<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Talking about strategy &#187; strategic positioning</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kimwarren.com/tag/strategic-positioning/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kimwarren.com</link>
	<description>with Kim Warren</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:00:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Why Most CEOs Are Bad at Strategy</title>
		<link>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/why-most-ceos-are-bad-at-strategy/</link>
		<comments>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/why-most-ceos-are-bad-at-strategy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:16:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kim Warren</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[how to compete]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Professor Roger Martin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic positioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[where to compete]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwarren.com/?p=909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A blog post by Roger Martin* makes a good case that CEOs find it hard to simultaneously make a good choice of where to play and how to win. He concludes they need to go beyond these basics and &#8216;creatively integrate&#8217; these two views. True enough if performance were all about formulating strategy, but it forgets that order-of-magnitude <a href='http://kimwarren.com/strategy/why-most-ceos-are-bad-at-strategy/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A <a href="http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/01/why_most_ceos_are_bad_at_strat.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-JAN_2010-_-HOTLIST0111&amp;referral=00202" target="_blank">blog post</a> by Roger Martin* makes a good case that CEOs find it hard to simultaneously make a good choice of <em>where to play</em> and <em>how to win</em>. He concludes they need to go beyond these basics and &#8216;creatively integrate&#8217; these two views. True enough if performance were all about formulating strategy, but it forgets that order-of-magnitude differences in performance more often arise from relentless expert <em>management</em> of strategy, than from unique choices of where+how to play. </p>
<p>He also claims that we do not have the tools to integrate these perspectives &#8211; which is not true, of course, because that&#8217;s what strategy dynamics does.</p>
<p>* Dean of the Rotman School of Management</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/why-most-ceos-are-bad-at-strategy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Short online strategy course</title>
		<link>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/short-online-strategy-course/</link>
		<comments>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/short-online-strategy-course/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:27:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kim Warren</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coggno]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online strategy course]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic positioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy course]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy dynamics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[video course]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[what is strategy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwarren.com/?p=506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just launched a short course at open learning materials provider, Coggno.  Its free intro on &#8216;what is strategy&#8217; may be useful in any case &#8211; it makes the case, with  examples, that steering strategy and performance is a larger issue that the infrequent choice of strategic &#8216;position&#8217; that dominates strategy books and courses. The short <a href='http://kimwarren.com/strategy/short-online-strategy-course/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just launched a <a href="http://strategydynamics.coggno.com/" target="_blank">short course</a> at open learning materials provider, Coggno.  Its free intro on &#8216;what is strategy&#8217; may be useful in any case &#8211; it makes the case, with  examples, that steering strategy and performance is a larger issue that the infrequent choice of strategic &#8216;position&#8217; that dominates strategy books and courses. The short course is based on the <a href="http://www.strategydynamics.com/mastering" target="_blank">full 10-week video slide-show course</a> used in MBA programs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/short-online-strategy-course/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s the use of strategy tools?</title>
		<link>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/whats-the-use-of-strategy-tools/</link>
		<comments>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/whats-the-use-of-strategy-tools/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:07:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kim Warren</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic positioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[troubled discipline]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwarren.com/?p=484</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On behalf of executives and consultants who really would like some useful approaches to strategy, I last week issued the following challenge to the Business School profs&#8217; discussion lists &#8211; so far, just a handful of the thousands of recipients have responded, and no explanation offered as yet for the irrelevance of strategy research and <a href='http://kimwarren.com/strategy/whats-the-use-of-strategy-tools/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On behalf of executives and consultants who really would like some useful approaches to strategy, I last week issued the following challenge to the Business School profs&#8217; discussion lists &#8211; so far, just a handful of the thousands of recipients have responded, and no explanation offered as yet for the irrelevance of strategy research and teaching. <span id="more-484"></span></p>
<p>TO&#8230;</p>
<ul>
<li>Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]</li>
<li>Management Education and Development Discussion [MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]</li>
</ul>
<p>We had a great post in December from Richard Whittington [below], drawing attention to a series of articles on this topic, so thought we might see an avalanche of responses – maybe from younger folk in the field worried about its future [and theirs], or from more experienced figures vigorously refuting that there is a problem. So the subsequent silence is puzzling.<br />
The evidence may be mostly anecdotal, but it seems increasingly recognised that students see little value in strategy classes, recruiters don’t value what those students learn in those classes, and executives and consultants don’t use the tools that have been so painstakingly put together. Why does no-one dare mention this ‘elephant in the room’?<br />
