B A 388T TEMBA Strategic Management - giordano 01905 & 01910(1)

B A 388T TEMBA Strategic Management - giordano 01905 & 01910(1) McCombs School of Business BA-388T University of Texas at Austin Spring 2006 STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT TEMBA COURSE OVERVIEW Joe Giordano jagintx@austin.rr.com Texts: Hamel, Gary and C. K. Prahalad. Competing for the Future. (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1994). Porter, Michael E. Competitive Strategy. (New York: Free Press, l998). Office Hours: By Appointment. Contact in class or through e-mail to arrange time. Course Description Perspective and Themes This course is about the creation and maintenance of a long-term vision for the organization. This means that it is concerned with both the determination of strategic direction and the management of the strategic process. As such, it deals with the analytical, behavioral, and creative aspects of business simultaneously. The course is organized around six themes in strategic management: the role of the general manager, the components of business strategy, corporate strategy development, divisional-level strategy development, managing strategic change, and the development of general managers. Our perspective in this course is that of the general manager whose responsibility is the long- term health of the entire firm or a major division. The key tasks involved in general management include the detection of and adaptation to environmental change; the procurement and allocation of resources; the integration of activities across subparts of the organizations; and, at the most senior levels, the determination of purpose and the setting of corporate direction. General managers, from our perspective, are managers who are in the position to make strategic decisions for the firm. Note that such managers are not ―generalists‖ in the sense that they need to know a little bit of everything, but not very much of anything. To be effective, general managers need to have in-depth understanding of the generic problems in all the relevant functional areas. Furthermore, they must be able to deal with problems and issues at the level of the total enterprise and its relationships with relevant external environments. Functional specialists can benefit from the general management perspective even though they may not be general managers. Every function‘s actions should be coordinated with the overall needs of the business. In fact, functional specialists are the people on whom general managers must rely to implement their strategies. Since such functional managers can be subject to suboptimizing pressure, they too need to understand the general manager‘s perspective. 2 Components of the Course The pervasive concept in this course is that of strategy. We will start our study of strategy at the business level and examine the challenges of managing a firm competing in a single industry. An integral part of this study will be an exploration of the components of strategy and how they vary among various settings and situations. In most large and medium-sized firms, corporate strategy is different from business strategy because of the multiplicity of businesses in which the firm is involved. We will explore the differences in corporate and business-level (or divisional-level) strategies and the requirements each places on managers at different levels in the firm. At each level of strategy, competitive strategy considerations will be considered. Successful general managers are highly competent in problem identification and analysis and have a strong action orientation. One purpose of this course is to provide an environment that will allow you to hone these skills, while at the same time gain a conceptual understanding of the strategic manager‘s task. Strategic management is more than analysis. To be sure, strategic analysis is a major part of this course, and we will explore and apply several analytical techniques for positioning a firm or a business unit within a competitive environment. But strategic analyses are complicated by the trade-offs inherent in any situation. These trade-offs reflect the fact that organizations consist of many players with multiple, competing objectives. When dealing with these trade-offs, general managers must confront the judgmental issues involved in establishing organizational purpose and balancing economic and noneconomic objectives. To the extent possible in each class, we will attempt to balance these trade-offs and to test our ideas about the appropriate relationships among them. Finally, strategic management requires moving beyond analysis and trade-offs into the realm of strategic action. Once the analytical problem of selecting a business or corporate strategy has been dealt with, we should know what to do. Knowing how to execute the selected strategy is essential to success. To the extent possible in each case, we will concern ourselves with the various combinations of systems (for example, information, control, reward, etc.), organization structures, and people necessary to execute a given strategy. We will test our ideas about the relationships between strategy and these other elements as we proceed through the course. General Flow of the Course The assignments are detailed in a later section. Please read through them to get an idea of the specific content of the course and each class meeting. In general, we will start with single-business or dominant-business companies and proceed to multiple-business companies. Similarly, we will begin with basic techniques of analysis and then expand and modify them to fit a range of situations. We will examine many sectors of the economy (for example basic industries, consumer products, service businesses, hybrids). As we proceed through the course, the classes and cases used in them will ―build‖ on each other in such a way that the knowledge and skills gained in analyzing one session can be used in subsequent cases. Throughout the course we will maintain our concern with both analysis and implementation. 2 3 Required Readings Two books are required reading for the course. In addition, there are often articles that will be used to support conceptual development for a particular class. Porter‘s Competitive Strategy provides a framework for examining the ways in which industry choice and structure affect strategic decisions. Hamel and Prahalad‘s Competing for the Future explores a set of ideas that encourage consideration of the ―how‖ and ―why‖ of industry transformation and strategic regeneration. Addressing the development of strategy requires understanding how firms evolve under the impetus of competition, technology, government action, and other major contextual forces. This in turn requires a deep understanding of the functional strategies associated with marketing, operations, finance, and human resources. Thus, you will need to bring what you have learned in other courses and your career to bear in Strategic Management. Our challenge in this course will be to integrate these functional strategies into overall business, corporate, and division-level strategies and to concern ourselves deeply with the implementation of the chosen strategies. Course Objectives 1. Development and reinforcement of a general management point of view—the capacity to view the firm from an overall perspective in the context of its environment. 2. Development of an understanding of fundamental concepts in strategic management: the role of the general manager, the levels and components of strategy, competitive analysis, and organizational evolution. 