MANT 437 Advanced General Management I Strategic Management Semester Two 2011

MANT 437 Advanced General Management I Strategic Management Semester Two 2011 1

COURSE OUTLINE MANT 437 Advanced General Management 1 Overview MANT 437: 0.125EFTS 18 points Prerequisites: Seminars: 72 MANT 300-Level points In CO8.24, Wednesday 2-4pm (to be confirmed) Course leader Dr. Conor O Kane CO8.24, Tel: 479-8121 Email: conor.okane@otago.ac.nz DISCLAIMER While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this document is accurate, the information is subject to change. Changes will be notified in class and/or via Blackboard/email. COURSE OBJECTIVES AND LEARNING OUTCOMES The purpose of MANT437 is to bring a level of proficiency in reading and assessing the professional academic literature in strategic management; and in the application of these ideas to practice. By engaging with seminal and contemporary research on a number of the most active areas in strategic management you will learn how to critically evaluate research papers, and develop a clear understanding of key themes in the field and an appreciation for some of the research questions and challenges that lie ahead. Specific learning outcomes will include: Developing an in-depth understanding of some of the key theoretical standpoints in the literature on strategic management Applying, and developing an appreciation for the relevance of, core theories and frameworks of strategic management to practice Developing your ability to critically review research and journal articles Improving your writing, presentational and research skills 2

COURSE CONTENT (in line with the scheduling of the topics listed below) will be selected from leading academic journals for analysis and discussion. These readings and discussions will be complemented by appropriate case material and examples from the contemporary business press. COURSE SCHEDULE** Week beginning July 11 July 18 July 25 Aug 1 Aug 8 Aug 15 Aug 22 Aug 29 Sept 5 Sept 12 Sept 19 Sept 26 Oct 3 Oct 10 Course Introduction and Overview Concept of Strategy Generic Strategies Resource Based View of the Firm Critical review of article presentations Also, discussion on deliberate and emergent strategy No Class consultations on strategy evaluations available Strategy evaluation assignment and presentations Mid-Semester Break Strategic Change and Turnaround Leadership Strategic Entrepreneurship and Innovation Strategies for Growth (and assignment consultations) Strategy as Practice Critical literature review assignment and course review ** Sequencing of, and emphasis on, particular topics is subject to student discussions on day one Reading lists may be updated on a continuous basis 3

COURSE METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS Extensive preparation and participation are required for this course. The class will meet for a two-hour seminar once a week. Each week will be devoted to a topic as listed in the schedule below. A reading list for each topic will be distributed in advance of the class. You are expected to study and critically assess each of the readings distributed, and to contribute to the seminar s discussion of these readings. Each week, where relevant, we will also discuss the application of ideas from the literature to the strategy of a firm, as described in a case study, assessing the extent to which theory can enlighten practice. Selected articles, book extracts, and case studies will be posted on blackboard. When studying an article or book, it is important to pay close attention to: - the structure and clarity of the key arguments being made in the literature - the theoretical justifications provided for the research questions - points of agreement and disagreement with others writing on the same topic - the operationalisation and measurement of the key concepts - the clarity of any stated propositions/hypotheses - the adequacy of the research design - if a large-sample empirical paper) the clarity of the statistical analysis presented - if a large-sample empirical paper) whether the statistical analysis adopts the most appropriate methods? - (if a large-sample empirical paper) how adequate the sample is - (if a case-based empirical paper) how appropriate the examined cases are - (if a case-based empirical paper) how tightly and objectively the case-derived observations related to the proposed framework are - how succinctly the data and results are presented - the relationship between the results and previous research - the originality of the research findings - the author s contribution to the literature/theory - the possible issues for future research - the author s contribution to management practice - how the material relates to the students companies for the strategic assignment - how the material relates to (in class) case material - how the material relates to contemporary business press - how the material relates to students practical experience 4

