REVISED AMENDMENT TO EXISTING SYLLABUS FOR Date Revision Shared with Students:

In response to the 2020 COVID-19 global pandemic, all courses at the University of Alberta moved to remote delivery, effective March 17, 2020. Subsequently, a decision was made to adjust the grading scheme for all University of Alberta courses for the Winter 2020 term to award one of the following grades: CR (credit) or NC (no credit) as indicated in the University Calendar.

The changes were put in place to ensure equity among students, preserve academic integrity in extraordinary circumstances, and to manage the issues presented by an uncertain future, including the impact on our students and human resources.

To ensure clarity for students, all Winter 2020 course outlines for both undergraduate and graduate courses are to be updated using this template to outline changes to exams, assessments and grading and shared with students.

Course Code: Course Title: Instructor Name: Instructor Contact Information:

Revised course assessment plan (Please list all assessed assignments and weighting below)

Created March 24, 2020

SMO 502 X50

SMO 502 X50The Dynamic Cycles of Organization Strategy

P. Devereaux (Dev) Jennings

dev.jennings@ualberta.ca 780-492-3998

3/26/2020

IMPORTANT NOTES:

● If students require alterations in their approved accommodations, please contactarrec@ualberta.ca.

● The changes with respect to the mode of delivery of instruction and assessment andthe changes to grading regulations do not constitute grounds for an appeal underacademic appeal policies (i.e. grade or academic standing appeals may not beadvanced on the grounds of these changes).

● When Incomplete (IN) status is assigned instructors are required to communicatewith students about the mechanisms and requirements that will be implemented todetermine the student final grade of CR or NC. For more information, including thetime to complete the remaining course work see the University Calendar.

Created March 24, 2020

SMO 502 X50

The Dynamic Cycles of Organization Strategy@ 1 Winter, 2020

Draft, March 25, 2020 to adjusted for UofA COVID-19 policy

Professor: Dev Jennings Time: Wed., 6:30-9:30 p.m. Period: Jan. 8th – April 8th Contact: dev.jennings@ualberta.ca

Place: Business 4-09 Office Hrs.: by appointment, normally from 5:40-6:10

Course Objective To refine your knowledge of strategy dynamics in different organizations and field contexts by examining the iterative cycles within and across problem identification, strategic analysis, and strategy execution. Design This re-designed SMO 502 course focuses less on traditional strategy and strategic planning and more on the dynamic, emergent, adaptive nature of organizational strategy. These dynamics are strongly influenced by the need to adjust in real time as well as underlying tension in strategy cycles due to governance issues, uncertain analytic metrics, and the need to blend power, persuasion and negotiation in the execution of strategy. Examining these cycles of strategy, their dynamics and underlying tensions can improve your strategic analysis and ability to implement strategy. The framework that we will use in this course builds of the standard comprehensive framework in strategy; i.e., strategic issues, external/internal/ performance analysis, strategic recommendations and implementation. But it adds in current thinking about the dynamics of and tensions in strategy found in the work of respected thinkers, such as Dick Rumelt (2011), Henry Mintzberg (2014), Dixit and Nalebuff (2008), and Pankaj Ghemawat (2018) - and as well as my own thinking and my experience in strategy. The essence of the framework is captured by the simple conceptual model below.

1 @ Copyright, PD Jennings, 2019. While I’m happy to share this syllabus and course, please contact me before using it. Thanks.

