Which of the five components of business strategy do you think is the most important? Why?

CSR AUG16 DF1.2 1. Which of the five components of business strategy do you think is the most important? Why? 2. How does this analysis fit with your organisations approach to business strategy? Refer to your blog posting 3. What does your organisation need to change (if anything)? Virginia Dove26 Aug, 2016 - 15:15:08 I believe the most important component of a business strategy is to identify the core competencies your organisation has to offer. If you correctly identify these you can confidently determine the second component, which is how you differentiate yourself from your competitors. I think it is extremely important to really know who you are and where you add value for your customer. In the past my organisation, a large government department, predominantly delivered grants to small medium and large private enterprises in Australia. Its business strategy has now been redefined. There are many organisations that can deliver money to businesses. That is not unique. What is unique is to use and activate levers in the economy to create an environment to assist businesses to thrive, reduce red tape and regulatory burden and provide advice on how to navigate highly competitive conditions. But in order to do that, you need to build the economic capability and credibility into the organisation. That is what the department has done. The organisation has now become an enabler rather than a funder. The turn in direction is helping the department become a more resilient organisation less vulnerable to the changes in funding cycle. Building capability that is difficult for others to imitate is a critical aspect of a good business strategy (Heller, I. 2008) Heller, I. 2008 The five components of a business strategy Ezine articles. EzineArticles.com (accessed 26/8/16) CSR AUG16 DF1.4 Think about your own business experience: 1. What comes first, purpose or capabilities? 2. What should come first? 3. Why? Mitchell Woellner30 Aug, 2016 - 21:32:08 My own experience with these has always been about a great over arching purpose. I want to do better and be better, the fascinating aspect of this is that i don't think other people looked at it this way. As i have pursued this path it seems that capabilities were developed to facilitate that. I look for people with capabilities that compliment mine and keep them really close either as a trusted adviser or as a direct part of the team. I don't really know if one before the other is right as such or more focused on individuals and how they move forward with each step in their learning and career. It's definitely something i need to consider more in my own business and experience CSR AUG16 DF2.3 Read the following article: • https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/corporate_strategy_portfolio_management_value_creation_strategy_how_to_be_good_corporate_parent/ Many business-unit managers say that group functions and group-level bosses are often more hindrance than help. How might corporate-level managers lead and organise the relationship between the corporate parent and the businesses? Ravi Emmanuel31 Aug, 2016 - 15:38:08 I agree with Paul that Communication within the business plays vital role in any businesses. Business can fail if there are no proper communication protocols. I have seen in the past that many times information relating to company business is not cascaded down to junior level from high level managers and employees are left in the dark. Information is strength. As much as corporate parents focus on creating value, they also need to understand how they destroy it. Although few multibusiness companies have an explicit parenting strategy, there are six distinct parenting strategies that most companies implicitly follow. By taking a few simple steps, a company can identify its implicit parenting strategy, assess the effectiveness of this strategy given the company’s industry and competitive environment, and select the most appropriate strategy on the basis of its capabilities and the needs of its portfolio of businesses. group level bosses and group functions can hinder business as they can make things complexed and difficult to understand and follow. CSR AUG16 DF2.5 Watch this clip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vII1HJcCxTk If your company was to internationalise, which of the three approaches (polycentrism, ethnocentrism, geocentrism) would you recommend? Why? Paul Clayton25 Aug, 2016 - 18:34:08 It is hard to conceive that we could internationalize as we are a service based business on several campuses in Qld, however, there is talk of a Chinese campus for UQ and if that happened conceivably we could end up with facilities and services on another continent. One parallel that i could make is with our market here domestically. UQ is driving to attain a 20% level of international students in the undergraduate cohort. Whilst we are not moving outside the campus we have international markets on our doorstep that we need to service and maximise. In this example we operate in a mixture of Geocentrism and Ethnocentrism. Generally we would try to make all products, services and offerings standardised for all and encourage the international market into our facilities to 'join in'. It would be unrealistic to think that this works in all cases so in some instances we target certain international populations, using research data, to try and provide a service to the international population. IN these instances we have a team provide a bespoke service that meets the needs of the user group we are targeting, e.g. badminton for asian students, basketball for American etc. CSR AUG16 DF4.3 View the following clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxJvS92uCus 1. Why is organisational design important? 