Strategic Management Report: Key Concepts, Theorists, and Developments

This report provides a comprehensive overview of strategic management, tracing its evolution from the contributions of Frederick Taylor's scientific management to the contemporary developments shaped by influential figures such as Alfred D. Chandler, Igor Ansoff, Michael Porter, Henry Mintzberg, and Richard D’Aveni. It delves into the core concepts of strategic management, including Chandler's insights on organizational growth, Ansoff's framework for strategic decision-making, Porter's competitive forces model, Mintzberg's crafting strategy, and D'Aveni's hypercompetition theory. The report explores the key ideas of each theorist, analyzing their impact on strategic thinking and providing a comparative analysis of their approaches. It examines how these concepts have shaped business strategies and organizational structures, offering a valuable resource for understanding the complexities of strategic management in a dynamic business environment. The report highlights the importance of adaptability, competitive advantage, and disruption in achieving sustainable success.

RUNNING HEAD: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 1
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Student Name
Institute Name

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 2
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................3
Strategic management concepts by Alfred D. Chandler and Igor Ansoff..................................4
Contemporary development by Michael Porter, Henry Mintzberg and Richard D’Aveni........6
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................9
Reference..................................................................................................................................10

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 3
Introduction
The report will discuss in detail about different concepts of the strategic management right
from its initiation. Frederick Taylor is considered as an inventor or the father of scientific
management. His contribution in industrial management is immense and his work is called as
scientific management (Taylor, 1911). He was an US based inventor as well as engineer that
implemented his work of engineering and knowledge in management as well as developed
the theory known as scientific management theory. Some of the important work introduced
by him was The Principles of Scientific Management (Chandler, 1962). It is also important to
note here that his work can be seen as an important part in all modern age manufacturing
companies and many other kinds of businesses. The work can be found in all kind of
production planning as well as production based control with process based designs and
control over the quality and cost based accounting system and also ergonomics (Taylor,
1911).
One of the most acknowledged work of the Fredrick Taylor is scientific management theory
which is entirely based on application of industrial based engineering principles to develop a
structure where any kind of waste was completely ignored as well as the process and methods
of the production can be rectified. At the same time, goods were properly distributed. Such
kind of improvements also serve the best kind of interest of the workforce, employees and
society normally (D'Aveni & Gunther, 1994). The theory propounded by the Taylor can be be
further divided into four principles for management.
1. Proactively collecting, evaluating and exchanging data to laws, rules and also
formulas from mathematics for finishing the work.
2. Using a scientific level work in collecting and training of employees.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 4
3. Collecting the science and the worker so that the employees implementing the
developed scientific work for the task.
4. Application of the work in equal manner between the manager and the employees
where the management implements scientific methods to plan and the worker is able
to perform the tasks which are pursuant towards planning.
The work approached by the Frederick Taylor is based on the study of management in a
quantitative manner with the help of the collection as well as analysis of the work. For
instance, his followers also worked as per the motion based studies to sort the overall
efficiency. The crucial elements of scientific management are based on the time-based studies
which are functional as well as specialized because of the supervision based standardization
of various techniques and tools along with implementation of standardized work techniques
with separate planning function based management by exception techniques as well as
principles. There are so many instructions based cards for the workmen based task and it is
allocated with huge bonus for the successful performance (D'Aveni & Gunther, 1994). The
usage of the different rate along with Mnemonic systems for diversifying the products and
implementation is actually helped the companies in that time to formulate better strategies.
The existence of routing structure with a modern time costing system etc. Taylor also
mentioned such components are just the elements of the methods of management which are
extensions of the four principles: -
1. The growth or development of true science
2. The selection of scientific based workman
3. The scientific based education as well as development of the workman
4. Friendly and intimate cooperation that exist between the men and the management.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 5
Strategic management concepts by Alfred D. Chandler and Igor Ansoff
The concept of Igor Ansoff has been created a unique kind of strategic management school of
different thoughts that is actually a synthesis of his work in the present industry. It is
associated with different kind of work of many crucial predecessors and his personal insight
into the important elements. These elements are also associated with the successful strategic
behaviour with empirical research that helps the theories as well as prescriptions (Chandler,
1962).
The Ansoff recognized four standard kinds of organizational decision that are associated with
the strategy based policy, programmes and specific based operating process. The last three
kinds, it was argued are specifically designed to solve the recurring issues. It is further
formed which do not need an original decision all the time (H. Igor Ansoff, 1965).
Ansoff also argued that within the activities of the company where there must be components
of the core capacity which is based on an idea which is later taken by many renowned
personalities.
To settle an association that exist between the past as well as future based corporate work
where Ansoff has recognized four important strategy elements which are discussed below: -
1. Product based scope present a clear kind of concept related to the idea of what any
business or products any company was accountable for (H. Igor Ansoff, 1965).
2. Growth vector is further discussed in detail as per the section mentioned by Ansoff
matrix which provides a way which explores the growth that can be attempted
(Mintzberg, H.,).
3. Competitive advantage is also based on advantages with an organization based
process which can be possessed that will ensure that it is finished in effective manner
and also covers a concept later championed by Porter (Chandler, 1962).

