Introduction
Strategies have a significant impact on an organisation including the ability to offer directions to the relevant stakeholders. Even though it is extremely important to develop a viable strategy for an organisation, a company needs to assess both internal and external factors that might affect the strategy’s success (Hrebiniak 2005). Barriers to effective implementation and evaluation of a strategy exist both inside and outside the target organisation making it extremely difficult to manage changes.
For instance, a transformational theory of leadership mentions that organisations need to embrace the possibility that changes will occur in the future (Secord & Secord 2003). This is to ensure that leadership styles and organisational structures do not become obstacles to strategy implementation. In essence, they must develop strategies that work both for the management and staff while at the same time accommodating this reality.
This makes it logical for organisations to come up with strategic plans. Strategic planning begins with development of a functional program of action that correlates with the needs of an organisation (Bayne and Woolcock 2011). Strategies of local, regional, SMEs, and multinationals differ since these companies have different management styles.
Additionally, they have different resources and leadership techniques that determine the present and future activities. The purpose of this paper is to discuss a strategy including its barriers, the effects it has on an organisation and the solutions needed to make strategies functional.
Literature review
Strategy
A strategy is not a matter of concern for corporate institutions only since even individuals have strategic plans. Countries also develop strategies that help them achieve collective goals over a stipulated period. This section will be taking the example of an organisation that has no leader, resources, and plans, it would be impossible to determine its current or prospective position.
Consequently, it will assess the position of a well-established organisation with a clear vision. This explains the importance of a strategy in an organisation. Eight significant elements of a strategy exist including direction, scope, goals, advantage, resources, environment, markets, and stakeholders (Hitchcock & Parnwell 2009).
According to Secord and Secord (2003), a strategy refers to the ability of a corporation to configure its resources in the right direction. It is a long-term plan that helps organisations to gain a competitive advantage within a changing environment. Finally, the scope that an organisation adapts helps it meet the demands of the market and to fulfil the needs of various stakeholders.
In a strategy, directions differ as it depends with the place where an organisation wants to be in the future. For instance, a multinational would want to venture in a third world country given that the destination will be cost effective. A multinational realises that third world countries have ready markets, and employees provide affordable labour. On the other hand, the direction of an SME would be a developed country since it needs exposure, and it should be close to many resources.
Developed nations are good sources of publicity given that people take particular interest in their activities (Groucutt, Forsyth, & Leadley 2004). Direction does not refer to physical movement only, but the beliefs that an organisation holds concerning the place of investment. Lately, people take a global approach and prefer the internet for investment. Each direction that an organisation takes depend on the level of commitment that members of the same company will put to ensures that the organisational strategy achieves the purpose it intended.
Hrebiniak (2005) states that a second element of strategy under scrutiny is scope, as it determines the extent or outreach that an organisation seeks to achieve over a certain period. Some organisations are comfortable with investing in a small region. Others prefer having a chain while others prefer only a single and centralised organisation operating from one place. A scope expands the ideas that an organisation has concerning the direction it chooses.
Taking the examples of multinationals and SMEs again, the former group invests in chain businesses, online transactions, franchises, and physical presence in the target country. Each of them chooses a scope that makes the managers and employees content. The organisational culture determines the scope that an organisation adapts.
According to Moutinho (2010), a strategy needs time of implementation, which usually takes 3-5 years. In essence, it occurs over the long-term due to execution, planning, configuration of resources, implementation, and evaluation. Each activity deserves dedication and planning, which means that organisations need sufficient time to be able to implement a functional program.
Short-term projects normally take less than 3 years and they do not qualify to be part of the strategic plan. Stakeholders like sponsors take particular interest in the period allocated in completion of a project. However, a corporation should not take advantage of the stipulated period since exceeding the 5-year plan will become costly to an individual, a company, or even a country.
A fourth element is the ability to achieve a competitive advantage over other players in the market. It would be ironical for an organisation to spend many resources, but the same entity expects nothing in return. Naturally, an investment follows a promise of getting publicity or financial proceeds (Groucutt, Forsyth, & Leadley 2004). Many business strategies aim at achieving a competitive advantage within an environment in which competent rivals exist.
For instance, Coca cola and Pepsi deal in the production of soft drinks, syrups, and distribution of water. Both of them deal in similar wares, but have different competition strategies. Both Pepsi and Coca Cola are multinationals, but consumers respond differently to their products and services. In essence, one of them has a competitive strategy that naturally attracts consumers to the company.
