[Matching item] Marketing management a strategic, decision-making approach Harper W. Boyd, Jr. [et al.]. New York: McGraw-Hill, - Mcgraw-Hill/Irwin series in marketing. [Matching item] Marketing management: a strategic decision-making approach / John W. Mullins [et al.]. This books (Marketing Management: A Strategic Decision-Making Approach [ FREE]) Made by Orville Walker About Books The eighth edition. (Ebook pdf) Marketing Management: A Strategic Decision-Making Approach. Marketing Management: A Strategic Decision-Making. Approach. Title.: Marketing.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Hindi|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
John W. Mullins John Mullins is Associate Professor of Management Practice in of Marketing Strategy: A Strategic Decision- Making Approach, 8th edition. Inc Annual Report at gepbansbassmenve.cf Marketing Management A Strategic Decision Making Approach 8th Edition By Approach 8th Edition By Mullins John Walker Orville Paperback [PDF] [EPUB] -. Marketing Management A Strategic Decision-Making Approach 8th Edition . SBU-level managers, particularly those in marketing and sales, are exempt from .. a strategic decision-making approach 7th edition pdf marketing management a.
Which skills and capabilities should be developed within the firm? What are the important opportunities and risks for the organization? How can the firm grow, through both its base business and new business? How can the firm generate more value for investors?
Implementation results in how the organization's resources are structured such as by product or service or geography , leadership arrangements, communication, incentives, and monitoring mechanisms to track progress towards objectives, among others. Bruce Henderson  In , Henry Mintzberg described the many different definitions and perspectives on strategy reflected in both academic research and in practice.
Because of this, he could not point to one process that could be called strategic planning. Instead Mintzberg concludes that there are five types of strategies: Strategy as plan — a directed course of action to achieve an intended set of goals; similar to the strategic planning concept; Strategy as pattern — a consistent pattern of past behavior, with a strategy realized over time rather than planned or intended.
Where the realized pattern was different from the intent, he referred to the strategy as emergent; Strategy as position — locating brands, products, or companies within the market, based on the conceptual framework of consumers or other stakeholders; a strategy determined primarily by factors outside the firm; Strategy as ploy — a specific maneuver intended to outwit a competitor; and Strategy as perspective — executing strategy based on a "theory of the business" or natural extension of the mindset or ideological perspective of the organization.
The first group is normative. It consists of the schools of informal design and conception, the formal planning, and analytical positioning. The second group, consisting of six schools, is more concerned with how strategic management is actually done, rather than prescribing optimal plans or positions.
Prior to , the term "strategy" was primarily used regarding war and politics, not business. He addressed fundamental strategic questions in a book The Practice of Management writing: " He recommended eight areas where objectives should be set, such as market standing, innovation, productivity, physical and financial resources, worker performance and attitude, profitability, manager performance and development, and public responsibility.
Andrews in into what we now call SWOT analysis , in which the strengths and weaknesses of the firm are assessed in light of the opportunities and threats in the business environment. Interactions between functions were typically handled by managers who relayed information back and forth between departments. Chandler stressed the importance of taking a long term perspective when looking to the future.
In his ground breaking work Strategy and Structure, Chandler showed that a long-term coordinated strategy was necessary to give a company structure, direction and focus. He says it concisely, " structure follows strategy. He developed a grid that compared strategies for market penetration, product development, market development and horizontal and vertical integration and diversification. He felt that management could use the grid to systematically prepare for the future.
In his classic Corporate Strategy, he developed gap analysis to clarify the gap between the current reality and the goals and to develop what he called "gap reducing actions".
This supported the argument for achieving higher market share and economies of scale. The idea of strategy targeting particular industries and customers i.
The prevailing concept in strategy up to the s was to create a product of high technical quality. If you created a product that worked well and was durable, it was assumed you would have no difficulty profiting. This was called the production orientation. Henry Ford famously said of the Model T car: "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants, so long as it is black.
The fallacy of the production orientation was also referred to as marketing myopia in an article of the same name by Levitt.