2

The first strategy cycle is around the nature of strategic problems & possibilities - and their recognition by management (especially leaders), both of which are conditioned by the organization’s governance. The second cycle is around dynamics in the organization’s external environment and internal operations, as reflected in the organization’s performance. We employ a variety of tools – dynamic market positioning, capabilities analysis, triple bottom line analysis – to capture these dynamics. We also consider the nature of the underlying analytics and narratives that make sense of them in various modes of strategic planning. The third cycle is around implementation actions and adjustments. The cycle includes both formal implementation, which relies on Gantt charts and KPIs, as well as informal implementation, which depends on mobilization and stakeholder mandates for generating action in organizations. These implementation techniques revolve around the psychology of persuasion and the use of power, as depicted in the figure above. As can be seen, as a researcher and a practitioner, I am a believer in the value of tension and paradox in strategic thinking - in finding “facts” but seeing them as socially constructed, in employing analytics but using them interpretively and in narratives, and in creating formal plans but seeing strategy execution as a behavioral project. I also believe in the embeddedness of strategy in context, and, therefore, the need to compare and contrasts the specifics of strategy across organizations and venues to derive strategy principles. Materials I rely on a course design and materials that illuminate the cycles of strategy and bring out paradoxes and tension. We examine current events and popular press readings, as well as more extended prepared cases. The cases that we do are often employed in quirky ways – to demonstrate certain types of problem identification or particular analytics. I also ask teams, when possible, to work with “live organizations,” particularly in their strategy projects, and share some of their insights. I do the same along the way with my own projects, past and present. To set up this course, I culled through the above materials and tried to isolate the essential pieces and construct an online eClass reading packet and an HBS case packetI have also identified background texts that may be of value for those who want to read further. • Most articles will be posted via ULRs on the Web, under eClass at: https://eclass.srv.ualberta.ca/portal/ • Harvard Business Review, one of our primary sources, can also be accessed via the U. of A. library at: http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&jid=HBR&site=ehost-live • I frequently draw on The Economist for examples and posting. Its main Web site is: http://www.economist.com/ • Unfortunately, the cases cannot be posted online. Sorry. You’ll need to buy them as a case packet at HBS. The number is: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/import/686441

Or you can buy these selectively and directly from HBS at: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/home/

3

For those of you who would like a standard, traditional approach to strategy, please consult Hitt et al.’s (2008) Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization (or its newer versions). For those of you interested in more dynamic strategy, please examine some of the source texts discussed in class, ranging from Mintzberg (2014) and Rumelt (2011) to Ghemawat (2019). Deliverables and Their Evaluation The class emphasizes deliverables based on the cycles of strategizing. More specifically, the following tables contains the assignments, their point values, and due dates. The cycle assignments are generally done in small teams, the participation and strategy reflection paper marks are individual. We started our adjustments to the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19 Crisis) during the week of March 19th. So most teams and individuals appear to be well-informed and ready to deliver their various items. Based on our discussions in and after class, the deliverable dates for the report and reflection paper, listed below, will be maintained; but there will be flexibility around the specific day for delivering and posting the presentation material, with at least one day grace offered for teams during the first week online course. The subsequent presentations will be sent for posting on or before the assigned delivery date for that team. Thanks everyone for working out and agreeing with this plan! In addition, given some teams and projects required more information for Cycle 3 (implementation), and therefore, Cycle 3 cannot be as rich as was intended, teams can choose to weight projects for Cycle 1 and for Cycle 1+2 more heavily than for Cycle 3 (1+2+3). The Cycle 3 portion can be reduced to 10 pts total, by request, and the remaining points assigned to Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 using those assignment’s relative weights (2/7th, 5/7th). I would also ask all teams to consider adjusting Cycle 1 & 2 components of the final report to reflect the current coronavirus social and economic crisis. Again, thanks!

Assignments Point Value Due Date, Times Cycle 1 Assignment (3-5 pgs. tot) 10 pts. Jan. 20th, 9:00 a.m. Cycle 1+2 Assignment (13-17 pgs. tot) 5+20 pts. March 2nd, 9:00 a.m. Cycle 1+2+3 Assignment Draft (19-25 pgs. tot)

5+5+15 pts.* April 6th, 9:00 a.m.

Presentation on one Cycle 10 pts. Please sign up for a slot**

On-Going Participation 15 pts. Cumulative across classes

Strategy Reflection Paper 15 pts. April 13th, 9:00 a.m. * optional reweighting ** adjusted delivery times Cycle Assignments: Teams of two to four people (max. five) will be formed and chose a live (or canned) case to assess during the semester. Teams will build up their case analysis by starting the problem cycle, the doing adjusted problems with analytics, then adjusted problems and analytics with execution. The point values above and in the more detailed part of the syllabus reflect this accumulating, evolving approach. This deliverable is still in place, but modified per the text above. Cycle Presentation: Each case team will be asked to present on one of the cycles in order to summarize what we have learned about the cycle and to show something about their assessment of their own case. The presentation will be fifteen minutes with another five to seven minutes for questions. This deliverable is still in place, but modified per the text above.

