DBA 503 Advanced Business

Strategies

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University

At International School of Thai

Nguyen University
Doctor in Business Administration
21 September
2014
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Part 2 Strategy Implementation
4. Implement
 Factors affecting strategy implementation
1) Leadership
2) Change
3) Culture
4) Communication
5) Structure
6) Incentive System
 Problems in the Implementation Strategy
 Tools for effective policy implementation.
5. Control and Feedback
 Balanced KPI Mixed
 Benchmarking
 Strategic Review Meeting

Case Study - When the competitive advantage is a disadvantage?

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.1.1 Leader VS Leadership
1) Definition of “Leader”
McFarland (1979:214-215)
o A leader is a person who has the ability to influence others to work
at various levels in order to achieve the goals and objectives set
Huse (1978:227)
o A leader is a person who can persuade other people to do a task
successfully
Yukl (1989:3-4)
o A leader is the most influential person in a group. The rest are
followers.
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
2) Definition of “Leadership”
McFarland (1979:303)
o Leadership is the ability to influence, direct and command
others to work to achieve the goals
Schwartz (1980:491)
o Leadership is the art of persuasion of other people to work
actively and willingly
Mitchell and Larson, Jr. (1987:435)
o Leadership is the process that a person uses his/her influence to
achieve organizational goals
Robbins (1989:302)
o Leadership is the ability to influence other people to achieve
goals
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.1.2 Interesting questions about
leadership
1) Is there “a leader” or it is only “leadership”?
2) Are Leaders “Born” Or “Made”?

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.1.2 Leader VS Manager / Executive
 Peter F. Drucker  Management is doing things right;

Leadership is doing the right things.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
 1) Different between “Leader” and “Manager”
Leader
1. Giving direction - Share visions and
strategies
- Focus on ideal
2. Interacting with - Create cultures and values
team members - Promote career path
3. Creating - Focus on people
relationships - Motivate and persuade
- Be a trainer and facilitator
4. Personal qualities - Friendly, warm
- Open-minded
- Flexible
- Understand themselves
5. Outcomes - Drastic change
Manager
- Planning and budgeting
- Focus on baseline
- Organize and manage people
- Direct and control
- Determine job description
- Focus on purpose
- Be a boss
- Distant
- Self-focus
- Rigid
- Understand organization
- Stable
2) Roles of “Leader” and “Manager / Executive”
Leader Manager / Executive
Change Planning
Inspiration Organizing
Motivation Directing
Influence Controlling

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.1.3 Leadership Theories
o Bolden et al. (2003) summarized leadership
theories into 5 approaches.
1) The Trait Approach to Leadership
 Arose from the “Great Man” theory. Leader are bond, not
made
 Example: Stogdill (1974)

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
2) The Behavioral School
 Traits were hard to measure and inconclusive
 Another approach in the study of leadership had to
be found.
 Behavioral School focuses on what leaders do
 Example: Blake & Mouton’s Managerial Grid (1964)

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
3) The Contingency or Situational School
 No one leadership style is right for every manager
under all circumstances.
 Contingency-situational theories were developed
to indicate that the style to be used is contingent
upon such factors as the situation, the people, the
task, the organization, and other environmental
variables.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Hersey and Blanchard (1972) House and Mitchell (1974)
Delegating Supportive leadership
Supporting Directive leadership
Coaching Participative leadership
Directing Achievement-oriented leadership

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4) Leaders and Followers
 The models discussed so far have dwelt on the leader as
some frontal figure who stands out from the rest as being
somehow different and “leading” the rest of the people. The
discussion now moves to recognition of the importance of
the leaders’ relationship with his/her followers and an
interdependency of roles.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Meredith Belbin’s Team Leadership

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Transactional and Transformational Leadership

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
“Phalanuphap”
- The attribute of a person which allows he/she to drive other people and
make them do or not do something to a certain extent is called
Phalanuphap
1) Power, which is an ability to “force” other people to follow even though they do
not want to;
2) Influence, which is an ability of a person to “persuade” or “drive” other people
to agree and follow;
3) Sutta or Admired Trust, which is an ability to make other people follow
because they believe, trust and have confidence in their leader
4) Ba-ra-mee or Epitomized respect, which is the respect that stems from the
results of good deeds that a person has been committing so consistently throughout
his life that other people praise him, take him as an idol, an inspiration, a sanctuary
as an epitome and are ready to follow him willingly.
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
 The foundation of Phalanuphap consists of 30 factors.
- 1) Money (financial resource) 2) Reputation 3) Position in
organization/society
4) Knowledge 5) Role 6) Education 7) Rank or Title 8) Award 9) Connection
10) Experience 11) Family background 12) Estate (Ta – Nun – Dorn)
13) Physical attraction or Beauty 14) Brand 15) Personality 16) Expertise
17) Performance 18) Rhetoric 19) Foresight 20) First move 21) Patronage
22) Ideation 23) Information 24) Culture 25) Tradition 26) Skill 27) Virtues
28) Favor or Indebtedness 29) Popularity and 30) Damagability.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
5) Dispersed Leadership
 This approach argues a less formalized model of leadership where
the leaders’ role is dissociated from the organizational hierarchy.
 It is proposed that individuals at all levels in the organization and in
all roles can exert leadership influence over their colleagues and
thus influence the overall leadership of the organization.
 Heifetz (1994) distinguishes between the exercise of “leadership”
and the exercise of “authority” – thus dissociating leadership from
formal organizational power roles
 Raelin (2003) talks of developing “leaderful” organizations through
concurrent, collective and compassionate leadership.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.2 Change
4.2.1 Concept of Change
1) Nadler and Tushman’s model