3. Integration of the knowledge gained in previous courses and understanding what part of that knowledge is useful to general managers. 4. Development of those skills and knowledge peculiar to general management and the general manager‘s job that have not been covered in previous functional courses. 5. Development of an awareness of the various impacts of external environmental forces on business and corporate strategy. 6. Practice in distinguishing between basic causes of business problems and attendant symptoms. 7. Practice in working out business strategies and implementation plans. 8. Development of habits of orderly, analytical thinking and skill in reporting conclusions effectively in both written and oral form. 9. Familiarity with some of the practical realities of running different types of businesses. 3 4 COURSE PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND FEEDBACK Performance evaluation and feedback will be based on your performance in two different settings—class participation and written work. Class Participation In a typical class, one or more students will be asked to start the class by answering a specific question or discussing a specific issue. Preparation of the case (including the assignment questions) and associated readings should be sufficient to handle such a leadoff assignment. After a few minutes of initial analysis, we will open the discussion to the rest of the class. As a group, we will then try to complete the analysis of the situation and address the problems and issues presented in the case. We will also spend time talking about the implementation of those recommendations and some of the complexities of effecting change in strategic management situations. Most general managers spend very little time reading and even less time writing reports. The vast majority of their interactions with others are verbal. For this reason, the development of verbal skills is given a high priority in this course. The classroom should be considered a laboratory in which you can test your ability to convince your peers of the correctness of your approach to complex problems, and of your ability to achieve the desired results through the use of that approach. Some of the factors that have an impact on effective class participation are the following: 1. Is the participant a good listener? 2. Are the points that are made relevant to the discussion? Are they linked to the comments of others? 3. Do the comments add to our understanding of the situation? 4. Do the comments show evidence of analysis of the case? 5. Does the participant distinguish among different kinds of data (that is, facts, opinions, beliefs, concepts, etc.)? 6. Is there a willingness to share? 7. Is there a willingness to test new ideas, or are all comments ―safe‖? (For example, repetition of case facts without analysis and conclusions or a comment already made by a colleague.) 8. Is the participant willing to interact with other class members? 9. Do comments clarify and highlight the important aspects of earlier comments and lead to a clearer statement of the concepts being covered? The questions above deal with both the process of class participation and (of equal or greater concern) the content of what you say. As will be noted subsequently, class participation will be a major portion of your grade in this course. The appendix to this course description provides additional information on the case method and why it is used so extensively in Strategic Management. 4 5 Written Assignments for Strategic Management There will be two substantive pieces of written work required for this course. The first will be a team analysis of a case and the second, an individual case write-up. The papers should be in three parts. The executive summary is a memorandum that should indicate your overall evaluation and that should be developed with the tenets of logic, precision, specificity, and good grammar. ―Bullet sentences‖ are only acceptable if their meaning is unequivocal and specific. (For instance, a bullet stating ―increase sales‖ is unacceptable. In such an instance, you should state which products you want to increase the sales of, how much the increase should be, and how you will achieve the specific increase.) The executive summary should be constructed after you have completed your full analysis. The second part of the paper concerns the full analysis forming the basis for your evaluation. It should be no longer than 1000 words. It should be carefully constructed to show a logical flow and integrated set of thoughts about the case. Guard carefully against undocumented assertions, failing to examine the monetary (and other resource) implications, neglecting to consider trade-offs and priorities, and against a lack of consideration for the implementation issues. You will need more than one draft in order to achieve the clarity, consistency, and structure necessary for your paper. The third part of the paper concerns a number of exhibits in which you show the application of specific tools (e.g., break-even analysis, cash flow analysis, competitor and/or industry analysis, etc.) Make sure that the exhibits are immediately understandable for a busy executive and that they summarize the key conclusions which you will then use in the second part of the paper to build you complete analysis. You may use as many exhibits as you deem necessary. Make sure you refer to these exhibits in the appropriate places in the analysis part of the paper. The first, team written assignment is due in class the week of February 27th. You may select your own team (up to five people) and submit your names to me by e-mail or in class. If you have not thformed your team by January 25, you will be arbitrarily assigned teams. One or more teams are likely to be asked to make a presentation of the case and defense of their conclusions to the class in session 9 (week of March 20). The second individually written assignment is due in class the week of May 1. Cases for the written assignments will be passed out in class. Please note for case write-ups: your name (for first assignment, team member names), the assignment title, the date, and the course name should be on the top right corner of the first page. Do not put case write-ups in folders, or use a cover sheet. Please use double spacing for the executive summary and full analysis. Grading Policies The purpose of grading in Strategic Management, as in all courses, is twofold. One purpose is to evaluate your performance for purposes of the academic system. The other (and more important) is to provide you with feedback on your ability to develop, utilize, and share your ideas and conclusions concerning the topics and situations covered in the course. Your grade for the course will be based on the following components: First Team paper 30% Second Individual paper 40% Class participation 30% 100% 5 6 Other Administrative Details 1. In preparation for the class, put your response to potential questions in writing so you can give a ready and confident response when called upon. 2. Often, individuals whose hands are not raised will be asked to comment. This is meant both to engage everyone in the discussion, and have a basis for your class participation grade. Please let me know in advance if some emergency has made it impossible for you to be prepared adequately for that class. 3. To help me learn your names, I will circulate a seating chart. Please try and take the same seat each class. 4. I will be happy to discuss the course, your progress, or any other issues of interest to you on an individual basis. Please see me in class or send me an email to set up an appointment. 