4

On-Going Participation: Your participation in the class is important, both for your learning and for that of your peers. Effective participation is based on pertinent analysis of and focused comments about issues being examined in a particular class segment. In addition, outside of class, you are encouraged to point out interesting articles, Web sites, or upcoming events relevant to each week’s case. These extra-class contributions will be posted on eClass and credited to you. If you also have an interesting strategic problem or technique to discuss in class, please contact me in advance, and we will see if we can work it into the session. During the coronavirus situation, for the moment, we will be relying on the scores in class recorded up through last Wed as your second half participation mark. I will consider how (if) we can fairly evaluate contribution and engagement going forward - e.g., based on suggestions, valuable eClass postings, attending the online sessions, etc. If I can't find a good way to credit contribution fairly, I will just weight the first part of the course 2/3rds (based on the number of presented classes) and the second part 1/3 (based on the prior three weeks). Strategy Reflection Paper: Each individual will be asked to write up a 5-7 page paper – four or five pages of text and one or two pages with a figure(s) or diagram(s) on a strategy issue, case, or personal view about strategic analysis. Participants will be able to submit their views on these strategy issues any time during the semester up to the end of the last class. This deliverable is still in place. COURSE POLICIES There are general UofA policies and some course specific policies worth noting for SMO 502. Final Grades Pass/Fail/Incomplete due to COVID-19 Crisis: While I will continue to provide written and %/grade based feedback on deliverables internally for each student, to respect her/his efforts and continue the learning process, per University Policy (see links below), 2 all externally delivered and recorded grades will be Pass/Fail/Incomplete. A pass (CR), per UofA policy for graduate business courses, will be a 78% (C+) and above. 3 An Incomplete (IN) will result from deliverables not being handed in and therefore not recorded. A Fail (NC) will be for averages below 78% based on the deliverables recorded. Academic Integrity: I am sure that each of you believes in academic integrity, but what that means as a concept might vary among you. The U. of Alberta has a good Web page that defines academic integrity and offers resources for sharpening one’s awareness of it. The page, which I recommend you consult, is: https://www.ualberta.ca/current-students/academic-resources/academic-integrity Special Needs: I would like to hear from anyone who has a special need – physical, mental, emotional, or contextual – that might affect his/her participation and performance during the semester. That need may be temporary or enduring. Please contact me to determine if there is some way that we can accommodate the need.

2 https://www.ualberta.ca/covid-19/students/updates/2020-03-20-student-updates.html 3 https://www.ualberta.ca/registrar/examinations/assessment-and-grading/grading-system-explained

5

Late Assignment Policy: In order to be fair, assignments that are late will receive a low mark than if it had been handed in on time when others also submit their work. For each day or part of full day that an assignment is late, it will lose 10% of its assessed percentage grade (i.e., an assignment that receives 90% will lose 5% of 90%). No papers will be accepted more than four days after the deadline. Sorry. Use of Technology in Class: I am totally fine with your using technology (laptops, pads, even phones) in class – but, please, only if that technology’s use is directly related to the class and does not detract from, but rather helps enhance, others’ in-class learning. For example, quietly, a participant may want to consult their slide decks, case(s), and reading materials via laptops or handheld devices. In addition, selectively and quietly, during exercises or lecture a student or team may want to Google concepts or examples to check on materials or to add to the discussion. In contrast, answering e-mails, calls and doing other assignments while in the class will both lessen your in-class learning and that of your classmates around you, as research has been point out recently. It will also lower your participation grade. Please do not do use technology that way. Thanks! https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/may/11/students-who-use-digital-devices-in-class-perform-worse-in-exams

COURSE OUTLINE

Cycle 1: Strategic Problems & Possibilities and Their Recognition by Management

“Strategy therefore starts out with an existing state of affairs and only gains meaning from, for better or worse, how things could be different.” (Freedman. 2011. Strategy, p. 611)

Wk. 1, Wed. Jan. 8: Nature of Strategy, Strategic Problems & Possibilities

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Short review of approaches to strategy; objectives & cycles in strategizing; the nature of ordinary vs. wicked problems & possibilities; internal & external sources.

