Strategic planning linkage qualitative study Thai justice ministry

2014 International Employment Relations Review, Vol 20 No 1
Page 27
THE LINKAGE BETWEEN ELEMENTS IN THE STRATEGIC
PLANNING
PROCESS: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Sirirat Choonhaklai
and
Ratthasirin Wangkanond
Mahidol University, Thailand
ABSTRACT
A qualitative study was conducted on the Ministry of Justice in
Thailand, a
pilot agency that implemented strategic planning in the levels of
ministry,
cluster and department. In this paper, the researchers focus on
the linkage
between determinants, strategic planning and outcomes.
Although the
Ministry of Justice of Thailand participated in a strategic
planning pilot
project, the study showed that the linkage between elements of
the
strategic planning process implemented by its agencies was

weak. The main
obstacles were found to be bureaucratic culture and work
characteristics.
BACKGROUND
The Thai government agencies' strategic planning resulted from
the civil
service reform in 2002, which was influenced by the evolution
in public
administration in the US from the past until the present which
witnessed
paradigm shifts through time in response to changing social
environments. The
bureaucratic system was seen as a closed, formalised, or classic
organisation
(Robbins, 1990: 34; Robbins, 1990: 34; Pfiffner, 2004: 443-
454) whose
administration focused on internal and specific factors while
disregarding
external environments. Its emphasis was on control, regulations
and a top-
down relationship. Therefore, by the late 1960s, and between
1968-1970 until
the present, scholars in public administrations propose the New
Public
Administration (NPA) (Nigro & Nigro, 1984: 14), which aims at
organisational
effectiveness, focuses on people, social values, equality and
public
participation (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2007). The NPA, therefore,
is related to
the notion of transparent, performance-based, and people-
centred
administration. During the same period, different ways to

improve public
administration were offered (Ocampo, 2000: 248-255). They
comprise (1)
internal and external environment-oriented managerial
improvement to build
a high-performance organisation; (2) reengineering; (3) a new
public
management approach; and (4) performance-based or outcome-
based
administration, and democratic participatory administration.
The Linkage between Elements in the Strategic Planning
Process: A qualitative study
Page 28
The new paradigms in public administration contributed to
changes both in
processes and procedures in Thai government organisations,
especially during
2001-2009 when two important acts were passed, ie The
Reorganization of
Ministries, Sub-Ministries and Departments Act, B.E. 2545 and
Section 17 of
the National Government Organization Act, B.E. 2534 revised
by the National
Government Organization Act (No.4), B.E. 2543 and by the
National
Government Organization Act (No.5), B.E. 2545. The revision
was effective
from October 3, 2002. Importantly, Section 3/1 of the latter Act

prescribes
improvement to promote people's interests, effective
achievement of
government's missions, social responsibility, transparency,
accountability and
public participation. Hence came strategic planning in
government agencies.
Later, the Office of Public Sector Development Commission
(OPDC) was
established as a mechanism to implement the reform according
to the Long-
term Strategic Plan to Improve the Thai Civil Service and
Indicators, B.E. 2546-
2550; B.E. 2551-2555; and B.E. 2556-2561.
According to the research to date, there has never been a study
on the relation
between elements of strategic planning in Thailand. Research
findings are
found on strategic planning and implementation in organisations
(eg
Pumipathanasuk 2010; Rachamani 2011), but not on the linkage.
This is in
agreement with Poister, Pitts and Edwards (2010:522), who
stated that studies
were rare on connections between planning process and
organisational
outcomes and on serious application of tools and models eg
Balanced Score
Card (BSC) model and McKinsey’s 7-S model; and with Hansen
(2011:771-772),
who pointed out a lack of serious evaluation of strategic tools,
eg SWOT
analysis, BSC and McKinsey’s 7-S.
In this paper, the researchers focus on the linkage between

