Management stratgique :

Travail de Synthse numro 1

Ralis par : Driss ZEMMOURI Encadr par : Mr. Karim GASSSEMI

1- The Design School and the Planning School :

The Design School sees the strategy formation as achieving the essential fit between internal capabilities (strengths and weaknesses) and external possibilities (threats and opportunities).

The Planning School originated at the same time as the design school is in fact an evolution of the design school by a basic idea taken from it: the SWOT analysis.

The main differences between the two schools :

1- The formality of the model

2- The position of the CEO in the process

3Originality of strategies

1- The formality of the model :

In the Design School

The model of strategy formation must be kept simple and informal, to ensure that strategy is controlled in one mind.

In the Planning School

Strategies result from a controlled, conscious process of formal planning, decomposed into distinct steps, each delineated by checklists and supported by techniques.

2- The position of the CEO in the process:

In the Design School

Responsibility for that control and consciousness must rest with the chief executive officer: that person is the strategist. In their view, the CEO is the key of the process of making-decision.

In the Planning School

Responsibility for that overall process rests with the chief executive in principle; responsibility for its execution rests with staff planners in practice, which means that the planning school put gradually the staff planners in the front of the stage.

3- Originality of strategies:

In the Design School

Strategies should be one of a kind: the best ones result from a process of individualized design.

In the Planning School

Creativity and originality are gradually deleted in the face of formalized efforts imposed.

2- Strategic Thinking :
The author conceives of strategic thinking as a set of ideas, principles, policies, concrete rules and operational procedures that shape the way managers think about their role and that guide their daily actions. This set of ideas and rules is more malleable than corporate ideology or organizational identity, which are more permanent. Also, strategic thinking is different from operational plans, which represent more concrete commitments and specific actions at particular points in time.

Therefore, strategic thinking contains features of both a process and a state of mind. It begins with deliberate search, continues with the building of a shared framework in managers minds, moves on to implementation in daily activity, and finally includes a review and update of its basic contents as conditions change outside and inside the company.

Figure : Type of frames of reference

Habits Values Insights decisions

Individual

Drifted frame of reference

Reflected frame of reference

Collective

Enduring organizational mindset

Strategic thinking

the first type is characterized as a drifted frame of reference and represents an individual mindset which is modified on the basis of personal experience, values, beliefs and habits. In this case, the leader who has held a position of power, since he adopt a way of behaving that is comfortable for him, he makes difficult the change of the corporate mind.
Habits Values Insights decisions

Individual

Drifted frame of reference

Reflected frame of reference

Collective

Enduring organizational mindset

Strategic thinking

The reflected frame of reference is the second type and is updated on a continuous and deliberate basis, which means that the manager, in light of new events that catch his attention, ponders the circumstances and adjusts his mindset to fit the new reality.
Habits Values Insights decisions

Individual

Drifted frame of reference

Reflected frame of reference

Collective

Enduring organizational mindset

Strategic thinking

The third type is described as an enduring organizational mindset, an essentially inflexible collective mind that changes only gradually. Yet, its certainly possible that organizational members will act according to the leaders set of beliefs, but, wont grasp those beliefs as their own.
Habits Values Insights decisions

Individual

Drifted frame of reference

Reflected frame of reference

Collective

Enduring organizational mindset

Strategic thinking

At last, the latter type constitutes the strategic thinking which represents a flexible frame of reference that is refined as a result of reflection, reconsideration and new insights, and which places objectives and priorities as the common ground with the frames of reference of the other managers with whom the focal manager has to interact.
Habits Values Insights decisions

Individual

Drifted frame of reference

Reflected frame of reference

Collective

Enduring organizational mindset

Strategic thinking

In the first three types, the key ideas that shape mindsets belong to those who generated them, not to those who receive them. However, in the strategic thinking, all organizational members have to give some personal preference in order to reach a common ground of shared understanding, consensus and commitment.

3- Introduction la stratgie :
It is based on the approaches of context, content and process, that the authors of the book Strategique defined strategic model. Indeed, it includes the strategic diagnosis of the organization (context), evaluation of strategic choices (content) and the strategic deployment (process), such elements define a practical approach to the study of strategic situations.
The strategic diagnosis

Strategic choices

Strategic deployment

Thus, according to the authors of the book, the three components of the strategy are defined as follows :

The strategic diagnosis: consists in understanding the strategic impact of the external environment, strategic capability of the organization, its goals and its culture, to define its strategy.

Strategic choices: concern strategic possible options for an organization, both in terms of guidelines and procedures to achieve them.

Strategic deployment: is to put the strategy into practice. Indeed, a strategy exists only when it is effectively implemented and translated into operational actions.

Albeit in a logical sequence, the strategic diagnosis precedes strategic choices, which precedes in turn the strategic deployment, Mintzberg notes that in reality, the components of the strategy do not follow this linear routing, and that choices must often be performed while the diagnosis is not completed.