Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general

managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of rms in their external environments. It entails specifying the organization'smission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders. Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure. Strategic management is an ongoing process that evaluates and controls the business and the industries in which the company is involved; assesses its competitors and sets goals and strategies to meet all existing and potential competitors; and then reassesses each strategy annually or quarterly [i.e. regularly] to determine how it has been implemented and whether it has succeeded or needs replacement by a new strategy to meet changed circumstances, new technology, new competitors, a new economic environment., or a new social, financial, or political environment. (Lamb, 1984:ix)

Strategy Evaluation is as significant as strategy formulation because it throws light on the efficiency and
effectiveness of the comprehensive plans in achieving the desired results. The managers can also assess the appropriateness of the current strategy in todays dynamic world with socio-economic, political and technological innovations. Strategic Evaluation is the final phase of strategic management. The significance of strategy evaluation lies in its capacity to co-ordinate the task performed by managers, groups, departments etc, through control of performance. Strategic Evaluation is significant because of various factors such as - developing inputs for new strategic planning, the urge for feedback, appraisal and reward, development of the strategic management process, judging the validity of strategic choice etc.

The process of Strategy Evaluation consists of following steps1. Fixing benchmark of performance - While fixing the benchmark, strategists encounter questions such as what benchmarks to set, how to set them and how to express them. In order to determine the benchmark performance to be set, it is essential to discover the special requirements for performing the main task. The performance indicator that best identify and express the special requirements might then be determined to be used for evaluation. The organization can use both quantitative and qualitative criteria for comprehensive assessment of performance. Quantitative criteria includes determination of net profit, ROI, earning per share, cost of production, rate of employee turnover etc. Among the Qualitative factors are subjective evaluation of factors such as - skills and competencies, risk taking potential, flexibility etc. Measurement of performance - The standard performance is a bench mark with which the actual performance is to be compared. The reporting and communication system help in measuring the performance. If appropriate means are available for measuring the performance and if the standards are set in the right manner, strategy evaluation becomes easier. But various factors such as managers contribution are difficult to measure. Similarly divisional performance is sometimes difficult to measure as compared to individual performance. Thus, variable objectives must be created against which measurement of performance can be done. The measurement must be done at right time else evaluation will not meet its

2.

3.

4.

purpose. For measuring the performance, financial statements like - balance sheet, profit and loss account must be prepared on an annual basis. Analyzing Variance - While measuring the actual performance and comparing it with standard performance there may be variances which must be analyzed. The strategists must mention the degree of tolerance limits between which the variance between actual and standard performance may be accepted. The positive deviation indicates a better performance but it is quite unusual exceeding the target always. The negative deviation is an issue of concern because it indicates a shortfall in performance. Thus in this case the strategists must discover the causes of deviation and must take corrective action to overcome it. Taking Corrective Action - Once the deviation in performance is identified, it is essential to plan for a corrective action. If the performance is consistently less than the desired performance, the strategists must carry a detailed analysis of the factors responsible for such performance. If the strategists discover that the organizational potential does not match with the performance requirements, then the standards must be lowered. Another rare and drastic corrective action is reformulating the strategy which requires going back to the process of strategic management, reframing of plans according to new resource allocation trend and consequent means going to the beginning point of strategic management process.

Strategy evaluation and choice

An environmental scan will highlight all pertinent aspects that affect an organization, whether external or sector/industry-based. Such an occurrence will also uncover areas to capitalise on, in addition to areas in which expansion may be unwise.

These options, once identified, have to be vetted and screened by an organization. In addition to ascertaining the suitability, feasibility and acceptability of an option, the actual modes of progress have to be determined. These pertain to: The basis of competition The basis of competition relates to how an organization will produce its product offerings, together with the basis as to how it will act within a market structure, and relative to its competitors. Some of these options encompass: A differentiation approach, in which a multitude of market segments are served on a mass scale. An example will include the array of products produced by Unilever, or Procter and Gamble, as both forge many of the world's noted consumer brands serving a variety of market segments. A cost-based approach, which often concerns economy pricing. An example would be dollar stores in the United States. A focus (or niche) approach. In this paradigm, an organization would produce items for a niche market, as opposed to a mass market. An example is Aston Martin cars.

Mode of action Measuring the effectiveness of the organizational strategy, it's extremely important to conduct a SWOT analysis to figure out the internal strengths and weaknesses, and external opportunities and threats of the entity in business. This may require taking certain precautionary measures or even changing the entire strategy.

In corporate strategy, Johnson, Scholes and Whittington present a model in which strategic options are evaluated against three key success criteria: Suitability; would it work? Feasibility; can it be made to work? Acceptability; will they work it?