determinants,
strategic planning and outcomes. A qualitative study was
conducted on the
Ministry of Justice, a pilot agency that implemented strategic
planning in the
levels of ministry, cluster and department. In addition, the
Ministry set up a
performance agreement to meet indicators according to the
strategic plan in
the cluster and department levels. The OPDC arranged for
department heads,
the Permanent Secretary and the Minister to sign the
performance agreement
in November/December 2003 (OPDC, 2004: 91-93).
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
The conceptual framework is developed from Poister and Streib
(1999: 316-
319), Poister, Pitts and Edwards (2010: 525) and Hu, Kapucu,
and O’Byrne
(2014: 86-88). The linkage between elements in the strategic
planning process
comprises determinants, strategic planning and outcomes. The
determinants
Sirirat Choonhaklai and Ratthasirin Wangkanond
Page 29
are (1) rules and command of OCPD overseeing strategic

planning in the public
sector; (2) the perception and understanding of personnel, which
reflects
preparedness for organisational mobilisation; and (3)
organisational
leadership. The strategic planning consists of (1) the formation
and
determination of strategies in order to analyse the process in
response to goals
and environments, and the application of models and tools; (2)
communication
and transmission of vision, missions, strategic issues, goals and
indicators to all
levels; (3) participation by all parties in determining strategies,
goals and
indicators to obtain strategic issues beneficial to those involved;
and (4)
implementation of plans, their integration and budgeting
according to
priorities. The outcomes are (1) organisational competence and
(2) results
from the implementation of plans. On the one hand, the
direction of influence
flows from the determinants to the strategic planning and
outcomes. On the
other hand, the latter elements provide feedback to those that
came before.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Meaning and significance of strategic planning
According to Porter (2008), strategic planning is a process that
enables and
facilitates leaders to achieve goals. The process helps determine

a direction
based on awareness of limits or possible obstacles, and
encourages learning to
become different from other organisations. Meanwhile, Gordon
(2005:1)
stated that strategic planning is a systematic process that helps
leaders
understand environments that influence their organisations and
make the best
decisions for their organisations to achieve their visions.
Likewise, according to
Bryson (2004:6), an organisation need strategic planning to
build a basic way
of practice for decision making since the planning inform what
goals should be
selected, what should be done and why these should be done. In
addition,
Gordon (2005:1) explains that strategic planning is a systematic
process that
enables executives to understand their organisational
environments, and
facilitates mutual agreement about how to achieve goals.
Strategic planning is an important element of strategic
management, which
arises together with result-oriented management (Poister &
Streib, 1999:308).
It is used in government agencies to promote strategic
development and
effective administration to reach both short- and long-term
goals. The
organisations need to arrange appropriate activities and
resources to support
the steering towards these goals (Chandler, 1962, cited by
Hansen, 2001:776).

According to Mercer (1991), Gordon (2005) and Bryson (2011),
strategic
planning comprises (a) vision, a future expectation of what the
organisation
aspires to be (eg Mahidol University's vision to be one in the
top one hundred
world class universities); (b) philosophy and value; (c)
missions, things to be
Page 30
done to achieve the vision (eg academic services, research and
development);
(d) goals or main objectives, things that are achieved after the
implementation
of the missions; (e) strategic issues, main points that the
organisation need to
develop in order to reach the goals and objectives; (f) programs
and plans that
the organisation needs to implement to progress towards the
goals and
objectives (eg plans to improve managerial systems and
mechanisms); and (g)
projects, things to be done to meet indicators of different
programs (eg
restructuring and job descriptions).
Principles of strategic planning

Explanations of the principles are covered in the following main
points.
Formation of a strategic plan
Before strategic planning, a group of planners hold meetings
with internal and
external stakeholders according to the strategic planning
procedures. An
analysis of the organisational environment has to be conducted.
The obtained
data are used to determine a vision, philosophy and values,
missions, goals,
indicators and strategic issues. After that, strategic plans will be
implemented
and followed up as part of the process.
A SWOT analysis consists of two pats (Kriebel & Krauss,
2007):
(1) An analysis of internal factors: The organisation's actual
state is analysed
so that strengths (eg a clear structure, good image and
competent
personnel) and weaknesses (eg ineffective managerial
mechanisms) are
indicated. Models that are used to analyse these internal factors
are, for
instance, Public Sector Management Quality Award (PMQA)
and
McKinsey’s 7–S framework. More than one model may be used
to obtain a
more extensive analysis. Mercer (1991: 53) indicated that any
internal
work can be included for analysis of internal factors.