5. Group work is acceptable and encouraged for purposes of general case preparation. However, the individual written assignment must be solely your own work. 6. NB: Written work is due in the Session indicated. Late papers will be accepted only in the event of personal emergency. 7. As is the case in all strategic management courses, laptops may not be used during class. Once a class session begins, they must be turned off and closed. Turn off PDAs and cell phones, please. 8. Please do not eat during class. 6 7 7 8 I. The Role of the General Manager Session 1, Week of January 16, 2006 Readings: Hamel and Prahalad, Chapter 4 ―Competing for Industry Foresight‖ Porter, Chapter 1, ―The Structural Analysis of Industries‖ Chapter 2, ―Generic Competitive Strategies‖ Collins & Porras ―Building Your Company‘s Vision,‖ Harvard Business Review. September- October 1996. deGeus, ―The Living Company,‖ Harvard Business Review, March-April 1997, pp. 51-59. Goleman, ―Leadership that Gets Results,‖ Harvard Business Review, Mar-Apr 2000, pp. 78-90. Gosling and Mintzberg, “The Five Minds of a Manager”, Harvard Business Review, November 2003, 54-63. Case: Introductory Note to DAAG Europe (9-374-036) DAAG Europe (A) (9-374-037) Robert Pelz has spent several years translating the strategic vision he has for his firm into reality. But as this evolves, he encounters several problems at the corporate, divisional, and subsidiary levels. We‘ll focus on how general managers balance their situations as they simultaneously try to manage their strategy, their part of the organization, and their careers. Preparation Questions: 1. How did DAAG Europe arrive at its present difficulties? 2. What actions should corporate management take? 3. What should Dr. Pelz do? 4. Appraise Dr. Pelz as a Manager. 8 9 II. The Concept of Business Strategy Session 2 Week of January 23, 2006 Readings: Hamel and Prahalad, Chapter 1, ―Getting Off the Treadmill‖ Porter, Chapter 3, "A Framework for Competitor Analysis" Porter, Chapter 4, "Market Signals" Porter, Chapter 5, "Competitive Moves" Case: Crown Cork & Seal in 1989 (9-793-035, rev. April 4, 2002) This session will provide an overview of the processes of strategy identification, evaluation, and formulation in single business firms. A critical task for any top executive is to develop a strategy for his or her organization to assure its survival in the face of a changing environment. Critical steps in that process include identifying the firm's current strategy and its key components, evaluating that strategy in light of the need for change, and then making the necessary changes. In addition, formulating a competitive strategy requires an analysis of industry structure, as well as actions that attempt to create a competitive advantage. These and other issues will be addressed in our discussion of Crown, Cork & Seal by applying the concepts presented in the assigned readings. This is the third update of the classic CC&S case. The first covered the company up to 1964. At that time, Connelly had turned a very sick company around. A major issue for discussion was whether success would continue. This case describes CC&S up through 1989, and the issue of continued success is still important. One of the things that make a general manager's job interesting is that the issue never goes away. We will be concerned with both business strategy and industry dynamics in this case. Continuing consolidation in the industry raises the question of whether CC&S should become a bidder in the apparent sale of Continental Can. Management style also becomes an issue in this case. Connelly's style is evident from the case. You may want to compare Connelly with other general managers you will meet in the cases. Why are some more successful than others? How can managers with such different styles be successful? Preparation Questions: 1. What are the industry structure and dynamics of the metal container industry? What are the industry trends? What are the implications of these trends? 2. What strategy does CC&S have for competing in this industry? What advantages does a firm the size of CC&S have for competing with American Can and Continental Can? How do you explain the comparison shown in Exhibit 5 of the case? 3. In some sense, a competitive strategy describes the amount and types of risk that a company is willing to take. What is CC&S's "risk profile"? 4. What are the major issues that William Avery faces in 1989? What advice would you offer him about these issues? 9 10 Session 3, Week of January 30, 2006 Robert Mondavi, one of the leading American premium wine producers, faced a number of challenges in 2001. The company‘s legendary founder stepped down, the economy began to sour, and Australian imports continued to flood the US market. In addition, the global wine industry had begun to consolidate in recent years and large diversified alcoholic beverage firms use the plentiful cash flow from their beer and distilled spirits businesses to move aggressively into the premium wine industry. Greg Evans, Mondavi‘s new CEO, had chosen to focus on organic growth, rather than pursuing acquisitions. As Evans looked ahead, he needed to decide whether to stay the course as the wine industry‘s global transformation continued. This case describes the changing structure of the global wine industry and the critical activities in the wine production, marketing, and distribution processes. In addition, it chronicles Robert Mondavi‘s history and describes the firm‘s product portfolio, marketing approach, and distribution capabilities. A numbers of competitors are examined in detail, including recent changes in their strategies. You are asked to assess Mondavi‘s position in this changing industry and recommend actions to counter those changes. Assignment: • Porter, Chapter 5, "Competitive Moves" • Porter, Chapter 6, ―Strategy Toward Buyers and Suppliers‖ Case: Robert Mondavi and the Wine Industry (9-302-102) Preparation Questions: 1. Evaluate the structure of the global wine industry. How and why is the structure changing? What threats do these changes present for Robert Mondavi? 2. How attractive are the economics of owning an independent ultra premium winery on a 100- acre vineyard in Napa Valley? Would you invest in such a venture? What advantages and/or disadvantages does Mondavi have relative to small independent wineries such as that? 3. Why are large alcoholic beverage firms such as Diageo, Foster‘s, and Allied Domecq entering the premium wine business? Do their strategies make sense? What advantages or disadvantages does Mondavi have relative to these firms? 4. What is Mondavi trying to accomplish with its international joint venture approach? How does this approach differ from the global strategies pursued by its rivals? 5. Do you agree with Mondavi‘s decision to focus on organic growth rather than acquisitions? What actions would you take to sustain and enhance Mondavi‘s competitive position? 10 11 Session 4 Week of February 6, 2006 Being profitable in an industry characterized by a high level of competition is always a challenge. However, that is particularly the case when you are one-ninth the size of your largest rival and the industry offers significant economies of scale. That is precisely the situation in which Airborne Express finds itself. In spite of its apparent disadvantage, Airborne has not only survived, in the most recent quarter its performance has been particularly strong. Revenues for the quarter are up by 29% over the prior year, and earnings have increased by more than 500%. What we want to do in this session is come to understand how Airborne has managed survive in its competition against its much larger and more resource rich rivals, Federal Express and UPS. We also want to consider what management must do if its most recent success is to continue. Reading: • ―Creating Competitive Advantage‖, HBS Note by Rivkin and Ghemawat (9-798-062) Case: Airborne Express (9-798-070) Preparation Questions: 1. How and why has the structure of the express mail industry evolved in recent years? How have the changes affected small competitors? 