The need for a comfortable measure of certainty in the outcomes of human endeavors underscores the drive towards formulating strategy. Strategy involves allocating resources for achieving predetermined goals in the most efficient manner. Strategy has widespread application and is usually the responsibility of leadership. Military strategy applies to the management and deployment of armies to achieve certain goals. Various teams, sporting or otherwise, use strategy to improve their chances of getting the best results.
Business strategy is about maximisation of profits by arranging all the input factors in the most productive pattern. ‘Strategy creation is about doing the right things and is a primary concern of senior executives and business owners’ (Havard, 2005, p. xi). Mintzberg et al. (1998, p15) do not give a unified definition of strategy; rather they postulate that, ‘there may not be one simple definition of strategy but there are now some general areas of agreement about the nature of strategy.’
They proceed to identify five components of strategy in their 5ps of strategy. They say, ‘strategy is a plan’ (Mintzberg, et al.1998, p.9) to mean, ‘a direction, a guide or course of action into the future, a path to get from here to there’. In their statement of the second P they say, ‘strategy is a pattern, that is, consistency in behavior over time’ (Mintzberg, et al.1998, p.12).
In the third P they state, ‘strategy is a position, namely the locating of particular products in particular markets’ (Mintzberg, et al.1998, p.12). They say on the fourth P, ‘strategy is perspective, namely an organizations fundamental way of doing things’ (Mintzberg, et al.1998, p.13), and finally, they present the last P as follows; ‘strategy is a ploy, that is a specific ‘maneuver’ intended to outwit an opponent or competitor’ (Mintzberg, et al.1998, p.13).
Tour de France and Chelsea Football Club offers us a useful perspective in the study of various facets of strategy. The first Tour de France took place in 1903, where sixty riders participated.
It has evolved over time with each tour currently taking three weeks and including twenty stages, up from the initial six, and now covers much of France’s countryside including its mountains and some neighbouring countries. The total course distance exceeds 2000 miles. ‘The cyclist who completes a strenous and often perilous course of more than 2000 miles in the lowest total time wins’ (Dummies.com, 2010).
A key feature of the Tour is the different colours of special jerseys used by various riders. ‘Throughout the race, the reigning World Champion wears his team colors, but on a special jersey with horizontal stripes’ (Dummies.com, 2010). Individual riders participate in the Tour as part of a team, with any winner receiving support from teammates based on the team’s strategy.
Since the tour comprises several competitions and stages, team goals define the team’s efforts. Tour de France 2010 (2009) reports that, ‘different teams have different tour objectives, and so adopt different strategies’. It goes on to say that, ‘During the flatter stages, teams with outstanding sprinters like Tom Boonen, Mark Cavendish, and Thor Hushovd, are likely to work to reel in any breakaway, setting up a sprint finish that favors their fast men’ Tour de France 2010 (2009).
The other sports strategy case study is Chelsea Football Club. Chelsea Football Club, established in 1905, became English champions twice in its one hundred year history, between 1905 and 2005. Gus Mears founded Chelsea Football Club at a time when London had failed to send any team to the first division of the football league. ‘Mears had spotted the potential for a football club to play at an old athletics ground at Stamford Bridge, an open piece of land in West London’ (Chelaseafc Team History, 2010).
An interesting note on Chelsea’s formation is that ‘in contrast to the history of so many clubs, Mears decided to build a team for a stadium, rather than the other way round’ (Chelseafc Team History, 2010). Another first for Chelsea was that, because of Mears associate, Parker, who ‘proved persuasive’, at the football league AGM so that Chelsea, ‘became the first club ever to make the League without having kicked a ball’ (Chelseafc Team History, 2010).
Chelsea Football Club and the Tour de France will provide us with the analogy to use for an analysis of various aspects of strategy. Teams in the Tour de France, and in the football leagues work hard towards attaining success. To Succed in the Tour de France, teams of riders must have coordinated action, which is normally determined by the team’s objectives. ‘Different teams have different tour objectives, and so adopt different strategies’ (Tour de France 2010).
This compares well with the football leagues that Chelsea football club plays such as the English premier league. In both cases, each team must define a strategy for achieving its goals in each season or Tour.
Evidence of strategy in the Tour emerges as different teams take certain deliberate actions to leverage on opportunities. This is exemplified by the Tour de France (2010) report that, ‘As the race progresses, responsibility for chasing down breakaways typically falls to the team of the leader, or sometimes to teams who will see a rider in the breakaway as a threat to their well-placed riders’.
In a similar way, Chelsea football club strategises to win leagues and tournaments through various actions. This typically includes getting the best football talent, and having a futuristic view when signing up new players. An instance comparing two chelsea players, newly signed Sidwell and the veteran Ballack illustrates this point.
The Soccer Lens, the Best in Football (2007) says, ‘To state that Sidwell will out-perform Ballack in the upcoming season would be laughable, however to say that in two years time Sidwell will be competing with Ballack for a place in Chelsea as midfield would be realistic. In other words, the young midfielder is one for the future at the Bridge’ (Soccer Lens, the Best in Football, 2007). This shows that Chelsea signed up Sidwell as a strategic measure.