(2) An analysis of external factors: Environments, external to
but influential
on, the organisation, are analysed ion two levels, ie general
environments
(eg the social system, culture, population quality, technology
and national
or global economy) and work-specific environments (eg clients,
people,
public and private sectors). The analysis shows opportunities,
factors that
the organisation can use to its advantage, and threats, factors
that can
lead to disadvantages or ineffectiveness. A model that can be
used to
analyse opportunities and threats is Porter (2008)'s Five Forces
Model,
which covers market trends, competitors, suppliers, partners and
customers. Another useful model is PEST, which includes
politics,
economics, social relations and technology (Bailey 1989;
Gordon 2005;
Mercer 1991).
Page 31
Implementation of strategic plans

To implement a strategic plan, projects under different
programs are
prioritised for each year so as to make an annual operational
plan and budget
requests. To make sure that the strategic plans are practicable,
and thus
achievable, every party needs to mutually determine key
performance
indicators that are connected to the organisation's vision and
missions. Success
of the implementation is to be measured against these
indicators. The
executives should use the cascading method to distribute these
indicators to
lower units to use as their missions and indicators. These
indicators are useful
for determining responsibilities, outcomes and performance for
each
individual in the form of a performance agreement. Therefore,
the
organisation, units and individuals are aligned to the same
goals.
Elements of strategic planning
The picture of a strategic administrative process painted by
Stone et al. (1999
cited by Poister, Pitts, and Edwards, 2010: 524-525), together
with Poister,
Pitts and Edwards’ (2010: 525) conceptual framework based on
the application
of Stone et al. (1999), enables the researcher to see the linkage
of strategic
planning and management defined by three elements:
determinants, process
and outcomes. Even though Hu, Kapucu and O’Byrne (2014: 86-

88) do not
mention strategic management, their explanation of strategic
planning also
points to these three elements. An integration of Poister, Pitts
and Edwards
(2010: 526) and Hu, Kapucu and O’Byrne (2014: 88) help
elaborate details of
each element. Firstly, in the process of strategic planning,
formation and
determination of strategic plans based on SWOT analysis, and
their
implementation should include participants in the process to
determine plans,
goals and indicators, communication and transmission of the
vision, strategic
issues, goals and indicators to all levels for them to be prepared
for
organisational mobilisation. Secondly, determinants cover
internal working
systems and laws, line of command, environments and other
features (eg the
organisation's size and age) that influence strategic planning,
including
leadership (Monahan, 2001 cited by Poister, Pitts, & Edwards,
2010: 526; Hu,
Kapucu, & O’Byrne, 2014: 86-88). Thirdly, according to
Poister, Pitts and
Edwards (2010: 528), outcomes can be classified into two
levels. On one level,
they are related to an increase in organisational competence (ie
having strong
partners, satisfied stakeholders, adapting to changing
environments, effective
leadership and positive organisational culture). On the other
level, outcomes
are long-term performance in implementing the strategic plans,

providing
services, enforcing laws, etc, which can be measured from
quality of service,
efficiency, client satisfaction and a rate of complaints. In the
meantime, Hu,
Kapucu and O’Byrne (2014: 88) define outcomes as (1) abilitiy
to design
Page 32
organisational missions, goals and prioritise plans; (2)
connection between
external factors and the organisation's important figures; and (3)
improvement
of organisational management and effectiveness.
In this study of linkage between elements in the Ministry of
Justice's strategic
planning, the researchers cover all three elements with varying
details.
Regarding the element of the strategic planning process, the
study looks at (1)
the formation and determination of strategies in order to analyse
the process
in response to goals and environments, and the application of
models and
tools (BSC, McKinsey 7-S, PMQA and SWOT Analysis); (2)
communication and
transmission of vision, missions, strategic issues, goals and

