SMO 502 X50

The Dynamic Cycles of Organization Strategy@1 Winter, 2021 Draft, Jan. 7, 2021

Professor: Dev Jennings Time: Wed., 6:30-9:30 p.m. Period: Jan. 13th – April 14th

Contact: dev.jennings@ualberta.ca

Place: Business 4-09 Office Hrs.: by appointment, normally from 5:40-6:10

Course Objective To refine your knowledge of strategy dynamics in different organizations and field contexts by examining the iterative cycles within and across problem identification, strategic analysis, and strategy execution. Design This recenlty re-designed SMO 502 course focuses less on traditional strategy and strategic planning and more on the dynamic, emergent, adaptive nature of organizational strategy. These dynamics are strongly influenced by the need to adjust in real time as well as underlying tension in strategy cycles due to governance issues, uncertain analytic metrics, and the need to blend power, persuasion and negotiation in the execution of strategy. Examining these cycles of strategy, their dynamics and underlying tensions can improve your strategic analysis and ability to implement strategy. The framework that we will use in this course builds of the standard comprehensive framework in strategy; i.e., strategic issues, external/internal/ performance analysis, strategic recommendations and implementation. But it adds in current thinking about the dynamics of and tensions in strategy found in the work of respected thinkers, such as Dick Rumelt (2011), Henry Mintzberg (2014), Dixit and Nalebuff (2008), and Pankaj Ghemawat (2018) - and as well as my own thinking and my experience in strategy. The essence of the framework is captured by the simple conceptual model below.

1 @ Copyright, PD Jennings, 2019. While I’m happy to share this syllabus and course, please contact me before using it. Thanks.

2

The first strategy cycle is around the nature of strategic problems & possibilities - and their recognition by management (especially leaders) - both of which are conditioned by the organization’s governance. The second cycle is around dynamics in the organization’s external environment and internal operations, as reflected in the organization’s performance. We employ a variety of tools – dynamic market positioning, capabilities analysis, triple bottom line analysis – to capture these dynamics. We also consider the nature of the underlying analytics and narratives that make sense of them in various modes of strategic planning. The third cycle is around implementation actions and adjustments. The cycle includes both formal implementation, which relies on Gantt charts and KPIs, as well as informal implementation, which depends on mobilization and stakeholder mandates for generating action in organizations. These implementation techniques revolve around the psychology of persuasion and the use of power, as depicted in the figure above. As can be seen, as a researcher and a practitioner, I am a believer in the value of tension and paradox in strategic thinking - in finding “facts” but seeing them as socially constructed, in employing analytics but using them interpretively and in narratives, and in creating formal plans but seeing strategy execution as a behavioral project. I also believe in the embeddedness of strategy in context (the “Org. Environment”), and, therefore, the need to compare and contrasts the specifics of strategy across organizations and venues to derive strategy principles. That organizational environment, through shocks and shifts, also requires adjustment of the cycles along the way, sometimes causing management to go back and do new analysis, and other times, to skip cycles to move forward more quickly. Materials I rely on a course design and materials that illuminate the cycles of strategy and bring out paradoxes and tension. We examine current events and popular press readings, as well as more extended prepared cases. The cases that we do are often employed in quirky ways – to demonstrate certain types of problem identification or particular analytics. I also ask teams, when possible, to work with “live organizations,” particularly in their strategy projects, and share some of their insights. I do the same along the way with my own projects, past and present. To set up this course, I culled through the above materials and tried to isolate the essential pieces and construct an online eClass reading packet and an HBS case packetI have also identified background texts that may be of value for those who want to read further. • Most articles will be posted via ULRs on the Web, under eClass at: https://eclass.srv.ualberta.ca/portal/ • Harvard Business Review, one of our primary sources, can also be accessed via the U. of A. library at: http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&jid=HBR&site=ehost-live • I frequently draw on The Economist for examples and posting. Its main Web site is: http://www.economist.com/ • Unfortunately, the cases cannot be posted online. Sorry. You’ll need to buy them as a case packet at HBS. The number is: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/import/790897

3

Or you can buy these selectively and directly from HBS at: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/home/

For those of you who would like a standard, traditional approach to strategy, please consult Hitt et al.’s (2008) Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization (or its newer versions). For those of you interested in more dynamic strategy, please examine some of the source texts discussed in class, ranging from Mintzberg (2014) and Rumelt (2011) to Ghemawat (2019). Deliverables and Their Evaluation The class emphasizes deliverables based on the cycles of strategizing. More specifically, the following tables contains the assignments, their point values, and due dates. The cycle assignments are generally done in small teams, the participation and strategy reflection paper marks are individual.

