Structures for Strategy: The Marketing Plan
Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online Structures for Strategy: The Marketing Plan file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Structures for Strategy: The Marketing Plan book.
Happy reading Structures for Strategy: The Marketing Plan Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF Structures for Strategy: The Marketing Plan at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Structures for Strategy: The Marketing Plan Pocket Guide.
Also, considering that the process of formulation may involve all employees of the organization or distinguish those who participate based on hierarchical levels logically depending on how the team is composed - and it fits therefore the definition of the formal dominant coalition -, it appears that the trend is that the levels of the organizational structure directly influence the formulation phase HALL, ; KICH; PEREIRA, The formulation phase is also impacted by the functionalization of the basic organizational form, and some research findings are worth mentioning.
The main finding of this relationship assumes that the formulation of the strategic planning process may be impacted as the participants in the process become more concerned with their specific function or their own area than with the organization as a whole, which Ranson, Hinings and Greenwood recognize as departmentalization.
The possibility of this influence is also due to the fact that the formulation is made from an organizational structure that establishes organizational guidelines. Especially in organizations characterized by high functionalization of the basic organizational form, as is the case of the MPSC, the strategic planning process tends to contribute more evidently, given that the process enables the strategic guidelines to be formulated with the participation of all areas and functions, consequently, it increases the organizational viewpoint at the expense of departmental one.
So far, the relation between the elements of the basic organizational form and the formulation phase of the strategic planning process is basically cause and effect. But this logic is reversed when dealing with the implementation phase, especially because the objective formulation is to understand the internal and external environment of the organization and define the strategic guidelines, however these settings usually will only be put into practice during the implementation phase HREBINIAK, ; PEREIRA, In this context, the implementation impacts all elements of the basic organizational form.
Initially, the implementation impacts the grouping from the moment the areas begin to work together and in partnership in the pursuit of a broader organizational objective than the objective of one particular area, i. This phenomenon tends to change the grouping of the Institution, because the division can extrapolate the functional form and boost the grouping focused on a product or even target market, which sets greater potential for flexibility. In addition, changes in organizational structure resulting from the process tend to impact indirectly in the grouping, since this element is directly related to the hierarchical levels and the organization of functionalization.
Regarding the relationship between the implementation phase and hierarchical levels, we note the existence of a reciprocal relationship. On the one hand, the implementation of the strategic planning process propels changes in the organizational structure, which can be characterized by the formation of new positions, departments, agencies, sectors and even the exclusion or modification of internal structures. On the other, the hierarchical levels also impact the implementation phase from the moment these changes are infeasible and ultimately limit the execution of a particular strategic action.
In addition, in accordance to what we identified in the case study Kich and Pereira , the commitment to the implementation of the process begins by the most formal dominant coalition of the organization and are precisely the hierarchical levels that formalize the institution's chief figure. The implementation phase interferes with the functioning of the basic organizational form to the extent that the strategic planning process indicates changes in the organizational structure, and that operation is dependent, even if indirectly, of hierarchical levels, since the greater the number of hierarchical levels and side departments, the greater will the functionalization level of the structure tend to be VOLBERDA, Also, from the moment in which the areas are joined in the search for a target, as a result of the process, the functionalization tends to have greater flexibility potential, this shows that the implementation influences the functionalization.
Therefore, the formulation phase of the strategic planning process is impacted by the elements of the basic organizational form, while the implementation primarily impacts the grouping, hierarchical levels and the organization of functionalization. The indicators of this sub-dimension are so close to the formulation and implementation phases of the strategic planning process which in some instances both constructs virtually unite in a unique understanding, because certain indicators aim to precisely assess how organizational goals are set and monitored, corresponding respectively to the formulation and implementation of the process phases.
The setting of objectives and priority setting has close ties with the formulation phase of the strategic planning process, for it is known that the definition of objectives in the MPSC is precisely through this process. In fact, the Code Cooccurrence Table, a report generated by the Atlas. In addition, the internal programming planning in the case of the institution derives from the Strategic Planning MPSC , primarily due to this process unfolding the strategic objectives and strategic initiatives, which in turn are detailed in programs and projects, which may be further specified in strategic actions.
This element of the planning and control system relates both to the phase of formulation and to the implementation phase. With regards to formulation, the relation occurs by establishing how all these events should take place. Regarding the implementation however, the internal programming planning is configured from the actual implementation of the objectives, initiatives and strategic actions. Just as the regulation of objectives and priority setting are associated with the formulation phase, progress evaluation and control relates to the implementation of the process, as also indicated in the Code Cooccurrence Table report.
In organizations that use strategic planning process, such as the MPSC, it is common for the control and the evaluation to result from the monitoring of the implementation of formulated actions in the process.
Therefore, it appears that there is no cause and effect relationship, but rather a certain similarity. And actually, the trend is that this approach would lead to the conclusion that the relationship between the organizational structure and strategy, in its broadest sense, to really be reciprocal, so much so that the very methodological framework by Volberda encompasses the formulation phase and implementation of organizational strategies.
In this sense, where the strategy results from a deliberate process analysis, the planning and control system tends to be considered as prepared. In contrast, in organizations that use the emerging strategic process to form their strategies, the tendency is for this sub-dimension to be analyzed from the rudimentary character.