Moutinho (2010) states that the resources that a country, individual or organisation has determines its present and futuristic position. Resources are multiple, but the most significant are human work force, time, and money. The size of a corporation determines the amount of resources it has. As such, the same size determines the type of strategy needed for implementation. John reinforces that besides resources, the environment of investment equally influences performance.
Environmental changes include improvement in technology, cross-cultural integration, globalisation, and civilisation. These aspects of society change over time and organisations need to prepare for such changes if they would like to remain relevant in a competitive economy. The amount of resources in at the disposal of an organisation determines the tasks they will be able to accomplish in the end.
According to Muller-Christ (2011), the greatest asset of a company is a ready market and capital. People cannot manufacture products or services that they will not sell. In a strategic plan, it is proper to assess the target market through a situational analysis and determine their likes and dislikes.
Without such data, it would be difficult to determine what consumers require and companies will count losses since consumer response will be disappointing people who know the needs of consumers often build mutually beneficial relationships with them and this helps in selling products and services. A final element of a strategy is the stakeholder. These people have a particular interest in an organisation, another individual, or country (Hitchcock & Parnwell 2009).
They include sponsors, clients, employers, employees, the media, and competitors. All of them determine the direction and scope that an organisation chooses during strategy development. Stakeholders contribute directly or indirectly towards the development of a strategic plan.
The plan will influence the decisions they take in the future and they must participate popularly in the project. Further, Muller-Christ (2011) asserts that a company needs the approval of relevant stakeholders prior to evaluation. Even though all these elements contribute towards development of a strategy, different types of strategies exist.
A corporate strategy assesses the overall direction and scope of an organisation including the possible changes an organisation might undergo in the future. Corporate strategies asses the functions of all stakeholders and the contributions they make towards the organisation after carrying out a situational analysis.
Corporate strategies highlight the vision and mission statements of the organisation in that all activities of the company concern all members and not only a particular group. On the other hand, a business strategy analyses what an organisation does to meet the needs of significant elements of the overall or corporate strategy.
For instance, instead of focusing on overall transformation of an organisation, a company decides to train employees. Business strategies focus on significant elements of the company that might be product development, marketing, competition, or training among other concerns. Finally, the operational strategy deals with the things that people do to achieve the goal of an organisation.
Implementation
Acting on the plans of an organisation in order to realise the intended objectives constitutes implementation of a strategy. Notably, the process of strategy implementation requires a collective approach within an organisation (Moutinho 2010). Prior to strategy implementation, it needs to undergo execution and planning since without an assessment of these elements there is a high possibility that an organisation might face huge losses in the future.
According to Bayne and Woolcock (2011), strategy implementation involves consulting stakeholders on the direction and scope they want the organisation to take. Experts insist on the importance of documentation in this stage in order to avoid denial of facts once a member of team makes a certain decision likely to affect the organisation.
The implementation stage involves development of a pilot project that the human resource manager tests in the internal team to ensure that the company will receive a similar response for the external publics. At this stage, it is possible to make changes to a plan that all people propose, as this is not the final draft that will undergo evaluation.
For instance, when an Apple needs to develop a new project, it must carry out extensive research, a situational analysis, and consultations both internally and externally. Throughout the procedure, it will organise meetings to assess the progress of the report before allocating funds. The project must prove viable in order to reduce any losses that are likely to occur in the end.
Strategic Business Model
A strategic business model has many features, but its main intention is to create a culture that ensures delivery of services and products and services to consumers while at the same time finding new avenues of investment by studying the environment. Business models are elements of the strategic plan that explain the intentions of an organisation in the area of investment.
It describes ways that an organisation employs to generate, distribute, and capture value. An organisation’s entry strategy often has a model that will determine its current and future position in the direction of investment. The following elements of a business model testify that it is an overly important aspect of a strategy.
First, a strategic business model explains the infrastructure that the organisation uses to operate. These refer to elements of information flow, recognition of the leadership structure, and the links between different stakeholders in the firm. For instance, a subcontracting firm normally has the most complex infrastructure since it bridges more than one organisation. It deals with its own clients and sponsors and later handles the same functions for a firm that gives it tenders and contracts.
A business model suggests that a company needs to have functional communication systems including technology to make information flow fast (Shajahan & Shajahan 2004). A second element of the strategic business model is creation of value for the company, products, and services. The moment a company appreciates its products and services, it becomes easy for other people to appreciate similar commodities.
Ability to create value for products and services makes them appreciate and people will definitely show interest in them. Companies that deal in luxury commodities use value addition to promote the sale of such products. Another element of consideration when developing a strategic business model is the ability to distribute. Hitchcock and Parnwell (2009) argue that there are many distribution channels, and organisations adapt distribution channels that suit the demands of society or the resources at the company’s disposal.