Assignments Point Value Due Date, Times

Cycle 1 Assignment (5-6 pgs. tot) 10 pts. Mon. Feb. 1st, 9:00 a.m. Cycle 1+2 Assignment (13-17 pgs. tot) 2.5+22.5 pts. Mon. March 8th, 9:00 a.m. Cycle 1+2+3 Assignment Draft (19-25 pgs. tot)

2.5+2.5+20 pts. Mon. April 19th, 9:00 a.m.

Case Component or Cycle Presentation

10 pts. Please sign up for a slot

On-Going Participation 12.5 pts. Cumulative across classes

Strategy Reflection Paper 12.5 pts. Mar. 24th & Apr. 7th, 6:30 p.m.

Cycle Assignments: Teams of four or five members will be formed by class members and the instructor to assess a live or canned case during the semester. Each team will build up its case analysis by starting the problem cycle, the doing adjusted problems with analytics, then adjusted problems and analytics with execution. The point values above and in the more detailed part of the syllabus reflect this accumulating, evolving approach. Case Component or Cycle Presentation: Five person teams will be formed, hopefully with different individuals than in your case project team, and, if you do not have a team, I will place you in one. Each team will present one component of a case – the overview, run a key exercise, do a debrief, or the update. I will provide specific guidance and some materials to each team in this effort, but encourage you to think for yourselves and prep what you think is relevant on the case component in the time available. As one of the component presentation, I will request a presentation of a team’s Cycle 1 or Cycle 3 part of their plan in order to help build collective insights in the class about conducting the case projects. Those Cycle 1, 2, and 3 elements will be listed on the Case Component list at the start of the semester. I request that each individual rank order their preference for case components and then use the preference and random draw to assign individuals to cases. I also request that any team wishing to present a case cycle to submit a team level preference for the cycle and then I use that preference or random draw to assign teams to Cycles. Participation (see Online Addendum below): Your participation in the class is important, both for your learning and for that of your peers. Effective participation is based on pertinent analysis of and focused

4

comments about issues being examined in a particular class segment. In addition, outside of class, you are encouraged to point out interesting articles, Web sites, or upcoming events relevant to each week’s case. These extra-class contributions will be posted on eClass and credited to you. If you also have an interesting strategic problem or technique to discuss in class, please contact me in advance, and we will see if we can work it into the session. There is also an opportunity to be one of the “facilitators” for a given online class session. More details are provided below. Strategy Reflection Paper: Each individual will be asked to write up a six-page paper – four or five pages of text and one or two pages with a figure(s) or diagram(s) on a strategy issue, case, or personal view about strategic analysis. Due to the large number of participants yet need for some individualized feedback in order to enhance your learning experience, I will need time for grading strategy reflection papers. Therefore, I will set up two different submission times: Wed. p.m., three weeks and one week before the course’s end. Then, at the start of the semester, I will then randomly assign folks to those submission times and try to grade each flight of papers in a timely fashion. COURSE POLICIES There are general UofA policies and some course specific policies worth noting for SMO 502. Of particular note for the online session is the addendum at the bottom. Academic Integrity: I am sure that each of you believes in academic integrity, but what that means as a concept might vary among you. The U. of Alberta has a good Web page that defines academic integrity and offers resources for sharpening one’s awareness of it. The page, which I recommend you consult, is: https://www.ualberta.ca/current-students/academic-resources/academic-integrity Particular Challenges or Special Needs: I would like to hear from anyone who has a particular challenge or special need – mental, emotional, physical or contextual – that might affect his/her participation and performance during the semester. That challenge / need may be temporary or enduring. Please contact me to determine if there is some way that we can accommodate the need. Late Assignment Policy: In order to be fair, assignments that are late will receive a low mark than if it had been handed in on time when others also submit their work. For each day or part of full day that an assignment is late, it will lose 10% of its assessed percentage grade (i.e., an assignment that receives 90% will lose 5% of 90%). No papers will be accepted more than four days after the deadline. Sorry. Use of Technology in Class: I am totally fine with your using technology (laptops, pads, even phones) in class – but, please, only if that technology’s use is directly related to the class and does not detract from, but rather helps enhance, others’ in-class learning. For example, quietly, a participant may want to consult their slide decks, case(s), and reading materials via laptops or handheld devices. In addition, selectively and quietly, during exercises or lecture a student or team may want to Google concepts or examples to check on materials or to add to the discussion. In contrast, answering e-mails, calls and doing other assignments while in the class will both lessen your in-class learning and that of your classmates around you, as research has been point out recently. It will also lower your participation grade. Please do not do use technology that way. Thanks! https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/may/11/students-who-use-digital-devices-in-class-perform-worse-in-exams

