I draw this discussion from Rudy Martens et al’ paper “Market strategy renewal as a dynamic incremental process”. Authors have researched a B2B organization in Belgium to show the complexities and incremental nature of market renewal process. They looked at historical data for incrementalism in strategic decision. By doing so, authors try to show the process of “muddling thru” using important incidents in renewal process.
Authors built the paper on the literature presentation by Lindblomian in a model called as “Muddling Thru” where he rejected the rational model of decision making in favor of incrementalism. With its literal meaning, for me, idea of “muddling thru” took a while to sink in. Further study on Lindblomian's literature helped. Lindblomian described it as “using short term solutions to solve long term problems”. Incrementalism is nothing but a method of working by adding many small, unplanned incremental changes to the project based on conditions around instead of a few planned large projects. This way, organization is capable of dealing with immediate problems instead of trying to create overall strategic plan. Strategic renewal is a challenge for the large corporate as it is essentially difficult to create a balance between exploration and exploitation. Therefore, process of “muddling through” is useful where organizations often face challenges or have already failed to implement overall strategy. Since radical changes to strategy and policies are difficult to implement, implementing it in small batches could be more effective.
Authors also took a look at importance of different levels in organization and the impact on strategy implementation and incrementalism. Higher management set the broader strategic goals and first line or lower level managers are more tactical and focus on very specific opportunities. Hence, middle management is play a very important role of driving organization in “muddling thru” process. They help to match the strategic vision stated by top managers to that of first line managers.
The authors conclude by stating “process of implementing” the strategic change is as important as “content” i.e. strategic vision. Therefore, when organizations have luxury of time, process of muddling thru is an effective process rather than implementing radical changes. Authors try to draw manager’s attentions specifically to these aspects of strategic renewal.
This research presented in this paper is limited as it limits to a B2B company only. The differences in the country culture where company reside and the industry segment of the company and impact from and on value chain could be other significant factors while analyzing further on this subject matter. However, this paper is in line with other article readings we have done in the class that provide details of organizational strategic renewal processes. Dr. V also highlighted an idea of implementing strategic renewal by implementing change by small projects rather than creating radical decisions such as ambidextrous organizations or exiting the exploitory business for explorations alone.
References:
Rudy Martens, Paul Matthyssens, Koen Vandenbempt, Market strategy renewal as a dynamic incremental process, Journal of Business Research, Volume 65, Issue 6, June 2012, Pages 720-728, ISSN 0148-2963, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.12.008.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296310002717)
(also available via UHCL Library)
Rudy Martens, Paul Matthyssens, Koen Vandenbempt, Market strategy renewal as a dynamic incremental process, Journal of Business Research, Volume 65, Issue 6, June 2012, Pages 720-728, ISSN 0148-2963, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.12.008.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296310002717)
(also available via UHCL Library)
Sameer, this is a great article. My upstart is going thru a problem where we can use this.OUR VC's fund are always asking for a long term strategy but they don't seem to understand that as this article states, "muddling thru" might be the best way to develop a project.While it is good to have a long term strategy, incremental changes must be made as new opportunities arise or the market enviroment changes. A long term strategy might look attractive but incremental changes would be beneficial to the overall health of the firm. This way it can make changes as needed and exploit opportunities that may arise in the process. Overall a great article and it is something that will be beneficial to startups such as mine, that many times look for a long term strategy just so that it looks attractive to investors.
ReplyDeleteSameer, you bring us a new understanding of incrementalism in renewing corporate strategy. As a matter of fact, today’s market is volatile and corporate strategy has to cope with this changing challenge. The points coming up here bring us more thinking about “muddling through” strategy. The environment around us sometimes is too complex. The management cannot draw clear visions in short time and make the strategic decision overnight. So most of time, strategies must be taken step by step and will be developed naturally in the learning process of organization constant adaption.
ReplyDeleteGreat article Sameer. I have never heard the term "muddling thru" but I appreciate it's importance to corporate renewal. I don't think it is ever a good idea to run before you walk. Corporations can be very fragile mainly because people can be fragile. If i caught wind that my company was taking a huge jump into a new strategy, I would become very nervous about my future there. I remember a time when a national manger of mine came to speak with me on a new direction the company was going. I thought it was a terrible idea and did not understand why we were moving in that direction. I began looking for a new job. Several months later we were bought out. A company that has good vision should be able to create change by "muddling-thru".
ReplyDelete