Page 329 -

CHAPTER 9 • STRATEGY REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND CONTROL 295

No organization can survive as an island; no organization can escape change. Taking
corrective actions is necessary to keep an organization on track toward achieving stated
objectives. In his thought-provoking books Future Shock and The Third Wave, Alvin
Toffler argued that business environments are becoming so dynamic and complex that they
threaten people and organizations with future shock, which occurs when the nature, types,
and speed of changes overpower an individual’s or organization’s ability and capacity to
adapt. Strategy evaluation enhances an organization’s ability to adapt successfully to
changing circumstances.
Taking corrective actions raises employees’ and managers’ anxieties. Research
suggests that participation in strategy-evaluation activities is one of the best ways to over-
come individuals’ resistance to change. According to Erez and Kanfer, individuals accept
change best when they have a cognitive understanding of the changes, a sense of control
over the situation, and an awareness that necessary actions are going to be taken to imple-
ment the changes. 6
Strategy evaluation can lead to strategy-formulation changes, strategy-implementation
changes, both formulation and implementation changes, or no changes at all. Strategists
cannot escape having to revise strategies and implementation approaches sooner or later.
Hussey and Langham offered the following insight on taking corrective actions:

Resistance to change is often emotionally based and not easily overcome by rational
argument. Resistance may be based on such feelings as loss of status, implied criti-
cism of present competence, fear of failure in the new situation, annoyance at not
being consulted, lack of understanding of the need for change, or insecurity in
changing from well-known and fixed methods. It is necessary, therefore, to over-
come such resistance by creating situations of participation and full explanation
when changes are envisaged. 7

Corrective actions should place an organization in a better position to capitalize upon
internal strengths; to take advantage of key external opportunities; to avoid, reduce, or
mitigate external threats; and to improve internal weaknesses. Corrective actions should
have a proper time horizon and an appropriate amount of risk. They should be internally
consistent and socially responsible. Perhaps most important, corrective actions strengthen
an organization’s competitive position in its basic industry. Continuous strategy evaluation
keeps strategists close to the pulse of an organization and provides information needed for
an effective strategic-management system. Carter Bayles described the benefits of strategy
evaluation as follows:

Evaluation activities may renew confidence in the current business strategy or point
to the need for actions to correct some weaknesses, such as erosion of product supe-
riority or technological edge. In many cases, the benefits of strategy evaluation are
much more far-reaching, for the outcome of the process may be a fundamentally new
strategy that will lead, even in a business that is already turning a respectable profit,
to substantially increased earnings. It is this possibility that justifies strategy evalua-
tion, for the payoff can be very large. 8

The Balanced Scorecard
Introduced earlier in the Chapter 5 discussion of objectives, the Balanced Scorecard is an
important strategy-evaluation tool. It is a process that allows firms to evaluate strategies from
four perspectives: financial performance, customer knowledge, internal business processes,
and learning and growth. The Balanced Scorecard analysis requires that firms seek answers
to the following questions and utilize that information, in conjunction with financial
measures, to adequately and more effectively evaluate strategies being implemented:
1. How well is the firm continually improving and creating value along measures
such as innovation, technological leadership, product quality, operational process
efficiencies, and so on?