Finally, the model assesses means of capturing the market and remaining sustainable. According to the definition of strategy, an organisation exists in an environment that keeps changing since society is naturally volatile.
In essence, the company has the responsibility of adapting to the changes in order to remain relevant. This includes responding to the changing consumer needs, technological advancements, transforming political, platforms, and globalisation. A strategic business plan addresses all this functions in a collective manner ensuring that views of majority get representation.
Schultz, Tannenbaum, and Lauterborn (1994) explain the different types of business models and the functions they have within the institutions of implementation. Bricks and Clicks business model mostly works for global institutions. They engage both online and offline strategies of in that a client does not have to be physically present in a company in order to make a transaction.
Instead, he or she needs to carry out an online transaction, which is affordable and efficient. Secondly, the collective business models incorporate more than one technique of managing enterprises. It mostly applies in chain businesses that invest in different countries. Besides these two, there are franchises, and direct sales model.
Franchises include the adaption of chain businesses that operate within the same geographic environment even though the owner distributes them evenly to suit the growing demands of people. Instead of moving to distant places, franchise models establish structures close to the target population making access to products and services easy.
There are the intermediary businesses models in which between manufactures, and consumers, distributors transport products to the market place (Paladino 2007). All the models have three things in common, which include distribution, acquisition of resources, and development of a functional infrastructure. A simple model can be in the following format:
External environment
Barriers
After discussing strategy conclusively in the literature review, it is important to highlight factors that deter implementation of a strategy in an established or start up organisation.
Social barriers
Communication is a social issue that can deter effective implementation of a strategy in an organisation. Without communication, it would be impossible to share information or even address any changes. Lack of communication interferes with strategy implementation, as people will lack the information they need. As such, it will be impossible for various stakeholders to embrace changes since they will lack communication.
Worst of all, activities occurs in a laissez faire leadership structure in which the staff will function indifferently since they will be operating on a failed strategy. Contemporary organisations prefer democratic communication structures that allow people to share information in a well-structured manner (Beer and Nohria 2000).
Evidently, a poor organisational structure deters flow of ideas within a firm, thus acting as barriers to implementation of strategies. Secondly, lack of risk management techniques deters an organisation from successful implementation of a strategy. Such instances arise in a case where the personal management fails to inculcate risk mitigation methods to ensure smooth strategy implementation.
Thirdly, cultural differences often generate mixed reaction sin the workplace. Some people want a democratic culture while others support an autocratic culture making it difficult to decide on which one to adapt in an organisation. Notably, an organisation’s culture can counter a strategy that is to be executed. In this scenario, there arises negative attitude and perception on the strategy, thus making an organisation to lack cohesive approach in strategy implementation.
Cross-cultural differences sometimes cause conflicts that are difficult to resolve in an institution. It is important for people to share a similar vision in an organisation, but failure to implement a functional strategy makes it impossible to share a vision, which does not exist (Paladino 2007).
People naturally have different tastes and preferences, which affect strategy development in various institutions. Additionally, a rigid organisational culture can resist any change within an organisation. Such cultures tend to resist changes that tend to alter the usual operations of a firm.
For instance, employees can be slow in implementing IT systems if they suspect that the change may result in lose of jobs. At this instance, an organisation may be seen to be lacking the common will and commitment to implement a worthwhile strategy. In summary, social factors are the second grossest elements of disturbance that bar strategy implementation in an organisation.
Political barriers
An organisation that experiences unhealthy politics and power struggles finds it difficult to implement any strategy, as the attention is shifted from the main objective. Beer and Nohria (2000) argue that managers often have personal ideologies that run an organisation even when an organisational culture exists to offer guidance.
He refers to this as political interference since the same person often imposes his or her individual will in an organisation that needs to be independent. Individualisation of public offices makes it impossible to correct leaders when they make mistakes. Sometimes, managers employ incompetent people, as they share relations or on mutual terms. They ignore the impact that such actions have on the position of the target organisation.
Secondly, power allotment within an organisation determines the progress it will make in a competitive economy. Unhealthy power and politics in an organisation characterised by a single dominant authority makes it difficult for followers to share ideas and this contributes towards organisational failure. Beer and Nohria (2000) further argue that dictatorial leaders are the worst exploiters of power since they prevent organisational learning when they impose individual will in the organisation.
According to them, it either their way on nobody else’s way. Such factors deter an organisation from experiencing change and there is a high possibility that many consumers will drift attention towards an organisation that offers quality services that meet the changing demands. In summary, leadership is an important element of ensuring that politics do not interfere with processes within the same company.