Readings: • Rumelt. 2011. Good Strategy / Bad Strategy excerpts. • Sulls & Eisenhardt. 2012. “Simple Rules for a Complex World.” HBR. • Christensen, 2009. “Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems.”

Rotman Magazine. • Mankins & Steele. 2006. “Stop Making Plans, Start Making Decisions.”

HBR. Cases and Contexts: • Dieselgate: Heavy Fumes Exhausting VW by M. Schuetz and C. Woo. Case

packet. • Suncor and the Future of Oil Sands by R. Vietor. Case packet.

Deliverables: Bio (optional); prep for and participate in class; begin considering your project and team.

Wk. 2, Wed. Jan. 15: Management’s Recognition of Problems & Possibilities and Initial Response

6

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Recognition (and sometimes creation) of problems & possibilities by management. Framing and initial responses around vision vs. operations, leading vs. following, solutions vs. proximate fixes, and variations on icons.

Readings: • Lewis et al. “Paradoxical Leadership”. CMR, 2014. • Montgomery. “Putting Leadership Back into Strategy.” HBR, 2008. • Additional postings nearer class time.

Cases and Contexts: • Apple (2011) after Jobs by F. Rothaermel. Case packet. • Guest Speaker & related readings - TBA

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Finish forming teams and choose likely organization (“live” or “canned”) to be assessed. Presentations by Groups 1 by end of class or start of next week’s class. Cycle 1 Assignment due Jan. 20th, Monday, 9:00 a.m.- thanks!

Cycle 2: External and Internal Dynamics & Analysis Tools

“High-velocity markets are ones in which market boundaries are blurred, successful business models are unclear, and market players (i.e., buyers, suppliers, competitors, complementers) are ambiguous and shifting. The overall industry structure is unclear. Uncertainty cannot be modeled as probabilities because it is not possible to specify a priori the possible future states. In these markets, dynamic capabilities necessarily rely much less on existing knowledge and much more on rapidly creating situation-specific new knowledge.” (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000. “Dynamic Capabilities.” AMJ. p. 1111)

Wk. 3, Wed. Jan. 22: Externals – Dynamic Markets and Mandates

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Nascent vs. mature markets. Fashion vs. New Fixture. Interest/ election cycles in govt. orgs. Hyper-competition vs. ecology of geo-politics.

Readings: • Ryall. 2013. “The New Dynamics of Strategy.” HBR. • Christensen et al. 2015. “What is Disruptive Innovation?” HBR. • D’Aveni. 2007. “Mapping your Competitive Position.” HBR. • Khanna et al. 2005. “Strategies That Fit Emerging Markets,” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: • YouTube, Google, and the Rise of Internet Video by K. Cool, M. Seitz, J. Mestrits, S. Bajaria and U. Yadati. Case packet.

• Ethiopia: An Emerging Market Opportunity? by J. Quelch and S. Yong. Case packet.

Deliverables: Cycle 1 assignment due the prior Monday, the 20th. Prep for and participate in class. Presentations by Group 1 (and 2?) at the start of class.

Wk. 4, Wed. Jan. 29: Internals - Dynamic Capabilities

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Business Models and Dynamic Capabilities in Different Sectors.

Readings: • Ghemawat & Rivkin. 2006. “Creating Competitive Advantage” by P. Ghemawat and J. Rivkin. HBS.

7

• Prahalad & Hamel, 1990. “The Core Competence of the Corporation” by C.K. Pralahad and G. Hamel, HBR.

• Davis. 2013. “Capturing the Value of Synchronized Innovation.” HBR. Cases and Contexts: • Intuit by F. Cespedes. Case packet.

• Lego. 2012 by Rivkin et al. Case packet. Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class.

Wk. 5, Wed. Feb. 5: Performance Assessments and Selecting Strategies

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Quant vs. qual data; financial vs. human resources factors; Triple Bottom Line assessments. Strategy selection.