Suitability Suitability deals with the overall rationale of the strategy. The key point to consider is whether the strategy would address the key strategic issues underlined by the organisation's strategic position.

Does it make economic sense? Would the organization obtain economies of scale or economies of scope? Would it be suitable in terms of environment and capabilities?

Tools that can be used to evaluate suitability include: Ranking strategic options Decision trees

Feasibility Feasibility is concerned with whether the resources required to implement the strategy are available, can be developed or obtained. Resources include funding, people, time, and information. or cash flow in the market Tools that can be used to evaluate feasibility include: cash flow analysis and forecasting break-even analysis resource deployment analysis

Acceptability Acceptability is concerned with the expectations of the identified stakeholders (mainly shareholders, employees and customers) with the expected performance outcomes, which can be return, risk and stakeholder reactions. Return deals with the benefits expected by the stakeholders (financial and non-financial). For example, shareholders would expect the increase of their wealth, employees would expect improvement in their careers and customers would expect better value for money. Risk deals with the probability and consequences of failure of a strategy (financial and non-financial). Stakeholder reactions deals with anticipating the likely reaction of stakeholders. Shareholders could oppose the issuing of new shares, employees and unions could oppose outsourcing for fear of losing their jobs, customers could have concerns over a merger with regards to quality and support.

Tools that can be used to evaluate acceptability include: what-if analysis stakeholder mapping

The direction of action Strategic options may span a number of options, including: Growth-based (inspired by Igor Ansoff's matrix market development, product development, market penetration, diversification) Consolidation Divestment Harvesting

The exact option depends on the given resources of the firm, in addition to the nature of products' performance in given industries. A generally well-performing organisation may seek to harvest (,i.e. let a product die a natural death in the market) a product, if via portfolio analysis it was performing poorly comparative to others in the market. Additionally, the exact means of implementing a strategy needs to be considered. These points range from: Strategic alliances CAPEX Internal development (,i.e. utilising one's own strategic capability in a given course of action) M&A (Mergers and Acquisitions)

The chosen option in this context is dependent on the strategic capabilities of a firm. A company may opt for an acquisition (actually buying and absorbing a smaller firm), if it meant speedy entry into a market or lack of time in internal development. A strategic alliance (such as a network, consortium or joint venture) can leverage on mutual skills between companies. Some countries, such as India and China, specifically state that FDI in their countries should be executed via a strategic alliance arrangement.

In general terms, there are two main approaches, which are opposite but complement each other in some ways, to strategic management: The Industrial Organizational Approach based on economic theory deals with issues like competitive rivalry, resource allocation, economies of scale assumptions rationality, self discipline behaviour, profit maximization

The Sociological Approach deals primarily with human interactions assumptions bounded rationality, satisficing behaviour, profit sub-optimality. An example of a company that currently operates this way is Google. The stakeholder focused approach is an example of this modern approach to strategy.

Strategic management techniques can be viewed as bottom-up, top-down, or collaborative processes. In the bottomup approach, employees submit proposals to their managers who, in turn, funnel the best ideas further up the organization. This is often accomplished by a capital budgeting process. Proposals are assessed using financial criteria such as return on investment or cost-benefit analysis. Cost underestimation and benefit overestimation are major sources of error. The proposals that are approved form the substance of a new strategy, all of which is done without a grand strategic design or a strategic architect. The top-down approach is the most common by far. In it, the CEO, possibly with the assistance of a strategic planning team, decides on the overall direction the company should take. Some organizations are starting to experiment with collaborative strategic planning techniques that recognize the emergent nature of strategic decisions. Strategic decisions should focus on Outcome, Time remaining, and current Value/priority. The outcome comprises both the desired ending goal and the plan designed to reach that goal. Managing strategically requires paying attention to the time remaining to reach a particular level or goal and adjusting the pace and options accordingly. Value/priority relates to the shifting, relative concept of value-add. Strategic decisions should be based on the understanding that the value-add of whatever you are managing is a constantly changing reference point. An objective that begins with a high level of value-add may change due to influence of internal and external factors. Strategic management by definition, is managing with a heads-up approach to outcome, time and relative value, and actively making course corrections as needed. Simulation strategies are also used by managers in an industry. The purpose of simulation gaming is to prepare managers make well rounded decisions. There are two main focuses of the different simulation games, generalized games and functional games. Generalized games are those that are designed to provide participants with new forms of how to adapt to an unfamiliar environment and make business decisions when in doubt. On the other hand, functional games are designed to make participants more aware of being able to deal with situations that bring about one or more problems that are encountered in a corporate function within an industry.