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 6
4. Synergy discussed by Ansoff is also explaining the kind of synergy and how the
complete work is actually greater than the simple sum of distinct parts which needs an
evaluation of how options fit with the core based capacities of the company.
Alfred D. Chandler discussed about the growth of management of a large organization from
the history and specific from the mid-19th century towards the end of the world war I. At the
time of that period, the typical kind of entrepreneurial company provide way to bigger
organization consist of so many units. A new kind of management was required since the
owner based manager that could not be existing at every place at once. Moreover, a new kind
of manager was required to function in the current culture with the salaried professionals. It
was also advised which can be split the activities of strategic based thought process and the
line management (Chandler, 1962). According to the analysis of Chandler, the effective
company is the one which can now be differentiate the strategy as well as the routine work.
Forming an effective strategy is now becoming the responsibility of the manager.
Contemporary development by Michael Porter, Henry Mintzberg and Richard D’Aveni
Michael Porter is best known for the strategy based theorists. He has usually been highly
prolific among the rest. Porter was also accountable for writing of many work and the articles
that have been accepted in the field. He has been specifically part of the creating or
popularizing of number of techniques that have been used widely in the discipline (Chandler,
1962).
The first book by Porter was based on the practising manager with competitive based strategy
and techniques for evaluating industries as well as competitors was initially published in the
year 1980. Drawing the attention heavily on industrial based economic, there was an attempt
to take such basic notions and develops a richer as well as complex kind of theory which
closer to the complete reality of the competition (H. Igor Ansoff, 1965). The book discussed

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 7
five kind of competitive forces that decides industry based profit level with potential level
entrants with buyer, supplier and competition within the sector. Every element must be
exerted with the power to bring margins down. The overall attractiveness of the sector
depends on these theories which greatly impact the performance as well (Chandler, 1962).
Competitive based strategy should be bringing at one place with rational and readily manner
with are present with new concepts to formulate a framework for analysing the competitive
culture.
Henry Mintzberg was propounded the term crafting strategy where the word strategy is
developed in a deliberate manner with delicacy. For Mintzberg, the strategy is more based on
many emerging along with different kind of organizational development than be
manufactured by a group of strategies sitting around the table which was believed for
predicting the future (Mintzberg, H.,).
It was also argued by Mintzberg that the current case must be labelled as strategic
programming. The instruction is based on strategy that has too long been collected in varied
ivory towers and built from analysis and corporate based data. In the time of specific and
completely unpredictable kind of modification, the actual usage of the strategy is questioned
from time to time (H. Igor Ansoff, 1965).
The recent work of Mintzberg is mostly considered the controversial with strategy is not the
time based on planning however the opposite with starting point. With the rise and fall of
strategic based planning is masterly and pain based deconstruction of central point of
management theory.
Richard D’ Aveni is best known for the work of Dartmouth College in connection with
Hypercompetition which is completely becomes part of the conventional form self-
confirming strategic standards. It is also based on the overall observation of actual world

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 8
where book presents a outcomes that he current world is not at all linear anymore and does
not award those who uses linear kind of approaches to develop corporate strategies (D'Aveni
& Gunther, 1994). In places, it is also suggested, the planner require to base the work on new
approach. In assessment with the new corporate world, it is made with the number of
discussed observation based on competition.
1. Companies should also destroy the competitive advantage to get the benefits.
2. There are number of entry based barriers with work with respect to them.
3. A logical side can be unpredictable as well as completely irrational.
4. Conventional planning in long run does not prepare anything in short term (Porter,
1985).
5. Attack on competition and their weakness can be an error. Conventional approaches
like SWOT analysis may not function in many hypercompetitive culture.
6. Organizations must compete to work and win however competing make the victory
very challenging.
D’Aveni manufactures the case for current complicated culture and the requirement to
transform the company in a continuous manner which is in response to the culture then
provides an answer to the arguments associated with requirement for dynamic kind of theory
which is also called as 7-S approach (D'Aveni & Gunther, 1994).
It covers many points like high level of satisfaction for stakeholders, strategic level
soothsaying, placing for high speed, moving the rules for the current game along with signals
based on strategic intent. The core value of D’Aveni’s concept is his based-on outcome that
organization needs to be aimed on disruption of the market. He advises that there are three
kind of factors that make sure a company to provide a sustainable disruption in the current
market. It is also important to cover current vision which is based on disruption and have

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 9
capacities for disruption for the company and it cover product tactics utilised to provide high
amount of disruptions (D'Aveni & Gunther, 1994). There are huge number of same cases that
exist between the work of Ansoff and D’Aveni. The suggestion that the culture consist of
some level of complicated and rate of transformation. They proposed a contingent level of
theory based approach where the company should be designed to answer to current and future
work. It was also believed that the environment of 1990s starts with a new time which very
turbulent with changing culture (D'Aveni & Gunther, 1994).
Conclusion
In initial time of growth, the concepts in strategic management revolve around many
microeconomics and the overall theory is based on company which addresses the question
based on why a company exist and what can be decided with the scale and overall scope.
There are number of theories which also revolve around the basic kind of theme. The starting
point outcome was based on many neoclassical theories based on perfect competition that
revolves around the company as a part of many inputs to manufacture desired solutions
(Porter, 1985). Companies also aim on accomplishing the least among the cost based
combination of inputs with production procedure. It further equates with the marginal level
cost to marginal based revenues to decide the level of output that increases the level of profit.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 10
Reference
Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and structure: chapters in the history of the industrial
enterprise. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.
D'Aveni, R. A., & Gunther, R. E. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the dynamics of
strategic maneuvering. New York: The Free Press.
H. Igor Ansoff (1965). Corporate Strategy. An Analytic Approach to Business Policy for
Growth and Expansion New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mintzberg, H., The fall and rise of strategic planning. Harvard Business Review, (1994,
January-February), 107-114.
Porter, M. E. (1985) The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior
Performance. NY: Free Press.
Taylor F.W. (1911), The Principles of Scientific Management, New York, NY, USA and
London, UK: Harper & Brothers