| English | Óêðà¿íñüêà | Ðóññêèé Master's portal of DonNTU |
|
Norenko JuliaFaculty of: EconomicsSpecialty: Company's Economy Subject final master work: "Organizational and economic mechanism of forming a development strategy of economic entities"Scientific leader: Stepanova T.A. |
|
Abîut autor |
Abstract
Content
Introduction
1 Constructing the concept of creating institutional mechanisms for economic development strategy economic entities
2 Mandatory school strategic planning
3 Strategy as a Large model
4 Strategy as Plan
5 Strategy as Position
6 Descriptive Schools
7 Strategy as the vision
8 Strategy as a process of thinking
9 Strategy as Politics and Power
10 The strategy of Culture and Ideology
11 The strategy of Inevitability
12 The strategy is determined by time, place and context
Conclusions
Introduction
Organizational and economic mechanisms of development strategy of economic entities in recent years increasingly attracted the attention not only in Ukraine but also in the global economy.
Strategic development of the enterprise is based on certain economic as well as institutional arrangements, which, in turn,provide the interaction of its functioning and development and reflect the specific features of the enterprise as a socio-industrial system.
Such economists as J. Byrne, and JA Putyanin as a synonym for the term "organizational-economic mechanism" using terms such as "economic mechanism", "financial mechanism".
Generalized definition of organizational-economic mechanism for the formation of development strategies of business entities can be represented as follows: - a set of laws, practices, methods, processes and technology solutionswho not only realize the development of economic entities, but also carry the information and material effect on the process.
1 Constructing the concept of creating institutional mechanisms for economic development strategy for economic entities
Currently, the role of organizational and economic mechanisms of the strategy of any kind greatly increases. Severe conditions of crisis are forced to abandon the modern entrepreneur thoughtless attitude to the formation mechanism of its development strategy "child" in the market. However, the possibility and the need for reducing and optimizing costs primarily on the production (his organization and the search for reserves), the retention of working in the field. In these circumstances, we see the role, relevance and importance of the affected subjects significantly increased.
In the study of new organizational and economic mechanisms, not only in Ukraine but in the world, consultants, new programs (for specific companies) and projects to create development strategies and survival in today's difficult circumstances.
The aim of this work is the development and identification as concepts and some new theoretical approaches to organizational and economic mechanisms of strategy development entities.
The main development objectives are:
1 Defining the nature and relevance of organizational-economic mechanisms strategy development entities.
2 Defining the concept of organizational-economic mechanisms of strategy development entities.
3 Development of a technique for constructing system of organizational and economic mechanisms of strategy development entities.
4 Determination of forward and backward linkages between organizational and economic mechanisms of strategy development entities.
Professor McGill University (Canada) and INSEAD Henry Minttsberg widely known for his controversial and critical approach to the subject of management, and to my colleagues - academics involved in this topic. I reviewed nearly 1500 articles, he has identified ten primary schools involved in the formation of strategy. The first three describe how the strategy should take shape, while six are trying to describe how it is shaped in practice. The tenth and final school unites those who consider a strategy as something permanent, depending on the circumstances. His work offers a good illustration of fragmented thinking when considering the object of strategy.
2 Mandatory school strategic planning
In the description of prescribing Schools Minttsberg Henry makes it clear that although these three schools are the largest, it they are very low regard. Part of the reason is his own dislike for those who prefer the theoretical ideal of what is happening in practice. A part of his disappointment that their success means that a lot of interesting possibilities remain unexplored.
3 Strategiya model
Minttsberg believes that it is "the most common view on the process of forming a strategy", not only because it is included in many business courses MBA, but also because it has lots of space in textbooks on strategy and other materials on the subject. While this approach is generally associated with the Harvard Business School, and specifically with the early work of Ken Andrews in the 1960's, Minttsberg believes that "the legs grow" not from there. The source of what he calls the early work of Igor Ansoff and Peter Selznik in 1950. Model School, as he calls it, finds that the "big strategy" is produced as a result of deliberate and careful thinking process. Current aims and objectives are reviewed in the light of SWOT analysis (strength, weakness, opportunities and threats), after which defines the strategic alternatives. These alternatives are evaluated, taking into account the values of top management and the need for social responsibility, and selected only "top" strategy. The Director-General not only controls the process, he or she is "builds" strategy. In this model, the end product is unique to the particular organization, and appears in the form of detailed "full" strategy, which only waits to be used in practice.
Minttsberg believes that although this is not not correct, this model is not only outdated, but also has a number of internal constraints. For example, it assumes that the factors of the markets and can be taken into account, to understand and correctly evaluate the head of a strategist. This may work for simple systems, but hardly suitable for more complex situations. This understanding of the strategy is also clearly separates the "idea" of "cause".