2. How has Airborne survived, and recently prospered, in its industry? 3. Quantify Airborne‘s sources of advantage. NOTE: I will provide further direction on the kind of analysis you might do. 4. What must Robert Brazier, Airborne‘s President and COO, do in order to strengthen the company‘s position? Session 5, Week of February 13, 2006 In this session we will address the sustainability of competitive advantage. We will emphasize that any such advantage is likely to be sustained only if management recognizes its bases, and works consciously to defend them. We will come to understand the critical features of sustainable advantages, discuss the contestability of such advantages, the effect of historical resource allocation decisions on subsequent choices, and solutions to management myopia. The Coors Brewing case provides an ideal context for discussing the above issues. The brewing industry experienced tremendous consolidation through that late 1970s, and at that time Coors was the lone highly successful regional brewer in and industry dominated by national firms. Our discussion will focus on the source of Coors' advantage and success, and pose the question of whether it is sustainable. Reading: • Ghemewat, "Sustainable Advantage," Harvard Business Review, 1986 • Porter, Chapter 14, "The Strategic Analysis of Vertical Integration" 11 12 Case: Adolph Coors Brewing Company (9-388-014) Preparation Questions: 1. Coors was very successful through the mid-1970s. What was its strategy historically? 2. How did Coors‘ operating performance change relative to its competitors‘ between 1977 and 1985? Why? 3. Should Coors build a brewery in Virginia? Will it be able to improve its position significantly? 4. What, if anything, might Coors have done differently earlier on? III. Corporate Strategic Management Session 6 Week of February 20, 2006 Readings: Burgelman, R.A. ―Managing the Internal Corporate Venturing Process‖ Sloan Management Review, Winter 1984, pp. 33-48. O‘Reilly and Tushman, ―The Ambidextrous Organization,‖ Harvard Business Review, April 2004., pp.74-81. Luehrman, T. A. ―Strategy as a Portfolio of Real Options,‖ Harvard Business Review, September-October 1998, pp. 89-99. Case: M-Tronics (9-396-178) This session we will consider the unique issues of strategy in a firm that operates in multiple businesses. While managing any business can present a complex set of challenges, the level of complexity increases markedly as a firm expands its presence beyond a single industry. Therefore, considerable time has to be spent trying to develop approaches that help executives manage in such situations. Many firms operate in a variety of different businesses, each of which contributes in different ways to the overall corporate strategy. This case introduces us to questions of managing this dynamic balance and how that relates to new ideas and internally developed diversification opportunities. Preparation Questions: 1. What is troubling George McElroy? 2. Should Mr. Martell be concerned about same issues? 12 13 3. What actions should Mr. Martell take at this time? Please prepare a specific action plan. Session 7, Week of February 27, 2006 FIRST, TEAM WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT DUE The case will be covered in Session 9 This session is the first of three (Sessions 7, 8 and 10) in which we will consider the unique issues of strategy in a firm that operates in multiple businesses. While managing any business can present a complex set of challenges, the level of complexity increases markedly as a firm expands its presence beyond a single industry. Therefore, considerable time has to be spent trying to develop approaches that help executives manage in such situations. This case describes the introduction and use of portfolio planning techniques in the Swiss pharmaceutical and chemical company Ciba-Geigy (now Novartis). These techniques were introduced in Ciba-Geigy in the early 1980s as part of a broader effort to begin formal strategic planning and systematize what had previously been an ad hoc approach to resource allocation in this increasingly diverse company. Portfolio planning is now a critical component in the strategic management of Ciba-Geigy. Corporate management uses it to help choose its set of businesses, to allocate resources among divisions, to set SBU targets and assess performance, and to influence SBU strategies through the selection of senior managers. All managers at both the corporate and division levels, where it has become a ―language‖ of business, have internalized this approach. The mandate of portfolio planning at Ciba-Geigy is, however, challenged by a major investment decision in one of the mature industrial businesses – pigments. Its placement in the portfolio as a core business implies that its goal is to generate cash. Yet the division wants to make a $140 million investment in clearing up a ―Superfund‖ site and beginning U.S. production of a very successful pigment – DDP – at its Newport Delaware facility. This would violate the target for cash generation set for the division. Therefore, corporate management must decide whether to break or uphold the practice of portfolio planning in this instance. Reading: • Porter, Chapter 12, "Strategy in Declining Industries" • Collis & Montgomery, ―Creating A Corporate Advantage‖, Harvard Business Review, 1998. Case: Portfolio Planning at Ciba-Geigy and the Newport Investment Proposal (9-795-040) Preparation Questions: 13 14 1. Should Ciba-Geigy make the Newport investment? Which option? 2. How does portfolio planning help or hinder the decision? 3. What are the purposes of portfolio planning? Does it fulfill those goals? Session 8, Week of March 6, 2006 A highly diversified firm operates in multiple businesses, but not all diversified firms are alike. For example, different approaches to diversification may be manifest in differences in goals, daily operations, and the role of top management, to mention just a few. Our purpose in this session is to develop an appreciation for the unique characteristics of this type of organization, and to come to understand the actions that are needed to make it successful. We will also discuss the role of acquisitions in organizational renewal, and the task of developing and maintaining a core competence in such a firm. The issues identified above will be addressed in conjunction with our discussion of Cooper Industries. Cooper is a large, successful, diversified firm that has grown by acquisition but which remains fundamentally an operating company. As you read the case, pay particular attention to the systems, procedures, and processes that Cooper has installed to enable it to run multiple, seemingly unrelated businesses as an operating company, yet with limited corporate overhead. Reading: • Haspeslagh and Jemison, "Acquisitions: Myths & Reality," Sloan Management Review, 1987 • Jensen, "The Eclipse of the Public Corporation,‖ Harvard Business Review, 1989 Case: Cooper Industries' Corporate Strategy (9-391-095) Cooper Industries Corporate Strategy (B) – to be distributed in class (9-795-154) Preparation Questions: 1. Should Cooper Industries acquire Champion Spark Plugs? 