Power and Cultural Schools of Thought

The top executive and Cultural Schools of Thought A Critical Essay Introduction The ten sh every(prenominal)ows of sen clock timent proposed by Mintzberg, Ahlstrand and Lampel (2009) depart an insight into different aspects of outline makeup. Mintzberg (2009) explains how we ar unable to gain a exculpate picture of the process of strategy by simply hearing at single schools al 1, we must look at them all to gain the whole image. The poem the Blind Men and the Elephant, written by magic Godfrey Saxe.The place of this essay is to evaluate and comp atomic number 18 two schools of thought (chosen at random), the goer and heathenish schools. abridgment The ten schools of thought atomic number 18 divided by Mintzberg et al (2009) into two distinct catagories. The prescriptive schools ar concerned to a greater extent with how strategies should be formed and the descriptive schools, which be more concerned with how strategies are formed. The exponent school is to be fou nd in the decriptive school catagory.The influence of advocate on strategy formation concerning arrangements merchant ship occur in two environments the micro-environment, involving position holding parties internal to the government activity, i. e. managers, CEOs and so forth , and the macro-environment, which invoves the organisation as a single entity pull ining with intrest groupings from the external environment. It should be made befuddle at this point what we mean when we talk most top executive.French and Raven (1960) get ahead argue that spring can arise from five crystallize sources or bases (further explained in appendix 1) coercive world index number, settle with part, legitimate office, de nonative power, and expert power. Mintzberg et al (2009) describe strategy formation in the power school as a process of dialogue, with its base discipline in political science, Kotelnikov (unknown). The eventual goal of negotiation is to form an pact between two or more parties whom originally may drive had rattling different ideas roughly the kick downstairsn topic.It does not mean simply splitting the arguments down the middle, solely reaching agreed goals, everlasting(a) bargaining and compromise, which will (hopefully) cook positive outcomes for those involved. It is before and during this process that political influences can become prevalent. For those involved in the strategy formulation any number of political games (Mintzberg et al (2009)) can be assiduous in gear up to affect power and influence among those involved ofttimes for personal gain or advantage.Bolman and transmit ((1997) from Mintzberg et al (2009246) from this propose a number of points about organizational politics and among these suggest that power is the most important resource. These political games and negotiations are peculiarly rife at heart the micro-environment. Once this power has been achieved Mintzberg besides refers to the 48 Laws of fore finger written by Greene and Elffers (1998) who having studied relevant individualists from the realms of history and present suggest a number of ways of concealing and using power for personal gain.When talking about the macro-environment negotiation becomes less of an internal affair further more so external, for example with pressure groups, suppliers and unions. In this, the macro-instance the stakeholders cohere added to parcel out holders and the market gets replaced by the environment, thereby opening up the organization to a oftentimes wider array of actors and forces Mintzberg et al (2009260).It is as well as plant forward by Pfeffer and Salancik ((1978) from Mintzberg et al (2009), that under the political influences that rich person metamorphosed the way in which organisations operate within the external environment ( by the power school) it has three strategic options getable to it (further explained in appendix 2) deal with each demand as it arises, strategica lly withhold and disclose cultivation and play one group against another. These three options all adapt the external environment in target to suit the extremitys and requirements of the organisation.The benefits of the power school allow the strongest in the organisation or the strongest organisation to survive. completely sides of any occurring issues are debated and any resistance among colleagues after the decision is made is kept to a minimal. dodging formation through the power school alike allows necessary change by breaking through any obstacles that may block the way. Limitations to this school are that it uses up a great amount of nix formulating strategies and can be extremely costly. Politics can be extremely divisive and can take on to aberrations.It is also possible that no strategy is located upon and all that blow overs is tactical maneuvering. Based on Mintzberg (2009). in that location are a number of tools available for strategy formulation within the po wer school (all of which are represented visually complete with advantages and disadvantages of each tool, in the appendices at the end of this paper, appendices 3 -5). The stakeholder digest (appendix 3) is a tool utilise in the identification of key stakeholders and assesses their interests and the ways in which these interests affect project risk and viability, (Overseas Development Administration http//www. uforic. org/gb/stake1. htmintro). During or before the implementation of a stakeholder analysis it could also be useable to complete a (Kurt Lewin) force field analysis (appendix 4). This tool is utilise to investigate