These stategies presuppose strategic planning by the Tour de France participants and by Chelsea Football club. They expose the forethough that goes into organising for a desired outcome during a strategic planning exercise. This sufficiently describes the thrust of strategic planning. The common strategy for winning a Tour de France is to, ‘conserve energy as much as possible for the times when it is needed most. (Tour de France 2010, 2009)
Elements of strategic management in the conduct of the Tour de France emerge in the selection of the team members and in the conduct of the race. A competitive team will usually have riders with certain skills and are able to provide the team with a competitive advantage. This makes it possible for the team to adapt to emerging situations either to expand its winning odds or to consolidate a commanding position. New developments emerge as the race takes shape, which may require adjustment to the original strategy.
Part of strategy may be working with your opponent to minimize a common threat by another participant. These serve to excite the “tour de France. ‘It’s the adhoc alliances and shifting rider and team strategies that make a stage race fascinating.’ (Tour de France, 2010. In addition, strategic options consideration and use take place depending on the prospects of good results. The teams are constantly on the lookout for, ‘stages that might favor their best climber’ (Tour de France 2010).
It aslo looks out for, ‘breaks where they can get a disproportionate number of riders from their own team, or a chance to launch a climbing specialist on a day-long solo expedition, where he can collect a jerseyful of King of the Mountain points’ ( Tour de France, 2010). The decisions to take these moves demonstrate strategic management by the teams in the Tour de France.
However, Grant (2005, p.9) warns that, ‘without effective implementation, the best-laid strategies are of little use’. This rings true in both the Tour de France and in the pursuit of the football championship by Chealsea Football Club, It is one thing to determine actions required to attain a goal and yet another to implement these actions effectively.
Moreover, goals dictate tactics and poor tactics can cause failure. Tactics are operational measures that are felxible to change and adjustments. Not changing ones tactics may prove fatal. If Chelsea ‘decides to stick to the tactics they have used in this past season, they might have a hard time achieving their main goal of winning the champions league’ (Soccer Lens, the Best in Football, 2007).
Resource constraints and availability affects strategy in several ways. Resources in the context of strategy will be specific to the set goals. Resources include finances, people, and time. The amount of resources available affect outcomes. Grant (2005, p.29) argues that, ‘Resource scarcity may engender ambition, innovation, and a ‘success-against-the-odds’ culture, while resource abundance may engender complacency and sloth.’ Chelsea seems to verify this argument.
When Chelsea signed in Shevchenko, ‘most football fans expected a goal scoring machine to arrive’ (Soccer Lens, The Best in Football, 2007). The upping of human resource for the club did not seem to pay dividends for the club. ‘The high expectations resulted in sheer pressure on the shoulders of Chelsea’s new striker; as a result he failed to settle in his first season at the Bridge and his performances have been generally criticized’ (Soccer Lens, The Best in Football, 2007).
The human resource in the Tour de France depends on strategy, Tour de France 2010 (2009) reports, ‘Many teams carry specialist sprinters, sometimes with one or more ‘lead-out men,’ who are fairly strong sprinters themselves, and give their all to put a team-mate at the front of a bunch in the last 200-300 meters of a stage’.
This kind of outlay seeks to insure competitive advantage for a team. Financial resources continue to determine which players Chelsea buys to meet its strategic needs and which riders a Tour de France team employs to have the best shot at the titles.
Sports provide an interesting analogy in the understanding of strategy. Most sporting activities have very clear goals and objectives hence lend themselves easily to strategic approaches.
Leagues, tournaments and other wide based organisational sporting events such as the Tour de France magnify this posibility. It is insufficient to look at Skill only in executing the sport, as a sucessfactor. Rather, many factors to do with what patterns to follow in the execution of the sport come into play. It is not just about winning a match or winning a stage, it is about winning the overall title.
The demands on individuals and teams alike, and their management take centre stage. Sports is also useful since it is much easier to tell whether a team had the best mix of strategy and resources, by the results it posts.in football, a teams strategy is immediately visible when its formation ismade public. Football coaches will create formations to meet the team’s greatest need, which could be defensive play or offensive play.
A big limitation with sports as an analogy for understanding strategy is that it does not provide an objective benchmark for a wide spectrum analysis of strategy. Winning a championship is a relative issue of being relatively better than your oponents who may have equally sound if not similar strategies. The scoreline is not the best parameter to use to judge good strategy. In sports too, great execution of an average stretegy may deliver results compared to poor execution of good strategy.
Another limitation is that most sporting activities take place in very controlled environments where penalties and reward are very clear, unlike business or military situations where the enviroment keeps changing and new trends and factors come into play effecting the execution of strategy. This makes sports insufficient for understanding dynamic elements of strategy and change management.
In conclusion, sports provide an easy to understand model for the application of strategy, but it does not provide the best analogy for most of the applications of strategic approach in dynamic environments. This limits its usefulness for advanced learning.
Reference List
Chealseafc Team History, 2010. Introduction. Web.
Dummies, 2010. Understanding the Tour de France and the Strategies. Web.
Grant, R. M., 2005. Contemporary Strategy Analysis. 5th ed. Malden, Ma: Blackwell Publishing.
Great Moments, 2010. Great Moments in the History of the Tour. Web.
Havard, 2005. Strategy- Create and Implement the Best Strategy for Your Business. Boston, Massachusetts: Havard Business School Publishing Corporation.
Mintzberg, H., Lampel, J., Ahlstrand, B., 1998. Strategy Safari. New York: The free press.
Soccer Lens the Best in Football, 2010. Analyzing Chelsea’s New Transfer Strategy. Web.
Tour de France 2010, 2009. Beginner’s Guide to the Tour de France for 2009. Web.