Technological barriers
Technology keeps changing over the years and organisations need to embrace each emerging technology in order to keep up with competition. Technological barriers equally exist to deter proper implementation of strategies. Sometimes technology fails to perform as expected making the company spend a lot of money on maintenance costs after purchasing equipments at a high cost already.
Besides this, technology encourages laxity, as employees and employers assume that computers have the capability to run all functions within the organisation. Consumer needs are often many and the service or product provider must meet the same needs within the stipulated period. Failure to perform as expected may lead to loss of customers.
Hence, even though technology is a positive element it also contributes towards laziness and failure of implementation of the strategy. Sometimes, it takes a long time for a company to implementation strategy due to technological failures. Technology sometimes causes lack of organisational purpose and commitment since people depend fully on the promptness and ubiquity to serve needs of the population.
According to Bennett and Blythe (2002), technological failure interferes with the quality of strategy implementation and this discourages consumers from seeking help from such institutions. Naturally, quick service delivery attracts consumers, but when technology fails, there is a high possibility that human labour force might not succeed in the exercise. Besides political barriers, technological barriers affect the placement of an organisation especially when its direction was for the global market.
Economical barriers
Companies need financial and human resources in order to realise their dreams, which includes strategy development. Lack of resources may make an organisation seek an extension that goes beyond the 5-year period of strategy implementation. This results in delayed processing of customer requests and interferes with management procedures. In most cases, financial challenges make it difficult for a company to implement a functional strategy.
When this happens, there is a high possibility that political barriers will arise, as other people will demand a full implementation of the strategy even when the company finances cannot permit such a procedure to take place. The worst thing that can happen to an organisation is half implementation of a strategy, as it will be impossible for the entity to embrace changes effectively and overcome resistance (Coombs & Holladay 1996).
Companies often realise that ye are rivalling other companies and they need to have the best strategy in order to beat competition. Without finances, it would be difficult to pay off strategy developers and employees will not feel motivated to implement the strategy. A poor or vague strategy might only help the company over the short term and this will affect the positioning of the company for the longest time possible.
Lack of resources may make it difficult to control different departments like human resource, public relation, and finance. When all these departments stall, the company can barely support itself and this may cause a downfall. There are also silent killers, such as direction of communication, quality of implementation, and individual barriers that can bar strategy implementation.
For instance, employees who have personal issues are likely not to concentrate on implementing an organisation’s strategy since such issues will pre-occupy their minds. Communication structure also plays crucial roles in strategy implementation. The flow of information helps in giving instructions to employees on how to implement a strategy (Beer and Nohria 2000).
Clearly, lack of a clear communication direction hampers strategy implementation. In addition, an organisation that prevents learning within its premises blocks employees from acquiring new information on how to implement current strategies. Organisational learning motivates employees to work towards achieving the goals of the firm, as well as their personal goals.
Effects
Political and economic barriers may cause long-term effects on a company especially when the company is incapable of training employees. It means that employers and employees will have different perceptions of the company since lack of financial assistance creates an environment in which status quo differences are explicit.
When organisations reach such extremes, there is a possibility of a complete failure since it will become irrelevant in society. Political barriers may daunt the image of the company since power strife will be evident and the company might lose some of the most important clients within the organisation (Bonnell 1999). This becomes an advantage to rivals investing in the same environment.
Technological failures also affect strategy implementation since they delay adaption of new management styles. In essence, an organisation will lack variations and offering consumers the same product all the time makes it an uninteresting procedure. When technology causes laxity in organisations, it is the worst thing that can happen. First, the company will undergo the losses of purchasing overworked machines, which will eventually break down and cost the company maintenance fees.
Such losses often affect the company over the long-term. Some implications of delayed or lack of services caused by various barriers cause consumer defection. Many things attract consumers to a certain service provider. When consumers get satisfied, they remain loyal to a company (Bennett & Blythe 2002). After the company proves incompetent, consumers often defect to a company that will handle their request promptly and effectively.
Sometimes, shareholders also defect from a company and this contributes towards financial problems for the company whose greatest source of income will be seeking other avenues of finding fulfilment.
Social barriers including legal battles often daunt the image of a company and as evident in the porter’s five illustration, the entrants will reduce, rivals will increase, suppliers, will reduce, and other competing forces will gain from the downfall of a company (Coombs & Holladay 1996). Finally, the barriers make it impossible for a company to measure changes, which include its progress within a transforming environment. This is very risky for an organisation that seeks to remain relevant in a competitive market.