Unlike the relationship between the formulation phase and the basic organizational form, this phase of the strategic planning process interferes directly in regulatory processes comprising the organizational structure. Especially in regard to the regulation of mutual adjustments and decision making, this phase has more of an impact rather than suffering one. It is noted that the regulation of mutual adjustments is influenced by the formulation of the strategic planning process from the moment that this process enables all employees to participate in the formulation of strategic guidelines, regardless of area of operation, function and hierarchical level.
This discussion tends to increase informal communication between staff and decentralize the activities of departments, which increases the potential for flexibility of the contact devices and the horizontal decentralization. Also as a result of the participation of all employees, the delegation and participation in the decision-making process increases during the formulation phase. It is also worth noting that, as the organizational structure itself defines the formal dominant coalition, it ends up interfering in this process, given that it is outlining the basic characteristics of the strategic planning process, and how to compose the formulation team is among them.
Regarding the implementation of the process, the tendency is that the regulation processes are further impacted. For example, the implementation impacts the regulation of tasks in that the formal organizational structure tends to be altered by the strategic planning process, either through the creation of new positions, or even by the change in the operation of certain departments. Just as the functionalization of the basic organizational form is affected, the amplitude and depth of the jobs are indirectly changed from the adjustments in the organization chart.
In contrast, with respect to training and education, implementation both causes an impact as it suffers one. The trend is for the strategic planning process to interfere in this matter when the training ends up being performed based on formulated objectives, as could be seen in the reality of the MPSC. However, the implementation ends up being impacted from the moment that knowledge is acquired by employees through these courses it then contributes to the achievement of strategic objectives and even for the improvement of their own strategic planning process, even when referring to appropriate changes in organizational culture BEPPLER; PEREIRA, The implementation also impacts the decision-making regulation, especially from the moment the participation and delegation of employees increases due to the implementation of strategic actions previously formulated.
In the reality of the MPSC, the delegation becomes more difficult because of the legality of power which the position the Public Attorney-General has. However, changes in the structure resulting from the strategic planning process tend to change the delegation and participation in the decision-making process, as was the case of the creation of the Coordination-General for the Operational Support Centers and the Public Assistant Attorney-General for Administrative Affairs.
This decision increased participation in decision-making process, despite not being legally able to replace the Public Attorney-General in the decisions referred exclusively to the position of Chief of Institution. Moreover, the openness to the participation and delegation in the decision-making process depends on the leader's profile, therefore, considering it is the organizational structure that determines the most formal dominant coalition, logically that all this regulation is impacted by this construct. This research aimed to evaluate the relationship between the strategic planning process and organizational structure.
After understanding the strategic process and organizational structure of the MPSC, we identified how the stages of formulation and implementation of the strategic planning process influence or are influenced by elements of the organizational structure in the reality of the MPSC. To achieve this goal, we chose the case study research strategy, which was outlined on the basis of the methodological framework by Yin From the identification of the relationships between the elements of the organizational structure and the phases of the strategic planning process, we concluded that the two propositions are confirmed.
Proposition 1 conceives that the formulation of the strategic planning process influences and is influenced by elements of the organizational structure, whereas Proposition 2 considered that the implementation of the strategic planning process influences and is influenced by elements of the organizational structure. Some elements of the organizational structure impact the stages of the process, others are impacted.
Some interfere more, some less. Some have reciprocal relations, while others are so close that they can even be understood as similar. Figure 1 summarizes the relationships identified between the formulation and implementation of the strategic planning process with the elements of the organizational structure in the reality of MPSC. The relations highlighted in red which express that the relationship is of a one-sided impact; in blue, there is a reciprocal relationship; and green, there is a strong correlation between the two units.
The structure of a strategic marketing plan - Marketing Strategy
The phases of formulation and implementation of the strategic planning process have different ways of relating to the constituent elements of the organizational structure. The lines highlighted by the blue color demonstrate the relational similarities, green indicates the confluences, and red show the unilateral and reciprocal impacts. Therefore, this study further examined the perspective of the relationship between organizational structure and strategy, more specifically from the strategic planning process. As the main limitation of this research concerns the impossibility of generalization of the case to other organizations as it is an in depth case study, we recommend the development of other research in organizations that are also in the process of the implementation phase, seeking to observe similarities and differences of the relationship between the two constructs.
Furthermore, analyzing other organizational factors that influence the implementation of the strategic planning process is part of the scope of the evolution of knowledge on strategy. It is known that the research by Kich and Pereira identified that the implementation of the process is influenced by four organizational factors, namely: structure, culture, communication and leadership. As a result of this research, Beppler and Pereira went deeper into the theme culture and strategy, while the present study evaluated the organizational structure factor in depth.
Thus, we suggested exploring the details of the relationship between the strategic planning process with the communication and the leadership, as well as other organizational factors that may hinder or facilitate the implementation of strategic planning, such as innovation.
Planejamento Empresarial. AMIS, J. Organizational Research Methods , v. Research in strategy-structureperformance construct: Review of trends, paradigms and methodologies. Journal of Management and Organization , v.
What Is A Marketing Plan and How to Make One (20+ Marketing Plan Templates) - Venngage
BEER, M. The silent killers of strategy implementation and learning. Sloan Management Review , v. Key success factors for strategy implementation in Latin America.
Journal of Business Research , n. Strategy and structure. Building Your Company's Vision. Harvard Business Review. September-October, DYE, R. How to improve strategic planning. Mckinsey Quarterly , v. The continuing validity of the strategy-structure nexus: new findings, Strategic Management Journal , v. An experimental template for case study research.
American Journal of Political Science , v. HALL, R. Are you sure you have strategy? Academy of Management Executive , v.