4 Strategy as Plan
The school is also planning to run in the 60's, the earliest and most influential author - Igor Ansoff. Here strategy formation is an integral part of the planning process. Therefore, it is very formal, rational process, is usually divided into specific steps, each of which is accompanied by analytical work and looking for answers to some questions. In terms of Minttsberga, this approach resembles the conveyor. Each element of the plan can be specified and identified, then work on all components, which are then re-collected into a single whole, and is the correct strategy. The strategy is to design, containing concrete objectives, budgets, programs and plans. Although it is in the attention of the General Director, the immediate work is staff planners to attract top management only when necessary.
The assumption that the formation of the strategy is the result of planning, according to Minttsberga incorrectly. He points to three major erroneous assumption: that the future can be predicted, that strategic thinking can be separated from the management of injury, and that the information, analysis and technology can produce "innovative" strategy. In his view, strategic planning - this oxymoron. Therefore, it pleases, that the School of Planning, is very influential in the 70's, now goes to the second plan.
5 Strategy as Position
Origins is based, according to Minttsberga, the military concept of the idea that the strategy depends on the correct class position can be traced to the works of Sun Tzu, written in the fourth century BCAnd indeed many of the findings of the School of positioning sound as "military rule". "If you are in such a situation, you should take the following position". In the classic management consulting products of its kind in the set to appear in the 60's and 70's of the (Boston matrix, etc.). Some have even prescribed to take a position without regard to surrounding circumstances. Thus, gaining market share at any cost or adherence to the "experience curve" as quickly as possible, be faithful to the approach in all circumstances.
New life breathed into the school work of Michael Porter on competitive strategy and the early mid 80's. He set out to describe what strategies work best in which circumstances. In Porter's model of simulation and planning have given way to a detailed analysis, especially competition and industry. Although the strategy is deliberate, controlled process, specific to the company, a unique strategy giving way to the Model School of common strategies, such as cost leadership, focus or differentiation that companies should use. The aim of the strategy becomes a developer, using the analysis, choose the best possible for his organization (in relation to competitors and the industry in which his company is working) so that managers can implement it. This is what Minttsberg called "determinism to voluntarism clothes".
Minttsberg points to a number of problems. The need for large volumes of information necessary for the effective use of this model makes it suitable only for the traditional, mature industries, because only these industries are stable enough to provide the necessary amount of historical information. Like the two previous schools, it is also sin separation processes of thinking and activity, and therefore leaves little opportunity for learning. "Its appeal" - not to go into the field and learn as well stay home and count.It also restricts the choice of strategy for the list of recipes, "recruitment positions", of which you should select. The strategy there is a formula, rather than "a unique view". It has potential for creativity and intuition complement the specific data, but more often it leads to the development of multiple mimetic strategies. According to Minttsberga error in that analysis of a replacement strategy, rather than to perform its primary function - to support the process of developing a strategy.
6 Descriptive Schools
While these six schools and trying to describe what actually happens (rather than to impose the ideal), Minttsberg with skepticism by the majority of them and was pleased to expose the most radical ideas. He acknowledged the contribution of the narrative school of strategic planning, but said that often too few case studies. The exception - the school to which he belongs, but it is not ideal.
7 Strategy as the vision
Although Minttsberg gave the name of the School of Business, he describes it in terms more appropriate for today Providcheskih School Leaders. Here is a strategy - providchesky process.The strategy is formed in the mind of a leader who, based on their intuition and past experience, builds a vision of the future of the organization and direction of its motion. Control and design, and implementation, the vision of the leader may change in the light of surrounding circumstances, and is best suited for business start-apov or restructuring of large organizations. Minttsberg suggests that this may be an important part of the process of revitalizing the organization.
In terms of education, since the process of forming a strategy is the product of one mind, he remains a "black box". The strategy also has a chance of becoming a victim of the vagaries of one individual, which can be prevented to control and does not intend to share power.On the other hand, the strategy can be innovative and progressive. This school is regularly reflected in publications like Fortune "success of the business is required to view the Director General and the failure of its absence".
8 Strategy as a process of thinking
Minttsberg uses the term Cognitive School, not because of any real, but because "its importance can lead to the creation of a school". Pointing to the fact that the strategy is the product of human minds, individually or collectively, he underlines the need to understand, "as the mind processes information and develops a strategy". Unfortunately, most existing literature on the subject uses the work of cognitive psychology, which tends to emphasize the limited capacity of the individual to gather the necessary information and process it, leading to subjective or distorted conclusions.
Inclusion on the list this alleged school - rather a call to work in this direction. According to Minttsberga, it is important to understand how the wisdom gained from experience, affects the formation of strategy. I would like to know more about the creative insight and intuition (as, for example, is described in Kenichi Omae bestseller The Mind of the Strategist).
