Page 169 -
P. 169

CHAPTER 5 • STRATEGIES IN ACTION  135

              bottom-line performance are especially severe if competitors relentlessly pursue increased
              market share at the expense of short-term profitability. And there are other trade-offs
              between financial and strategic objectives, related to riskiness of actions, concern for busi-
              ness ethics, need to preserve the natural environment, and social responsibility issues. Both
              financial and strategic objectives should include both annual and long-term performance
              targets. Ultimately, the best way to sustain competitive advantage over the long run is
              to relentlessly pursue strategic objectives that strengthen a firm’s business position
              over rivals. Financial objectives can best be met by focusing first and foremost on achieve-
              ment of strategic objectives that improve a firm’s competitiveness and market strength.
              Not Managing by Objectives
              An unidentified educator once said, “If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.”
              The idea behind this saying also applies to establishing objectives. Strategists should avoid
              the following alternative ways to “not managing by objectives.”
               • Managing by Extrapolation—adheres to the principle “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
                 The idea is to keep on doing about the same things in the same ways because things
                 are going well.
               • Managing by Crisis—based on the belief that the true measure of a really good
                 strategist is the ability to solve problems. Because there are plenty of crises and prob-
                 lems to go around for every person and every organization, strategists ought to bring
                 their time and creative energy to bear on solving the most pressing problems of the
                 day. Managing by crisis is actually a form of reacting rather than acting and of letting
                 events dictate the what and when of management decisions.
               • Managing by Subjectives—built on the idea that there is no general plan for which
                 way to go and what to do; just do the best you can to accomplish what you think
                 should be done. In short, “Do your own thing, the best way you know how”
                 (sometimes referred to as the mystery approach to decision making because
                 subordinates are left to figure out what is happening and why).
               • Managing by Hope—based on the fact that the future is laden with great uncer-
                 tainty and that if we try and do not succeed, then we hope our second (or third)
                 attempt will succeed. Decisions are predicated on the hope that they will work and
                 the good times are just around the corner, especially if luck and good fortune are on
                 our side! 2


              The Balanced Scorecard

              Developed in 1993 by Harvard Business School professors Robert Kaplan and David
              Norton, and refined continually through today, the Balanced Scorecard is a strategy eval-
                                      3
              uation and control technique. Balanced Scorecard derives its name from the perceived
              need of firms to “balance” financial measures that are oftentimes used exclusively in
              strategy evaluation and control with nonfinancial measures such as product quality and
              customer service. An effective Balanced Scorecard contains a carefully chosen combina-
              tion of strategic and financial objectives tailored to the company’s business. As a tool to
              manage and evaluate strategy, the Balanced Scorecard is currently in use at Sears, United
              Parcel Service, 3M Corporation, Heinz, and hundreds of other firms. For example, 3M
              Corporation has a financial objective to achieve annual growth in earnings per share of 10
              percent or better, as well as a strategic objective to have at least 30 percent of sales come
              from products introduced in the past four years. The overall aim of the Balanced
              Scorecard is to “balance” shareholder objectives with customer and operational objec-
              tives. Obviously, these sets of objectives interrelate and many even conflict. For example,
              customers want low price and high service, which may conflict with shareholders’
              desire for a high return on their investment. The Balanced Scorecard concept is consistent
              with the notions of continuous improvement in management (CIM) and total quality
              management (TQM).
                 Although the Balanced Scorecard concept is covered in more detail in Chapter 9 as
              it relates to evaluating strategies, note here that firms should establish objectives and
   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174