the proportionality of power involved in an issue identify the most important players (stakeholders) and target groups for a iron on the issue identify opponents and allies identify how to influence each target group (12Manage (unknown http//www. 12manage. com/methods_lewin_force_field_analysis. html).Also useful within the stakeholder analysis are the i nternal/external and primary/secondary stakeholder analysis, which further help to provide a clearer picture about the positioning of an organisations stakeholders. Stakeholder mapping is also a very useful way of exploring power balances with the stakeholders. There are a number of approaches to stakeholder mapping which are further explained in appendix 5, these are power / dynamism ground substance (Gardener et al (1986) from 12Manage. com), power / interest matrix (Gardener et al (1986) from 12Manage. om) and power, legitimacy, urgency (Mitchell, Agle, Wood (1997) from 12Manage. com). A business example of the power school in sue can be found in Darren McCabes 2009 published study on a UK construct society. The building society given the pseudonym Brickco, due to the retirement of the original CEO during 1996 a exchange was appointed. During the opening of the case study McCabe (2009 158) notes that, there appeared to be a struggle between the CEO and major(postnominal)/mid dle managers over the ambiguity and contradictions that imbued the strategy discourse.The conducted study lasted for one year and there are a number of examples of the CEO exerting his authority within the micro-environment of the organisation. After encouraging all staff to work together as a team in the July 1996 Newsletter, the CEO announced a number of changes, McCabe (2009 159) states in relation to this, as in the case of a privatized utility (Balogun and Johnson, 2004), these strategic and operational priorities were established without the interest of managers and staff.The One Team strategy again seemed to be initiated alone by the CEO and also the New Foundations program followed a similar initiation. These examples clearly identify with the CEOs use of legitimate power in golf club to set and carryout strategies of his employment along with the use of political games in order to ensure employees work to their usual rejectards and also to minimize the possibility of bac klash. Culture, as an aspect of instruction was discovered during the 1980 due to the success of Japanese coorporations. While seemingly imitating technologies from the U.S. it was noticed that these coorporations did things differently. Mintzberg (2009 276) writes, all fingers pointed to the Japanese finishing, and especially how that has been manifested in the oversize Japanese coorporations. The culture school is from the descriptive category of the schools of thought (mentioned in the earier paragraphs). The culture school has its orgins in anthropology i. e. the study of humanity and in particular ethnical anthropology, the study of populations establish on historical records and etnographic observations (studyanthropology. rg (unknown http//www. studyanthropology. org/types-of-anthropology)). Kotelnikov (unknown http//www. 1000ventures. com/business_guide/crosscuttings/cultural_intelligence. html) defines culture as Broadly and simply put, culture refers to a group or fed eration with which you share common experiences that puzzle out the way you understand the world. A more involved interpretation of the term from the Roshan Cultural Heritage Institute (2001), notes that culture/s can be formed near language, arts and sciences, thought, spirituality, amicable activity and inter process.Bringing our definition back towards our strategy school focus, corporate culture is be as joint behavior of spate using common corporate vision, goals, shared value, beliefs, habits, working language, systems and symbols (Kotelnikov (unknown http//www. 1000ventures. com/business_guide/crosscuttings/cultural_intelligence. html)). An individual does not suddenly become a part of the culture of an organisation it is a process of acculturation which itself while taking place is not visually noticeable.Within this strategy school, strategy formulation is viewed as a social process and is based on the understandings and beliefs of individuals involved with the stra tegy formulation process. Due to its cultural beginnings, spectacular change in strategy is discouraged but continuation is very a great deal encouraged. Strategy takes the form of perspective above all, more than positions, rooted in collective intentions and reflected in patterns by which the deeply implant resources, of the organization are protected and utilise for competitive advantage, based on Mintzberg (2009) sourced from fellner. reinhard. com (unknown (http//fellner. reinhard. om/different_strategies. htm). Benefits of the culture school are that it emphasises the crucial role that social processes, beliefs and values are playing in decision-making and in strategy-formation, based on Mintzberg (2009) sourced from 12Manage. com (unknown http//www. 12manage. com/methods_mintzberg_ten_schools_of_thought. html). Also this approach assists in the process business mergers and acquisitions by bridging cultural gaps. Limitations are that cultural strategies are not at suited to radical change and it provides very little information about how the situation should emerge following the strategy implementation.When approaching strategy formation from this cultural prospective it maybe appropriate to bridge a national or even religious