9 Strategy as Politics and Power
Minttsberg distinguishes between two directions, accepting a policy of strategic process. At the micro level, internal policy occurs when influential individuals (or coalitions of individuals, possessing power) use political means to achieve their goals. This is especially true when the "youth" wants to upset the status quo and implement its own strategy. It is also possible in times of great change, when there are significant shifts in impact and conflicts, or when there is no one dominant force. Minttsberg indicates that although "hardly make sense to describe the formation of the strategy as a process in which there is no policy", the weakness of this school is that the mere politicking can harm or even prevent the formation of strategybecause the strategic objectives - to discuss,rather than consent. This school may reflect reality, but does not provide a reliable method of forming a strategy.
The second area is considering a policy separate from the strategy, which companies use political influence to external organizations to achieve their goals. Such a "macro policy" has taken place, for example, when a large organization faced with the threat of bankruptcy and to convince the national government to give up her ring buoy.
10 The strategy of Culture and Ideology
Despite the fact that the culture has gained unexpected importance in the literature on governance in the 80's, went so far very little work directly linking culture and strategy. The exception - the Swedish school, especially strong in the 70's. By using small sources, Minttsberg trying to identify the main points of the Cultural School. According to its proponents, the generally accepted beliefs, traditions and history and culture creates expectations. Expectations and form behavior. This causes a particular set of beliefs and intentions that form the active strategy. The advantage of such cultural and ideological strategies that consensus and common interests make it very strong and integrated. The danger is that the stronger and richer in culture, the more difficult it will change the current strategy in the future.
11 The strategy of Inevitability
While most other schools are considering the external environment, as something that should be taken into consideration when developing the strategy, the School of the Environment (as defined Minttsberga) external circumstances dictate a strategy. Minttsberg suggests that the school "has grown from a contingency theory, postulates that the environment imposed on the organization of the specific characteristics". This initial idea was then further developed "population ecology", believes that the laws of biology (natural selection, selection) can and should be applicable to the organization. This, according to Minttsberga means that "organizations, as members of the population, are born, are ecological niches and, eventually, die". In its extreme form, the requirements of the environment not only restricts, it actually deprives the organization of strategic choice, because they must adapt to survive. This eliminates the freedom of the will: "thus, there is no internal or external policies, and leadership - it is a myth".
Minttsberg little attention to these extremist views, because it believes that strategic management is distinguished from other types of control "is itself the focus on strategic choice - how to find out where to find how to create, if you can not find, and how to use". And then you can revert to the environment, to learn more about the external circumstances, and how they can limit the strategic choices.
The last school - Structural - conceptually different from all nine.Rather than look at the writers, and prescribing an ideal, or researchers, describing the current practice, the main thing here - the perspective, look at the episodes in the history of organizations.
12 The strategy is determined by time, place and context
Structural School is considering forming a strategy, as something defined by time or circumstances. Rather than provide the best way to build a strategy, this approach is of the opinion that any or all methods may be appropriate in different circumstances. However, the nature and form of organization, such as its size or maturity, combined with the specific environment at a given time, means that the sooner you one way of forming a strategy and not another. Different processes shaping the strategy, therefore, there are certain historical phases in the life cycle of the organization. Roman Is formal planning or intuition plays an important role of a policy or vision, or go on stage any possibility of a strategy depends on the time and context. This approach means that the study focuses on certain periods in history (growth, change, stability), the stage of the life cycle (growth, maturity, decline), as well as the type and form of organization to see if whether the apparent logic or system.
This school, as indicated by Minttsberg may explain the phenomenon of revolutionary change, that is something that is not able to do the narratives of school. Radical changes have meant a change of strategy and organizational structure and processes, ie are the antithesis "progressive" approach.
Scientific novelty of the topic is a new approach,construction of a new model for the formation of organizational-economic mechanism of development strategy of economic entities.
Testing of this topic was presented in my article "The current state and problems of investment development in Ukraine".
The change and the emergence of a new approach to the formation of this mechanism will have an impact not only on a specific company, for which he or she will be invited as well, and possibly on the economy of the industry as a whole.
Conclusions
Thus, the material presented above indicates that at the present time, the question of research is not only relevant, but simply necessary for the survival and development of economic entities in the market.
Were examined and the degree of achievement of preparedness of the field such as economics Minttsberg, Byrne, Putyatin. The formation of organizational and economic mechanisms to build a development strategy of the company cares not only local researchers, but also Western. However, in this area is still space for new development.
A list of the literature:
Finance journal
2. Article «Stock Market-2009: where to invest money in order not to lose», Sergei Mikhalevskaya, «NOW», 8.01.2009
Ukrainian finance journal
4. Byrne J.Strategic Business / / Business UIK.-1996 .- ¹ 7. - P.42-47
5. Putyatin Y., Pushkarev AI, Trided AN Financial arrangements for strategic management development company. - Kharkiv: Basis, 1999. - 488s.
6. Trided ANThe concept of building organizational and economic mechanism for the formation of an enterprise development strategy / / UD
© DonNTU 2009, Norenko Yulia