Readings: • McMillan. 2003. “Five Pitfalls to Avoid When Writing Performance Analysis.” Balanced Scorecard Report.

• Reichheld. 2003. "The One Number You Need to Grow" HBR. • Brest & Born. 2013. “When Can Impact Investing Create Real Impact?”

Stanford Innov. Review. Cases and Contexts: • Amazon 2016 by J. Wells, G. Danskin and G. Ellsworth. Case packet.

• Ethiopia: An Emerging Market Opportunity? by J. Quelch and S. Yong. Please re-read the case and consider costing the options.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Wk. 6, Wed. Feb. 12: Inner Workings – Governance and Power in Cycle 1

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Formal vs. informal governance principles and dynamics. Positive and negative effects on strategy formulation and execution.

Readings: • Useem. 2006. “How Well Run Boards Make Decisions” HBR. • Strebel. 2004. “The Case for Contingent Governance.” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: • Board of Directors at the Coca Cola Co. by J. Lorsch, R. Khurana and S. Sanchez. Case packet.

• CEO Succession at Cisco (A) by B. Groysberg, J. Y-J. Cheng and A. Lobb. Case packet.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Presentation by Group 2 on Cycle 2 sometime in class.

Wk. 7, Wed. Feb. 19: Spring Break – Work on Cycle 2 Assignment W8, Wed. Feb. 26: Inner Workings – Framing with Analytics and Stories in Cycle 2

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Analytics as facts vs. analytics as framed artifacts. Strat plans vs. stories. Using analytics to set objectives and to guide initiatives.

Readings: • The Death of Truth, excerpts. NYTimes writer, Michiko Kakutani. • NYTimes article on privacy and Facebook.

8

• https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/technology/facebook-privacy.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

• Shaw et al. 1998. “Strategic Stories.” HBR. • Pfeffer & Sutton. 2006. “Mngt. Half-Truths and Nonsense.” CMR.

Cases and Contexts: • Managing with Analytics at P&G by Davenport et al. Case packet. • Facebook and Fake News. Wells et al. Case packet.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Presentation by Group 3 on Cycle 2 sometime in class. Cycle 2 Assignment to be submitted at 9:00 a.m., March 2nd – thanks!

Cycle 3: Action and Adjustment

“I am describing a strategy as a design rather than as a plan or as a choice because I want to emphasize the issue of mutual adjustment. In design problems, where various elements must be arranged, adjusted, and coordinated, there can be sharply peaked gains to getting combinations right and sharp costs to getting them wrong.” (Rumelt. 2011. Good Strategy Bad Strategy, pp. 130-131).

Wk. 9, Wed. Mar. 4: Implementation Plans and Realities

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

I-Plans and Star Diagrams for changing systems. Ecosystems and strategic change. Shifting the big ship.

Readings: • Sulls et al. 2015. “Why Strategy Fails,” HBR. • “Strategy from the Start.” HBR Chpt on 7-Ss. • Guillen & Garcia-Canal. 2012. “Execution as Strategy: How Emerging-

Market Multinationals Survive Amid Turbulence,” HBR. Cases and Contexts: • GE’s Growth Strategy by C. Bartlett. Case packet.

• Autodesk in 2018 by J. Conn et al. Case packet. Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class.

Wk. 10, Wed. Mar. 11: Mobilizing Internal Coalitions in Organizations

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Change management for cultures. Insurgency and resistance. The driven vs. tempered change methods.

Readings: • Kotter. 2007. “Leading Change,” HBR. • Meyerson & Scully. “Tempered Radicals.” HBR.

Cases and Contexts: • Haier Hanfei Electontrics (A) by L.S. Paine. Case packet. • Radial Bearing Team by Wirth et al. Case packet.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Wk. 11, Wed. Mar. 18: Building Mandates with Community Stakeholders All materials were posted online March 14th, 2020, with updates and team presentations added during the week of March 16th.

9

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Stakeholder models in community contexts. Working with (and in) govts.