gap in order for the formation to occur. Hofstede ((1980) from 12Manage. com) published a framework lay outing five areas or dimensions of difference, value perspectives between cultures power distance, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, uncertainty avoidance and long term versus short term orientation (further news report of these terms can be found in appendix 6).The Ashridge Mission instance (also used in the strategic school) can also be used in the formation of strategies from a cultural perspective. Developed by Andrew Campbell after a study by the Ashridge Strategic Management Centre, this model allows clear thinking for those involved allows for discussion points with colleagues about th e mission the model can be used to not only create new missions but also analyse existing missions.The model contains four separate elements that together provide the foundation for a strong mission / strategy formation, these being purpose, strategy, values and policies and behavioural standards (the Ashridge Mission Model can be found in appendix 7). Conclusion It is widely considered that the power and culture schools are opposites when considering strategy formulation. Power school strategy formation involves those stakeholders who hold power within the business, whereas in the culture schools strategy formation is unifying among all stakeholders.Political influence and individual concerns shape strategy formation in the power school whereas organisational culture shapes cultural strategy formation. Although not the case one hundred percent of the time power strategy is capable of allowing radical change whether it is necessary or not, while cultural strategy is unlikely to lea d to frequently change in strategy at all. Cultural strategy is notoriously vague when determining how a situation should eventually conclude whereas goals in a power strategy are clearly defined (if only to the creator/s of the strategy as in the case of Brickco).The Sloan Management Review (1999), sourced from 1000Ventures. com, read that champions of the power school include people who like power, politics and conspiracy, particularly the French. In the culture school champions include people who like the social, the collective and the spiritual, particularly in Scandinavia and Japan. Appendices * appendix 1 based on the French and Raven (1959), Five Sources of Power Located at advert ChangingMinds. org. , (unknown), French and Ravens Five Forms of Power, Online, http//changingminds. org/explanations/power/french_and_raven. htm , accessed October 2010. Coercive powerThis is the power to force someone to do something against their will. It is often physical although other thre ats may be used. It is the power of dictators, despots and bullies. coercion can result in physical harm, although its principal goal is compliance. Demonstrations of harm are often used to illustrate what will happen if compliance is not gained. Coercion is also the ultimate power of all governments. Although it is often seen as nix, it is also used to keep the peace. Parents coerce young children who know no soften. A person holds back their friend who is about to step out in front of a car.Other forms of power can also be used in coercive ways, such as when a reward or expertise is withheld or referent power is used to endanger social exclusion. Reward power One of the main reasons we work is for the money we need to conduct our lives. There are many more forms of reward in fact anything we find desirable can be a reward, from a meg dollar yacht to a pat on the back. Reward power is thus the ability to give other people what they want, and hence ask them to do things for y ou in exchange. Rewards can also be used to punish, such as when they are withheld.The promise is essentially the same do this and you will get that. countenance power Legitimate power is that which is invested in a role. Kings, policemen and managers all have legitimate power. The legitimacy may come from a high power, often one with coercive power. Legitimate power can often thus be the acceptable face of raw power. A common trap that people in such roles can fall into is to forget that people are obeying the position, not them. When they either fall from power or move onto other things, it can be a puzzling surprise that people who used to fawn at your feet no long do so. Referent power This is the power from another person liking you or wanting to be like you. It is the power of charisma and fame and is wielded by all celebrities (by definition) as well as more local social leaders. In wanting to be like these people, we stand near them, hoping some of the charisma will rub o ff onto us. Those with referent power can also use it for coercion. One of the things we fear most is social exclusion, and all it takes is a word from a social leader for us to be shunned by others in the group. Expert powerWhen I have knowledge and dexterity that someone else requires, then I have Expert power. This is a very common form of power and is the basis for a very large proportion of human collaboration, including most companies where the principle of specialization allows large and complex enterprises to be undertaken. Expert power is that which is used by Trades Unions when they encourage their members to strike for better break or working conditions. It is also the power of the specialist R&D Engineer when they threaten to leave unless they get an exorbitant pay rise or a seat by the window. * Appendix 2 3 strategies available to organisations in the