Successful managers (efficient and effective) have always devised good strategies, but it was not until recent times (1962) that management scholars recognized strategy as a key factor in organizational success. This delay in recognition was mainly due to changes in the environment since the 1940s (World War II).
Policy formulation approach (1950)
The activity of integrating functions requires a more formal structure of procedures so that the company can coordinate activities both within and between the basic functional areas. This is how the «Policy formulation approach» arises, based on the concept of implanting the daily orientation guides that establish the delimitation as to what a functional area can or cannot do.
Initial strategy approach (1962-1975)
Chandler proposed that "strategy" be defined as: "the determination of long-term goals and plans, the actions to be taken and the allocation of resources necessary to achieve this."
The initial strategy approach encompasses four key ideas, which are:
- The "actions" to be taken to achieve the objectives, as in the objectives themselves. The "search" for key ideas rather than the routine principle of implementing policies based on a single idea that may or may not need consideration. Interest in " how »the strategy is formulated, not just what will result from it. Abandon the conventional wisdom that the relationship between the company and its environment was more or less stable and predictable.
Chandler's definition of "strategy" was refined by Andrews K., and Ansoff I., and others, who introduced the idea as a "process," rather than fixed indications (the policies).
Two factors soon became apparent:
- "Strategic planning" was appropriate in the organizational world. The role of the manager in implementing strategic planning was unclear.
Strategic Management Approach (1974-1990)
Hofer Ch. And Schendel D., suggested a new approach: "strategic management", based on the principle that the overall design of an organization can only be described if the achievement of "objectives" is added to "policies" and to strategy as one of the key factors in the strategic management process.
Hofer and Schendel focus on four key aspects of strategic management, which are:
- The establishment of objectives The activity of the formulation of the strategy The implantation of the strategy Change in the analysis of the administration and the activity of achieving the predetermined objectives.
Reflections on planning
An organization is a complex ende that interacts and reacts to a turbulent external environment.
Projecting the future instead of suffering it
We can say that the idea of planning responds to this logical concern of humanity for knowing time; and the modern administrator for knowing the future, although with a more active approach than simply waiting for its occurrence. What is sought with planning is not only the design of scenarios, but the way to alter them and get the most out of them. It is, therefore, about carrying out the action of planning the future instead of suffering it.
Company planning
The planning system in companies, arose from four basic premises:
- Before writing a projected plan to achieve a goal, you must decide "what you want to achieve." In times of rapid change, it is necessary to foresee the future, as far away as possible, to anticipate these transformations. To consider a company as a number of departments, it must be considered as a whole (that is, a system). Give all its importance to the environment outside the company before developing any plan.
These premises contain a kernel of truth, and when they are brought together into one concept, a powerful new method appears, "strategic management."
Definition of strategic management
Certo S. defines it as follows: «It is the process followed to ensure that an organization has an organizational strategy and benefits from its use.» Stoner J. defines it this way: "Management process that implies that the organization prepares strategic plans and then acts according to them."
Strategies and policies
Strategies and policies have very close links with each other. "Strategies" are general action programs aimed at meeting general objectives.
Policies are guides that provide guidance in administrative action and, above all, in decision-making, forcing us to elaborate them within certain limits.
Main types of strategies
The main strategies that set the general course of its operations must correspond to the following areas:
- New or modified goods or services Marketing Marketing Growth Finance Organizational structure Personnel Public relations
Strategic planning and direction
Planning is, one of the characteristic activities in the contemporary organizational environment, planning becomes more necessary in the face of the increasing interdependence and rapidity that is observed in the occurrence of phenomena: economic, political, social and technological.
Need to apply strategic management in small and medium enterprises
Greater consideration should be given to the need to apply strategic management in small and medium-sized enterprises. In practice, sooner or later, most companies lose energy, reach a goal, miss their way. A strategic plan is as necessary and possible for a small or medium company as for a large one. Between the plan of a small and large there are no differences of nature, but of level, volume and complexity. Decisions about goods or services, the location, structure and appointment of managers are very important decisions. They invariably have consequences on the results of the company. The way to make these fundamental decisions and the way to put them into practice is what defines the strategic management process.
Leadership
Leadership is the process of a set of actions, based on the power, capacities or abilities that a person has to direct, convince and influence others, so that they carry out or try to carry out certain activities or behaviors, and to achieve certain objectives. or functions as members of a group or company. Not all bosses are leaders, nor are all leaders bosses. The origin of power is generally accepted by specialists that the ability or ability to influence other people and the origin or power of leaders, rests on one or more forms or bases of power such as coercive, reward, legitimate power, expert and reference or charisma.
There are several theories about leadership, such as theories of characteristics and behavior. Characteristics theory has been dedicated to conducting research and studies to identify the characteristics that are common in successful leaders and concluded that many of the leaders were distinguished by being intelligent, physically vital, dominant, with self-confidence, and for being knowledgeable about their work, although there are people who possess these qualities and are not leaders. While the behavioral ones have studied the behavior or habits of leaders oriented towards both employees and work,Some of the best-known theories of behavior that have been studied in the United States are those from the University of Michigan that focus on factors of production and employee, and those from Ohio University that focus on structure and consideration. There is also the one on the supervisor's grid (focused on factors of interest to people and production). Five types of leaders are distinguished in the extreme, and these are the country club administrator (much interest in the person and low in production), impoverished administrator (low interest in person and production), administrator focused on the organization of personnel (average interest in the person and production), administrator focused on obedience-authority (high interest in production and low in the person),team manager (high interest in people and production).