Solutions
Almost all problems have solutions and barriers to strategy implementation have long-term solutions. First, a company needs to develop an effective communication plan in an asymmetrical manner. In essence, communication will occur in a two-way manner in which managers, staff, clients, and shareholders will present facts for analysis. Through team building efforts, a company can recover given that it will be a joint effort to make the company recover from the crisis.
Secondly, the successive strategic plans must include crisis and risk management plans in order to handle such crises in a mature manner (Fearn-Banks 2007). A plan must always be an improvement of a previous one, otherwise, the entire company may lose track of its activities and this will contribute towards huge losses. Thirdly, a corporation needs to set realistic goals for its strategic plan or else an overly ambitious plan may interfere with resource allocation.
Working on a realistic budget is necessary, as the company can be able to avoid conflicts and crises. Catastrophes occur in many organisations and a commercial entity should provide a conclusive risk management plan to handle crises in the future. Coombs crisis management model mentions that an organisation should be able to plan for crises in order to avoid negative public scrutiny when a crisis occurs (Hitchcock & Parnwell 2009).
Organisation should not assume that political influence would bar them from failure since tragedy occurrences affect all functions. Fourth, a management team should not break the rules of work since such distractions often amount to huge losses. In so doing, nobody should defy the preset rules given that the intention of the strategy is to include the views of all stakeholders.
Besides, a leader must be able to take control of the situation to ensure that nobody defies the rules of operation in the company. The company needs to carry out a situation analysis in order to determine its strengths and weaknesses. It needs to maximise on strengths and avoid the weaknesses.
Finally, media relations and government relations play imperative roles in the success of any commercial entity. From a personal relationship to an industrial contact, government relations help to create mutual agreements and goodwill with the public (Hitchcock & Parnwell 2009).
It is hence impossible to run any organisation without government relations and other inclusive functions as earlier discussed. Government relations are crucial in maintaining a good political presence in a competitive economy, which will assist in dealing with political barriers.
Conclusion
In summary, an organisation cannot survive without a strategy. It highlights significant issues that the company needs to do presently in order to avoid disasters in the future. A strategy has a vision, objectives, and goals, which means it runs the entire organisation. The only thing that an organisation needs to ensure is that it has a good leader whose main objective is to fulfil the strategy.
At the corporate level, an organisation faces many competitive forces, but with a competent strategy, it is able to overcome all odds and emerge successful. In essence, weaknesses and threats will always exist to deter progress, but companies need to develop strategies of transforming the weaknesses and threats into opportunities and strengths (Groucutt, Forsyth, & Leadley 2004).
Finally, when stakeholders attribute great responsibility to the organisation involved, the organisation must adopt a suitable communication strategy in order to prevent or minimise reputational damage. Coombs’s SCCT provides managers resources to resolve the type of crisis and the proper communicational approach to protect organisational reputation (Coombs & Holladay 1996).
List of References
Bayne, N., & Woolcock, S 2011, The new economic diplomacy: Decision-making and negotiation in international economic relations, Ashgate Publishers, Farnham, England.
Beer, M., & Nohria, N 2000, Breaking the code of change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Bennett, R., & Blythe, J 2002, International marketing: strategy planning, market entry & implementation (3rd ed.), Kogan Page, London.
Bonnell, V., E 1999, Iconography of power: Soviet political posters under Lenin and Stalin, Univ. of California Press, Berkeley.
Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J 1996, ‘Communication and attributions in a crisis: An experimental study of crisis communication’, Journal of Public Relations Research, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 546-561.
Fearn-Banks, K 2007, Crisis communication: A casebook approach (3 ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey.
Groucutt, J., Forsyth, P., & Leadley, P 2004, Marketing: Essential Principles, New Realities, Kogan Page, London [U.A.].
Hitchcock, M., K., & Parnwell, J. G 2009, Tourism in Southeast Asia: Challenges and New Directions, NIAS, Copenhagen.
Hrebiniak, L. G 2005, Making strategy work: leading effective execution and change, Wharton School. Publishers, Upper Saddle River, N.J..
Moutinho, L 2010, Strategic management in tourism, CABI Publishers, Wallingford.
Muller-Christ, G 2011, Sustainable Management: Coping with the Dilemmas of Resource-Oriented Management, Springer Berlin, Berlin.
Paladino, B 2007, Five key principles of corporate performance management, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, N.J..
Schultz, D. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Lauterborn, R. F 1994, The new marketing paradigm, NTC Business Books, Lincolnwood, Ill., USA.
Secord, H., & Secord, H 2003, Implementing best practices in human resources management, CCH Canadian, Toronto.
Shajahan, S., & Shajahan, L 2004, Organisational behavior (text and cases including internet exercises and skill tests), New Age International, New Delhi.