STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

GLOBAL LEADERSHIP EXECUTIVE MBA

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT Spring 2003

Dr. Joseph C. Picken
Hoblitzelle 2.808
/ Phone (UTD office): (972) 883-4986
Phone: (McKinney office): (972) 562-5401

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

This course is designed to provide a concise overview of the key concepts that comprise the foundation of our current understanding of business and corporate strategy. Core concepts will be presented in selected readings and audio-lectures, and explored through the in-depth analysis and discussion of case materials in regular teleconferences.

The course will address traditional approaches to industry and competitor analysis and competitive advantage, and contemporary extensions and refinements of these concepts. The use of these analytical tools and techniques will be demonstrated through case studies focusing on a variety of issues, including the relationship between an organization and its environment, competition, market entry, vertical integration, diversification, global competition and strategic alliances.

The course is designed to challenge you in a number of ways. It will not only require the application of the functional knowledge, skills and techniques you have learned in earlier courses, but will also introduce you to the basic tools and techniques of industry analysis, strategy formulation, and implementation. Case studies will be used to sharpen your analytical and decision-making skills and highlight the reality of organizational and environmental uncertainties in strategic decision-making. Written assignments will be designed to enhance and sharpen your communications skills. The case studies and discussions will encourage an integrated, multifunctional "general management" view of the organization and its environment to foster the skills and perspectives essential to corporate and division-level policy analysis, formulation and implementation.

COURSE MATERIALS:

  • All course materials will be posted electronically on BLACKBOARD unless otherwise noted on the assignment schedule.
SUPPLEMENTAL READING

This course assumes some prior exposure to the basic concepts of strategic management. These will be briefly reviewed early in the course. If you have not previously been exposed to these concepts, or wish to dig deeper, a number of excellent references are available. I would recommend you begin with:

  • Grant, R. M. 2002. Contemporary Strategic Analysis, 4th ed. Cambridge, MA. Blackwell Publishers, Inc.
  • Porter, M.E. 1985. Competitive Advantage. New York. The Free Press.
  • Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. 1994. Competing for the Future. Boston, HarvardBusinessSchool Press.

In addition, the Harvard Business Review, the Sloan Management Review, and the California Management Review are excellent resources with readable articles on various topics in strategic management in almost every issue.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS & GRADING:

Class activities will include audio-lectures and teleconference discussions of the readings and cases.The list of assigned readings and cases is attached. Supplemental materials will occasionally be provided or posted electronically. Advance preparation and enthusiastic participation in class discussionsis an important part of the learning experience in this course and will be evaluated.

The course has been designed to allow flexible management of your time. There will be no quizzes or exams. Your grade will be based on individual written assignments, on your contributions to class discussions, and on a comprehensive final examination. These activities will be weighted as follows:

Individual Written Case Analyses (2)35%

Group Written Case Analyses (3)50%

Class Participation (participation/contribution to teleconferences)15%

The effectiveness of your written and oral communications will be a factor in the evaluation of each of these areas.

Individual Written Assignments

Evaluation:Eightypercent (80%) of your grade will be based on written assignments. Cases are assigned in the course schedule. Particular care should be taken to fully address the requirements for each paper detailed in the assignment.Written assignments will be evaluated for content, organization, presentation, grammar and spelling. Written assignments will be required as follows:

Assign / Due / Case / G/I / Weight / Pages
1 / Jan 12, 2003 / EMI & the CT Scanner / Group / 15% / 5-7
2 / Jan 26, 2003 / Birds Eye and the UK Frozen Foods Industry / Individual / 15% / 5-7
3 / Feb 9, ,2003 / Polariod Corporation: Digital Imaging Technology / Group / 15% / 5-7
4 / Feb16, 2003 / Hattori-Seiko and the World Watch Industry in 1980 / Individual / 20% / 6-8
5 / Feb 23, 2003 / Xerox & Fuji Xerox / Group / 20% / 6-8

Format:Page length guidelines apply to the body of the written assignment. Cover pages, charts or exhibits, and lists of references are not included in the page count. The use of bullets and numbered lists is often appropriate. The use of charts and exhibits is encouraged, but only to the extent that they help you make your points. Charts and exhibits should be numbered and appropriately referenced in the body of the document. A list of references should be attached as required.

The manuscript should use 11-12 point type, double-spaced, with 1” margins all around. Appropriate titles and section headings should be used. Number the pages, put the course and section number and your name and student number in a header at the top of each page.

WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS ARE DUE ON THE DATE ASSIGNED. Late papers turned in within one week after the due date will be graded, but 10 points will be deducted; papers turned in within two weeks will be graded, but 15 points will be deducted. Late papers received more than two weeks after the due date will receive a zero. I will grant you two “mulligans”. Each “mulligan” will be worth a one week extension of the due date for an assignment. A mulligan must be requested more than 24 hours prior to the date and time the paper is due. You may use one or both of your mulligans on the same assignment. Once used, they are gone, so use them judiciously. A written evaluation and critique will be provided on all graded papers.

