There are two strategies in strategy development; the intended strategy procedure and the emergent strategy methodology. Strategies indentified in MacFarlane Solutions are developed using the emergent strategy approach. The process of this approach involves creativity and intuitions through cumulative day to day regimens and activities (such as Bill's skills and its interest about new technology) which determine the decisions that eventually end up being the long term way of the organization. Seeing that creative strategic thinking is the stronghold of Macfarlane Alternatives due to the vision of an individual leader - Monthly bill and adjustable to new opportunities, it can't be put on practice after Bill's pension since there is no clear group of tools and strategy platform that the management team may use.
Hence, strategy can be pre-planned in Macfarlane Solutions as advised by Rigby and Bilodeau (2007) that proper planning is one of the most essential management tool in strategy development. The planned strategy is a technique that is prepared beforehand and monitored tightly by the organization and it begins with an intention or a concept, a plan is then developed and communicated (Ocasio and Joseph 2008). On the other hand, due to today's energetic environment, there are consistent changes in the practice of the supposed strategy procedure where managers find it difficult to rely solely after the planning process and eventually it is misguided. The root principle for this is the lacking of versatility and openness of the planned procedure that is vital for responsiveness and improvisation in today's ever changing environment.
In addition, Bill's autocratic authority style as recognized in the case study acts as a hurdle to the intended strategy way and the balance of the management team in MacFarlane Alternatives. The term steadiness here refers to the ability of the management team to use as an intact system in the long run (Arrow, McGrath, & Berdahl, 2000). The explanation for this is basically because there is certainly less contributions and participations in strategy development with an autocratic innovator allow free riding on the work of others. Matching to Tyler & Smith (1998), there are possibilities that team management might not exactly want to participate in the autocratic led group because they would like to add more inputs in decision making. That is proven by the feedbacks from Graham Smith and Bill's nephew - Pete that they enjoyed the workshop conducted by Dr. Jane where there are high involvements are implicated.
For that reason, it's advocated that Macfarlane Alternatives need to find a balance between these two strategic perspectives rather than the perfect form of either. By integrating both of these strategic methods, it forms the boundary of a continuum along which has the potential to create the groundwork for an progressive and integrative concept of strategy creation (Mintzberg and Walters 1985, Birkinshaw, Hamel and Mol, 2008). Therefore, the framework of strategy development process in MacFarlane Solutions needs to follow 4 major requirements:
Multiple options: The team management of MacFarlane Alternatives needs to explicitly consider strategic alternatives to be able to take into account the ever before changing environment and plan future possible developments.
Multiple perspectives: The integration of supposed and emergent way need to consider various viewpoints and inputs from the stakeholders of MacFarlane Alternatives for the intended purpose of conquering existing inertia.
Systematic tool based process: The integrative strategy procedure must be clear a set of tools and strategy framework that the management team may use, for example after Bill's pension.
Flexibility: The integrative strategy construction must be versatile to different kinds of framework.
The integration of the two strategic perspectives can be shown via the scenario planning that has the potential to lay down the basic of the abovementioned requirements and will be discussed in question 2.
The configuration of MacFarlane Solutions plays an important role in succeeding the integration. Therefore, the decentralized composition specifically - delegation can help boost the distribution of electric power in decision making by developing a semi-autonomous where in fact the management team involve some substantial tactics and efforts at making decision but in the end in charge of it. Corresponding to X (2), a decentralized structure tends to be more agile in decision making, and the decisions made tend to be more customer oriented where fulfill Bill's necessity along the way of decision making.
In addition compared to that, decentralized buildings not only aid in being successful the integration of two strategy approach, but also to provide as a learning company. According to Minzberg (1983), a learning firm tends to be flat and versatile organization and better one which is tall centralized bureaucratic composition. Therefore, shared vision by Invoice to his management team is important so that everyone knows the preferred way of the organization. In this way, company learning is precondition for a learning organization, because each member in the MacFarlane Solution's team management learns to be more accountable in reference to making decisions in the interest of the organization and not only the employee's. In addition to that, strategy development in the field of learning may be formal and explicit, but it addittionally may well include the casual and implicit part of wider approaches for the Macfarlane Solutions such as its culture and people management approach.
As the management consulting industry in today's business has been growing gradually in the development strategy of organizations such as Boston Consulting Group and McKinsey & Co over the last decades (Kieser 2002, Werr & Styhre 2003, Susanne 2008) it offers come under strong criticism from both educational and business journalists (Craig 2005, Kihn 2006, Klenter and Mollgard 2006). Reasons for failure are recognized as consultants deserving the blames such as consultant do not listen, incompetent, not understanding the business and failure to provide results. Nevertheless, in the event review of Macfarlane Alternatives, the situation where consultants are often to be blamed for talking to failures are no longer just a one party's fault when plus its both the consultants and the customers of the consulting process are mutually accountable that is eventually at fault (Appelbaum 2004 and Mohe 2005).
The consultant-client marriage in the event review is developed unsteadily anticipated to several reasons including the personal characteristic of the consultant and consumer (such as lack of skills), bad consultant and client romantic relationship (lack of communications) and sociopolitical factors of the client's group. There is propensity that the clients are believed as the passive part and the expert should play the active role in a consultant-client romantic relationship because consultant fails to adjust to the personality of the client's point of view. The underlying reasons of the is due to the lack of skills such as the consultant's know-how or often known as the "know it all" attitude, consultants often develop strategies based on their experience without in actuality understand the problem. For example, Bill was overlooked and considered the passive part when Dr. Jane assumed that the perfect solution is should be solely reaching Bill's criterion that is to require more people in strategy making process, without looking sufficiently beyond her skills to determine if there have been other issues-area related.