Source: http://wiki.ggc.edu/wiki/Principles_of_Management:Power_Points:Chapter_15
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
2) Lewin’s change Model

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Source: http://www.web-books.com/eLibrary/NC/B0/B58/047MB58.html
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.2.2 Process
for change management

Source: http://blogs.ubc.ca/etec530leadingchange/learning-topics/kotters-model/
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.3 Culture
4.3.1 Definition
 Organizational culture is the behavior of humans within an
organization and the meaning that people attach to
those behaviors.
 Culture includes the organization's vision, values, norms,
systems, symbols, language, assumptions, beliefs, and
habits.
 It is also the pattern of such collective behaviors and
assumptions that are taught to new organizational members as
a way of perceiving, and even thinking and feeling.
 Organizational culture affects the way people and groups interact
with each other, with clients, and with stakeholders.
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.3.2 Characteristics of Organizational culture
1) Created by the interaction of people in the
organization
2) Cultures are things that all members of the
organization hold on to
3) Cultures can be created, learned and transmitted
4) Cultures can be objective or subjective

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.3.3 Three Levels of organizational
culture

Source: http://nitieim19pomb095.blogspot.com/2012/08/my-company-culture-tata-motors.html
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.3.4 Factors determining organizational
cultures
1) Organization’s core ideology and core values
2) Leaders' beliefs and behaviors
3) Transmission of existing organizational cultures
 Stories, Histories, Rituals, Ceremonies, Material Symbols,
Language

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.3.5 Types of Organizational culture
1) Adaptability Culture
2) Achievement Culture
3) Clan Culture
4) Bureaucratic Culture

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.3.6 Examples
1) SIEMENS
2) Unilever

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.4 Communication
A key issue is the ability to manage communication
about the strategy as part of the implementation
process.
1) Build the Communications Strategy as a STRATEGY
 Develop a big-picture communications strategic goal.
 Clearly define objectives.
 Identify critical tactics.
 Incorporate the appropriate feedback loop.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
2) Understand the Communication Channels
Chosen
 Recognize limitations of various channels:
 Match the channel to the desired level of
interaction and feedback needs:
 Multiple channels may be necessary:

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
 Communication Category Example of Communication Medium
Intrapersonal Internal communication (e.g. what we think, when we listen to an
inner voice)
Interpersonal One to one, small group, emails, telephone calls and other
activities that allow personal listening and response
Organizational Lectures, seminars, debates, meetings, memos, intranets,
newsletter, workshops, displays
Community Local radio, talks, seminars, debates, local newspapers, bill
boards, bus tickets, health fairs
Public/Media Newspapers, television, radio, internet, CD-ROMs, mobile phones
Source: Sally Markwell 2009

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
3) Apply the Appropriate Packaging Technique
 Using the language of the end-user will aid pull-
through and execution.
 Well-constructed communications provide an
opportunity to disseminate and reinforce corporate
culture:
 Finally, avoid pandering to the “Lowest Common
Denominator”:

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.5 Structure
2 Types of Organizational Structure
1) Traditional Organizational Structure
2) Non-Traditional Organizational Structure
The Importance of a Good Organizational Structure
 A well-designed organization structure facilitates the
completion of projects
 A sound organization structure ensures that the company has the
right people in the right positions.
 A well-designed organization promote good communication
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
4.6 Incentive System
Incentive System will be explained in “Control
and Feedback”

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
II. Problems of strategy implementation
Uncoordinated management processes by different executive groups leads to
ineffective strategy execution

Source: Kaplan and Norton (2005)

III. Tools for effective strategy implementation
1) Strategy Map
 A strategy map is a diagram
 That is used to document the primary strategic goals
 Being pursued by an organization or management team.