Case Analysis Guidelines

The written assignments and regular teleconferences will require the analysis of case situations. Case analysis assignments are designed to evaluate and develop your skills in:

  • identifying key strategic issues (decisions or actions required in a given situation)
  • analyzing business situations (understanding the organizational and environmental context, identifying and analyzing opportunities and threats; and identifying and evaluating options)
  • recommending specific strategies and actions (to address the identified strategic issues).

Discussion questionsfor each case are provided below to help you to focus your analysis. You are encouraged to work together in your study groups to discuss the cases, including the written assignment cases, with the understanding that written assignments (including tables and figures) are to be prepared and written individually.

The following general approach to case analysis is recommended:

  • Read the case quickly. Identify the key issues and decisions/actions required.
  • Decide what kind of recommendations should be made (and to whom)
  • Choose appropriate analytical tools/frameworks from those introduced in the course
  • Analyze the situation thoroughly
  • Draw logical conclusions based on your analysis
  • Make specific recommendations for action (what should be done, who should do it, when and in what sequence).

In general, there are no “right” or “wrong” answers for a specific case – different approaches and insights are possible, depending on your individual perspective and approach. Regardless of your approach, I will expect you to draw logical conclusions and (if appropriate) make recommendations that: (a) address the identified strategic issues; (b) follow logically from your analysis and conclusions; and (c) make sense (are feasible) in the context of the case situation.

Class Participation

Twenty percent (20%) of your grade will be based on the quality of your preparation and active participation in teleconference discussions and exercises.From time to time, it may be necessary to miss a conference call due to illness or travel schedules. Please let me know in advance and keep in mind that written assignments must be emailed by the due date, regardless. If participation becomes an issue, your grade will be impacted.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR CASE ANALYSIS

EMI and the CT Scanner

Case (A)

  • How is EMI doing in the early 1970’s?
  • What are their strengths and weaknesses? Construct a value chain (following Quinn) and use it to analyze their internal strengths and weaknesses with regard to the proposed CT Scanner business.
  • What is EMI’s “theory of the business” (following Drucker)?Develop a list of the key assumptions about EMI’s environment, mission and core competencies as they apply to the CT Scanner business. Is this theory of the business valid?
  • What are the key issues to be addressed in the case? What do you recommend?

Case (B)

  • It’s 1977 – How is EMI doing in medical electronics?
  • What problems do you see on the horizon?
  • Reevaluate EMI’s “theory of the business”. Is it still valid?
  • What should their strategy be at this point?

Monsanto’s March into Biotechnology (A)

  • In which industry did Monsanto compete before the acquisition of G.D. Searle? What were the key features of the competitive environment?What was Monsanto’s strategy?
  • From Monsanto’s perspective: Why build a biotechnology capability? Would a strong position in biotechnology meet criteria for a core competency? Did any other companies see the same opportunities?What were the issues/key choices Monsanto faced in developing a biotechnology capability?
  • What was the rationale for the acquisition of G.D. Searle? What problems and opportunities were created by the acquisition?
  • What are some of the arguments pro and con: basic science (core competencies) vs. near term returns (applications). What do you think they should do?
  • What are the risks and tradeoffs among the competing approaches (in-house vs. university vs. strategic alliances)? What do you think they should do?
  • What about the issue of different ways to reach the same goals (outcomes): pesticides vs. genetically altered crops. What are the opportunities and tradeoffs? What internal outcomes are required?
  • How successful do you think Monsanto was? What was the situation in 1995? What conclusions can we reach from this?

Birds Eye and the UK Frozen Foods Industry (A) & (B)

  • What were the key elements of Birds Eye’s strategy from 1946-1965
  • What were its core competencies? What were its principal sources of competitive advantage?
  • Birds Eye effectively controlled the entire value chain from grower to consumer. What were the key activities in the value chain? How did the company create value in each?
  • Was vertical integration justified?
  • Birds Eye pioneered the market and dominated it into the mid-1960’s, but then began to lose market share to competitors. What happened?
  • What is the key issue at the end of this case? What changes in strategy would you recommend?

Intel’s Strategic Position in the Family Room, 1998

  • What are the key issues/decisions required in this case?
  • In what areas does Intel face uncertainties in developing its strategy for the family room? (Hint: consider the demand side and supply side separately)
  • What kind of uncertainties exist in each (following the categorization from Strategy Under Uncertainty)?
  • What do we know about the evolving competitive environment?
  • Who are Intel’s major customers/competitors/alliance partners likely to be in the market for PC-centric systems? For TV-centric systems? For information appliances?
  • What markets should Intel pursue? Which should they avoid?
  • What kinds of strategies should Intel pursue? Should the strategies be different by market segment? What are the risks in each?

