Assignment Week 2 Analytical And Emergent Approaches
Assignment Week 2analytical And Emergent Approaches
Assignment Week 2 · Analytical and Emergent Approaches Write a 2 page paper addressing the following elements in your paper: · Evaluate the similarities and differences of both the analytical and emergent approaches to strategic management. · Evaluate the benefits of combining the two models. Include a title page and 3-5 references. Only one reference may be from the internet (not Wikipedia). The other references must be from the Grantham University online library. Please adhere to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), (6th ed. 2nd printing) when writing and submitting assignments and papers. 100% ORIGINAL. NO PLAGIARISM.
Paper For Above instruction
Strategic management is a vital aspect of organizational success, involving various approaches to formulate and implement strategies effectively. Among these, the analytical and emergent approaches stand out for their distinct philosophies and methodologies. Analyzing their similarities and differences, as well as exploring the benefits of integrating these approaches, offers valuable insights for managers aiming to navigate complex business environments efficiently.
The analytical approach, often associated with deliberate strategic planning, emphasizes a rational, systematic process. It involves a comprehensive assessment of internal and external factors, formulation of strategies based on data-driven insights, and a structured implementation plan. This method assumes that organizations can predict market trends and formulate optimal strategies through rigorous analysis (Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, & Lampel, 1998). Its strengths include clarity, control, and the capacity to develop cohesive strategies aligned with organizational objectives.
In contrast, the emergent approach highlights adaptability, learning, and flexibility. It recognizes that the external environment is often unpredictable and that strategies must evolve through trial and error. In this view, strategies emerge incrementally from ongoing actions rather than being solely designed in advance. This approach is associated with real-time decision-making, allowing organizations to respond swiftly to unforeseen changes (Burgelman, 2002). Its primary benefit lies in fostering innovation and resilience amidst rapid environmental shifts.
Despite their differences, both approaches share common ground in their core goal of achieving organizational success through effective strategy formulation. However, the emphasis on prediction and control in the analytical approach contrasts with the emergent approach’s focus on adaptability and learning. These differences highlight the potential challenges in balancing structure with flexibility within strategic management processes.
Integrating the analytical and emergent approaches can provide organizations with a balanced strategic framework. The analytical model offers a foundation for setting clear goals and direction, ensuring coherence and consistency. Meanwhile, the emergent approach allows for ongoing adaptation and refinement of strategies, enabling organizations to capitalize on new opportunities and mitigate risks in dynamic environments. This combination fosters a strategic environment where deliberate planning guides initial direction, and emergent strategies facilitate continuous learning and adjustment (Mintzberg et al., 1998).
The benefits of combining these approaches are numerous. It allows organizations to maintain a strategic orientation rooted in data and analysis while remaining adaptable to environmental uncertainties. This synergy enhances organizational agility, promotes innovation, and improves responsiveness to market changes. Moreover, it supports a proactive stance where deliberate strategies are supplemented by emergent insights, leading to more resilient and sustainable success.
In conclusion, the analytical and emergent approaches to strategic management offer unique advantages and pose certain challenges. Understanding their similarities and differences helps organizations appreciate the need for a balanced approach. By integrating these models, organizations can develop strategies that are not only well-informed but also adaptable, ultimately positioning themselves better in today’s volatile business landscape.
References
Burgelman, R. A. (2002). Strategy as a theatrical performance. Organization Science, 13(4), 363-376.
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (1998). Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management. Free Press.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Sull, D. N. (2001). Strategy as simple rules. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 107-116.
Chaffee, E. (1985). Three models of strategy. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 89-98.
Ghemawat, P. (2006). Strategic competence: Extending the boundaries of strategic thinking. Business Strategy Review, 17(3), 47-60.