 The main idea is that each objective in your balanced

scorecard is
 Represented by a shape, usually oval or square.
 These shapes are then grouped by perspective and lines
 Are drawn to show the cause and effect chain.
Benefits of Using Strategy Map
 Strategy Maps capture and communicate your strategy
 Strategy Maps help you manage performance better
 Strategy Maps capture important elements of strategy: focus,
choice and drivers of change
 Strategy Maps help you create a strategic balance scorecard
 Strategy Maps raise the discussion from operations to strategy
 Strategy Maps help you systematically design measures and align
investment

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Example: Patagonia’s strategy map

Source: http://www.strategymapexample.com/
Example: US regional airline’s strategy map

Source: http://www.strategymapexample.com/
2) The Pyramid of Purpose

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Source: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newSTR_99.htm?
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
3) Simons' Seven Strategy Questions

Source: http://pakbec.blogspot.com/2014/01/seven-strategy-questions-simple.html
 Dr. Dan Can Do’s Law
 Adjusted from Pareto principle (the 80–20 rule) -
roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the
causes

Theory Level Causes Outcomes

Pareto principle A1 20% 80%

A2 4% 64%

Dr.Dan Can Do law A3 1% 51.2%

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
5. Control and Feedback
5.1 Balanced KPI Mixed
 The world of indexation
 Balanced KPI Mix is based on Balanced Scorecard:
BSC
 Balanced Scorecard: BSC
 Financial Perspective : F
 Customer Perspective: C
 Internal Process Perspective: I
 Learning and Growth: L
 No need to fix with these 4 dimensions
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
 Balanced KPI Mix will help the organization move
forward sustainably because:
1)It is human nature to response to incentives
2)Good KPIs increase outcomes and lower cost
3)Bad KPIs distort behaviors in undesirable ways and create
problems
 How to develop KPI?
1)Be careful
2)Top executive should involve, take part and monitor KPI
development process closely

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
5.2 Benchmarking
 Benchmarking is the process of comparing one's business
processes and performance metrics to industry bests
or best practices from other companies.
 Dimensions typically measured are quality, time and cost.

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Types of Benchmarking
1) Internal Benchmarking
2)Competitive Benchmarking
3)Collaborative Benchmarking
4)Cooperative Benchmarking
5)Process Benchmarking
6)Strategic Benchmarking
7)Functional Benchmarking

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Example: The Xerox Case
 Xerox invented photocopier in 1959 and maintained a virtual monopoly for
many years.
 By 1981, however, the company’s market shrank to 35% as IBM, Kodak
developed high-end machines and Canon, Richo, and Savin dominated
the low-end segment of the market.
 From benchmarking analysis at Xerox, it was found that
 Product Defect Rate > 30 times higher than their competitors
 Cost in Product design > 3 times
 Number of employees > 2 times
 Times used to launch a new product > 2 times

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Results from benchmarking included:
 Product Defect Rate / 100 machines  78%
 Cost per unit  50%
 Service time  27%
 Product reliability  50%
 Employee income  20%

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
5.3 Strategic Review Meeting
 Hold leaders accountable for strategic initiatives
 Deeply investigate the strategic status of one
initiative
 Focus on whether strategy implementation is on
track, where problems are occurring in the
implementation, why they’re happening, what
actions will correct them, and who will have
responsibility for achieving the targets
 Except in unusual circumstances, do not use the
meeting to alter or adapt the strategy
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD
Senior Fellow, Harvard University
2) Attendees:
 Senior Management Team
 Strategic Initiative Owners
 Functional and Planning Specialists
 Business Unit Heads
 Strategy Manager

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
 3) Strategic Review Meeting Agenda
 Sample Agenda

Source: https://onstrategyhq.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/strategy-meeting-model-and-agenda.pdf

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
 Case Study
Day 2

When the competitive advantage is a disadvantage

In 2005, Laura Casela (some details, including her name, have been changed) joined a strategic communications firm
started by two former consulting colleagues of hers. Laura was brought in as the Director of Business Development to help
grow the year-old firm. Laura was excited about her new role and about the company’s future. The firm was founded on a
unique premise. Most communications firms rely on freelance writers to do a lot of their work and clients have little
knowledge about who these writers are. Laura’s colleagues decided to change that by hiring stay-at-home moms who had left
the industry to have more time with their families; they felt this was an untapped and experienced resource and if leveraged
appropriately, could be a competitive advantage for the young firm. They built their brand around this hiring approach and
had success with it in their first year in the market.
However, soon after taking the job, Laura discovered that the leads she was pursuing were not turning over. She was
able to capture referrals but when new leads went to the website, they seemed to lose interest. She asked a few would-be
clients what turned them away and they explained they weren’t looking for a business of stay-at-home moms. Many said it
just didn’t feel like “a right fit.”

Case Study Questions: What would you do if you were Laura?

Source: http://blogs.hbr.org/2010/02/when-you-think-the-strategy-is/

Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak,PhD

Senior Fellow, Harvard University
Prof Kriengsak Chareonwongsak
 Mobile: 0066-81-776-8989
 E-mail: kriengsak@kriengsak.com
 www.facebook.com/drdancando
 www.twitter.com/drdancando
 www.drdancando.com
 www.oknation.net/blog/kriengsak