The consultant-client relationship is more than simply simply a personal relationship albeit it is seen as a immediate communication from the advisor to your client. Regarding to Luhmann (2005), the concept of communication isn't just mutual understanding and shared meaning of the two functions but also to include mutual inputs. It is because the partnership between customer and specialist belongs to two different communication systems and ethnicities where each get together has its communication system. Therefore, Luhmann (2005) created the third communication system this is the gap between the two celebrations where consulting no more cured as an the best way stream of input-output connection where in fact the consultants provide alternatives only but also to comprehend the consulting interventions. For example, instead of creating a summary report to Bill on the many benefits and idea from the management level, Dr. Jane should ask inputs and feedbacks from her customer - Bill. You will discover options that Dr. Jane is able to identify another issues-related area from the responses such as Bill's real requirements. In addition to that, seeing that Invoice are determined to retired in two years time and appointed a new CEO in his mind, it can be assumed that Expenses wanted direct engagement in decision making. Participation can be differentiated into two categories corresponding to Marchington and Wilkinson (2005) that is immediate participation and indirect participation in which Invoice need to seek clarification on how the expert will operate where he should understand the consultant's procedure and ways of functions and address this necessity to the consultant at the first place.
The scenario planning used by Dr. Jane is an essential tool in helping policy designers and managers face strategic decisions scheduled to uncertain future results, however a contradiction to the type of how strategy are developed in MacFarlane Solutions - the emergent strategy development. The blend of the agile emergent strategy development and Bill's autocratic leadership style leads him to do whatever he feel that is necessary to deliver the normal good and require its members to contribute without asking for input (Arrow, McGrath, & Berdahl, 2000).
Therefore, Dr. Jane should explain that two different strategy perspectives - expected and emergent strategy can be integrated in the situation planning way. The underlying theory because of this is (1) meant strategy requires from ideas of strategy development based on incorporated creativity which allows intuition, hence allowing existing assumptions to be challenged by innovative strategies (2) which is comparable to planned strategy if the strategy development process consider multiple strategic choices somewhat than one 'best' strategy (Give 2003, Schoemaker and Day 2009). Next, Dr. Jane can adapt to the nature of MacFarlane Alternatives and convert the circumstance planning from an indirect form to a primary form of scenario centered decision support which in the end causes a tactical planning procedure as reinforced by Parson et al. (2007) and Volkery and Ribiero (2009).
The indirect form of scenario planning that pertains to the early phases of strategy making such as involvement of professionals and open-minded conversation is instituted similarly to the research study as Amount 2. Hence, instead of having more tactical alternatives as a finish output, the immediate form of scenario planning require the output of more specific and targeted home elevators strategies in inquiries, eradicating less plausible alternatives and focus on the most optimistic ones. In mention of Physique 2, Dr. Jane should concentrate on the most immediate form of scenario centered decision support that is 'appraising robustness of options for future action' rather than 'stimulating a wider issue about possible futures'. Even though it is arguable the particular one best strategy will be eventually chosen as the end result in the event review if the workshop persists, however the different of the scenario planning as considering platform and learning platform should be resolved by Dr. Jane. Therefore, through demonstrating the results of a respected choice made, the immediate form of circumstance planning assists as learning platform targeted to assess real life strategy and projects (Coates 2000). The ultimate value of the amended circumstance planning does not emphasize very much in the creation of scenario but the discourse of the consequences (Bishop, Hines and Collins, 2007).
It can be concluded that the consulting methodology adopted by Dr. Jane originates from a constructivist and traditional position is commonly less directive and provide less information that results in the process of explorations as indentified in the case research where interviews with the management team are completed. While using the exploration process, the requirement of the client is obtained through interpretation and information sharing which deserting away from identifying and mending the true problem. Therefore, it is essential for Dr. Jane to find the common surface for the two particular systems as abovementioned and appointment process should start only in the normal surface of the contact system. At such, the challenges in finding the normal floor of the consultant-client relationship may be accomplished by using the naturalist from the narrative way. The naturalist approach to interviewing differs from the constructivist way because more probing questions are being used by Dr. Jane during the interview such as:
What are the people doing in MacFarlane Solution's strategy development?
What are the encounters the team management of nine experienced of starting the emergent strategy development?
What does indeed this mean to them?
The CEO of MacFarlane Alternatives - Bill shouldn't be excluded from the above diagnosis as well. By doing the naturalist procedure, circular questioning can assist Dr. Jane to identify vital non-obvious and indirect information of the client system (like the dynamics of emergent strategy, autocratic management and more immediate involvement) that in the end allow new ways to act in promoting problem definition. It is strongly stressed that communication is the main element factor to the succession of an consultant-client relationship and its consulting process, therefore one consultant, as recommended by Wrzesniewski et al. (2003) and Peavy (1992) should retain in head that the meaning-making factor is significant before assessment process can take place. The advisor must first ask itself, "How do i assist my client to complex and examine its constructions and meanings of interest to their decisions?"
