Prescriptive and emergent approaches for developing strategies

Prescriptive and emergent approaches for developing strategiesIntroductionThe concept of in railroad carnate system battles with the perennial issue of determining the overall purpose and mountain chain of an organisation. From a contemporary perspective, it involves the specification of long-term goals and objectives that will add think of to the backup and cope with the uncertainty of modern measure. As a practice, it consists of adopting courses of legal litigate and allocating resources in ways necessary for carrying extinct the overall objectives.Widely prize as the most principal theories for strategy organic evolution, the normative and emergent approaches must(prenominal) be examined within the context of an increasingly dynamic, highly competitive and spherical business environment. Powerful extraneous forces atomic number 18 driving organisations to cut back costs, enkindle processes and identify new opportunities for growth.Many businesses are compelled to make dramatic improvements not only to compete and prosper but also merely to survive. This brings to the forrader the importance of determining how effectively the prescriptive and emergent approaches nookie relate the needs of todays businesses when formulating strategy.The Prescriptive ApproachThe prescriptive approach regards strategy ontogeny as a systematised and deterministic process where analysis of the organisation, its performance and immaterial environment leads to the formation of a rational, long-term plan. Senior management is in charge of defining the final objectives and the plan is then put into action through the successive layers of the organisation.Techniques which feed this process include Porters heavily incorporate Five Forces model for analysing industry and Value Chain Analysis which highlights active capabilities as a solid basis for competitive advantage.It is pointed out by Ansoff that firms in fast-paced, competitive environments who use a sys tematic process for strategical planning very often go on to dominate their market agency. Their logical, analytic approach allows them to devise predictive and pre-emptive strategies from which they can meet new opportunities subject on. For instance, in 1995 EasyJet used incredible foresight to introduce low cost flights allowing it to take advantage of a much cost-conscious European Market.Whats more, this approach makes it potential to organise complex activities and exercise a greater degree of train over different business units. For example, Tescos planning process resulted in sound defined long-term goals and clear boundaries for its UK core business, retail service, non-food and international sectors. It has succeeded in achieving consistent growth and pro mark in all of these areas over fresh years.Strategy formation which places a lot of weight on alive capability strengths is thought to be a secure basis on which a firm should define itself and optimise its posit ion, particularly in times of rapid and turbulent change. For example, Motorola has success amply met the needs of emerging markets by exploitation its fundamental technological strengths in electronic components to progress from supplying TVs and car radios to offering telecommunications services.From a contrary perspective,Johnson states that the prescriptive model contains some(prenominal) assumptions that are unsustainable in todays business world. The logical approach implies that strategy development is eer deliberate and that strategies are realised according to plan.However, empirical research by Mintzberg discounts this, highlighting that realised strategy tends to be only 10 to 30 percent of the intended strategy. This is mainly because unpredictable events, such(prenominal) as the portal of new regulations or technologies, will regularly act to force the trustworthy strategy off its course.Additionally, the prescriptive approach to planning falls unawares in allowin g for any learned elements to be absorbed into the strategy and so can limit an organisations ability to respond flexibly in todays speedily changing environment. The narrow-minded manner in which it focuses on established areas of business and capabilities can block up serious transformational change where reinvention is required.A further blame is that the prescriptive model fails to complement modern organisational cultures where employees at lower levels are included in the decision making process. This type of involvement is oft found in small or medium sized businesses. As a result, organisational creativity can be stifled and employee dissonance whitethorn occur as it is at these levels that work processes are most fully understood.The Emergent ApproachMintzberg put the idea forward that strategies can be unplanned, developing incrementally over time as a businesses actions adapt to a changing reality. Instead of meeting a premeditated plan, he argued that strategy evolve s through a process of learning, adjustment and experimentation.Formulation of strategy runs repeat to performance and managers at multiple organisational levels have a key stimulus into the actual strategies pursued by the organisation. This models emphasis on learning underlies more new-made theories which focus on the value of knowledge as a core organisational competence for gaining competitive advantage.An emergent approach leads to more germinal and responsive strategy making which is well suited to the hyper-competitive and unpredictable environments of today. Interestingly, Hamel and Prahalad pointed out that the most successful firms in the world such as Microsoft and orchard apple tree Macintosh do not tie themselves down to mission, goals and objectives or the influence plan.In contrast with the prescriptive approach which focuses on creating a fit between established strengths and emerging opportunities, the emergent approach challenges the status quo by intentional ly creating a misfit between these factors. Hence, it is more suited to instigating positive, transformational organisational change such as diversification or restructuring. It also has the added benefit of helping to reduce resistance to change as it allows time to build employee support season the strategy is taking shape.On a negative note, when formulation and implementation occur simultaneously there is a risk that strategy development becomes too slow and jumbled a process. This means that valuable opportunities may be missed along the way. Also, conflicting objectives from different groups can hinder strategy development, particularly when there are power shifts taking place during a major strategic change such as a merger.Without strict analysis and identifiable targets, objectives can pretermit clarity and there may be no real basis for evaluating performance. Indeed, it was pointed out by Brews and Hunt that an over-reliance on emergent strategy formation could result in underperformance.ConclusionWithin the framework of an environment which is by and large unpredictable, many organisations are forced to become more flexible and adaptive to change. This supports the adoption of an emergent approach to strategy development which invokes a more searching capacity to respond to new opportunities.Nonetheless, such a strategy can preclude control over actions and may risk a lack of direction. A greater use of strategic planning tools for internal and external analysis would certainly facilitate improved organisational learning and enhance strategic thinking even while following an emergent approach.This recognition that the prescriptive and emergent processes, rather than being mutually exclusive, can be complementary color approaches that reinforce each other is being highlighted in more recent theories such as the Logical Incrementalism approach proposed by Quinn.All in all, most viable strategies in todays business world should have customised elements of prescriptive and emergent characteristics in order to manage the complexities of their business and still rapture over changing circumstances.