Polaroid Corporation: Digital Imaging Technology in 1997

  • What do we know about Polaroid’s business in 1997?
  • What do we know about Polaroid’s position in the digital imaging market in 1997?
  • Is the digital camera business an attractive opportunity for Polaroid in 1997? What are the arguments pro and con?
  • Is Digital Imaging a disruptive technology for Polaroid’s market?
  • What kinds of uncertainty does Polaroid face in addressing this market?
  • Does Polaroid have any current or potential competitive advantages in this market?
  • What strategic options are available to Polaroid in this market? Have Polaroid’s early moves (PD-2000, PD-300) limited its options?
  • What should Polaroid’s goals and expectations be about this market? How should Polaroid develop and maintain competitive advantage? What are the major risks?

Hattori-Seiko and the World Watch Industry in 1980

  • Why has the watch industry been a global business since before the turn of the century? Why did the Swiss succeed as global leaders? What were their sources of competitive advantage? How did they sustain their position for so long?
  • What did the Swiss location have to do with it? Could this industry have evolved anywhere?
  • Why did Timex succeed the Swiss as world volume leader in the 1950’s and 1960’s? Why did Bulova become the revenue leader? How did each circumvent the Swiss sources of competitive advantage?
  • Why didn’t the Swiss respond effectively to the competitive threat? Did the US location of Timex and Bulova have anything to do with it?
  • Why did Hattori-Seiko succeed Timex and Bulova as an industry leader? What was their strategy? How did home market conditions influence their strategy?
  • Why were Timex and Bulova unsuccessful in meeting the Japanese challenge?
  • Others (TI) launched new technologies – why didn’t they succeed?
  • What are the challenges currently facing Seiko, the latest industry leader?

Xerox & Fuji Xerox

  • What role did Fuji Xerox play in Xerox’s global strategy before 1990? How would this have looked from Fuji’s perspective?
  • Was Fuji Xerox a success in 1990? By what measures? What were Fuji Xerox’s major contributions to the Xerox Group?
  • Evaluate the success of the relationship from the perspective of Kanter’s “Eight I’s”. What were the principal reasons behind Fuji Xerox’s success? How did the structure of the deal influence the outcome?
  • What can we conclude about Fuji Xerox’s performance from the perspective of Porter’s ideas in The Competitive Advantage of Nations?
  • How should the relationship evolve to enhance the role and contribution of Fuji Xerox to the group?

COURSE OUTLINE

Session

/ Readings/Preparation / Cases for Discussion / Assignments
(US Central time) / Conf Call
(US Central time)
1
Oct 18,2002
8:30-11:00 /
Concepts of Strategy/Competitive Forces
What is Strategy? 96608
How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy 79208
Strategy as Simple Rules R0101G
2
Week of Jan 6-12
2003 /
The Context of Strategy
Theory of the Business 94506
Right Strategy – Wrong Problem (OD)
Technology in Services: Rethinking Strategic Focus SMR 3127 / EMI and the CT Scanner (A) & (B) / Written Assignment # 1 due 2:00 PM Sunday Jan 12 / SundayJan 12
4:00 – 5:30 PM
3
Week of Jan 13-19
2003 /
Resources & Competencies
Core Competence of the Corporation 90311
Capturing Value from Knowledge Assets: The New Economy CMR 108 / Monsanto’s March into Biotechnology (A) / No Conference Call
(Retreat week)
4
Week of Jan 20-26
2003 /
The Scope of the Business
To Diversify or Not to Diversify 97608
Desperately Seeking Synergy 98504
Unbundling the Corporation 99205 / Birds Eye and the UK Frozen Foods Industry (A) / Written Assignment # 2 due 2:00 PM Sunday Jan 26 / Sunday Jan 26
4:00 – 5:30 PM
5
Week of Jan 27-Feb2
2003 / Strategy Under UncertaintyStrategy under Uncertainty 97603
Strategy and the New Economics of Information 97504 / Intel’s Strategic Position in the Family Room, 1998 / Sunday Feb 2
4:00 – 5:30 PM
6
Week of Feb 3-9
2003 /
Strategy & Technology
Strategy and the Internet R0103D
The Art of Standards Wars CMR 140
Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave 95103 / Polaroid Corporation Digital Imaging Technology in 1997 / Written Assignment #3 due 2:00 PM Sunday Feb 9 / Sunday Feb 9
4:00 – 5:30 PM
7
Week of Feb 10-16
2003 /
Global Strategy & Competition
The Competitive Advantage of Nations 90211
Going Global: Lessons from Late Movers R00201 / Hattori-Seiko and the World Watch Industry in 1980 / Written Assignment #4 due 2:00 PM Sunday Feb 16 / Sunday Feb 16
4:00 – 5:30 PM
8
Week of Feb 17-23
2003 /
Strategic Alliances
Collaborative Advantage: The Art of Alliances 94405
Collaborate with your Competitors and Win 89104 / Xerox and Fuji-Xerox / Written Assignment #5 due 2:00 PM Sunday Feb 23 / Sunday Feb 23
4:00 – 5:30 PM

1

GLEMBA BPS 6210 Spring 2003

Dr. Joseph C. Picken

Revised December 30, 2002 Printed: 10/7/2018