5

Addendum – the Online Learning Experience: Due to Covid-19, we will be running our course

completely online. I will be holding sessions on Wednesday from 6:30-9:30 p.m. MST through the winter

semester. I have been teaching MBA and Ph.D. classes online since last March and have tried to use

breakout rooms, the chat function, presenters, and linked portals to enhance student learning

experiences. I still keep track of and evaluate participation in-class discussion and exercises, but not with

as much grade weight as in normal in-person class sessions. So it is important that you attend the class

sessions as much as possible. To date, I have not recorded, then posted lectures; I’ve just posted prep

materials and slides. I realize that some instructors do post recorded lectures; but in the online world

the principles for constructing dynamic strategy are still learned better via real-time engagement in class

discussion, breakout room exercises, interactive team & speaker presentations than by just by listening

to posted prep materials and lectures.

However, we do have 50 or so enrolled (double the normal number for SMO 502). That will require extra

effort to engage, both on my part and yours. I will try to use class facilitators, drawn from volunteers, to

help manage the portal questions and chat. I will also try to be flexible about some of these policies and

evolving demands, perhaps modifying them a bit over the coming weeks.

COURSE OUTLINE

Cycle 1: Strategic Problems & Possibilities and Their Recognition by Management

“Strategy therefore starts out with an existing state of affairs and only gains meaning from, for better or worse, how things could be different.” (Freedman. 2011. Strategy, p. 611)

Wk. 1, Wed. Jan. 13: Nature of Strategy, Strategic Problems & Possibilities

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Short review of approaches to strategy; objectives & cycles in strategizing; the nature of ordinary vs. wicked problems & possibilities; internal & external sources.

Readings: Rumelt. 2011. Good Strategy / Bad Strategy excerpts.

Sulls & Eisenhardt. 2012. “Simple Rules for a Complex World.” HBR.

Christensen, 2009. “Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems.” Rotman Magazine.

Mankins & Steele. 2006. “Stop Making Plans, Start Making Decisions.” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: Dieselgate: Heavy Fumes Exhausting VW by M. Schuetz and C. Woo. Case packet.

Suncor and the Future of Oil Sands by R. Vietor. Case packet.

Deliverables: Bio (optional); prep for and participate in class; begin considering your project and team.

Wk. 2, Wed. Jan. 20: Management’s Recognition of Problems & Possibilities and Initial Response

Strategy Concepts & Recognition (and sometimes creation) of problems & possibilities by

6

Tools: management. Framing and initial responses around vision vs. operations, leading vs. following, solutions vs. proximate fixes, and variations on icons.

Readings: Lewis et al. “Paradoxical Leadership”. CMR, 2014.

Montgomery. “Putting Leadership Back into Strategy.” HBR, 2008.

Additional postings nearer class time.

Cases and Contexts: Ginni Romitty (2017). Case packet

Guest Speaker & related readings – TBA

Apple (2011) after Jobs by F. Rothaermel. Case packet (backup case).