Situational leadership theories teach that you cannot define a single type of leadership that is effective in all kinds of situations, in any work environment, and for all kinds of subordinate groups. Among the best-known theories are that of the life cycle, contingency model for leadership, Vroom and Yetton's leadership model, mode trajectory-goal, and situational leadership theory.
Personal leadership styles are autocrat (authority is exercised in the use and abuse of his position), paternalistic (he almost does not have confidence in his subordinates), consultative (he feels a certain confidence in his collaborators because he is very demanding), indifferent (not assumes some responsibility and if possible transfers it to others) and the Democrat (decisions are made in team or in participation).
Fiedler's contingency approach
Fiedler's theory implies that leadership is any process in which the leader's ability to exert influence depends on the group's situation and the degree to which the leader's style, personality, and approach fit the group. In other words, according to Fiedler, people become leaders not only because of the attributes of their personalities but also because of various situational factors and the interaction between leaders and the situation.
Critical dimensions of the leadership situation
- Position Power This is the extent to which the power of a position, unlike other sources of power such as charismatic or experience power, enables a leader to have group members comply with instructions. This Fiedler dimension had in mind the extent to which tasks can be clearly specified and the extent to which people can be held accountable for their performance, in contrast to situations where tasks are vague and unstructured. leader and members This dimension, which Fiedler considered the most important from the leaders' point of view, refers to the extent to which group members appreciate and trust the leader, and the extent to which they are willing to follow him.
Leadership styles
- Mainly to the tasks.- The leader obtains satisfaction when observing that the tasks are carried out, mainly to the achievement of good interpersonal relationships and towards obtaining a position of personal importance.
Conclusions
Performance in terms of leadership then depends on both the organization and the leader's own attributes. Except perhaps for rare cases, there is no point in talking about effective or ineffective leaders; It is only possible to speak of a leader who tends to be effective in one situation and ineffective in another. If you want to increase the effectiveness of the group or the organization, you must learn not only to train leaders more effectively, but also to integrate an environment in the organization that allows the leader to perform well.
Route / Goal Theory
The theory and approach of path and goal suggests that the main function of leader is to set, clarify goals for his subordinates, help them find the best way to achieve them and eliminate obstacles in performance. This approach studies leadership in various situations.
In addition to the variables in expectation theory, other factors must be considered when considering the possibility of leaders being effective.
Situational factors
- The characteristics of subordinates, such as their needs, self-confidence, and skills. The work environment, including components such as homework, the reward system, and relationships with coworkers.
Leader behavior
- Supportive leadership behavior takes into account the needs of subordinates, shows concern for their well-being, and creates a pleasant organizational climate; with participatory leadership, subordinates are allowed to influence the decisions of their superiors and this can result in increased motivation. Instrumental leadership provides subordinates with fairly specific guidance and specifies what is expected of them. Achievement-oriented leadership involves setting challenging goals, seeking improvement in performance and confidence that subordinates will achieve high goals.
This theory proposes that the leader's behavior is acceptable and satisfies subordinates to the extent that they consider it as a source of satisfaction. Another proposition of the theory is that the leader's behavior increases the effort of subordinates, that is, it is motivating, in that it does:
- That the satisfaction of the needs of subordinates depends on effective performance. That behavior favors the environment of subordinates through advice, direction, support and rewards.
The key to the theory is that the leader influences the paths that link behavior to goals. The leader can do this by defining positions and tasks, by removing obstacles to performance, by including helping group members to set goals, by promoting group cohesion and team effort, by increasing opportunities for satisfaction. personal in performing the job, by reducing external pressures and controls, by making expectations clear, and by doing other things that meet people's expectations.
Lead through vision and strategy
In complex organizations, authoritarianism does not work, it has little chance of going through all the resistance forces, people will ignore it, or pretend to cooperate, while doing everything possible to weaken their efforts. The micro-management tries to solve this problem by specifying in detail what employees must do and monitoring compliance.
This tactic may cross some barriers to change, but since detailed plans are extremely slow to create and communicate, the change produced in this way tends to be very costly. Only the vision-based approach - a core component of all great leadership - works over time. Vision refers to an image of the future with some explicit or implicit comment on why people should strive to create that future.
In a process of change, a good vision achieves three important purposes:
- Clarifies the general direction of change. Motivates people to act in the right direction, even when the initial steps are personally painful. Helps coordinate the actions of different people, even thousands of individuals, in a surprisingly fast and efficient way.
The word vision connotes something big or mystical, but the direction that guides successful transformations is often simple and mundane. A vision can be mundane and simple, at least partially, because in successful transformations it is only one element in a larger system, which also includes strategies, plans, and budgets. Without strategizing it can be a much more contentious activity and budgets can be dissolved in negligent exercise. Without a good vision, a smart strategy, and a logical plan can rarely inspire the kind of actions necessary to bring about greater change. Effective visions describe what some activity or organization will be like in the distant future,They articulate a group of possibilities that are the greatest interest of most people who have an investment in the situation: clients, shareholders, employees. An ineffective vision can be worse than none, the fight for a poorly developed vision can, at times, throw people off a cliff, and uncompromising chatting generates dangerous illusions.
