Report on Strategic Management

           Organizations earn success through the competitive, corporative and functional strategies. Basically, the main goals of the organizations are to earn success in the market to secure their market position. Commonly, organizational goals related to the increase in market share and sales. Moreover, organizations are also concerned with a better reputation and strong market positioning (Plessis, Hargovan, & Bagaric, 2010). Organizations use different strategies to accomplish such goals. For instance, some organizations develop strategies concerning with the Corporate social responsibilities (also known as CSR policies) to get a better image in the market.

          Sales are quantitative and numerical. Therefore, increase or decrease in the sales can be easily measured. For instance, we can say that a company sold 1000 products in a month or company generated revenue of 1 million dollars in a month (Cheng, Ioannou, & Serafeim, 2014). Changes in these numerical and quantitative values can be also measured easily. Therefore, we can say that quantitative values and outcomes can be easily compared within and outside the company.

              For example, the annual report of Amazon Company presents that company generated $178 billion revenue from their sales in 2017 that is more than revenue generated in 2016 (as revenue generated in 2016 was $128 billion. (Cheng, Ioannou, & Serafeim, 2014) Thus we can conclude that the organization is successfully operating in the company and revenue stream is continuously improving with the time. Somehow, there is some qualitative and subjective information that relates to organizational success but cannot be measured directly like quantitative and objective values (Morsing & Schultz, 2006). For instance, market reputation, positioning, quality, and customer satisfaction are subjective and qualitative that cannot be easily measured.

            Similarly, stakeholders’ value is subjective and qualitative that is difficult to measure in a quantitate way. Organizations are required to understand the needs and expectations of their stakeholders (Plessis, Hargovan, & Bagaric, 2010). Key stakeholders include customers, management, employees, shareholders, and society. Excluding income, return on investment (dividend or profit yield), and market growth, the key concerning topics for shareholders are efficiency in the use of resources and how the overall company is performing in the market in comparison to the competitor companies.

         According to the Quiry, Fur, Salvi, Dallocchio, and Vernimmen, (2011) society also take an interest in the organization and its operations. How the company is using resourcing, potential benefit or loss for the community and role in the development are the main concerning point for the society  (Quiry, Fur, Salvi, Dallocchio, & Vernimmen, 2011). Even from the production sector, the marketing or supply chain all activities of a company concern with the society and its requirements. Customers also live in society and the things that benefit their society are their first priorities. A fine example of this is the Toyota Motors Company. While working on the Corporate social responsibilities (CSR) they introduced a Hybrid car that is quite eco-friendly (Plessis, Hargovan, & Bagaric, 2010). According to an estimation, the company has sold more than 10 million hybrid cars to society. Eco-friendly things develop a positive image in the society that grabs the attention of customers.  Actually, Successful organizations ever try to make their stakeholders satisfied. For this purpose, they adopt corporate social strategies.

            Strategies based on the idea to promote corporate social responsibilities give strength to the company. But there is a problem. How to measure the performance related to the CSR., of course, it is not easy because CSR is subjective. According to the Lindgreen and Swaen, (2009)             Organizations are must require to measure such subjective outcomes and performance indicators to provide a clear and better view to the managerial staff so that they can work on future strategies and policies in different areas. Wholistic approach and balanced scorecard approach are two main approaches that are valid, reliable and easy to measurable (Cheng, Ioannou, & Serafeim, 2014).

            Organizations can measure their performance in the market particularly related corporate social responsibility or efforts done to earn better reputation in the market through directly relying on the performance indicators rather than the direct performance measurement (Plessis, Hargovan, & Bagaric, 2010). In other words, paying more focus on efficiency-related measures and indicators such as utilization of sources (material, manpower, and financial resources) and effectiveness measures (such as outcomes generated for stakeholders).       

          The leading companies in the real world are adopting Balanced scorecards and it improves the performance of members and subunits. A balanced scorecard is an efficient tool that enables to reach the maximum outcomes and expectation of the workers. The balanced scorecard transforms the mission and strategies according to the requirement of the company (Ballou & Heitger, 2006). It measures the external sharing and internal critical processes related to the growth, learning and innovation process.

        The research statement is focused on an important issue. But this issue is not the one and only issue that need to be focused. Other than focusing on reputation, image building, and solving admiration related issues there are many more issues that should take prime attention of managerial staff. For instance, financial measures and incorporate quantitative (Quiry, Fur, Salvi, Dallocchio, & Vernimmen, 2011). Actually, to run a company in an appropriate manner, management should have focused on all aspect. Management cannot ignore reputation for financial benefits and vice versa because organizational success is not possible without both of these.     

          According to the Plessis, Hargovan, and Bagaric, (2010) the main advantages are provided to the contributors in the organization. Different organizations use Balanced scorecards to generate new and innovative strategic planning for the global vision, internal processes, learning processes, growth, and understanding of the learning processes. (Quiry, Fur, Salvi, Dallocchio, & Vernimmen, 2011) The configured framework of the company is specially designed to access the ideal tools required for the management control system, structural communication with the mission and strategy, and capability to provide the framework.

             Lindgreen and Swaen, (2009) claim that complex analysis about the performance and configuration of the system is required and balanced scorecards as a traditional scorecard precisely provides information about the strategic objectives (lexicon.ft.com, 2018). The use of Balanced Scorecards in the system as a compact model provides strategic dimensions to the management. The use of Balanced scorecards in the organizations enhances the opportunities regarding the systematic learning and raises awareness in the workers about the decisions and immediate results of the decisions (Plessis, Hargovan, & Bagaric, 2010).

            Wholistic approach and balanced scorecard approach can be used to collect information and feedback from employees, customers, and society thus through this we can get the idea about the performance of a company in the market as well as views of stakeholders regarding organizational operations. Financial performance can be also evaluated from annual reports, and financial transactions recorded in a fiscal year but such subjective measures can be only evaluated through these approaches.      

            For instance, the world leading household products manufacturing and selling company Proctor and Gamble Company is working on CSR strategies. They offer internship programs, conduct testing for quality, and work on the social welfare projects (Cheng, Ioannou, & Serafeim, 2014). Therefore, among stakeholders, Proctor and Gamble are successfully able to secure a better reputation in the market. Proctor and Gamble company use balanced scorecards to collect feedback about the performance of the whole organization. The company also evaluate department wise performance in a quarter, semiannual, and annual thus company can understand in which time duration P&G Company was performing well (Plessis, Hargovan, & Bagaric, 2010). And when customers were highly satisfied with their products and services.  

             Furthermore, the Samsung Company is also using a balanced score card to evaluate the performance of its supply chain, marketing, finance, and production department. Samsung also uses a balanced scorecard to collect information and feedback about new policies developed by the administration of the company. An example of a balanced scorecard used by Samsung company is presented below in the appendix. 

            Summarizing, the whole discussion we can conclude that organizations need to focus on both qualitative and quantitative measurements. Managers need to focus on financial performance as well as the market reputation of the company. Thus, they can understand the actual performance of the company.     

Appendix:

References of Strategic Management