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Finish forming teams and choose likely organization (“live” or “canned”) to be assessed. Presentations by Group 1 (& 2?) by end of class or start of next week’s class. Cycle 1 Assignment due Feb. 1st, Monday, 9:00 a.m.- thanks!

Cycle 2: External and Internal Dynamics & Analysis Tools

“High-velocity markets are ones in which market boundaries are blurred, successful business models are unclear, and market players (i.e., buyers, suppliers, competitors, complementers) are ambiguous and shifting. The overall industry structure is unclear. Uncertainty cannot be modeled as probabilities because it is not possible to specify a priori the possible future states. In these markets, dynamic capabilities necessarily rely much less on existing knowledge and much more on rapidly creating situation-specific new knowledge.” (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000. “Dynamic Capabilities.” AMJ. p. 1111)

Wk. 3, Wed. Jan. 27: Externals – Dynamic Markets and Mandates

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Nascent vs. mature markets. Fashion vs. New Fixture. Interest/ election cycles in govt. orgs. Hyper-competition vs. ecology of geo-politics.

Readings: Ryall. 2013. “The New Dynamics of Strategy.” HBR.

Christensen et al. 2015. “What is Disruptive Innovation?” HBR.

D’Aveni. 2007. “Mapping your Competitive Position.” HBR.

Khanna et al. 2005. “Strategies That Fit Emerging Markets,” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: YouTube, Google, and the Rise of Internet Video by K. Cool, M. Seitz, J. Mestrits, S. Bajaria and U. Yadati. Case packet.

Ethiopia: An Emerging Market Opportunity? by J. Quelch and S. Yong. Case packet.

Deliverables: Cycle 1 assignment due the prior Monday, Feb. 1st. Prep for and participate in class. Cycle 1 Presentation by volunteer Group 1 at the start of class.

Wk. 4, Wed. Feb. 3: Internals - Dynamic Capabilities

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Business Models and Dynamic Capabilities in Different Sectors.

Readings: Ghemawat & Rivkin. 2006. “Creating Competitive Advantage.” HBS.

7

Prahalad & Hamel, 1990. “The Core Competence of the Corporation”. HBR.

Davis. 2013. “Capturing the Value of Synchronized Innovation.” HBR.

Helfat & Peteraf. 2009. “Understanding Dynamic Capabilities.” SO!

Cases and Contexts: Lego. 2012 by Rivkin et al. Case packet.

Apple Bets on Augmented Reality by McDonald et al. Case packet.

Deliverables: Cycle 1 assignment due the prior Monday, Feb 1 Prep for and participate in class.

Wk. 5, Wed. Feb. 10: Performance Assessments and Selecting Strategies

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Quant vs. qual data; financial vs. human resources factors; Triple Bottom Line assessments. Strategy selection.

Readings: McMillan. 2003. “Five Pitfalls to Avoid When Writing Performance Analysis.” Balanced Scorecard Report.

Reichheld. 2003. "The One Number You Need to Grow" HBR.

Brest & Born. 2013. “When Can Impact Investing Create Real Impact?” Stanford Innov. Review.

Cases and Contexts: Amazon 2016 by J. Wells, G. Danskin and G. Ellsworth. Case packet.

Ethiopia: An Emerging Market Opportunity? by J. Quelch and S. Yong. Please re-read the case and consider costing the options.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class.

Wk. 6, Wed. Feb. 17: Spring Break – Work on Cycle 2 Assignment Wk. 6, Wed. Feb. 24: Inner Workings – Governance and Power in Cycle 1

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Formal vs. informal governance principles and dynamics. Positive and negative effects on strategy formulation and execution.

Readings: Useem. 2006. “How Well Run Boards Make Decisions” HBR.

Strebel. 2004. “The Case for Contingent Governance.” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: Board of Directors at the Coca Cola Co. by J. Lorsch, R. Khurana and S. Sanchez. Case packet.

CEO Succession at Cisco (A) by B. Groysberg, J. Y-J. Cheng and A. Lobb. Case packet.

The House of Tatas is a potential backup case. Not yet in case packet.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Presentation by Groups 2 & 3 on Cycle 2 sometime in class.