indicators at all
levels; (3) participation by all parties in determining strategies,
goals and
indicators to obtain strategic issues beneficial to those involved;
and (4)
implementation of plans, their integration and budgeting
according to
priorities. The determinants under study include (1) rules and
command of
OCPD overseeing strategic planning in the public sector; (2) the
perception and
understanding of personnel, which reflects preparedness for
organisational
mobilisation; and (3) organisational leadership. The outcomes
under study
cover organisational competence (eg empowerment through
networking, and
the improved understanding and performance of personnel) and
results from
the implementation of plans.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This qualitative research comprises the following procedures:
(1) Exploratory research was conducted to investigate
determinants, strategic
planning and outcomes specific to the Ministry of Justice. Main
informants
were purposefully sampled and selected by the method of
judgment
sampling based on their ability to answer questions and other
characteristics, eg positions, job descriptions and working
experience.
These informants were 30 officers from the OPCD and 11

agencies under
the Ministry of Justice (ie Office of the Policy and Strategy
under Office of
the Permanent Secretary, Office of Justice Affairs, Central
Institute of
Forensic Science, Department of Special Investigation, Legal
Execution
Department, Right and Liberties Promotion Department,
Department of
Juvenile Observation and Protection, Department of Probation,
Department of Corrections, Office of the Narcotics Control
Board, and
Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission).
(2) Primary data were obtained through structured interviews
and focus
group discussions. Secondary data were studied from agencies'
documents
to assist the design of questions and discussion guidelines.
(3) A variety of data-collecting methods was used in response to
the need of
this research, which aims to explore, examine and describe data.
Data
Page 33
were collected through (a) structured interviews designed for
gathering in-
depth data and (b) group interviews through focus group

discussions. Data
were also gathered from existing documents. Most of them were
official
documents, eg annual reports, strategic and operational plans,
minutes,
directives, regulations and laws.
(4) The data were analysed by the method of content analysis.
The data were
thoroughly read to find out themes and patterns related to the
research
questions. The procedures comprised the following steps: first,
the data
were managed so that all the interviews were transcribed;
secondly, the
transcriptions were read and re-read to find out themes for
coding the
sources to obtain abstract concepts (Rossman & Rallis, 1998
cited by
Creswell, 2003: 192).
(5) Reliability was checked through the method of member
checking. That is,
results were sent to the data collectors and main informants to
examine
whether the interpretations corresponded with their intentions.
In
addition, findings were read by external experts.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The researchers present and discuss findings on each element in
the strategic
planning and then discuss about their linkage.

Strategic planning
The process covers formation and determination of strategic
plans,
communication and transmission before implementation,
participation, and
implementation.
Formation and determination of strategic planning
Findings showed that every agency under the Ministry of Justice
appointed
their strategic units to collect primary data and invite specific
personnel to
mutually make plans. Generally, these personnel were from
their own
organisations, ie director-generals, deputy director-generals,
experts,
department general inspectors, division directors and
operational officers.
Together, they conducted SWOT analyses that were limited to
specific aspects
and then mutually determined visions. Usually, the
administrators themselves
prescribed the visions that were not related to the SWOT
results. The
intermediate administrators (ie division directors) further
conducted the SWOT
analyses to obtain missions, strategic issues, goals, indicators,
programs and
projects.
However, at the department level, the process was different.
Some
departments employed academics or private companies, while
others made

Page 34
the plans by themselves. Most agencies used data of
performance in previous
years. Whereas some departments invited external stakeholders,
most relied
on their own personnel in the process of the SWOT analysis.
Data were not
adequately prepared for the SWOT analyses; some strengths,
weaknesses,
opportunities and threats (eg survey results of clients'
satisfaction and reports
of civic participation) were left out when the strategic plans
were made. The
interviews showed that, in the SWOT analysis sessions,
participants expressed
their impressions about the organisations without supporting
evidence.
Moreover, most of the participants shied away from expressing
their views.
Brainstorming was also lacking which would have allowed
participation of
personnel from all levels to share their views about their
organisation’s
direction. As a result, the process to form and determine
strategic issues was
not appropriate and also not based on the organisation’s
environmental