2. What is Cooper's corporate strategy? How does it create value? What are its key resources? 3. What are the limits of Cooper's corporate strategy? 4. What do you think of Cooper‘s long-term prospects? Week of March 13, 2006: SPRING BREAK PERIOD 14 15 Session 9, Week of March 20, 2006 First Team Assignment Case Covered Session 10, Week of March 27, 2006 A particular form of diversified firm, one whose fashion standing tends to come and go, is the conglomerate. While conglomerates tend to be highly diversified multi-business firms, it is their type of diversity that makes them unique. In studying Vivendi, we get a glimpse at a venerable French firm that has extended its reach of business dramatically in recent years, often going against prevailing business wisdom. Our goal is to first understand the motivations for this approach, and ultimately to reach conclusions about its wisdom, and the unique challenges that conglomeration poses for top management. Reading: • Goold, M. and Campbell, A., ―Desperately Seeking Synergy‖, Harvard Business Review, September-October, 1998. Case: Vivendi: Revitalizing a French Conglomerate (9-799-019) Vivendi (B): Revitalizing a French Conglomerate – to be distributed in class (9-703-418) Preparation Questions: 1. What is Vivendi‘s corporate vision? How does this firm intend to create value? 2. Is this a good strategy for the company? 3. Is this a good strategy for the investor? 4. How does the business environment in France affect Messier‘s plans and his ability to carry them out? ........................ IV. Strategy Implementation Session 11, Week of April 3, 2006 Few companies have gained as much notoriety in recent years as has Southwest Airlines. Some of that notoriety has been due to CEO Herb Kelleher‘s often unconventional behavior, while other stems from their unbroken stream of profitability. Many observers of organizations have studied Southwest in an attempt to learn what has made them so successful. We will be no exception. 15 16 However, not only will we try to determine the source of their historical success, we will grapple thwith the unique set of challenges that they face due to the events of September 11, the rise of low cost competitors, and the subsequent restructuring of the airline industry. Assigned reading: • None Case: Southwest Airlines 2002: An Industry Under Siege (9-803-133) Preparation Questions: 1. How does this company make money even when other airlines don‘t? What are the most important contributors to its financial success? 2. How should management respond to the fact that Southwest Airlines has fallen to next- to-last place among major airlines in on-time performance as of September,2002? 3. Once operations are fully stabilized, would you recommend to the management of the airline that it resume its historic growth rate of from 10% to 15% per year? Why? 4. If you would recommend a resumption of previous growth rates, what form should this growth take? For example, should it be achieved within the current network or through an expanded network? By means of a greater proportion of long-haul flights (over three hours in length) or not? Why? 5. If you would not recommend a resumption of previous growth rates, how would you suggest dealing with the consequences of reduced growth, whatever they may be? 6. What are the implications for Southwest of the actual or threatened bankruptcies of other major U.S. airlines? Session 12 Week of April 10, 2006 Readings: Gabarro, John, ―When a New Manager Takes Charge,‖ Harvard Business Review, May- Jun 1989. Kotter, “Leading Change, Why Transformation Efforts Fail,” Harvard Business Review, Mar-Apr 1995, pp. 59-67. Case: Cleveland Twist Drill (A) (4-384-083) Cleveland Twist Drill (B) – to be distributed in class (9-384-163) The relationship between the process by which an organization's strategy is developed, and that used to implement it, is not well understood. However, the relationship has a variety of potentially important implications, which will be discussed in this session. In addition, we will again consider the role of top-level executives in implementation, the range of factors critical to successful implementation of any major strategic change, and the unique situation faced by an executive new to the top management job. 16 17 Declining industries provide one of the most basic challenges for general managers trying to introduce strategic change. We’ll begin our study of managing strategic change by focusing on Jim Bartlett, the new president of CTD as he tries to decide how to bring about the broad changes required making his firm competitive again. Preparation Questions: 1. What is your assessment of the situation facing Jim Bartlett at Cleveland Twist Drill in April 1982? 2. What is your assessment of Jim Bartlett’s first nine months as president of Cleveland Twist Drill? 3. As Bartlett, what is your detailed plan of action for accomplishing the objectives that you and Ames have for the business? 4. Which of the three options that Bartlett was considering in April 1982 would you pursue? Why? Are there others that make more sense given his objectives? Session 13 Week of April 17, 2006 In this session we are exposed to the history and long rivalry of Philips and Matsushita as they evolve during the pre- and post-war era to emerge as major competitors in the global consumer electronics industry from the 1970s to the twenty-first century. We are initially exposed to the history of Philips, a company that dominated the global consumer electronics industry in the post-war era. It did this by building highly independent, fully integrated national organizations (NOs) that were able to sense and respond to local market needs. However, this approach begins to run into difficulties in the mid 1970s, and for over two decades management struggles to integrate and coordinate independent NOs to allow them to deliver a more scale-sensitive and competitively coordinated response to global competitors such as Matsushita. We also see the worldwide expansion of Matsushita around a very centralized scale-intensive approach. It is this global scale efficiency and coordinated global approach that allows Matsushita to overtake Philips in the 1980s. By 2001, however, we see the Japanese company also struggling to adjust its strategy to pressures from national markets and host governments to respond to their local needs. In addition, a strengthening yen puts at risk Matsushita‘s highly centralized sourcing approach, forcing the company to close some of its central operations. The case provides an opportunity to observe a series of CEOs in each firm grapple with the process of making needed changes in strategy and organizational processes over an extended period of time. Reading: • Ghemawat, P., ―The Forgotten Strategy‖, Harvard Business Review, November, 2003, 76-87. • Bartlett and Ghoshal, "Matrix Management: Not a Structure, a State of Mind," Harvard Business Review, 1990 Case: • Philips versus Matsushita: A New Century, A New Round (9-302-049) Preparation Questions: 17 18 1. How did Phillips become the leading consumer electronics company in the world in the postwar era? What distinctive competence did it build? What distinctive incompetencies? 2. How did Matsushita succeed in displacing Philips as No. 1? What were its distinctive competencies and incompetencies? 3. What do you think of the change each company has made to date – the objectives, the implementation, and the impact? 