Readings: • W. Clement. 2005. “Lessons from Stakeholder Theory for U.S. Business Leaders.” Business Horizons.

• Marquis. 2012. “Managing Stakeholders with CSR Logic.” HBS Case. • S. Hart & S. Sharma. 2004. “Engaging Fringe Stakeholders for Competitive

Imagination.” Academy of Management Executive. Cases and Contexts: • The Vancouver 2010 Olympics, by A. Elberse, C. Anthony, and J. Callahan.

Case packet. • Vancouver Olympics and likely COE guest lecturer

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Presentation by Group 4 sometime in class.

Wk. 12, Wed. Mar. 25: Inner Working of Implementation and Action All draft materials were posted online March 16th, 2020, with updates and team presentations to be added during the week of March 25th.

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Power, negotiation, and the psychology of persuasion.

Readings: • Cialdini. 2001. “Harnessing the Power of Persuasion.” HBR. • Hoffman and Jennings. 2012. “The Social and Psychological Foundations

of Climate Change.” Solutions. • Pfeffer. 2010. “Powerplay.” HBR. • Halpern. 2017. “Changing the World One Nudge at a Time.” Rotman

Magazine. Cases and Contexts: • Amir Dan Rubin: Success from the Beginning by J. Pfeffer. Case packet. Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class.

Presentation by Group 4 on Cycle 3 sometime in class.

Combining the Cycles Wk. 13, Wed. April 1: Pulling the Cycles Together & Group Presentations I may post some unique, supplementary dynamic strategy materials (e.g., about strategy and ecosystems) for this week, along with the team presentations that are scheduled to be offered via online posted decks.

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Adjusting the Cycle and Refining Your Strategy Narrative

Readings: • See prior readings for strategy narratives • See current event readings (posted at the time).

Cases and Contexts: Local live cases and some non-local prepared ones assessed using dynamic strategy analysis.

Deliverables: Presentations by Groups 5, 6, 7 on Cycles 1+2+3 sometime in class. Assignment on Cycle 3 due on April 6th by 9:00 a.m. - thanks!

10

Wk. 14, Wed. April 8: Wrap-Up in Last Week of Class All draft materials will posted online on April 6th, 2020. I will attempt to secure speaker slides and also put together a finale deck.

Strategy Concepts & Tools:

Writing about and presenting strategy – analyses, artifacts, stories. Revisiting concepts.

Readings: • Rumelt. Good Decisions, Bad Decisions. Excerpts. • To be posted.

Cases and Contexts: • Any remaining presentations. • Likely guest lecture wrap-up.

Deliverables: Prep for and participate in class. Remaining presentations (if overflow or adjustment needed).

Wk. 15, Mon. April 13: Strategy Reflection Paper – Classes Are Over Please submit your personal reflection paper by Monday, April 13th, 9:00 a.m. Still in place.

MORE ON THE DELIVERABLES AND THEIR EVALUATION

The Three Cycles Assignments: (Please see the deliverables section for slight modifications.)

The core of idea of the Cycles Assignment is for course participants in a team to apply the different cycles of strategizing to a live or canned case (preferably the former) in order to work through strategy and implementation, adjusting as they go along. Each cycle would be written up in draft form, then developed further and tightened (based on feedback) in order to be combined into a complete final project. In other words, the Cycle 2 Assignment has both an adjusted Cycle 1 assessment (worth 5 pts.) and the Cycle 2 analyses (worth 20 pts.), as displayed in the overview section of the syllabus. The Cycle 3 Assignment, has both an adjusted Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 portion (worth 5 pts .each), and the Cycle 3 Core component (worth 15 points). That assignment will represent the final version of the group report. Along the way, the team is asked to present once on one of the cycles during some point in a specific class. This presentation is meant to help the other teams focus on and better understand the nature of the cycle being studied. The teams then hand in their assignments on those cycles a few days later. To help guide you on the assignment, the following questions might be useful to address in the different cycle assignments. However, how you write-up the information and turn it into something persuasive and insightful, does not have a template. It might follow these sections, but the specific method of crafting the assignment is up to each team. I would encourage you to think about the grading template, which is further down in this Appendix, in order to consider how to apportion your work and pages in the assignment. Cycle 1: Strategy Problems & Problems and Their Recognition by Management 1. What is the strategic problem or possibility being assessed?