W8, Wed. Mar. 3: Inner Workings – Framing with Analytics and Stories in Cycle 2

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Analytics as facts vs. analytics as framed artifacts. Strat plans vs. stories. Using analytics to set objectives and to guide initiatives.

Readings: The Death of Truth, excerpts. NYTimes writer, Michiko Kakutani.

8

NYTimes article on privacy and Facebook.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/technology/facebook-privacy.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Shaw et al. 1998. “Strategic Stories.” HBR.

Pfeffer & Sutton. 2006. “Mngt. Half-Truths and Nonsense.” CMR.

Other current selections.

Cases and Contexts: Intuit: From Product to Platform by Hagu & Altman. Case packet. (Background case)

Managing with Analytics at P&G by Davenport et al. Case packet. (Background and backup case)

Facebook and Fake News. Wells et al. Case packet. (Main case, along with Intuit)

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Guest speaker likely. Cycle 2 Presentation by Groups 2 sometime in class. Cycle 2 Assignment to be submitted at 9:00 a.m., March 8th – thanks!

Cycle 3: Action and Adjustment

“I am describing a strategy as a design rather than as a plan or as a choice because I want to emphasize the issue of mutual adjustment. In design problems, where various elements must be arranged, adjusted, and coordinated, there can be sharply peaked gains to getting combinations right and sharp costs to getting them wrong.” (Rumelt. 2011. Good Strategy Bad Strategy, pp. 130-131).

Wk. 9, Wed. Mar. 10: Implementation Plans and Realities

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

I-Plans and Star Diagrams for changing systems. Ecosystems and strategic change. Shifting the big ship.

Readings: Sulls et al. 2015. “Why Strategy Fails,” HBR.

“Strategy from the Start.” HBR Chpt on 7-Ss.

Guillen & Garcia-Canal. 2012. “Execution as Strategy: How Emerging-Market Multinationals Survive Amid Turbulence,” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: GE’s Growth Strategy by C. Bartlett. Case packet.

Autodesk in 2018 by J. Conn et al. Case packet.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Cycle 2 Assignment to be submitted at 9:00 a.m., March 8th – thanks!

Wk. 10, Wed. Mar. 17: Mobilizing Internal Coalitions in Organizations

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Change management for cultures. Insurgency and resistance. The driven vs. tempered change methods.

Readings: Kotter. 2007. “Leading Change,” HBR.

Meyerson & Scully. “Tempered Radicals.” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: Haier Hanfei Electontrics (A) by L.S. Paine. Case packet.

GE Appliances: Implementing Haier’s Made-in-China System by Campbell et al. Case packet.

9

Radial Bearing Team by Wirth et al. Case packet. (Secondary case)

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Guest speaker likely.

Wk. 11, Wed. Mar. 24: Building Mandates with Community Stakeholders

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Stakeholder models in community contexts. Working with (and in) govts.

Readings: W. Clement. 2005. “Lessons from Stakeholder Theory for U.S. Business Leaders.” Business Horizons.

Marquis. 2012. “Managing Stakeholders with CSR Logic.” HBS Case.

S. Hart & S. Sharma. 2004. “Engaging Fringe Stakeholders for Competitive Imagination.” Academy of Management Executive.

Cases and Contexts: The Vancouver 2010 Olympics, by A. Elberse, C. Anthony, and J. Callahan. Case packet.

Vancouver Olympics and potential COE guest lecturer

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class.

Wk. 12, Wed. Mar. 31: Inner Working of Implementation and Action

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Power, negotiation, and the psychology of persuasion.

Readings: Cialdini. 2001. “Harnessing the Power of Persuasion.” HBR.

Hoffman and Jennings. 2012. “The Social and Psychological Foundations of Climate Change.” Solutions.

Pfeffer. 2010. “Powerplay.” HBR.

Halpern. 2017. “Changing the World One Nudge at a Time.” Rotman Magazine.

Cases and Contexts: Amir Dan Rubin: Success from the Beginning by J. Pfeffer. Case packet.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class.

