gap assessment has moved from identifying performance gaps to exposing aspects such as consumer perception and expectations of organisational performance (Saunders, Yusuf, 2004). Strategic gap research continues to evolve and identify incremental aspects of the strategic gap to be exploited. While important, the lack of discovery of new ways to exploit potential profit centres mean academic interest in the area seems to be waning.

o       Unique Resources

A unique or strategic resource is one that allows ongoing competitive advantage and enhanced outcomes. They are product or project dependent and can be tangible or intangible. A unique tangible resource by itself is unlikely to give an ongoing competitive advantage, it is normally the combination of the resource and its deployment that gives it value. These aspects are underpinned by the VRIN model which identifies the strategic capability of the resources (Smith, 2008). The VRIN model (refer Appendix D) includes:

Value: This is the unique resources that can unlock value and competitive advantage.

Rarity: These are the resources that possessed by few other organisations.

Imitability: The resources that a difficult to copy.

Non substitutability: These are the ‘pinch points’, the resources that can’t be replaced.

Rolls Royce cars are an example of using reputation as a unique resource. There are many car manufacturers that produce high quality vehicles but Roll Royce is still the best known aspirational car in the market place. This reputation is important because a Rolls Royce is still a large expensive chunk of metal to which the same laws of physics apply as other cars, and for which there is no need only desire. Wine is an example of a product that in combination with reputation achieves a competitive advantage. The product is unique because there are many so many variables that can’t be controlled and each time it is made the result is slightly different. Every person who tries the product has a slightly different palate and so their tastes are slightly different making each brand a unique experience. If this is marketed and distributed successfully to the consumer, then the manufacturer can achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.

o       Critical Success Factors

Critical success factors (CSFs) can be considered the critical “pinch” points, which are the areas, products, costs, quality etc. that must be achieved for the project to work and compete in the market place successfully (Dexter, 2010). Identifying CSFs allows planners to recognise if the company has the capacity to move from analysis to exploitation of the potential strategic gap. Planners can more realistically assess possible opportunities and threats when they understand more closely the problem areas that any new direction may expose (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011). The current ongoing financial crisis is an example of the fluid nature of CSFs. Until recently the ability to borrow money was relatively easy. In South Australia there are many mining projects that are ready to proceed that either will not go ahead or proceed in a reduced form because of their inability to raise capital. When these projects were initiated the planners would have considered raising the funds as an issue but not the CSF that it has become.

o       Core Competencies

Core competencies are the bundle of skills and resources that allow a company to compete successfully, achieve profitability and be the foundation of competitive advantage. (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011).Business in the past would have considered core competencies something that was to be held in house and closely guarded. The increasing complexity of businesses means that what a core competency is and how it should be controlled has become less obvious. The ability to keep these competencies in house is almost impossible (Shreefal, 2007). At Holden, for example, a core competency would be the design of cars. Even within this core competency there are many aspects that would be outsourced. For example: they wouldn’t write the software that is used to draw the car and they probably use outside design houses, engineers and mathematicians to look at certain aspects of a new design. Dell for example looks like it has computer manufacturer as a core competency, but doesn’t make anything just assembles the parts. The complexity, high level of dynamism (rate of change) and number of manufacturers with in the computer market mean the power of suppliers is low enough that it doesn’t need to keep these competencies in house. In the past the outsourcing of core competencies has been cyclical in nature. Companies have been prepared to outsource more in good times and as times get tough or there is a problem they are brought back in-house again. With the rise of better communications, complexity of projects and efficiency of transport infrastructure many companies will be forced to outsource core competencies to compete (Merrifield, 2006). Taking this to its logical conclusion is outsourcing everything. This leads to the issues that are demonstrated by the local tool “manufacturer” GMC, who did none of their manufacture in house, which made outsourcing a core competency. The problem created was that large retailers such as Bunning’s also have manufacturers that they can buy the same product from direct, save money and just bypass GMC. In 2008 this left GMC in receivership and the issue of controlling core competencies unresolved and even less clear (ABC, 2008).

