Opinión personal de “the fundamental dimensions of strategy” de frédéric fréry
Páginas: 3 (639 palabras)
Publicado: 1 de julio de 2010
Opinion and synthesis essay on Frédéric Fréry’s article “The fundamental dimensions of strategy”
The reading states that in nowadays world of business is almost impossible to define the wordstrategy in an accurate way. The discipline has at least 10 schools and multiple definitions. Because of this, the author doesn’t give us one unique definition or paradigm about strategy, but a set ofguidelines instead.
According to the author, despite the school of thought you came from, strategy is all about creating value. Is a set of policies oriented to create value for someone: customers,shareholders, stakeholders, etc. Value creation is the purpose of any strategy and it must stand in the middle of contradictory scenarios. On one hand the company, should be committed to the customers, butalso, to the share holders. Another interest conflict is that a strategy should be built thinking on profit maximization, but also, maximizing corporate responsibility and ethics.
Following thesteps of Michael Porter, the article also clarifies that strategy is not operational efficiency and efficiency techniques are easily copied and widely practiced over a number of competitors. Strategy of agiven company is its uniqueness of its value creation (whether it is value for the customers, the stakeholders or the shareholders).
A second thing about strategy or, as the authors call it, the“How” is the imitation factor. According to Fréry, the best strategy can prove out to be useless if it is easily imitated. An implication of the definition of strategy and its why’s on the paragraphsabove, imply that in order to achieve sustainable success a corporation must be unique. If someone imitates our core processes and competencies, we are no longer unique, so someone else is stealing awayour strategy. That’s the reason why imitation is so important when it comes to strategy.
What’s most; the author defines innovation as a failed imitation, which has a lot of sense actually because...
The reading states that in nowadays world of business is almost impossible to define the wordstrategy in an accurate way. The discipline has at least 10 schools and multiple definitions. Because of this, the author doesn’t give us one unique definition or paradigm about strategy, but a set ofguidelines instead.
According to the author, despite the school of thought you came from, strategy is all about creating value. Is a set of policies oriented to create value for someone: customers,shareholders, stakeholders, etc. Value creation is the purpose of any strategy and it must stand in the middle of contradictory scenarios. On one hand the company, should be committed to the customers, butalso, to the share holders. Another interest conflict is that a strategy should be built thinking on profit maximization, but also, maximizing corporate responsibility and ethics.
Following thesteps of Michael Porter, the article also clarifies that strategy is not operational efficiency and efficiency techniques are easily copied and widely practiced over a number of competitors. Strategy of agiven company is its uniqueness of its value creation (whether it is value for the customers, the stakeholders or the shareholders).
A second thing about strategy or, as the authors call it, the“How” is the imitation factor. According to Fréry, the best strategy can prove out to be useless if it is easily imitated. An implication of the definition of strategy and its why’s on the paragraphsabove, imply that in order to achieve sustainable success a corporation must be unique. If someone imitates our core processes and competencies, we are no longer unique, so someone else is stealing awayour strategy. That’s the reason why imitation is so important when it comes to strategy.
What’s most; the author defines innovation as a failed imitation, which has a lot of sense actually because...
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.