THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING STRATEGIES Strategy evaluation is necessary for all sizes and kinds of organizations. Strategy evaluation should initiate managerial questioning of expectations and assumptions, should trigger a review of objectives and values, and should stimulate creativity in generating alternatives and formulating criteria of evaluation. Regardless of the size of the organization, a certain amount of management by wandering around (MBWA) at all levels is essential to effective strategy evaluation. Strategy-evaluation activities should be performed on a continuing basis, rather than at the end of specified periods of time of just after problems occur. Evaluating strategies on a continuous rather than a periodic basis allows benchmarks of progress to be established and more effectively monitored. Some strategies take years to implement; consequently, associated results may not become apparent for years. Successful strategists combine patience with a willingness to take corrective actions promptly when necessary. There always comes a time when corrective actions are needed in an organization. Managers and employees of an enterprise should be continually aware of progress being made toward achieving the firm's objectives. As critical success factors change, organizational members should be involved in determining appropriate corrective actions. If assumptions and expectations deviate significantly from forecasts, then the firm should renew strategy-formulation activities, perhaps sooner than planned. In strategy evaluation, like strategy formulation and strategy implementation, people make the difference. Through involvement in the process of evaluating strategies, managers and employees become committed to keeping the firm moving steadily toward achieving objectives. REVIEWING BASES OF STRATEGY Strategy evaluation should address such questions as the following: 1. How have competitors reacted to our strategies? 2. How have competitors' strategies changed? 3. Have major competitors' strengths and weaknesses changed? 4. Why are competitors making certain strategic changes? 5. Why are some competitors' strategies more successful than others? 6. How satisfied are our competitors with their present market positions and profitability? 7. How far can our major competitors be pushed before retaliating? 8. How could we more effectively cooperate with our competitors? Numerous external and internal factors can prohibit firms from achieving long-term and annual objectives. Externally, actions by competitors, changes in demand, changes in technology, economic changes, demographic shifts, and governmental actions may prohibit objectives from being accomplished. Internally, ineffective strategies may have been chosen or implementation activities may have been poor. Objectives may have been too optimistic. Thus, failure to achieve objectives may not be the result of unsatisfactory work by managers and employees. All organizational members need to know this to encourage their support for strategy-evaluation activities. Organizations desperately need to know as soon as possible when their strategies are not effective. Sometimes managers and employees on the front line discover this well before strategists. External opportunities and threats and internal strengths and weaknesses that represent the bases of current strategies should continually be monitored for change. It is not really a question of whether these factors will change, but rather when they will change and in what ways. Some key questions to address in evaluating strategies are given here: 1. Are our internal strengths still strengths? 2. Have we added other internal strengths? If so, what are they? 3. Are our internal weaknesses still weaknesses? 4. Do we now have other internal weaknesses? If so, what are they? 5. Are our external opportunities still opportunities? 6. Are there now other external opportunities? If so, what are they? 7. Are our external threats still threats? 8. Are there now other external threats? If so, what are they?
|
Page#2
