Strategy as Practice and Leadership

STRATEGY AS PRACTICE AND LEADERSHIP

ST4S19

SUMMATIVE ASSIGNMENT 2

To Convey

HOW INVENTING NEW KNOWLEDGE BEHAVIOR THEORY COMPLY WITH MY CURRENT COMPANY’S APPROACH TO STRATEGIC KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING?

Presented Before

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH WALES

Index

1. Introduction
2. Analysis and Evaluation (Using they Key Themes)

1. Areas of Analysis Criteria:

1. Knowledge Management /Environment
2. Intellectual capital and Social capital
3. Balanced Scorecard
4. Communities of Practice SWOT Analysis
5. Soft Systems Thinking (SST)

1. Observations, Challenges and Critical Issues
2. Recommendations
3. Appendices
4. References

1. Introduction

1. Industry Description and Analysis

 During this decade, the real estate industry has reached its peak, which is predicted to remain active throughout the next few decades. The majority of the market segments have expressed enormous interest which showed a high demand on the products. Consequently, the real estate business became more attractive for clients for investment in real estate units, and more and more feasible for the owners. “A superior design for better life” is the company product’s slogan which is quite successful and attractive as a marketing tool.

1. The assessment system selection:

The selection of the assessment system is quite important; a suitable decision making shall be made depending on the nature of the industry or the specialty of the company. For instance, the question imposed here is does the SSM favour the specialty of real estate and design and build construction industry.  However, weighing between the Structures System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) and the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), few comparison points prevailed out of the study.  However, the enormous contrast between the SSADM and other contemporary systems such as SSM are using an agile approach rather than the old waterfall methodology.

The Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)’s value lies in identifying the problem situation in an organized and agile way. The seven steps that the SSM consists of shall be consecutively implemented which start with  the problem recognition, several human activities systems shall be designed for the identification of the problem and solving, define possible changes, comparison and competition assessments, decision making, and taking action.

The first step is to enter the problematic situation, ill-defined problem, and express it, formulate a defined root of activities, build the concept model using the roots, comparing vs. real similar situations, predict changes for possibilities and feasibility and finally conclude an action plan for improvement and problem solving, i.a. Ill-defined problem such as “The constructed units are consistently delivered late to the customers”.

1. Objectives:

The purpose of this paper is to assess the company’s Knowledge Management System and recommend solutions to generate a business model reflecting an effective strategy dealing with the company’s competitive initiatives and business approaches. The business model concerns such as revenues and costs flowing from the strategy are to demonstrate a business that can be profitable and viable. The business model shall highlight the importance of main factors for a successful strategy such as the value of the Intellectual Capital (IC) and Social Capital (SC), the Community of Practice (CoP) and the Soft Systems Thinking (SST), which are considered an add value for the knowledge management system and the organizational learning behaviour.

1. Methods of Investigations:

A survey on the hardcopies of the business plans of the company throughout the last few years. A survey questionnaire ran through different strategic involved individuals of the organization in order to assess the company’s strategy. This paper reflects the major issues with relevant mitigation actions.

1. Analysis and Evaluation

1. Areas of Analysis Criteria:

The Key points to develop the analysis and implementation:

• Identification of Stakeholders

All stakeholders in this study have been identified at the entities level of the group organization. Hierarchies have been modified in order to eliminate the endless cycles of approvals. The stakeholders’ structure recommended in Appendix No.1 is rigor and contributes clarity. showing the main stakeholders in relation to their involvement throughout the project. The challenge in this area is that the stakeholder’s structure has been dissipated and requires a sophisticated communication plan.

• Implementation and Model Validation

A company’s mistake to run a model validation and exert efforts to conduct a research analysis and redesign a model and fail to implement. The subject of systems implementation is as important as systems analysis.  Per Reisman 1979, the concern is due to the fact that too many completed systems have not been implemented.

• Relevance to the Systems Dynamics

Based on eliciting information from facts and real world stakeholders, this shall contribute useful insights to the systems dynamics which is quite compatible with the selected SST and methodology, by Jay W. Forrester 1994. The stakeholders’ structure recommended in Appendix No.1 is rigor and contributes clarity to systems thinking.

1. Knowledge Management /Environment

Grant 1996 suggested that “Knowledge notion is the most strategically significant resource of the firm”. From another view, Bollinger and Smith 2001, and Goh 2002, suggested that knowledge is a strategic asset. Between arguments about the ideal notion of knowledge, it is the essential condition that confers resources with strategic significance that has a major impact on economic growth and value.

Paradoxically with the concept of Romer 1993, which argues that the economic growth occurs whenever people take resources and rearrange them in ways that are more valuable, the company commits mistakes on allocating the wrong people to the right tasks or the right people to the wrong tasks, which diminishes the value of knowledge the resources might have and puts the business at risk when unqualified resources are authorized for strategic decision making. A complete waste of resources at one hand, and a high risk of business tendency to damages on the other hand.