Strategic Management MGT 401 Assignment Posting Date Submiss

Strategic Managementmgt401assignmentsposting Datesubmission Datemarksa

In the context of strategic management, search the Fortune “Most Admired Companies” for 2010 and compare that list to the 2017 list. Identify which companies have fallen out of the top 10, and investigate why one of those companies is no longer on the list. Determine which companies appeared in both 2010 and 2017 and explain why they remained on the list. Additionally, identify companies that entered the top 10 from outside the list in 2010 and explore how they achieved that position. Select one of these companies, conduct research on its opportunities, threats, strengths, and weaknesses, and prepare a 3- to 5-page report. The report should analyze whether the firm has any core competencies, particularly distinctive ones, and whether it has a competitive advantage. Include an assessment of its business model and a SWOT analysis. Finally, discuss the likely future trajectory of the company if it continues on its current path.

Paper For Above instruction

Strategic management plays a crucial role in understanding how companies sustain competitive advantage within their industries. The Fortune “Most Admired Companies” list serves as a benchmark for assessing corporate reputation, operational excellence, and strategic positioning over time. Comparing the 2010 and 2017 lists provides insight into organizational changes, industry shifts, and the factors influencing corporate success and decline. This analysis not only highlights the dynamics of strategic management but also allows for an in-depth case study of specific companies, examining their strategic competencies, internal and external factors, and future prospects.

In 2010, the list of most admired companies was dominated by firms like Apple, Coca-Cola, and IBM. Fast forward to 2017, some of these firms remained at the top, while others fell out of the top 10. For example, IBM, which was highly regarded in 2010, dropped from the top ranks by 2017. The decline of IBM can be attributed to various factors such as sluggish innovation, increased competition from newer technology firms, and challenges in adapting to rapidly evolving digital markets. Conversely, companies like Amazon and Google entered the top 10 list between 2010 and 2017, driven by their innovative business models, aggressive expansion strategies, and leveraging technology to gain competitive advantage.

The companies that maintained their positions often shared strong core competencies, such as brand recognition, innovative capability, and operational efficiency. The ability to continuously adapt to industry changes and invest in emerging technologies appears to be a significant contributor to sustained admiration and success. Companies like Apple exemplify distinctive competencies—delivering innovative products that set industry standards—thus maintaining a competitive advantage through product differentiation, brand loyalty, and a robust ecosystem of hardware, software, and services.

Focusing on one of these successful firms, such as Apple Inc., reveals a strategic pathway to sustained excellence. Apple’s core competencies include design innovation, brand strength, and an integrated ecosystem of products and services. Its distinctive competencies, especially in product design and user experience, create a competitive advantage that is difficult for rivals to imitate. Apple’s business model revolves around premium pricing, seamless product integration, and a loyal customer base, which contribute to robust revenue streams and market dominance. A SWOT analysis highlights Apple’s strengths like brand loyalty and innovation, weaknesses such as high product prices and dependency on flagship products, opportunities in expanding services and wearables markets, and threats from intense competition and global regulatory challenges.

If Apple continues on its current trajectory, it is likely to maintain or even expand its market dominance by continuously innovating and expanding its services ecosystem. However, potential risks include market saturation, technological disruptions, and increasing regulatory scrutiny. Strategic investments in emerging markets, sustainable practices, and continued innovation could determine its long-term viability and success.

In conclusion, analyzing the shifts in the Fortune “Most Admired Companies” list between 2010 and 2017 offers valuable insights into strategic management, competitive advantage, and organizational adaptability. Companies that invest in core competencies and maintain innovation can sustain their reputation and performance over time. Apple exemplifies a firm with distinctive competencies and a resilient business model that may secure its future in a competitive and dynamic global marketplace.

References

• Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
• Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. (1994). Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. HarperBusiness.
• Ghemawat, P. (2001). Strategy and the Business Landscape. Pearson Education.
• Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2017). Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases. Cengage Learning.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2008). The Strategy Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue Ocean Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 82(10), 76-84.
• Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press.
• Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competency of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
• Thompson, A. A., Peteraf, M. A., Gamble, J. E., & Strickland, A. J. (2018). Crafting and Executing Strategy: The Quest for Competitive Advantage. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Ulrich, D. (1997). Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for Creating Values and Building Competitive Advantage. Harvard Business Review Press.