COURSE ASSESSMENT Together with an enhanced understanding of strategic management, students will demonstrate proficient analytical, critical thinking, presentational, and written skills as part of their assessment. More specifically, students will have a total of three separate assignments consisting (in all) of two presentations and two written exercises. These assignments will amount to 90% of the course marks. The remaining 10% of the marks will be awarded to students based on their continued contribution and interaction over the course of the ten discussion/presentation based classes. This assessment will take the following format: 1. Critical review of article presentations (10%) Week 5 (August 8) Students will select an article from a leading journal on a topic of strategy of their choice. They will critically review this article in a presentation to the class. 2. Strategy evaluation and presentation (4000 words) (35%) Week 7 (Aug 22) Drawing on at least one theoretical perspective on strategy to be found in the literature, each student will conduct a strategic evaluation of a company of their choice. This document should evaluate the company s strategic evolution in recent years and how this might correspond to their performance levels during this time. Students should make strategic recommendations for the company going forward. The evaluation should also allude to what (if any) aspects of the organisation s strategy are not well explained by extant theory. Students will accompany their written submission (25%) with a 20 minute presentation (10%) 3. Student contribution and interaction (10%) Aside from course introduction (week 1) and course review (week 13), there are a total of ten classes eight discussion based and two presentation based. The class participation grade is based on your regular weekly contributions to these class discussions. 4. Critical literature review and presentation (6000-7000 words) (45%) Week 13 (October 10) In the second half of the semester, following consultation with the course coordinator, students will select a particular theme of strategic management of interest to them and critique literature relevant to this area. Students will be expected to review and 5

juxtapose key arguments/evidence/contributions on this topic and conclude with a gap in the literature that should warrant further research attention. ASSESSMENT SUMMARY Critical Review of Article Presentations 10% Strategy Evaluation and Presentation 35% Class Contributions 10% Critical Literature Review 45% Total 100% PLAGIARISM Students should ensure that all submitted work is their own. Any student found responsible for dishonest practice (e.g. copying the work of others, use of unauthorized material in tests) in relation to any piece of work submitted for assessment shall be subjected to the University s Dishonest Practice regulations. This may result in various penalties, including forfeiture of marks for the piece of work submitted, a zero grade for the paper, or in extreme cases, exclusion from the University. Plagiarism is a form of dishonest practice. Plagiarism is defined as the copying or paraphrasing another s work, whether intentionally or through failure to take proper care, and presenting it as one s own. In practice, this means plagiarism includes any attempt in any piece of submitted work to present as one s own work, the work of another (whether another student or published authority) http://www.otago.ac.nz/administration/policies/otago003145.html. Plagiarism may be intentional or unintentional. Intentional plagiarism is the clear intent to pass off another person s work or ideas as your own for your own gain (e.g. copying another person s work or copying from textbooks and other sources without appropriate referencing). Unintentional plagiarism may occur if you do not understand the appropriate way to acknowledge the source of your ideas and information. If you are unsure of the acceptable methods of acknowledgment you should consult with the course coordinator or the library staff. Helpful websites include http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/ - particularly for assistance in citing electronic sources.the University reserves the right to use plagiarism detection tools. 6

LATE SUBMISSIONS In fairness to course members who complete assignments on time, work submitted after the due date will incur a penalty for lateness. The penalty is 10% of the maximum marks per day late. In the event of unusual/unforeseeable circumstances you must discuss waiver of the penalty with the course director at the earliest opportunity. Weekly readings will come from this core reading list Concept of Strategy Week 2, July 18 Case study The LEGO Group: working with strategy Cummings, S. (1993). The first strategists. Long Range Planning, 26(3), 133-135. Denis, J. L., Langley, A., & Ronleau, L. (2007). Strategising in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames. Human Relations, 60, 179-215. Eisenhardt, K. (2002). Has strategy changed? MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(7), 88-91. Mintzberg, H. (1987). Crafting strategy. Harvard Business Review, 65, 66-76. Hambrick, D., & Fredrickson, J. (2005). Are you sure you have a strategy? Academy of Management Executive, 19, 51-62. Hoskisson, R., Hitt, M., Wan, W., & Yiu, D. (1999). Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of a pendulum. Journal of Management, 25, 417-456. Miller, C., & Cardinal, L. (1994). Strategic planning and firm performance: A synthesis of more than two decades of research. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1649-1665. Nag, R., Hambrick, D. C., & Chen, M. J. (2007). What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 935-955. Porter, M. E. (1996). What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74, 61-78. Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1994). Strategy as a field of study: why search for a new paradigm. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 5-16. Ramos-Rodriguez, A. R., & Ruiz-Navarro, J. (2004). Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic management research: A bibliometric study of the Strategic Management Journal, 1980-2000. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 981-1004. Rumelt, R., Schendel, D., & Teece, D. (1991). Strategic management and economics. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 5-29. 7