needs.
According to Bryson (2004:123), to effectively respond to
changing
environments, organisations need to understand both internal
and external
environments so as to build strategies related to the contexts.
Therefore, it can
be concluded that, as a whole, the processes conducted by these
agencies
were not completed according to the standard of strategic
planning because
they did not draw upon the SWOT results to design visions,
missions, strategic
issues, objectives and indicators. Moreover, reviewing the
contents of the
strategic plans, the researchers found that, even though all the
elements (eg
vision, missions, objectives) were available, they were not
designed according
to the principles.
Vision
A vision is vital to the success of strategic planning since it
gives common
direction to the organisation's members, eg what the
organisation aspires to
be and what kind of improvement is necessary. Missions, goals,
objectives and
other elements are designed to achieve the vision. Every agency
has its own
missions as prescribed by law. Only some of them developed
their own
strategic missions. However, none of the 11 agencies appointed
units to be in

charge of each mission. An interviewee voiced an interesting
point:
The strategic unit tends to include missions prescribed by laws
as part
of the strategic plan and then adds some strategies that are
related to
the Department and Ministry to make it challenging.
Goals, objectives and strategic issues
Even though all agencies indicated their goals, objectives and
strategic issues,
these were simply a compilation of those belonging to projects
and the
Page 35
strategic issues were not prioritised for annual operation
planning. These
objectives and indicators did not result from the SWOT
analyses, neither were
they allocated to different units and performance agreements.
As a whole,
they were not related to the organisation’s strategic plans and
performance
indicators. Informants gave the following descriptions.

The OPCD has the same way of practice with every Ministry.
The
Ministries sign performance agreements mainly to obtain bonus
rewards, not to improve their organisations. Some Ministries
received
high bonus scores. Some received four from the total scores of
five. In
some Ministries, their personnel were given bonuses of 1,000 or
2,000
baht. But, their problems remain. Their high scores like four or
five are,
therefore, not related to their performance. They, for example,
designed indicators that enabled them to make easy scores. If a
meeting is held, they get three scores. But, if they can provide
the
meeting's minutes, they get four scores.
The strategic plan and performance agreement are related only
on the
document. No goals is indicated in the form that the plan is
successfully implemented. As a result, the performance
evaluation
does not reflect the strategic plan's success or failure.
Tools and models
The study showed that the Departments and Ministry used tools
and models,
ie SWOT analyses, BSC, McKinsey 7-S, and PMQA. Most of
them used the
McKinsey 7-S model to analyse internal environments and
PEST to analyse
external environments. Some agencies also included C

(Customers). However,
only the Right and Liberties Promotion Department used PMQA
when data
were collected for analysis.
BSC was used for strategic mapping between vision, missions,
strategic issues
and objectives (ie efficiency, service quality, effectiveness and
organisation
development) due to requirements in the OPCD's Strategic
Planning Toolkit.
Also, the OPCD included BSC in performance agreements. This
showed that
government agencies conform to regulations and orders rather
than aim to
achieve outcomes.
Communication and transmission
In practice, the operational officers in charge of strategic
planning submitted
plans for the director-generals to approve and circulate to units
under the
departments for them to use as a guideline for their strategic
planning. Some
agencies put the plans on their websites. However, most of them
held no
Page 36

formal meeting to communicate information about the plans and
create
common direction among personnel. The plans were usually
communicated in
executive meetings, or emphasised by general inspectors.
Exceptions were the
Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection, the Office
of Public Sector
Anti-Corruption Commission and the Department of Special
Investigation.
However, a commitment to successfully implement the plans
was never made.
Stakeholder involvement
The study found that, in most of the agencies, only those
personnel in charge
of making strategic plans participated in the process.
Representatives from
different levels of personnel were lacking. Some told that they
did not
participate because it was not in their field of expertise. Only
one agency was
found to invite external people to participate in the SWOT
analysis.
The participation level is low. The process is not open much for
participation. Many personnel do not want serious participation.
They
simply want to express their opinions.
When it came to participation, people would rather not express
their