Combining the Cycles Wk. 13, Wed. April 7: Pulling the Cycles Together & Group Presentations

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Adjusting the Cycle and Refining Your Strategy Narrative

Readings: See prior readings for strategy narratives

See current event readings (posted at the time).

Cases and Contexts: Local live cases and some non-local prepared ones assessed using dynamic strategy analysis.

Deliverables: Cycle 3 Presentation Group 3 sometime in class.

Wk. 14, Wed. April 14: Wrap-Up in Last Week of Class

10

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Writing about and presenting strategy – analyses, artifacts, stories. Revisiting concepts.

Readings: Rumelt. Good Decisions, Bad Decisions. Excerpts.

To be posted.

Cases and Contexts: Passion and Strategy: Novozymes' Embrace of the UN Sustainable Development Goals by Zelleke & Billaud. Case packet

Likely guest lecture wrap-up.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Remaining presentations (if overflow or adjustment needed). Assignment on Cycle 1-3 due on April 19th by 9:00 a.m. - thanks!

Wk. 15, Mon. April 13: Strategy Reflection Paper – Classes Are Over Please submit your personal reflection paper by Monday, April 19th, 9:00 a.m.

11

MORE ON THE DELIVERABLES AND THEIR EVALUATION

Participation

Your participation in the class is important, both for your learning and for that of your peers. Effective participation is based on pertinent analysis of and focused comments about issues being examined in a particular class segment. In addition, outside of class, you are encouraged to point out interesting articles, Web sites, or upcoming events relevant to each week’s case. These extra-class contributions will be posted on eClass and credited to you. I use a simple scoring system that that ranges from “2” for awesome, insightful comments to “0” for no-evident comments or group participation (e.g., in exercises or discussion), with “1.0” being average participation. The scores are the added up an averaged over the semester, with mean level (“average”) participation being benchmarked at 90% (the A-/B+) boundary. After each class I score individuals based on this, so I spent some time in the first week or two getting to know who each person is and something about your background in order to credit you adequately. I also try to find out more about you to help form team projects and offer opportunities (questions, links to orgs, etc) based on your background. There are two other participation type opportunities beside the comments and emailed items. One is a strategic problem or technique that you know about and want to share with the class. Please contact me in advance of what seems to be a relevant class for it, and we will see if we can work it into the session. The other is the opportunity to be a voluntary facilitator for the online portal lecture and discussion sections. Given there are 50 people online, I may miss the hands button or chat thread question. So in each class I will ask two people to pay attention to the thread and hands to help me out, one person for the first half, and the other for the second half. Volunteers will be solicited early in the course and put into pool, two per session randomly selected, and assigned to the various sessions. Facilitators will receive a “2.0” participation score for any half day that is successfully managed.

The Three Cycles Assignments: The core of idea of the Cycles Assignment is for course participants in a team to apply the different cycles of strategizing to a live or canned case (preferably the former) in order to work through strategy and implementation, adjusting as they go along. Each cycle would be written up in draft form, then developed further and tightened (based on feedback) in order to be combined into a complete final project. In other words, the Cycle 2 Assignment has both an adjusted Cycle 1 assessment (worth 5 pts.) and the Cycle 2 analyses (worth 20 pts.), as displayed in the overview section of the syllabus. The Cycle 3 Assignment, has both an adjusted Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 portion (worth 5 pts .each), and the Cycle 3 Core component (worth 15 points). That assignment will represent the final version of the group report. Along the way, the team is asked to present once on one of the cycles during some point in a specific class. This presentation is meant to help the other teams focus on and better understand the nature of the cycle being studied. The teams then hand in their assignments on those cycles a few days later. To help guide you on the assignment, the following questions might be useful to address in the different cycle assignments. However, how you write-up the information and turn it into something persuasive and insightful, does not have a template. It might follow these sections, but the specific method of

12

crafting the assignment is up to each team. I would encourage you to think about the grading template, which is further down in this Appendix, in order to consider how to apportion your work and pages in the assignment. Cycle 1: Strategy Problems & Problems and Their Recognition by Management 1. What is the strategic problem or possibility being assessed? 2. Why is this problem / possibility important and how is it related to the organization’s current

strategy and objectives? 3. Is the problem / possibility internally or externally generate? More normal or wicked in nature? 4. Are there already solutions floating around the organization or in its field that are related to

(and might help solve or generate) the problem?