Industry and firm effects on performance Week 3, July 25 Case study New Zealand building supplies industry Brush, T. H., & Bromiley, P. (1997). What does a small corporate effect mean? A variance components simulation of corporate and business effects. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 825-835. Burgelman, R. (1996). A process model of strategic business exit: Implications for an evolutionary perspective on strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 193-214. Carroll, G. R. (1993). A sociological view on why firms differ. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 237-249. Chang, S. J., & Singh, H. (2000). Corporate and industry effects on business unit competitive position. Strategic Management Journal, 21(7), 739-752. Hansen, G. S., & Wernerfelt, B. (1989). Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 399-411. Kotha, S., & Nair, A. (1995). Strategy and environment as determinants of performance: Evidence from the Japanese machine tool industry. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 497-518. Makino, S., Isobe, I., & Chan, C. (2004). Does country matter? Strategic Management Journal, 25(10), 1027-1043. McGahan, A., & Porter, M. (1997). How much does industry matter, really? Strategic Management Journal, 18, 15-30. Rumelt, R. (1991). How much does industry matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12, 167-185. Resource Based View of the Firm Week 4, August 1 Case study The Formula 1 constructors Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Jeffrey, A. M. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105-1121. Haas, M. R., & Hansen, M. T. (2005). When using knowledge can hurt performance: The value of organizational capabilities in a management consulting company. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 1-24. Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstone of competitive advantage: A resource based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179-191. Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91. Priem, R., & Butler, J. (2001). Is the resource-based view a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, 26, 22-40. 8

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180. Wernerfelt, B. (1995). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 171-175. Student Presentations and Deliberate and Emergent Strategies - Week 5, August 8 Student presentations so no case study Ansoff, H. I. (1991). Critique of H. Mintzberg s The design school: Reconsidering the basic premise of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 449-466. Grant, R. (2003). Strategic planning in turbulent environment: Evidence from the oil majors. Strategic Management Journal, 24(6), 491-517. Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formulation. Management Science, 24, 934-948. Mintzberg, H. (1990). The design school: Reconsidering the basic premise of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 171-195. Mintzberg, H. (1991). Learning 1, Planning 0: Reply to Igor Ansoff. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 463-466. Mintzberg, H. (1994). The fall and rise of strategic planning. Harvard Business Review, January/February, 107-114. Pascale, R. (1984). Perspectives on strategy: The real story behind Honda s success. California Management Review, 26(3), 47-72. Strategic Change and Turnaround Week 9, September 5 Case study Malaysia Airlines: A business turnaround Arogyaswamy, K., Barker, V. L., & Yasai-Ardekani, M. (1995). Firm turnarounds: An integrative two-stage model. Journal of Management Studies, 32(4), 493-525. Baden-Fuller, C., & Stopford, J. M. (1990). Corporate rejuvenation. Journal of Management Studies, 27(4), 399-415. Barker, V., III, & Mone, M. A. (1994). Retrenchment: Cause of turnaround or consequence of decline? Strategic Management Journal, 15(5), 395-405. Barker, V., III, & Duhaime, I. M. (1997). Strategic change in the turnaround process: Theory and empirical evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 18(1), 13-38. 9

Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Wan, J. C. (2003). Turnaround in East Asian firms: Evidence from ethnic overseas Chinese communities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(6), 519-540. Dunphy, D. C., & Stace, D. A. (1993). The strategic management of corporate change. Human Relations, 46(6), 905-920. Pearce, J. A., & Robbins, K. D. (1994). Retrenchment remains the foundation of business turnaround. Strategic Management Journal, 15(5), 407-417. Pettigrew, A. M. (1987). Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6), 649-670. Rajagopalan, N., & Spretzer, G. M. (1996). Toward a theory of strategic change: A multi-lens perspective and integrative framework. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 48-79. Robbins, K., & Pearce, J. (1992). Turnaround: Retrenchment and recovery. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 287-309. Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. (1994). Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1141-1166. Leadership Week 10, September 12 Case study Strategic Leadership and Innovation at Apple Inc. Caldwell, C., Hayes, L. A., & Long, D. T. (2010). Leadership, trustworthiness and ethical stewardship. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 97-512. Cannella, A. A., Jr., & Monroe, M. J. (1997). Contrasting perspectives on strategic leaders: Toward a more realistic view of top managers. Journal of Management, 23(3), 213-237. Hambrick, D. C., Finkelstein, S., & Mooney, A. C. (2005). Executive job demands: New insights for explaining strategic decisions and leader behaviours. Academy of Management Review, 30, 472-491. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193-206. Knights, D., & Morgan, G. (1992). Leadership and corporate strategy: Towards a critical analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 3(3), 171 190. Lieberson, S., & O Connor, J. F. (1972). Leadership and organisational performance: A review of large corporations. American Sociological Review, 37, 117-130. Meindl, J. R., & Ehrlich, S. B. (1987). The romance of leadership and the evaluation of organisational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 91 109. Pfeffer, J. (1977). The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review, 2, 104-112. Westley, F., & Mintzberg, H. (1989). Visionary leadership and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 17 32. Wood, J. A., Jr., & Winston, B. E. (2005). Toward a new understanding of leader accountability: Defining a critical construct. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 11(3), 84 94. 10

Strategic Entrepreneurship and Innovation Week 11, September 19 Case study - Cordys: Innovations in business process management Basadur, M. (1992). Managing creativity: A Japanese model. Academy of Management Executive, 6(2), 29-42. Bell, G. G. (2005). Clusters, networks and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 287-295. Chesbrough, H., & Appleyard, M. (2007). Open innovation and strategy. California Management Review, 50(1), 57-73. Eisenhardt, K., & Tabrizi, B. (1995). Accelerating adaptive processes: Product innovation in the global computer industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 84-110. Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Sirmon, D. G., & Trahms, C. A. (2011). Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating value for individuals, organizations and society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(2), 57-75. Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., Camp, S. M., & Sexton, D. L. (2001). Integrating entrepreneurship and strategic management actions to create firm wealth. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 49-63. Karim, S., & Mitchell, W. (2004). Innovating through acquisition and internal development: A quarter-century of boundary evolution at Johnson & Johnson. Long Range Planning, 37(6), 525-547. Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001) Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1123-1134. Rothwell, R. (1992). Successful industrial innovation: Critical factors for the 1990s. R&D Management, 22(3), 221-239. Rudma, S. T. (2001). Are successful innovators high performers? Insights from Israel's largest companies. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 149-150. Strategies for Growth Week 12, September 26 Case Study Lufthansa: Going global, but how to manage complexity? Anand, J., Mesquitta, L., & Vassolo, R. (2009). The dynamics of multimarket competition in exploration and exploitation activities. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 802-880. Chakrabarti, A., Singh, K., & Mahmood, I. (2007). Diversification and performance: Evidence from East Asian firms. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 101-120. Hamel, G. (1991). Competition for competence and interpartner learning within strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 83-103. 11

Hitt, M., & Hoskisson, R. E. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4), 767-798. Athreye, S., & Kapur, S. (Eds.). (2009). The internationalization of Chinese and Indian firms Trends, motivations and strategy [Special issue]. Industrial and Corporate Change. 18(2). Knights, G., & Cavusil, T. (2005). A taxonomy of born global firms. Management International Review, 45(3), 479-501. Yip, G., Rugman, A., & Kudina, A. (2006). International success of British companies. Long Range Planning, 39(1), 241-264. Strategy as Practice Week 13, October 3 Case Study Design and development of strategy processes at RACC Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. (2007). Strategizing: The challenge of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1), 5-27. Jarzabkowski, P., & Spee, A. P. (2009). Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11, 69-95. Jarzabkowski, P., & Whittington, R. (2008). Directions for a troubled discipline: Strategy research, teaching and practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17, 266-268. Johnson, G., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2003). Micro-strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 3-22. Moisander, J., & Stenfors, S. (2009). Exploring the edges of theory-practice gap: Epistemic cultures in strategy-tool development and use. Organization, 16, 227 247. Regnér, P. (2008). Strategy-as-practice and dynamic capabilities: Steps towards a dynamic view of strategy. Human Relations, 61, 565-588. Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29, 731-735. 12