4. What recommendations would you make to Gerald Kleisterlee? To Kunio Nakamura? Session 14. Week of April 24, 2006 This session will continue to focus on several issues raised in the immediately preceding cases – forces and constraining the need for cross-market coordination in order to gain economies of scale and scope versus local market differentiation and responsiveness. However, it also exposes us to issues of how global organizations decide on and implement different roles and responsibilities between headquarters and subsidiaries. In addition, the case provides an example of how a company‘s competencies are actually built over time. Reading: • Bartlett, C. & Goshal, S., ―Tap Your Subsidiaries for Global Reach‖, Harvard Business Review,1986. Case: • BRL Hardy: Globalizing an Australian Wine Company (9-300-018) Preparation Questions: 1. How do you account for BRL Hardy‘s remarkable post merger success? 2. What is the source of the tension between Stephen Davies and Christopher Carson? 3. Should Millar approve Carson‘s proposal to launch D’istinto? Why/why not? 4. What recommendations would you make to the organization concerning the conflicting proposals for Kelley’s Revenge and Banrock Stations? What would you decide to do as Carson? As Millar? 5. From Millar‘s perspective, are these decisions (#3 and #4 above) independent? Why or why not? Session 15, Week of May 1, 2006 18 19 SECOND, INDIVIDUAL WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT DUE The case will be covered in class. 19 20 20 21 APPENDIX: THE USE OF CASES IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 1WHY WE USE THE CASE METHOD The case method is one of the most effective means of management education. It is widely used in schools of business throughout the world, and this use is predicated upon the belief that tackling real business problems is the best way to develop practitioners. Real problems are messy, complex, and very interesting. Unlike other pedagogical techniques, many of which make you the recipient of large amounts of information but do not require its use, the case method requires you to be an active participant in the closest thing to the real situation. It is a way of gaining a great deal of experience without spending a lot of time. It is also a way to learn a great deal about how certain businesses operate, and how managers manage. There are few programmable, textbook solutions to the kinds of problems faced by real general managers. When a problem becomes programmable, the general manager gives it to someone else to solve on a repeated basis using the guidelines he or she has set down. Thus the case situations that you will face will require the use of analytical tools and the application of your personal judgment. Sources of Cases All the cases in this course are about real companies. You will recognize many of the names of the companies although some of them may be new to you. These cases were developed in several different ways. Occasionally, a company will come to a business school professor and request that a case be written on that company. In other situations, a professor will seek out a company because he or she knows that the company is in an interesting or difficult situation. Often, the company will agree to allow a case to be written. Occasionally, cases will be written solely from public sources. This is perhaps the most difficult type of case writing because of the lack of primary data sources. In those situations where a company has agreed to have a case written, the company must ―release‖ the case. This means that they have final approval of the content of a given case. The company and the case writer are thus protected from any possibility of releasing data that might be competitively or personally sensitive. Public source cases, obviously, do not need a release. Given the requirement for release, however, it is amazing the amount of information that companies will allow to be placed in a case. Many companies do this because of their belief in the effectiveness of the case method. Preparing for Class When you prepare for class, it is recommended that you plan on reading the case at least three times. The first reading should be a quick run-through of the text in the case. It should give you a feeling for what the case is about and the types of data that are contained in the case. For example, you will want to differentiate between facts and opinions that may be expressed. In every industry, there is a certain amount of ―conventional wisdom‖ that may or may not reflect the truth. On your second reading you should read in more depth. Many people like to underline or otherwise mark up their cases to pick out important points that they know will be needed later. Your major effort on a second reading should be to understand the business and the situation. You should ask yourself questions like: (1) Why has this company survived? (2) How does this business work? (3) What are the economics of this business? On your second reading, you should carefully examine the exhibits in the case. It is generally true that the case writer has put the exhibit there for a purpose. It contains some information that will be useful to you in analyzing the situation. Ask yourself what the information is when you study each exhibit. 1This note was prepared by Dan. R.E. Thomas. It is intended solely as an aid to class preparation. 21 22 You will often find that you will need to apply some analytical technique (for example, ratio analysis, growth rate analysis, etc.) to the exhibit in order to benefit from the information in the raw data. On your third reading, you should have a good idea of the fundamentals of the case. Now you will be searching to understand the specific situation. You will want to get at the root causes of problems and gather data from the case that will allow you to make specific action recommendations. Before the third reading, you may want to review the assignment questions in the course description. It is during and after the third reading that you should be able to prepare your outlined answers to the assignment questions. There is only one secret to good case teaching and that is good preparation on the part of the participants. Since the course has been designed to ―build‖ as it progresses, class attendance is also very important. Class Discussions In each class, one or several people will be asked to lead off the discussion. If you have prepared the case, and are capable of answering the assignment question, you should have no difficulty with this lead-off assignment. An effective lead-off can do a great deal to enhance a class discussion. It sets a tone for the class that allows that class to probe more deeply into the issues of the case. The instructor‘s role in the class discussion is to help, through intensive questioning, to develop your ideas. This use of the Socratic method has proved to be an effective way to develop thinking capability in individuals. The instructor‘s primary role is to manage the class process and to insure that the class achieves an understanding of the case situation. There is no single correct solution to any of these problems. There are, however, a lot of wrong solutions. We will try to come up with a solution that will enable us to deal effectively with the problems presented in the case. After the individual lead-off presentation, the discussion will be opened to the remainder of the group. It is during this time that you will have an opportunity to present and develop your ideas about the way the situation should be handled. It will be important for you to relate your ideas to the case situation and to the ideas of others as they are presented in the class. The instructor‘s role is to help you do