11

2. Why is this problem / possibility important and how is it related to the organization’s current strategy and objectives?

3. Is the problem / possibility internally or externally generate? More normal or wicked in nature? 4. Are there already solutions floating around the organization or in its field that are related to

(and might help solve or generate) the problem?

5. How does top management or those owning/ controlling the organization view the problem / possibility – do they even recognize it?

6. How top management organized? 7. What form of leadership is used and how is it related to this issue? 8. Are there preliminary solutions to the issue that are being advocated? 9. Where do they come from (other members, externally, consultants, etc.)?

10. How does the underlying governance approach influence this problem / possibility definition

and recognition/ prelim response by management? 11. What is the underlying set of principles and the culture in the firm’s governance? 12. What is the particular decision making structure in this firm? (Who really seems to have the

power … or is thought/ emotion leader?) Cycle 2: External and Internal Dynamic & Analysis Tools

1. What are the projects/ services/ offerings of the organization? Which are you focus? 2. What organizational field and/or markets are they embedded in, both regionally and

internationally? 3. How new and dynamic is that field/ market (vs. mature, more stable)? 4. How are other organization’s positioned in the market (i.e., positioned relative to each other via

features, categories, time, brand – please choose a couple of dimensions and try to map them overtime..)?

5. What type of geo-politics and social issues might be directly impacting the organization? How are these expressed through various stakeholder interests?

6. What capacity (knowledge, resources, focus) does the organization have to address the strategic problem / possibility?

7. Are there underlying capabilities that are distinctive and dynamic? 8. How might you describe the organization’s ecosystem and alliance network? 9. How does the organization engage with the government (e.g.., via formal or informal roles,

particular units and so on)? Are some of the capabilities of the organization contingent on the government?

10. What systematic quantitative and qualitative data on the organization’s external environment, internal capacity, and performance are available? (This is a sensitive, but important question. Please consider how best to approach it, and perhaps work with the professor to ensure the organization is comfortable providing data.)

11. What are some of the key performance indicators for this organization and for this field? 12. What are some of the key metrics for assessing risk & uncertainty that are used by this org and/or

field? 13. What are key artifacts/ forms of analyses favored by management and by similar forms of

organizations? 14. Are data analytics part of strategy formulation and or execution? In what way?

12

15. Based on your analyses and preferred artifacts, what are the potential strategic recommendations,

outputs, diagrams, or key points that you would offer for addressing the strategic problem(s)? 16. What strategy initiative(s) (if any) might you recommend? 17. What type of risks are there and how might you mitigate them?

Cycle 3: Action and Adjustment

18. Please consider one specific initiative or strategic recommendation or bundle or recommended actions. What type of implementation plan (I-Plan) would fit with your initiative?

19. Please sketch out one using the six I-Plan elements discussed in class. 20. Would an incremental, systems approach based on S-models (Star or 7-Ss) work as an underlying

approach for you initiative? 21. What supporting ecosystem changes for that organizational system would be needed? 22. Suppose your initiative is aimed at the underlying culture or logic of action for an organization. Will a

mobilization model work and what specific steps would need to be followed as a starting point? 23. Suppose you are dependent on stakeholders (external and internal) for implementing change. Who

are these stakeholders? How do they influence the organization? And how might you modify / leverage their effects to help you implement your initiatives?

24. What approaches are taken in this organization to the use of power, negotiation and persuasion? How might they be used to help you implement some of the recommended changes? (This is a sensitive set of questions and should only be asked indirectly and discretely.)

Sewing It All Together Across Cycles

25. Do the three cycles combine in a logical, integrative fashion? 26. How might the three cycles adjusted a bit in order to do so? Or is it important to keep them slightly

askew to illustrate key issues and leaps? 27. What would be some final strategic recommendations and implementation points that you would

like to add in a few bullet points either in the Exec Summary, the Strategic Story or in the report’s conclusion?