macro-environment Located at Reference Mintzberg, H. Ahlstrand, B. and Lampel, J. , (2009), Strategy Safari The completed Guide Through the Wilds of Strategic Management, 2nd Edition, page 261, FT Prentice Hall, Great Britain. Also includes savoir-faires to Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. R. (1978), The external Control of Organisatins A Resource Dependance Perspective, Harper and Row, New York. An Organisation Can Simply Deal With Each Demand As It Arises.This is another example of Cyert and Marchs (1963) sequential attention to goals, but at the level of macro power. Rather than attempting to resolve opposing demands in one fell swoop, the organisation deals with them inturn, for example worrying about pressing financial demands and then turning to concerns about market share (96). An Organisation Can Strategically Withhold and Disclose Information. In this way it can manipulate expectations and shape outcomes. A group is satisfied relative to what it expects to get also by what the group as obtained in the by and by what competing groups obtained.Thus, employees may be willing to forego p ay increases when the company is near bankruptcy and suppliers, creditors, owners are also suffering. If the employees found that the owners were secretly profiting they would be quite irate. It is in the organizations interest to keep each group or organisation feel it is getting relatively the best deal. Knowledge of what each group is getting is best kept secret (96). An Organisation Can Play One Group against the Other. For example, the demands of public employees for higher wages can be juxtaposed with the demands of local citizens groups for lower taxes (97). Appendix 3 The Stakeholder Analysis A stakeholder analysis is an approach that is frequently used to identify and investigate the force field (appendix 4) formed by any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the acheivement of the nonsubjective of the organisation (12Manage (unknown http//www. 12manage. com/methods_stakeholder_analysis. html) A visual example of a stakeholder analysis can be found down t he stairs (this is not a complete guide, only a start to show as an example). Financial fraternity Suppliers Owners Board of Directors Project / Organisation Government EmployeesCustomers Competitors moving-picture show 1 Benefits and Limitations Benefits the stakeholder analysis allows for a clearer insight into the race with stakeholders and the groups which the individual is involved with. Also it allows for a clearer picture of how larger a part of the organisation and how much power the stakeholder holds and inturn the the priorities and associated risks of the individual. This can help in the formation of better strategies and decisions and also lead to a better acceptance of these strategies within the organisation (adapted from 12Manage (unknown)).Limitations the stakeholder analysis should be conducted consistantly due to the nature of power changes of stakeholders within organisations. It is the prespective of the management that ultimately decides the position of each stakeholder. It is almost impossible to completely repay the wants and needs of all stakeholders which allows for a couple of potential strategies focus on the leading stakeholder group and do what is possile for the others or try to satisfy all demands according their weight or stakeholder value perspective (adapted from 12Manage (unknown)). Appendix 4 Lewins military unit Field Analysis Steps to follow when conducting a forcefield analysis (Valuebasedmanagement. net (unknown) 1. Describe the situation you are currently in 2. Describe the situation you want to be in ( desire) 3. Identify what will happen if no change occurs 4. List the forces affecting the movement towards the desired situation 5. List the forces preventing change towards the desired situation 6. Investigate all these forces and decide if they can be changed 7. Apply a scale and decide upon the score of each factor e. g. 1 = very weak, 10=very strong 8.List the factors, driving forces on the left and opposing fa ctors on the right 9. Determine if change is possible 10. Discuss the appropriate action i. e. making opposing factors weaker or strengthening the driving forces 11. Allow for the possibiity that changing any factor could create new factors or change the effect of others. A visual example of the force field analysis Driving chock up Resisting Force Desired Position Current Situation Resistant Factors Driving Factors Resisting Force Driving Force Resisting Force Driving Force Resisting Force Driving Force Resisting Force Image 2 Appendix 5 Stakeholder Mapping The three examples of stakeholder mapping shown below have been sourced from 12Manage. com (http//www. 12manage. com/methods_stakeholder_mapping. html), however the reference to their origianal authors are below the images. The power / dynamism matrix assess the level of power of each stakeholder and also the dynamism of their stance in order to ascertain the amount of political effort that should be put their way. High Low pi zzazz Power Low A Fewest Problems B Unpredictable but manageble High C Powerful but predictable D Greatest danger or oppertunitiesPower / Dynamism hyaloplasm (Gardener et al (1986)) The power / interest matrix assess how much power a stakeholder has and how much interest in the organisations strategies they are likely to show, thus allowing for a measure of what kind of relationship to have with the stakeholder. Level of Interest Low High Power Low A Minimal Effort B Keep