Search

Purpose Strategizing in a multinational corporation requires balancing global and local strategy. The purpose of this paper is to provide some insights into how multinational corporations succeed in this endeavor. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a detailed qualitative investigation of the strategy-development processes at Gamma – a European multinational corporation in the materials industry. Specifically, the authors investigated strategy development in the DACH region (i.e., for the German, Austrian and Swiss subsidiaries). To collect data, they conducted interviews with key informants at the corporate headquarters and the subsidiaries and collected archival data. Findings The data revealed that Gamma had found an approach to strategy development that balanced its global strategy with local conditions, finding a suitable way to align its global and local strategies. The authors therefore unravel three key insights revolving around subsidiaries’ unique interpretations of the basic idea of global strategy, idiosyncratic strategy development processes in subsidiaries and globally and locally synchronized temporal structures. Originality/value Knowing how to balance the strategic needs of headquarters and subsidiaries allows multinational corporations to follow a general strategy while simultaneously developing a local market strategy responsive to the individual market requirements.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide guidelines for practitioners for developing creative strategies and new business models. Design/Methodology/Approach This paper reviews more than 150 interviews with CEOs, directors and business unit heads from across functional areas over the past decade, and captures best practices in strategy development and business modelling. Findings Findings of this study were combined with a review of relevant research papers from leading academic and practitioner journals to identify three critical management practices: challenging mental models, looking beyond logic and encouraging openness for new ideas, which enable organizations to develop creative strategies for building better business models. Originality/Value This paper demonstrates how these three practices combined can serve as a much needed tool for creative strategy design and development, particularly for established companies, when confronted with new forms of competition.

PurposeMiddle market businesses – entities from $50 million‐$1 billion in revenue – are a significant force in the economy, generating $3 trillion in annual revenues and employing 20 million here in the USA alone. They are particularly besieged, and vulnerable, and yet they are unlikely to use strategic planning systematically to help set priorities and improve performance. The article aims to explore the internal and external forces arrayed against these firms, then prescribe a practical process for developing strategy –what it is, who does it, when – to improve competitive advantage, management perspective, and overall performance.Design/methodology/approachThe practical strategy development process described in the article focuses on developing a strategic databank, convening and managing the strategy team, and setting the stage for practical implementation , when broad objectives need to be translated into specific actions, schedules, budgets, and metrics. The approach described balances internal and external analysis and stakeholder input, captures the key decisions in an accessible, common format, and creates a practical roadmap for managers to help guide decision‐making throughout the course of the year. Dozens of middle‐market firms across a wide array of industries have used the methodology, which derives from two decades of strategy consulting and senior operating experience.FindingsFormal strategy development is underdeveloped or ignored in many middle‐market businesses, even as market and industry forces grow more antagonistic. This practical, streamlined methodology delivers substantial process and content dividends – giving managers strategic perspective, a forum for debating resource allocation, and an accessible platform for setting priorities and making key decisions. Equally important, is it is a straightforward approach to securing stakeholder input, enhancing the firm's ability to carve out competitive advantage and enhance stakeholder satisfaction.Research limitations/implicationsThe guidelines and logic are universal for middle market businesses, but some of the parameters described may need to be adapted to fit the planning cycle and technology of each firm, and refined over time to dovetail with the firm's budgetary process.Practical implicationsMiddle‐market businesses need to institute a streamlined, rational, balanced, and participative strategy development process to navigate the forces that confront them. The process can be compressed to eight weeks, and will deliver a small set of focused, practical strategies and performance metrics that can be communicated to key stakeholder groups. Careful process management will induce managers to commit to implementation, and clarify the rationale for allocating the firm's precious resources. By breaking down lofty, abstract statements into practical, actionable, measurable activities, the firm's leaders can better chart the future, respond to threats and opportunities, and enhance performance.Originality/valueThe rational, practical approach described offers middle market business managers a toolkit for formulating strategies that can be implemented – for bridging the gap between aspirations and real performance. The article outlines a straightforward process, providing hands‐on guidelines for optimizing performance, and galvanizing the management team.

PurposeMost strategies stumble in the implementation phase. This article outlines a market‐validated process, and practical guidelines, for optimizing implementation. The primary audience is mid‐level and senior executives charged with the responsibility for implementing strategy.Design/methodology/approachThis implementation process focuses on the critical timeframe immediately following formal strategy selection, when broad objectives need to be translated into specific actions, schedules, budgets, and metrics. The approach is to capture the key decisions in an accessible, common format, and to deploy this tool consistently throughout the organization to monitor and guide implementation. Dozens of firms across a wide array of industries have used the methodology, which derives from two decades of senior operating and strategy consulting experience.FindingsStrategy development receives significant attention and resources, but implementation is often neglected, with disastrous consequences. Using a straightforward approach, format, and process, managers can bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality; they can succeed in accomplishing what they set out to do, and think and act strategically.Research limitations/implicationsThe approach and logic described are universal, but the actual format may need to be adapted to fit the planning cycle and technology of each firm, and refined over time to dovetail with the firm's budgetary process.Practical implicationsStrategy programs need to be expanded to focus on the implementation process. More attention should be given to breaking down lofty statements into practical, actionable, measurable activities. The language and methods used to implement need to be simplified, and consistently deployed. Success in implementation is critical to validating the investment in strategy in the first place.Originality/valueThe rational, practical approach described offers middle and senior managers a toolkit for bringing strategies to life – for bridging the gap between aspirations and real performance. It outlines a practical process, providing hands‐on guidelines for optimizing performance, and galvanizing the management team.

Somewhere along the way, the words “strategy” and “forecast” got confused. At its roots, strategy development is about good conversation—and, unless you're returning a call from the state lottery commission, good conversation is almost never about numbers. If there is any correlation between creating good strategies and a development process focused on financial projections, I'm sure it's a negative one.

What makes a great leader? Here is how executives utilize innovations to strike out in new directions.