28. What might a one- to one-and-half page Exec Summary that capture the strategic narrative and key points? Please consider adding this the Cycle 3 Assignment (cumulative report).

Evaluation of the Cycles Assignments

Cycle 1 Assignments are preliminary assessments of the organization’s strategic problem & possibilities, the org’s objectives, and managerial recognition of and engagement with the problem & possibility. Given the semester will have just begun, the assignment is only 3-5 pages of text (double-spaced, 1” margins, 12 pt. font), including 1 or 2 pages of figures/ diagrams. The grading of the draft will be based on the following template:

SMO 502: Dynamic Org Strat., Cycle One Project: _ Team: _ Grade: _ out of 10 pts.

Item Score/ 10 Max Comments Prelim Prob/Poss Identified /3 Rich Info.- Cycle Questions /2.5 Underlying Tensions Examined /1 Prelim Solution(s) & Paths /1.5

13

Writing /2

Cycles 2 & 3 Assignments are to be more developed, in light of the time and nature of the section, than Cycle 1 Assignments. Cycle 2 Assignments include the revamped Cycle 1 Assignment (3-5 pgs.), and a core Cycle 2 Assignment that is 10-12 pages (double-spacing, 1” margins, 12 pt. font), including 1-4 pages of supporting figures and tables. The grading template for Cycle 2 Assignments is below:

SMO 502: Dynamic Org Strat., Cycle Two Project: _ Team: _ Grade: _ out of 5 + 20 pts.

Item Score/ Max Comments Prob./ Poss. Refined /3 Linked to Analytics /2 Analytics /6 Supports Arguments /2 Cycles Questions - Rich Info /2 Underlying Tensions Examined /2 Recommendations & Risks /4 Writing /4

Cycle 3 Assignments includes the revised Cycle 1 & 2 Assignments, which together are 13-17 pgs., and a core Cycle 3 Assignment that is 6-8 pages (double-spacing, 1” margins, 12 pt. font), including 1-3 pages of supporting figures and tables. The grading template for Cycle 3 Assignments is below:

SMO 502: Dynamic Org Strat., Cycle Three Project: _ Team: _ Grade: _ out of 5 + 5 + 15 pts. see slight mods in deliverables section

Item Score/ Max Comments Prob./ Poss. Refined /3 Please consider adjusting this. Linked to Analytics /2 Analytics Refined /3 Please consider adjusting this. Linked to Execution /2 I-Plan: Overview/ Approach /3 I-Plan: Gantt & Costs /2 I-Plan Rich Info /2 I-Plan: Informal Side- Underlying Tensions Examined

/3

Exec Summary - Story /2 Writing /3

Cycle Presentation Grading

14

You or your small group should provide an overview of your case analysis and potential resolutions sometime during the course (see the class outline). The presentation should be 15 minutes long, with five to seven minutes of questions. The evaluation form used to assess the presentation is below.

For the current coronavirus situation, this same template will be used, with roughly the same number of slides required, for the online presentations. I will ask a few questions, and the class will do the same, via email (or Google Hangout, for live presentations). The time limits will not be as strictly upheld.

Component Comments

CONTENT (45%)

Good Theoretical/ Conceptual Material for Day’s Case & Topic

Details/Description Were Rich and Informative

FORM (45%)

Entertaining & Professional

Mechanics Were Good (Timing, Structure,)

Questions (10%)

Addressed Content and with Respectful Tone

Strategy Reflection

Each individual will be asked to write up a reflection paper on a strategy issue raised in one of the classes, your project, or on a strategy issue of great interest to you. The issue may be around the main case, a reading, or a specific thought on which the class member wishes to elaborate – perhaps abut a strategy construct or a position s/he has on strategy issue in the news. The paper should be 5-7 pages: four or five pages of text and one or two pages with a figure(s) or diagram(s). Participants will be able to submit their views on these strategy issues any time during the semester up to the end of the last class. The grading will be based on the following template. Please continue to follow this.

Component Points / 15 Max Comments Strategy Prob./ Poss./ Issue / 2.5

15

Assessment / 5 Recommendations for Action / 2.5 Supporting Figure or Table / 2.5 Writing /2.5