views because they thought the strategic planning was an
academic
work. Most did not pay attention. Though people showed up, a
few
expressed their views.
......... Important obstacles are a) the administrators do not pay
attention; b) people think only a certain group of personnel is
responsible for it; c) people think that it is academic,
complicated and
painstaking; d) it does not make any difference; and e) many
believe
that, without the strategic plan, the Department can go on with
the
legal authority that it has.
The findings showed that most personnel and administrators did
not consider
participation to be as important as it should have been. Allison
and Kaye (1997:
35) point out that strategic planning that is based on
participation is of better
quality. Stakeholders should be aware when they should play a
part in the
process. According to Bailey (1989: 170), the environmental
analysis is
important and the analysis should regularly draw upon
stakeholders to
examine and adjust the plans. Many organisations, especially
government
agencies, are obsessed with routine work so that planning and
evaluation are
difficult. To solve this problem, a timeframe should be set up
and it should be

ensured that stakeholders participate in the planning and
evaluating process.
Likewise, Mercer (1991: 140) states that stakeholder
participation is vital in the
planning and implementing processes.
Page 37
Implementation
Since the SWOT results were not taken seriously, the strategic
plans lacked
credibility. Although every agency had its own operational plan,
the plan was
not connected to the planning and budgeting processes, but to
the
performance agreement, which was taken from the Ministry's
four-year
operational plans. In practice, government agencies have to
submit annual
operational plans for the Minister to approve before they can
submit budget
plans to the Bureau of the Budget. Meanwhile, the OPDC used
indicators in the
annual operational plans to set up the performance agreements.
The implementation of strategic plans was a weakness in these
government

agencies' strategic planning. When strategies were set up, as
already
mentioned above, no unit was appointed to be responsible for
the missions
and strategic issues. Bryson, (2004: 50) confirmed that
providing human and
financial resources is an important duty of administrators for
implementation.
Moreover, organisations have to provide units and persons
responsible for
undertaking activities to meet the requirements of the plan. The
findings
showed that the administrators never made a commitment to
successfully
implement the strategies. In addition, the indicators in the four-
year
operational plans, which are translated into each annual
operational plan,
cannot be used to measure strategic performance because they
are pre-
determined by the OPDC in its preparation of the performance
agreements.
Determinants
The determinants include the OPDC’s rules and regulations,
personnel
perception and understanding and leadership.
The OPDC's rules and regulations
Unlike those organisations in the private sector, government
agencies conform
to rules and orders. Although strategic planning should respond
to each
agency's specificity, these agencies cannot set up and implement

their own
strategies because they need to perform their routine missions
as prescribed
by laws, and also their commitments to higher authorities
(Melkers &
Willoughby 1998, cited by Poister, Pitts, & Edwards 2010:526).
This situation is
also the case for the Ministry of Justice. The strategic planning
was conducted
because it was required by the OPDC's rules and regulations. Its
agencies also
need to produce outcomes as prescribed by these rules and
regulations.
Therefore, the analysis shows that these determinants are
formally related to
the strategic planning and outcomes although they are not
connected to the
process of implementing the agencies' strategic plans to achieve
the objectives
and indicators.
Page 38
Perception and understanding
The findings showed that the number of personnel responsible
for strategic
planning was not sufficient. These personnel needed to fulfil

other duties so
that they could not allocate time to the strategic planning. For
instance, each
probation officer had to supervise 500-1800 probationers a year,
and this was
not the only responsibility they had. Also, most of them were
annual-contract
employees and thus lacked job security. Transfer of personnel
was frequent, so
not many were continuously responsible for the strategic
planning. In the
Central Institute of Forensic Science the Department of Special
Investigation,
the Legal Execution Department, the Department of
Corrections, the Office of
the Narcotics Control Board, and the Office of Public Sector
Anti-Corruption
Commission, most personnel devote themselves to the
organisation’s
prescribed missions (eg crime scene investigation, law
enforcement.) so that
the strategic planning was relegated to supporting staff.
Personnel
improvement was not systematic and continuous so that the
level of
understanding about the strategic planning was low. Personnel
need to be
trained so that they can use and connect tools and models (such
as BSC and
PMQA) and thus effectively work as part of the strategic
planning team.
Therefore, the quality of personnel was an obstacle to the
strategic planning.
Leadership