this. The Use of Extra- or Post-Case Data You are encouraged to deal with the case as it is presented. You should put yourself in the position of the general manager involved in the situation and look at the situation through his or her eyes. Part of the unique job of being a general manager is that many of your problems are dilemmas. There is no way to come out a winner on all counts. Although additional data might be interesting or useful, the ―Monday morning quarterback‖ syndrome is not an effective way to learn about strategic management. Therefore, you are strongly discouraged from acquiring or using extra- or post-case data. Some case method purists argue that a class should never be told what actually happened in a situation. Each person should leave the classroom situation with his or her plan for solving the problem, and none should be falsely legitimized. The outcome of a situation may not reflect what is, or is not, a good solution. You must remember that because a company did something different from your recommendations and was successful or unsuccessful, this is not an indication of the value of your approach. It is, however, interesting and occasionally useful to know what actually occurred. For some cases, we will include that discussion. 22 23 STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT References In addition to the course readings, the following books and articles are listed here to supplement your readings on the concepts and problems we explore in the course. Books: Allison, Graham T. Essence of Decision. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1971.) Amram, Martha and Nalin Kulatilaka. 1998. Real Options: Managing Strategic Investment in an Uncertain World. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Andrews, Kenneth R. The Concept of Corporate Strategy. (Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin, 1971.) Barnard, Chester I. The Functions of the Executive. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938.) ndBartlett, Christopher A. and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1998, 2 edition. Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press. Beamish, Paul W. 1998. Strategic Alliances. Cheltenham: Elgar Publishing. Bennis, W. and B. Nanus. Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge, Harper & Row: New York, l985. Besanko, David, David Dranove, and Mark Shanley. The Economics of Strategy. New York: John Wiley, 1995 Block, Zanas and Ian C. MacMillan. 1993. Corporate Venturing. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press. Brandenburger, Adam and Barry Nalebuff. Co-opetition. New York; Doubleday, 1996 Brown, John Seely and Paul Duguid. 2000. The Social Life of Information. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Brown, Shona L. and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. Competing on the Edge. (Boston: HBS Press, 1998). Burgelman, R. and L. Sayles. Inside Corporate Innovation, Free Press: New York, 1986. Caves, Richard. American Industry: Structure, Conduct, Performance. Third Edition. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.) Chandler, Alfred D., Jr. Strategy and Structure. (New York: Doubleday, 1966.) Chandler, Alfred D., Jr. Scale and Scope. Cambridge: Harvard University Press). Christensen, Clayton M. 1997. Innovator‘s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Christensen, Clayton M. 2003. Innovator‘s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Cyert, Richard M. and James G. March. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963). 23 24 D‘Aveni, Richard A. Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering. (New York: Free Press, 1994). De Geus, Arie P. 1997. Living Company. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Doz, Yves and Gary Hamel. Alliance Advantage: The Art of Creating Value Through Partnering. Boston: HBS Press, 1998). Drucker, Peter F. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, and Practices. (New York: Harper and Row, 1974). Evans, Philip and Thomas S. Wurster. 1999. Blown to Bits: How the New Economics of Information Transforms Strategy. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Gouillart F.J. and J.N. Kelly. 1995. Transforming the Organization. New York: McGraw Hill. Hamel, Gary. 2000. Leading the Revolution. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Handy, Charles. 1991. Age of Unreason. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Haspeslagh. Philippe C. and David B. Jemison. Managing Acquisitions: Creating Value Through Corporate Renewal. (New York: Free Press, 1991). Henderson, Bruce D. Henderson on Corporate Strategy. (Cambridge: Abt Books, 1979). Komisar, Randy and Kent L. Lineback. 2000. The Monk and the Riddle: The Education of a Silicon Valley Entrepreneur. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Kotter, J. The General Managers, Free Press: New York, 1982. Leavitt, Harold J. Corporate Pathfinders. (Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin, 1986). Leonard, Dorothy. 1997. Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Markides, Constantinos. 1999. All the Right Moves: A Guide to Crafting Breakthrough Strategy. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Nelson, Richard and Sidney Winter. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Nohria, N. and R. Eccles. 1993. Networks and Organizations. (Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press). Pfeffer, Jeffrey and Robert I. Sutton. 1999. The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Porter, Michael. Competitive Strategy. (New York: Free Press, 1981). , Competitive Advantage. (New York: Free Press, l985). Prigogine, Ilya. 1997. The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos, and the New Laws of Nature. New York: The Free Press. Quinn, James Brian. Strategies for Change: Logical Incrementalism. (Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1980). ndRappaport, Alfred. 1998, 2 edition. Creating Shareholder Value: A Guide for Managers and Investors. New York: Free Press. 24 25 thRogers, Everett M. 1995, 4 edition. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press. Rothschild, William E. Strategic Alternatives: Selection, Development, and Implementation. (New York: Amacom, 1979). Rumelt, Richard P. Strategy Structure and Economic Performance. (Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1974). Salter, Malcolm S. and Weinhold, Wolf A. Diversification Through Acquisition. (New York: Free Press, 1979). Sayles, L. Leadership: What Effective Managers Really Do and How They Do It, McGraw-Hill: New York, 1979. Schelling, Thomas C. The Strategy of Conflict. (London: Oxford University Press, 1960.) Selznick, P. Leadership in Administration, Row, Peterson and Company: Evanston, IL, 1957. Tichy, N. and DeVanna, M. The Transformational Leader, John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1986. Tushman, Michael L. and Charles A. O‘Reilly III. 1996. Winning Through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Yergin, Daniel and Joseph Stanislaw. 1999. The Commanding Heights: The Battle Between Government and the Marketplace That Is Remaking the Modern World. Touchstone. Articles: Amram, Martha and Nalin Kulatilaka. 1999. ―Disciplined Decisions: Aligning Strategy With the Financial Markets,‖ Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb 77(1): 95-104. Banks, Robert L. and Steven C. Wheelwright, ―Operations vs. Strategy: Trading Tomorrow for Today,‖ Harvard Business Review, May-June 1979. Bartlett, Christopher A. and Sumantra Ghoshal. 