5. How does top management or those owning/ controlling the organization view the problem / possibility – do they even recognize it?

6. How top management organized? 7. What form of leadership is used and how is it related to this issue? 8. Are there preliminary solutions to the issue that are being advocated? 9. Where do they come from (other members, externally, consultants, etc.)?

10. How does the underlying governance approach influence this problem / possibility definition

and recognition/ prelim response by management? 11. What is the underlying set of principles and the culture in the firm’s governance? 12. What is the particular decision making structure in this firm? (Who really seems to have the

power … or is thought/ emotion leader?) Cycle 2: External and Internal Dynamic & Analysis Tools

13. What are the projects/ services/ offerings of the organization? Which are you focus? 14. What organizational field and/or markets are they embedded in, both regionally and

internationally? 15. How new and dynamic is that field/ market (vs. mature, more stable)? 16. How are other organization’s positioned in the market (i.e., positioned relative to each other via

features, categories, time, brand – please choose a couple of dimensions and try to map them overtime..)?

17. What type of geo-politics and social issues might be directly impacting the organization? How are these expressed through various stakeholder interests?

18. What capacity (knowledge, resources, focus) does the organization have to address the strategic

problem / possibility? 19. Are there underlying capabilities that are distinctive and dynamic? 20. How might you describe the organization’s ecosystem and alliance network? 21. How does the organization engage with the government (e.g.., via formal or informal roles,

particular units and so on)? Are some of the capabilities of the organization contingent on the government?

22. What systematic quantitative and qualitative data on the organization’s external

environment, internal capacity, and performance are available? (This is a sensitive, but

13

important question. Please consider how best to approach it, and perhaps work with the professor to ensure the organization is comfortable providing data.)

23. What are some of the key performance indicators for this organization and for this field? 24. What are some of the key metrics for assessing risk & uncertainty that are used by this org

and/or field? 25. What are key artifacts/ forms of analyses favored by management and by similar forms of

organizations? 26. Are data analytics part of strategy formulation and or execution? In what way?

27. Based on your analyses and preferred artifacts, what are the potential strategic

recommendations, outputs, diagrams, or key points that you would offer for addressing the strategic problem(s)?

28. What strategy initiative(s) (if any) might you recommend? 29. What type of risks are there and how might you mitigate them?

Cycle 3: Action and Adjustment

30. Please consider one specific initiative or strategic recommendation or bundle or recommended actions. What type of implementation plan (I-Plan) would fit with your initiative?

31. Please sketch out one using the six I-Plan elements discussed in class. 32. Would an incremental, systems approach based on S-models (Star or 7-Ss) work as an

underlying approach for you initiative? 33. What supporting ecosystem changes for that organizational system would be needed? 34. Suppose your initiative is aimed at the underlying culture or logic of action for an organization.

Will a mobilization model work and what specific steps would need to be followed as a starting point?

35. Suppose you are dependent on stakeholders (external and internal) for implementing change. Who are these stakeholders? How do they influence the organization? And how might you modify / leverage their effects to help you implement your initiatives?

36. What approaches are taken in this organization to the use of power, negotiation and persuasion? How might they be used to help you implement some of the recommended changes? (This is a sensitive set of questions and should only be asked indirectly and discretely.)

Sewing It All Together Across Cycles

37. Do the three cycles combine in a logical, integrative fashion? 38. How might the three cycles adjusted a bit in order to do so? Or is it important to keep them

slightly askew to illustrate key issues and leaps? 39. What would be some final strategic recommendations and implementation points that you

would like to add in a few bullet points either in the Exec Summary, the Strategic Story or in the report’s conclusion?

40. What might a one- to one-and-half page Exec Summary that capture the strategic narrative and key points? Please consider adding this the Cycle 3 Assignment (cumulative report).

