Hamel and Prahalad argue that western companies used to "fitting" vision to adapt its resources, as a result, they will only seek to maintain their advantages. In contrast, Japanese companies dedicated to accelerating the pace of organizational learning in order to maximize resources, and trying to achieve seemingly impossible goals (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989:65). They believe these Japanese companies develop “an obsession with winning” among the employees, and by promoting the vision of global leadership to sustain that obsession. This obsession is termed “strategic intent”. This critical identifies articles position in the wider debate about processes of strategy, and considers the underpinning assumptions. Finally, commenting on the article’s strengths and weaknesses.
Position of the Article
Strategic management is to determine the corporate mission, it is a dynamic process which according to the external environment and internal factors to determine the business goals and ensure the correct implementation of the target and make the ultimate corporate mission to achieve (Steiner, 1982). The article clearly shows the strategic planning assess the current tactical advantages of known competitors will not help you understand the resolution, stamina and inventiveness of potential competitors. The strategic planning determines how to allocate the resources of a company to improve its profitability. Management looks at internal and external opportunities and risks and determines a course for the organization (Levinson, 1984). The planning process typically acts as a “feasibility sieve”. So it is realistic. Conversely, the authors favor “fold the future back into the present, to create new space and new competitive advantages that is uniquely suited to the company’s own strengths” (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989:73). Sadly, in many large companies consistent this view of innovation which is just adapt to the current strategic not for the future. There’s a significant amount of overlap between innovation and strategy (Boutellier, 2000). The concept of strategic intent future solves the contradiction between the innovation and the top management (Tidd, 2009). The formation of strategic intent is important, but more important is to let management and staff are able to identify strategies, and are willing to pay for their efforts (Moore, 1995). During the actual operation of the enterprise, the challenge is a clear strategic intent; it will be change the abstract strategic intentions into higher than reality one but not divorced from the reality target, to motivate the staff towards strategic intent (Blaxill, 2007). Therefore, Strategic intent compared to "business heart", this section includes the vision of the future, the identification of their values and desire for success. It formulates through external analysis and can be positioned as driven internally by the organization.
The article assumes that the challenge will take root only if senior executives and lower level employees feel a reciprocal responsibility for competitiveness (Hans Jonas, 1984). The authors believe the reciprocal responsibility will engage employees intellectually and emotionally in the development skills. Only deal with relationship between the strategic intent and the reciprocal responsibility, combine two parts in order to achieve goals of the enterprises (Martin Heidegger, 1998). Many foreign corporations (for example the Japanese) believe in loyalty to the workers and treat their employees as partners in the business rather than as resources (Luigi Pellizzoni, 2004). Employees are asked to participate in decision processes and are rewarded for ideas that help the company. Employees are provided training by the company and loyalty is expected in both directions (Tony Honoré, 1999). Profitability is measured for the long term and strategic intent can be implemented (Peter...