Part B

o       Resources and Competencies of Dyson

Threshold and distinctive are the two types of resource or competency. Threshold are the things a company needs to compete in a given market and distinctive are those attributes that allow the company to thrive and prosper (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011). Dyson’s threshold resources include 100 million pound profit which allows it to compete on an equal footing with its competitors even though it is not the largest manufacturer. They also have a robust well presented product that has an international distribution network. The distinctive resources include manufacturing plants that manufacture in countries with low labour costs and are close to suppliers. This is in contrast to Miele for example who mainly manufacture in Germany and have much higher production costs and other well known designers such as Apple who outsource their manufacture. Threshold competencies at Dyson include the skills that 350 engineers and scientists bring with them. What makes Dyson competencies distinctive is the quadrupling of research investment in five years and the links between other local and international research centres. This investment is backed up by the type of employees that they seek out which include people that are “creative and courageous-unconditioned fresh-thinkers” (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011, p. 116). These people then have their creativity reinforced by the companies mantra of “thinking, testing, breaking, questioning” (Johnson, Whittington, Scholes, 2011, p. 116) and through this the understanding of why the project did not work and how to improve it. This tolerance of failure comparative to competitors allows Dyson employees to take greater risks that will hopefully give the company a greater competitive advantage. Sir James Dyson’s road to success is also a distinctive competency. Because his business was started from nothing and had resistance from other product manufacturers it meant that he was forced to have a high tolerance, and willingness to take on personal risk. At every step of the way he was financially accountable for his actions which are in contrast to most corporations where at best managers have a small stake in the organisation. This has lead the company to another competency which is its high level of secrecy, this high level of secrecy allows the company to surprise the market with new products, protect them with patents and have a longer and larger first mover advantage. This is demonstrated by the Dyson bladeless fan and hand dryer that are both unique.

“The flutter of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil may set off a chain of events that, over time, leads to a tornado in Texas” (Riley, 2006)

Trying to asses competencies is a case of causal ambiguity. As the “Butterfly effect” and chaos theory suggests, threshold capabilities completed slightly differently may in fact be distinctive. If these capabilities were clearly understood then they would be copied and wouldn’t be distinctive. The danger of defining the competencies in this way is missing how the Dyson company works as an organism. The competitive advantages the organisation has are often created by the synergies that are created from interaction between threshold and distinctive resources and competencies.

Conclusion

Whilst this type of analysis is important to understand yourself and competitors, but as chaos theory suggests even small changes can create significant differences in the outcomes. The strategic gap and its analysis are important in understanding the creation of competitive advantage but is only one aspect on the road to their successful exploitation.

Result: 8/10

Bibliography

Abc.net.au, 2008, “GMC goes into receivership”, viewed 19 August 2011, <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-12-01/gmc-goes-into-receivership/225140&#62;

Dexter, B, 2010, “Critical success factors for developmental team projects”. Team performance management, vol.16, no 7-8, pp. 343, viewed 18 August 2011, (Emerald Management Plus).

Hussey, D, 1999, “Igor Ansoff’s continuing contribution to strategic management” Strategic Change, vol. 8, pp. 375-392, viewed 14 August 2011, (EBSCO Host).

Johnson, G, Whittington, R, Scholes, K, 2011, Exploring Strategy (Ninth Edition), Peason Education Limited, Essex England.

Mang, P, 2000, “Strategic innovation: Constantinos Markides on strategy and management”.  The Academy of Management executive, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 43, viewed 18 August 2011, (Business Source Complete).

Merrifield, B, 2006, “Make Outsourcing a Core Competency”. Research technology management, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 10, viewed 18 August 2011, (Business Source Complete).

Ngram viewer, 2011, Strategic gap, viewed 13 August 2011, Ngram Viewer,.

Porter, M, 2008, “The five Competitive Forces that Shape Strategy”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 78-93, viewed 14 August 2011, (EBSCO Host).

Saunders, M, Yusuf, A, 2004, “An Investigation of Strategic Gaps between Projected and Target Student Recruitment in a Regional College of Technology: A Managerial Perspective”, International Journal of Management, vol. 21 no. 4, pp. 464-470, viewed 14 August 2011, (Business Source Complete).

Sheehan, N, Vaidyanathan, G, 2009, “Using a value creation compass to

discover ‘‘Blue Oceans’’”, Strategy & Leadership, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 13-20, viewed 18 August 2011, (Emerald Insight).

Shreefal, M, 2007, “Outsourcing a Core Competency”. Research technology management, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 28, viewed 19 August 2011, (Business Source Complete).

Smith, A, 2008, “Resource Based View of the Firm: Measures of Reputation Among Health Service-Sector Businesses”, Health Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 25 no.4, pp. 361-382, (EBSCO Host).

Watts, G, Cope, J and Hulme, M, 1998, “Ansoff’s Matrix, pain and gain Growth strategies and adaptive learning among small food producers” International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, vol. 4 no. 2, pp. 101-111, viewed 14 August 2011, (EBSCO Host).

Appendix A

Ansoff’s Product Matrix

(Hussey, 1999).

Appendix B

Porters Five Forces

(Porter, 2008)

Appendix C

Kim and Mauborgne’s ‘blue oceans thinking’

(Sheehan, Vaidyanathan, 2009)

Appendix D

The VRIN model includes:

Value: This is the unique resources that can unlock value and competitive advantage.

Rarity: These are the resources that possessed by few other organisations.

Imitability: The resources that a difficult to copy.

Non substitutability: These are the pinch points, the resources that can’t be replaced. (Johnson,  Whittington, Scholes, 2011)

Result: 8/10