2. How could the information outlined assist your organisation? Comment on other student’s posts. • Paul Clayton28 Aug, 2016 - 18:49:08 Organisational Design is important for several reasons. Firstly the business needs to be organised in a manner that allows for it to operate in the most efficient manner to maximise resources and make decisions in a manner that allows maximum flexibility. An example of this would be if a business is expanding into new global markets then the structure might need to be modified to allow the changes to take effect and the new business structure support the new global market with decisions made locally so that the product can work well int he local market at teh same time as parent policy being led centrally. This is described well by Kitchen (2010) in the matrix structure. We recently undertook an organisation design review to see if we had the right people, roles and structures, with the resources to support them to deliver on the new business plan. It resulted in some changes that have been challenging but left us better aligned to strategy and more agile as we move forward. Kitchen, N. (2010). LSBF Global MBA: Introduction to Organisational Structure & Design. [online] YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxJvS92uCus [Accessed 28 Aug. 2016]. • CSR AUG16 DF4.5 Levers for strategic change Forcefield analysis provides a view of the forces at work that enable or prevent change occurring. Refer illustration 14.3, page 476 1. What parallels can you draw in your organisation? Comment on similarities/difference to other student’s posts. • Paul Clayton28 Aug, 2016 - 19:32:08 At UQ Sport There are conflicting forces at play that we are working to smooth to ensure a successful delivery of the strategic plan. As a specific example in one of the strategic goals, we are looking to develop the UQ sporting clubs. In an effort to create a more collegiate spirit and make the clubs more recognisable adn representative we are working towards a single name and brand for all clubs, "team UQ". Just in this one area we have forces pushing and resisting. The University and UQ Sport staff are pushing the development of the brand. The University is providing funding to support the change. Suppliers that we currently work with are keen to get on board and are providing bulk discounts to help win over the clubs. Some clubs are very supportive as they have little identity and welcome the support and branding. There is also significant resistance from the clubs. Some have deals with clothing suppliers and want to maintain loyalty. Some like their own name and brand and do not want to change. Some this is from history and some it is just stubbornness. Some are concerned with the longevity of the plan and funding. Everywhere there is fear of change. This is compounded by many of those on the pushing side full time business professionals and those resisting are club volunteers. We are working hard to overcome the resistance with a combination of carrot and stick. We are paying for the design and the initial purchase of the new designed kit. We are working with them to offer funding to reduce their hire fees (if they get on board) and ensuring that the consultation is strong and regular. ON the other side we are signing up new club affiliation agreements and those who dont get on board will see significant difficulties continuing to operate on campus die to increased hire fees, not being an affiliate student club. CSR AUG16 DF6.3 Read: Vogel, D.J. 2005, “Is there a market for virtue? The business case for corporate social responsibility", California Management Review, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 19-46. Do you agree with the author’s argument? Why or why not? What are the implications for your organisation? Comment on at least one other student’s post. • Paul Clayton2 Sep, 2016 - 19:59:09 I agree with the assertions of David Vogel (2005), especially as his paper was published eleven years ago. I suspect that even now it would be hard to make a really strong case for CSR as a business decision based on financials alone but that ignores what i feel is the real issue, and one that will lead in coming years to a situation where the business case stacks up. There is undeniable evidence that we have entered the Anthropocene era (Carrington, 2016) and if we do not take action to correct the damage we are likely to become the architects of our own demise. As this becomes more widely acknowledged and accepted there will be growing pressure and market demand for businesses to be front and center with their CSR initiatives and it will become a point of difference, in my opinion, that would be business suicide to ignore. At that point the market forces demanding ethical and environmental approaches to business will ensure you comply of die. Carrington, D. (2016). The Anthropocene epoch: scientists declare dawn of human-influenced age. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropocene-epoch-experts-urge-geological-congress-human-impact-earth [Accessed 2 Sep. 2016]. • CSR AUG16 DF6.4 Read Manner M 2012, "The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance", Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 53-72. How important are a CEO’s characteristics on their commitment to CSR. What implications does that have for your organisation? And for you as a future CEO? • Paul Clayton3 Sep, 2016 - 10:06:09 I think that the leadership and management style of the CEO is what ultimately effects the corporate social performance of a given business. This also would be linked to understanding of the value of CSP to the business and the sector that they work in. For instance if you work in the financial services sector you are much less likely to have a strong position on CSP than if you work in manufacturing or services. There is contrary data on the effect of the CEO on company culture. Alison Beard at HBR makes an argument that a business culture and performance can be enhanced if the CEO does not embody the culture of the organisation as they can compliment the culture by providing a different perspective. She goes on to say that a strong leadership style and clear guidance is much more important to success. Conversely Kathleen Melcher (2016) argues that the values of the CEO set the culture of the organisation. I can understand how this can be the case but again comes down to the style and sometimes ego of the CEO. At UQ Sport our culture is strongly influenced by our CEO who is very much results driven and the social performance is very much secondary to the main concerns of participation and financial success. For me moving forward i hope to be the kind of CEO who works collaboratively to set the values and culture of the organisation to the business need, irrespective of my personal beliefs and then deliver upon them. I am a firm believer that in you work position you are merely delivering a role, a performance for the business, very much like an actor. That being said Corporate Social Responsibility would be an agenda i would promote and any initiatives would be more than just paying lip service as we do. Beard, A. (2016). CEOs Shouldn’t Try to Embody Their Firms’ Culture. [online] Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2016/07/ceos-shouldnt-try-to- embody-their-firms-culture [Accessed 3 Sep. 2016]. Melcher, K. (2016). How CEO Values Affect Company Performance | DeGarmo. [online] Degarmo.com. Available at: http://www.degarmo.com/how-ceo-values-affect-company- performance-2 [Accessed 3 Sep. 2016].