If “there is nothing so useful as good theory” and our tools are not used, the conclusion seems inescapable – we have little useful theory! If we accept that there actually is a big problem here – where has it come from? I will probably get beaten up for this, but here goes with two suggestions …</p>
<ul>
<li>Most of the tools, whether external or internal oriented, originate from efforts to explain profitability [rents], when that is of little interest to either investors or managers. It has been axiomatic to those in Finance for decades that investors value growth in free cash flows .. which does not correlate with maximising rents. Profitability needs to sufficient to either fund growth or enable funds for growth to be raised, and growing companies are likely to be less profitable than they could be if not growing. How long have we known this? – since Penrose in the 1950s! [ In some cases e.g. Amazon  ‘sufficient’ profitability can even be negative for many years so if sustained superior profitability is the goal, where are the case studies exploring how UNsuccessful Amazon has been?!].</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Most of the tools offer ways to find  a good strategic ‘position’ for a firm vs. rivals .. but this question only arises at start-up or at major cross-roads in a company’s history [most of the great case study companies we use in class have sustained essentially the same ‘position’ for decades [IKEA, Southwest Airlines, eBay …] , or else made just one or two major changes [IBM, Nokia …].. so what does ‘strategic management’ actually do in between these once-in-a-lifetime events? If we were honest we would rename our classes, if not our whole field ‘Strategic Positioning’ instead of Strategic Management.</li>
</ul>
<p>The consequences of having no useful tools for the continuing strong strategic management of organizations are serious. We are experiencing right now the result of incompetent strategic management of many of our major corporations, especially but not exclusively the banks of course. So – are we going to continue ignoring this elephant and keep churning out research and tools that no-one values, or really try to do something about it?</p>
<p>… excuse me while I go hide under the table.</p>
<p>Kim Warren</p>
<p>&#8212;</p>
<p>From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Richard Whittington<br />
Sent: 10 December 2008 10:52<br />
To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU<br />
Subject: FW: Business Policy and Strategy Management: Is there any differnce?</p>
<p>Dear All</p>
<p>This topic came up earlier this year, and Joe Bower mentioned a relevant Dialog forthcoming in the Journal of Management Inquiry. The Dialog has now been published under the heading: ‘<a href="http://online.sagepub.com/cgi/searchresults?src=selected&amp;andorexactfulltext=and&amp;journal_set=spjmi&amp;fulltext=jarzabkowski" target="_blank">Directions for a Troubled Discipline: Strategy Research, Teaching and Practice</a>’, JMI, 17, 4, 265-286, 2008.</p>
<p>The three main papers are:</p>
<p>Joe Bower, ‘The Teaching of Strategy: From General Manager to Analyst, and Back Again?’</p>
<p>Rob Grant, ‘Why Strategy Teaching should be Theory Based’</p>
<p>Paula Jarzabkowski and Richard Whittington, ‘A Strategy-as-Practice Approach to Strategy Research and Education’.</p>
<p>Richard Whittington</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span lang="EN-US"></p>
<hr size="2" /></span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/whats-the-use-of-strategy-tools/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is strategy? &#8230; and the strategy life-cycle</title>
		<link>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/what-is-strategy-and-the-strategy-life-cycle/</link>
		<comments>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/what-is-strategy-and-the-strategy-life-cycle/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:01:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kim Warren</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alibaba.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blockbuster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IKEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Porter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Netflix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic initiativies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic management dynamics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic positioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy dynamics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy implementation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textbook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[what is strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wiley]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwarren.com/?p=297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just working on the first chapter of the textbook 2nd edition, and thought it needed a bit more on this question &#8211; found the only way to explain to newbies was to go through an organization&#8217;s life and track what &#8216;strategic management&#8217; actually does over that time-horizon. Main messages are: The choice of strategic &#8216;position&#8217; <a href='http://kimwarren.com/strategy/what-is-strategy-and-the-strategy-life-cycle/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just working on the first chapter of the textbook 2nd edition, and thought it needed a bit more on this question &#8211; found the only way to explain to newbies was to go through an organization&#8217;s life and track what &#8216;strategic management&#8217; actually <em>does </em>over that time-horizon. Main messages are:</p>
<ul>
<li>The choice of strategic &#8216;<em>position&#8217;</em> [what to provide, to whom and how, relative to rivals] is a <strong>very</strong> rare activity.</li>
<li>Substantial strategic <em>initiatives</em> [acquisition, new market entry etc] occur occasionally.</li>
<li>By far the majority of the task is <em>steering</em> [a.ka. implementing] the strategy from period to period.</li>
</ul>
<p>So &#8211; how come the attention in all the textbooks and journals is in precisely the opposite priority? <span id="more-297"></span></p>
<p>This took me on a tour around some interesting examples &#8211; Blockbuster vs Netflix in video rental, Alibaba.com [China's eBay-beater], IKEA, etc. And also onto Michael Porter&#8217;s &#8216;<a href="http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/b01/en/common/item_detail.jhtml;jsessionid=4NXJDVNWPYUZCAKRGWDSELQBKE0YIISW?id=4134&amp;_requestid=39801" target="_blank">What is Strategy?</a>&#8216; article [HBR, Nov/Dec 1996], which got me really annoyed, because it totally dismisses everything except the first task &#8211; though that shouldn&#8217;t have surprised me I guess.</p>
<p>See a draft of this new section <a href="http://www.kimwarren.com/files/StrategyLifeCycleExtractNov08.pdf" target="_blank">here</a> [forgive the baby steps approach, but it has to work for new-comers to strategy as well as you experts!].</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://kimwarren.com/strategy/what-is-strategy-and-the-strategy-life-cycle/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