Informed High C Keep Satisfied D Key Players Power / Interrest Matrix (Gardener et al (1986)) The power, legitimacy and urgency model places stakeholder behavior into one of seven areas depending on the combination of the characters named in the model title.Below is quoted from 12Manage. com (unknown http//www. 12manage. com/methods_stakeholder_mapping. html) * POWER of the stakeholder to influence the organisation. * authenticity of the relationship and actions of the stakeholder with the organisation in terms of desirability, properness or appropriateness. * URGENCY of the requirements being set for the organisation by a stakeholder in terms of criticality and time-sensitivity for the stakeholder. The stakeholders who show only one of the three characteristics (number 1, 2 and 3, in the picture (below)) are defined as the potential Stakeholders.They are sub-classified further as dormant, discretionary or demanding stakeholders. The stakeholders who show two out 3 of the characteristics (number 4, 5 and 6 in the picture (below)) are defined as Expectant Stakeholders. They are sub-classified further as dominant, dangerous or dependant stakeholders. The stakeholders showing all 3 characteristics are called Definitive Stakeholders. POWER (dominant) 4. LEGITIMACY 1. (dormant) (discretionary) (definitive) 6. 5. 7. 2. (dependent) (dangerous) URGENCY 3. (demanding) Power / Legitimacy / Urgency (Mitchell, Agle, Wood (1997))Appendix 6 Hofstedes Cultural Dimensions Reference 12Manage (unknown http/ /www. 12manage. com/methods_hofstede. html) * Power Distance the degree of inequality amoung people which the population of a country considers as normal * individuality Vs Collectivism the extent to which people fee they are supposed to take care for, or to be cared for by themselves, their families r organisations they belong to * Masculinity Vs Femininity the extent to which a culture is conducive to dominance, assertiveness and acquisition of things.Versus a culture which is more cuducive to people, feelings and quality of life. * Uncertinty Avoidance the degree to which people in a country prefer structure over unstructured situations * Long term Vs Short term taste Long term values point towards the future, like saving and persistance. Short term values oriented towards the past and present, like respect for tradition and fullfilling social obligations. Appendix 7 Ashridge Mission Model Reference 12Manage (unknown http//www. 12manage. com/methods_campbell_ashridge_mis sion_model. tml) Steps These are the ten questions by which you can measure the quality of a mission statement. * blueprint 1. Does the statement describe an inspiring purpose that avoids playing the selfish interests of the stakeholder shareholders, customers, employees, suppliers? 2. Does the statement describe the companys responsibility to its stakeholders? * Strategy 3. Does the statement describe a business domain and explain why it is seductive? 4. Does the statement describe the strategic positioning that the company prefers in a way that helps to identify the crystalize of competitive advantage it will look for? Values 5. Does the statement identify values that link the organisations purpose and act as beliefs that employees can feel proud of? 6. Do the values resonate with and reinforce the organisations strategy? * Behavioral Standards 7. Does the statement describe important behavioral standards that serve as beacons of the strategy and the values? 8. atomic number 18 the behavioral standards described in such a way that individual employees can judge whether they have behaved correctly or not? * Character 9. Does the statement give a portrait of the company and does it experience the culture of the organisation? 10.Is the statement easy to read? Benefits of this model * Combines strategic and cultural motivators to guide an organisation * The model is particularly useful to ensure that a company has a clear Mission AND it has employees with a strong Sense of Mission * The model emphasises the need for a fit between strategy and values. Aditionally the Ashridge Model recognises the importance of the link between organisational shared values and the private values of employees and managers. * Improves decision making. Raises energy levels. Reduces the need for supervision. Promotes constructive behavior.Increases satisfaction and loyalty. * Puts corporate purpose as the corner stone and starting point of a mission. Limitations of this model * Having inappropriate values or an inappropriate guts of mission is a powerful negative influence on employee behavior. * Shared values and sense of mission are often extremly difficult to change and can become an obstacle for change. * Strongly shared values or a strong sense of mission can lead to an insularity that becomes xenophobic. * Creating a mission statement is often a time and resource consuming process. Assumptions of the model Committed employees and teams perform more efficiently and more effectively than appathetic employees and teams do. * bulk connect themselves more easily to values than to abstract strategic concepts. * A mission must be clearly defined and managed. An intuitive understanding of mission is not enough. (EMPLOYEE) VALUES Employees personal values PURPOSE Why the company exists (COMPANY) VALUES What the company believes in STRATEGY The competitive position and distictive competance STANDARDS AND BEHAVIORS The policies and behavioral patterns that underpin the distinctive competance and the value system Ashridge Mission Model (Cambell (1992)