Evaluation of the Cycles Assignments

Cycle 1 Assignments are preliminary assessments of the organization’s strategic problem & possibilities, the org’s objectives, and managerial recognition of and engagement with the problem & possibility. Given the semester will have just begun, the assignment is only six pages of text (double-spaced, 1”

14

margins, 12 pt. font), including 1 or 2 pages of figures/ diagrams. The grading of the draft will be based on the following template:

SMO 502: Dynamic Org Strat., Cycle One

Project: _

Team: _ Grade: _ out of 10 pts.

Item Score/ 10 Max Comments Prelim Prob/Poss Identified /2 Rich Info. Discussed/ Accessible /2 Prelim Solution(s) & Paths /2 Figure / Diagram Quality /1.5 Underlying Governance Considered

/1.0

Writing /1.5

Cycles 2 & 3 Assignments are to be more developed, in light of the time and nature of the section, than Cycle 1 Assignments. Cycle 2 Assignments include the revamped Cycle 1 Assignment (3-5 pgs.), and a core Cycle 2 Assignment that is 10-12 pages (double-spacing, 1” margins, 12 pt. font), including 1-4 pages of supporting figures and tables. The grading template for Cycle 2 Assignments is below:

SMO 502: Dynamic Org Strat., Cycle Two

Project: _

Team: _ Grade: _ out of 2.5 + 22.5 pts.

Item Score/ Max Comments Prob./ Poss. Refined /1.5 Linked to Analytics /1

Or Just used Prior Report - yes 2.0 Just added Cycle 1 to opening or as an attachment

Useful Analytics /6 Quality Diagrams & Figures /4 Rich Info Foundation /2 Underlying Soc/Psych Element Considered

/2

Recommendations/ Risks / Scen. /4.5 Writing /4

Cycle 3 Assignments includes the revised Cycle 1 & 2 Assignments, which together are 13-17 pgs., and a core Cycle 3 Assignment that is 6-8 pages (double-spacing, 1” margins, 12 pt. font), including 1-3 pages of supporting figures and tables. The grading template for Cycle 3 Assignments is below:

SMO 502: Dynamic Org Strat., Cycle Three

Project: _

Team: _ Grade: _ out of 2.5 + 2.5 + 20 pts.

15

Item Score/ Max Comments Prob./ Poss. Refined /1.5 Linked to Analytics /1

Analytics Refined /1.5 Linked to Execution /1

Or Just Use Prior Report for both - yes

3.5

I-Plan: Overview/ Approach /3 I-Plan: Gantt & Costs /3 I-Plan Rich Info /4 I-Plan: Informal Side- Underlying Tensions Examined

/3

Final Imp Recommendations /2.5 Exec Summary - Story /1.5 Writing /3

Case Component or Cycle Presentation Grading

You or your small group should provide an overview of your case component or cycle. The presentation will vary greatly, depending on whether you are doing an overview, an exercise, a wrap up or presenting on a cycle. On average, the core of it should be about 15 minutes long, with five to seven minutes of questions or class engagement. The evaluation form used to assess the presentation is below. At the end of the course, the percentage grade will be translated into a point grade, with 15 pts as the maximum.

Component Comments

CONTENT (45%)

Good Theoretical/

Conceptual Material for

Day’s Case & Topic

Details/Description Were

Rich and Informative

FORM (45%)

Entertaining &

Professional

Mechanics Were Good

(Timing, Structure,)

16

Questions (10%)

Addressed Content and

with Respectful Tone

Strategy Reflection Paper

Each individual will be asked to write up a reflection paper on a strategy issue raised in one of the classes, your project, or on a strategy issue of great interest to you. The issue may be around the main case, a reading, or a specific thought on which the class member wishes to elaborate – perhaps abut a strategy construct or a position s/he has on strategy issue in the news. The paper should be six pages: four or five pages of text and one or two pages with a figure(s) or diagram(s). Participants will be able to submit their views on these strategy issues in one of the two designated time slots near the end of the course. Please indicate whether or not you wish to have the piece posted for any class feedback. The reflection will be evaluated by me using the following template.

Component Points / 12.5 Max Comments

Strategy Prob./ Poss./ Issue / 2

Assessment / 4.5

Recommendations for Action / 2

Supporting Figure or Table / 2

Writing /2