This marketing concept, in the decades since its introduction, has been reformulated and repackaged under names including market orientation, customer orientation, customer intimacy, customer focus, customer-driven and market focus.
It's more important than ever to define yourself in terms of what you stand for rather than what you make, because what you make is going to become outmoded faster than it has at any time in the past.
Jim Collins wrote in that the strategic frame of reference is expanded by focusing on why a company exists rather than what it makes. What can we be best in the world at? What drives our economic engine? Change creates novel combinations of circumstances requiring unstructured non-repetitive responses; Affects the entire organization by providing direction; Involves both strategy formulation processes and also implementation of the content of the strategy; May be planned intended and unplanned emergent ; Is done at several levels: overall corporate strategy, and individual business strategies; and Involves both conceptual and analytical thought processes.
Chaffee further wrote that research up to that point covered three models of strategy, which were not mutually exclusive: Linear strategy: A planned determination of goals, initiatives, and allocation of resources, along the lines of the Chandler definition above. This is most consistent with strategic planning approaches and may have a long planning horizon.
The strategist "deals with" the environment but it is not the central concern. Adaptive strategy: In this model, the organization's goals and activities are primarily concerned with adaptation to the environment, analogous to a biological organism.
The need for continuous adaption reduces or eliminates the planning window. There is more focus on means resource mobilization to address the environment rather than ends goals. Strategy is less centralized than in the linear model. Interpretive strategy: A more recent and less developed model than the linear and adaptive models, interpretive strategy is concerned with "orienting metaphors constructed for the purpose of conceptualizing and guiding individual attitudes or organizational participants.
It places emphasis on symbols and language to influence the minds of customers, rather than the physical product of the organization. These reflect an increased focus on cost, competition and customers. These "3 Cs" were illuminated by much more robust empirical analysis at ever-more granular levels of detail, as industries and organizations were disaggregated into business units, activities, processes, and individuals in a search for sources of competitive advantage.
By the s, the capstone business policy course at the Harvard Business School included the concept of matching the distinctive competence of a company its internal strengths and weaknesses with its environment external opportunities and threats in the context of its objectives. The use of mediating assessments reduces variability in decision-making because it seeks to address the limitations of mental model formation, even though it cannot eliminate them entirely. By delineating the assessments clearly and in a fact-based, independent manner, and delaying final judgment until all assessments are finished, MAP tempers the effects of bias and increases the transparency of the process, as all the assessments are presented at one time to all decision makers.
For example, because salient or recent pieces of information are not given undue weight, the process preempts the availability bias. MAP also reduces the risk that a solution will be judged by its similarity with known categories or stereotypes an error arising from the representativeness bias When differentiated, independent facts are clearly laid out, logical errors are less likely.
A deal team, assembled to perform due diligence, begins by identifying key issues — revenue and cost synergies, hidden liabilities, cultural compatibility, and so on. It prepares a report to the board, with chapters that cover each issue. In the subsequent board meeting, the chair leads a thorough discussion in which members state their view of the merger and explain their reasoning.
Questions are asked and answered, and the concerns that emerge are discussed in depth. Eventually, a vote is taken. This approach is thorough and professional and seems unobjectionable.
However, it resembles unstructured interviewing in a critical respect: The conclusion is drawn directly from a global image of the case, an image that emerges spontaneously and gradually as information is considered. In contrast, structured decision-making requires leaders to make separate, explicit assessments of each aspect and to use those assessments as the basis for a decision. In the case of the possible acquisition, it would proceed as follows: Due diligence is completed as usual.
If the deal team has done a good job, the key issues it has identified correspond to the required mediating assessments. The only novelty is that the deal team is required to conclude each chapter of its report with a summary rating. The agenda of the board meeting follows the chapters of the report. Topics are reviewed in sequence unless a deal-breaker fact emerges that ends the discussion. Board members are asked to refrain from making general comments about the acquisition until the mediating assessments are complete.
At that point, ratings on all assessments are displayed. Only then does the discussion turn to the holistic evaluation of the deal. As this example illustrates, the implementation of MAP does not substantially increase the overall burden of deciding.