2000. ―Going Global: Lessons from Late Movers,‖ Harvard Business Review, March-April, 132-142. Berg, N., ―Strategic Planning in Conglomerate Companies,‖ Harvard Business Review, May 1975. Berry, Charles, ―Corporate Growth and Diversification,‖ The Journal of Law and Economics, October 1971. Bettauer, A., ―Strategy for Divestments: How to Dispose of Part of the Organization,‖ Harvard Business Review, March 1967. Bettis, Richard A. and William K. Hall, ―Strategic Portfolio Management in the Multibusiness Firm,‖ California Management Review, Fall 1981. Biggadike, Ralph, ―The Risky Business of Diversification,‖ Harvard Business Review, May-June 1979. Bloom, P. and P. Kotler, ―Strategies for High Market Share Companies,‖ Harvard Business Review, November-December 1975. Bourgeois, L. J. and David R. Brodwin, ―Strategy Implementation: Five Approaches to an Elusive Phenomenon,‖ Strategic Management Journal, July-Sept. 1984. 25 26 Bowman, Edward H., ―A Risk/Return Paradox for Strategic Management,‖ Sloan Management Review, Spring 1980. Brown, John Seely and Paul Duguid. 2000. ―Balancing Act: How to Capture Knowledge Without Killing It,‖ Harvard Business Review, May-June, 73-80. Burgelman, Robert A., ―A Model of the Interaction of Strategic Behavior, Corporate Context, and the Concept of Strategy,‖ Academy of Management Review, January 1983. , ―Designs for Corporate Entrepreneurship in Established Firms,‖ California Management Review, XXXVI (Spring l984). Buzzell, R. D., B. T. Gale, and R. G. M. Sultan, ―Market Share - A Key to Profitability,‖ Harvard Business Review, January-February 1975. Carey, Dennis, moderator. 2000. ―Lessons from Master Acquirers: A CEO Roundtable on Making Mergers Succeed,‖ Harvard Business Review, May-June, 145-154. Chaudhuri, Saikat and Benham Tabrizi. 1999. ―Capturing the Real Value in High-Tech Acquisitions, Harvard Business Review, September-October, 123-130. Christensen, Clayton M. and Michael Overdorf. 2000. ―Meeting the Challenge of Disruptive Change,‖ Harvard Business Review, March-April, 66-76. Collins, Jim. 1999. ―Turning Goals Into Results: The Power of Catalytic Mechanisms,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 77(4): 71-82. Clifford, Donald, ―Growth Pains of the Threshold Company,‖ Harvard Business Review, September-October 1973. Day, George S., ―Diagnosing the Product Portfolio,‖ Journal of Marketing, April 1977. Eccles, Robert G., Kersten L. Lanes, and Thomas C. Wilson. 1999. ―Are You Paying Too Much for That Acquisition?,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 77(4): 136-146. Emshoff, James R. and Ian I. Mitroff, ―Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Planning,‖ Business Horizons, October 1978. Foreman, Leonard and William Lawrence, ―The Case Against Corporate Planning,‖ Business Horizons, October 1978. Fredrickson, James and Anthony Iaquinto, ―Inertia and Creeping Rationality in Strategic Decision Processes,‖ Academy of Management Journal, September 1989, 516-542. Fruhan, William E., ―Pyrrhic Victories in Fights for Market Share,‖ Harvard Business Review, September-October 1972. Ghemawat, Pankaj and Fariborz Ghadar. 2000. ―The Dubious Logic of Global Megamergers,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August, 64-72. Gluck, F.W., S.P. Kaufman, and A.S. Walleck, ―Strategic Management for Competitive Advantage,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 1980. Greiner, Larry E., ―Evolution and Revolution as Organizations Grow,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 1972. 26 27 Gulati, Ranjay, Tarun Khanna and Nitin Nohria. 1994. ―Unilateral Commitments and the Importance of Process in Alliances,‖ Sloan Management Review, Spring. 61-69. Guth, W. D. and R. Taguiri, ―Personal Executive Values and Corporate Strategy,‖ Harvard Business Review, September 1975. Hall, William K., ―SBUs: Hot, New Topic in the Management of Diversification,‖ Business Horizons, February 1978. , ―Survival Strategies in a Hostile Environment,‖ Harvard Business Review, September-October 1980. Hambrick, D.C., and J.W. Fredrickson ―Are You Sure You Have a Strategy?‖ Academy of Management Executive, November 2001.. Hamermesh, Richard G. and Steven Silk, ―How to Compete in Stagnant Industries,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 1980. Haspeslagh, Philippe, ―Portfolio Planning: Uses and Limits,‖ Harvard Business Review, January-February 1982. _____ and David B. Jemison, ―Acquisitions: Myths and Reality,‖ Sloan Management Review, Spring 1987. Hayes, Robert H. and William J. Abernathy, ―Managing Our Way to Economic Decline,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 1980. Hirsh, R. ―How Success Short-Circuits the Future,‖ Harvard Business Review, 1986, 64 (2), pp. 72-77. Jemison, David B. and Sim B. Sitkin, ―Corporate Acquisitions: A Process Perspective,‖ Academy of Management Review, January 1987. ______ ―Acquisitions: The Process Can Be a Problem,‖ Harvard Business Review, March-April, 1986. Khanna, Tarun and Krishna Palepu. 1999. ―The Right Way to Restructure Conglomerates in Emerging Markets,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 77(4): 125-134. Lindblom, Charles E., ―Still Muddling, Not Yet Through,‖ Public Administration Review, November-December 1979. , ―The Science of ?Muddling Through,‘‖ Public Administration Review, Spring 1959. Lorenzoni G. and C. Baden-Fuller. 1995. ―Creating a Strategic Center to Manage a Web of Partners,‖ California Management Review, Vol. 37, no.3, 146-163. Melichor and Rush, ―Evidence on the Acquisition-Related Performance of Conglomerate Firms,‖ Journal of Finance, March 1974. Mintzberg, Henry, ―The Manager‘s Job: Folklore and Fact,‖ Harvard Business Review, June - August 1975. Mintzberg, Henry and James A. Waters, ―Tracking Strategy in an Entrepreneurial Firm,‖ Academy of Management Journal, September 1982. , ―Planning on the Left Side and Managing on the Right,‖ California Management Review, July-August 1976. Perspective…1995. ―How Can Big Companies Keep the Entrepreneurial Spirit Alive?‖ Harvard Business Review, November-December, 183-192. 27 28 Porter, Michael E., ―Please Note Location of Nearest Exit: Exit Barriers and Planning,‖ California Management Review, Vol. XIX. , and R. Caves ―From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers...,‖ Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1977. Quinn, James Brian, ―Strategic Change: ?Logical Incrementalism,‘‖ Sloan Management Review, Fall 1978. , ―Technological Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Strategy,‖ Sloan Management Review, Spring 1979. Rappaport, Alfred and Mark L. Sirower. 1999. ―Stock or Cash? The Trade-Offs for Buyers and Sellers in Mergers and Acquisitions,‖ Harvard Business Review, March-April, 147-158. Scott, Bruce R., ―Stages of Corporate Development--Part I,‖ Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Case No. 9-371-294. Spence, A. Michael, ―Entry, Capacity, Investment and Oligopolistic Pricing,‖ Bell Journal of Economics. Stevenson, Howard H., ―Defining Corporate Strengths and Weaknesses,‖ Sloan Management Review, Spring 1976. Tilles, S., ―How to Evaluate Corporate Strategy,‖ Harvard Business Review, July 1973. Uyterhoeven, Hugo, ―General Managers in the Middle,‖ Harvard Business Review, Sept-Oct 1989. Vancil, Richard F. and Peter Lorange, ―Strategic Planning in Diversified Companies,‖ Harvard Business Review, January-February 1975. Wheelwright, Steven C. and Robert H. Hayes, ―Competing Through Manufacturing,‖ Harvard Business Review, January-February l985. Wrapp, H.E., ―Good Managers Don‘t Make Policy Decisions,‖ Harvard Business Review, September-October 1967. Zaleznik, Abraham, ―The Human Dilemmas of Leadership,‖ Harvard Business Review, July-August 1963. 28