1. Discuss some of the reasons why strategy evaluation is becoming increasingly difficult with the passage of time.
Strategy evaluation is becoming difficult due to current unstable domestic plus global economies. Economies are being faced by diverse challenges due to increase of diverse changes inclusive of industrialization as each state wants to develop. Compared to the current economies the earlier economies where much stable due to long product life cycles together with development cycles. In addition, the complexity of environment and its diverse changes which do not favor strategies set by organizations. Since strategies formulated fall out of budget and time, as they cater for unscheduled plans brought by natural environmental uncertainties. For instance, increasing rate of environmental changes which prompt resources be channeled to other sectors.
Strategy evaluation is being challenged by swift obsolescence of best strategies with technologies. The implementation of better ideas and technology do not take long due to increased advancement. These outdo the earlier plans, because the economies are employing anything new which will enhance their stability. Strategy evaluation implementation process is encountering difficultness in forecasting the future with accuracy. Many of the uncertainties experienced while the strategies are underway are not catered for, thus making the set strategies fall out of plan. This makes the planning and implementation of the organizational strategies become hard to the strategists.
Additionally, strategists in their planning currently are encountering rapid technological advancement which cannot be compared with the old times. Prior to this era, technological transformations were slower plus competition from other same operating organizations. Also, establishment of organizations were well regulated contrarily to todays, thus presenting few competitors then who did not require constant revising of strategies.
2. Discuss the three challenges that strategists face today.
Strategists are at crossroads regarding whether management process is an art or science and how its application should be in an organization. The process in an organization cannot be defined clearly as art or science since sometimes entails application of both or one and the other is left aside. In current market, taking the process as science is risk since the system of principles which characterizes it to be a science may be obsolete. This will ditch the organization in situation which may compromise its existence and sustenance in a competitive today’s market. Conversely, if taken as an art the process is not only limited to the study of employees with reliance of experience the strategists have. Thus, making it combination but not knowing when to incorporate both.
Secondly strategists encounter the predicament of whether the formulated strategies ought to be visible or hidden from the stakeholders. This emanates from the fright of information leaking to other same operating organizations which may pose a sharp competition once they learn their secrets. Strategists in this predicament tend to incline to what as a small group of experts decide is good, thus not including the stakeholders in contributing in decision making.
Strategists currently do not exactly establish whether the process should be more top-down or bottom-up in an organization. This has created tension as the lower management claiming they have been sidelined in decision making and other issues which require joint action. Conversely, strategists view it is better that strategies should come from top management to the bottom. This ensures that the process is not over consultative and the implementation becomes easy.
Reference
David, F. R. (2008). Strategic Management: Concepts. 12 Ed. United States of America. Prentice Hall.