Trivial extra effort is required from the deal team to generate a summary assessment on each due diligence topic. A board discussion that is structured around mediating assessments will be more organized and focused than the usual process, but not necessarily longer or more contentious.
At this moderate cost, the rigor of formal structure in strategic decision-making has the benefit of sequencing the process such that important facts are less likely to be overlooked and thoughtful, self-critical consideration of trade-offs is much more likely to occur. In this way, using MAP triggers conscious reflection. In typical unstructured decision-making, by contrast, we often unconsciously weigh losses more than gains , the near future more than the distant future, and vividly presented anecdotes more than dull statistics.
As urgency mounts and enthusiasm about the one-off deal builds, serious issues may be ignored or relegated, say, to an appendix of a presentation document. It is easy to see how these dynamics can lead to mistakes in judgment. Using a structured decision-making process ensures that the checklist of key questions is defined in advance and that, at the time of final decision, all its elements are given sufficient visibility. This rigor limits the risk that a compelling narrative will sway the board.
Our advice is not to assign explicit weights to assessments, as some decision theorists would suggest.
Executives reject that type of framework because it mechanizes decisions and removes room for intuition, including the possible interactions among the criteria. The holistic judgment of experienced executives is valuable, but it must first be prepared by a profile of mediating assessments. Nor do we advise treating all assessments equally. Rather, some dimensions that are simply more important than others should be framed as make-or-break assessments and evaluated first.
For example, when evaluating a new technology, considerations such as time to market and cost are important, but the assessment of whether the technology will work at all is paramount. Structuring Recurrent Decisions Recurrent decisions, in aggregate, also produce strategic outcomes.
Large organizations make countless decisions like these, and their collective impact on the business can be critical. In addition, when decisions of a particular type are repeated, a structured approach facilitates learning. Explicit mediating assessments make it easy to conduct a postmortem of past decisions, examine the reasoning and use of facts, learn which assessments may have been misguided, and revise the assessments or the scales accordingly.
The quality of judgments is likely to improve further if the assessments and the evaluation are expressed on a relative scale. However, the ambiguity of verbal labels is a major source of noise, because different people use different words to convey the same underlying judgment. Percentile scales offer a possible solution. Many leading companies already use them to express judgments about the performance of employees on multiple dimensions.
Percentile scales have several advantages over other types of rating scales. First, they require the evaluator to bring comparable cases to mind and to think of the case at hand as one particular instance of a broader category.
This approach, which has been called the outside view, is a powerful debiasing technique by itself. When people have learned to use a percentile scale well, they are said to be calibrated. Improving calibration is another major step in reducing noise in judgments.
Third, percentile ratings can easily be translated into policy. If underwriters, for instance, rate risks in percentiles, premiums can be priced on the basis of their ratings, and the company can decide at what percentile in the distribution of risks it sets the limit of what it is willing to underwrite.
Percentile scales can be challenging to define, introduce, and administer. But the accuracy gains they bring are worth the effort. People who have the same role in an organization and make similar decisions are assumed to be interchangeable, but companies do not normally check whether this assumption is correct. To better understand how to structure recurrent decisions, consider the case of a venture capital firm we will call VC Co.
Like many investors, VC Co. To improve the quality of its decisions, the firm decided to adopt a structured decision approach. In doing so, VC Co. First, to predefine the critical assessments, VC Co. This judgment, in turn, breaks down into specific subassessments such as problem-solving skills, technical expertise, resilience, and open-mindedness. Such qualities can be assessed on the basis of interactions with the team, its track record, and reference checks.
Second, VC Co. Organizing the data collection to make assessments independent of one another to the extent possible minimizes the halo effect. For instance, having seen an impressive product demo, VC Co. MAP guides them to treat these as separate judgments. Assigning a numerical rating to each assessment safeguards against the tendency to form overly coherent mental models.
For instance, when VC Co. With a numerical rating, this risk is reduced. Using percentile scores to make qualitative assessments puts recurrent decisions into context. Or is she comparable to Bob and the other entrepreneurs we view as belonging to the second quartile?