The administrators in the department and division levels are
significant to the
success of strategic planning. The findings showed that these
administrators
had visions and creativity. However, no process existed to
communicate these
to the operational level. Many administrators, especially those
in the
intermediate level, conform to the principle of practicality so
that they focus
only on practice, but ignore outcomes that could meet the
organisation’s key
indicators.
The factor of leadership. It can be seen that once all
administrators shared the
same concept as the government leader, Thaksin Shinawatra,
who paid
attention to strategies. Performance agreements were quickly
endorsed
because the ministers, permanent secretaries, director-generals
all paid
attention. Then, the permanent secretaries designed indicators
together with
lower officers. Now, that picture is no more.
The factor of leadership influences a success. If the leaders pay
attention and
join meetings to make plans, and pay attention to
implementation, the plans
will be effective.

Page 39
Outcomes
The study on outcomes covers organisational competence (ie
empowerment
through networking, personnel having knowledge and
understanding of
strategic planning, and performance improvement) and
implementation
outcomes.
Organisational competence
According to the findings, no agencies had a strategy of
empowerment
through networking. These agencies preferred to work on their
own in their
fields of specialisation and strictly conform to rules and
regulations. Therefore,
they focus on fulfilling the legally prescribed missions, rather
than strategic
planning.
Implementation outcomes
Outcomes from the implementation of plans (eg services, law
enforcement,
quality of service and efficiency) were rarely documented by
research.

Although all agencies enjoyed positive responses from clients
and personnel,
these could not be counted as outcomes of strategic plan
implementation
because the implementation of the plans as a whole was never
followed-up
and evaluated. A main reason for this failure is the lack of key
indicators for
each agency and allocation of missions to lower levels.
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSIONS
The linkage between the determinants, strategic planning and
outcomes is
weak, which can be analysed as follows.
Bureaucratic culture
Many government agencies have high degree of bureaucratic
culture ie focus
on formalities (Sun & Xu 2012:70). In this case, the outcomes
realised in
response to the OPDC's orders were not related to the strategic
plans. This had
both advantages and disadvantages. However, the emphasis here
is on those
obstructing the process of strategic planning.
Leader centeredness
Success depends on organisational leaders. Strategic planning is
not an
exception. A comparison showed that strategic planning became
important in
organisations whose leaders understood and paid attention to

the process; for
example, after the reform of the civil service in 2002, the then
prime minister,
Taksin Shinawatra, paid attention to the policies to improve
civil service in
Page 40
response to social needs and also to promote organisational
effectiveness.
Consequently, every government agency adopted strategic
planning as an
administrative tool. The process was continuous. However, after
Taksin's term,
the strategic mission was no longer seriously implemented
(Choonhaklai,
2012:214). The lack of seriousness and continuity leads to
limited success of
strategic planning, inadequate improvement of the knowledge
and
understanding of personnel and insufficient participation. As a
result, the
strategic mission becomes part of routine work (Choonhaklai
2012:214).
Top-down administration
The bureaucratic system according to the classical theory, eg
Max Weber,

Frederick W. Taylor and Henri Fayol, is very influential to the
Thai system, in
which organisations are closed and centralised systems with
command-line
administration and without participation from internal and
external
stakeholders. This explains why the participants in the strategic
planning,
especially lower ranks, shied away from expressing their views.
It was found in
many places, not only Thailand, where strategies were
determined by higher
administrators (Poister, Pitts, & Edwards 2010:539). When
strategic planning is
caught in the command line, the resulting plans are not
connected to the
planning process and do not lead to outcomes that meet the
organisations'
needs, but the requirements of external organisation, the OPDC.
Work characteristics
Most agencies under the Ministry of Justice are required to
perform as
prescribed by laws, regulations and orders. They share common
missions that
are their routine work. For example, the Central Institute of
Forensic Science,
the Department of Special Investigation, the Legal Execution
Department, the
Department of Corrections, the Office of the Narcotics Control
Board, and the
Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission do not
seek satisfaction
from clients. The characteristics of their work prevent creation
of new missions

or strategies to compete with other organisations and therefore
obstruct the
system of strategic planning.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Policy recommendations
Although the linkage between the three elements-determinants,
strategic
planning and outcomes was weak, partly due to the cultural and
organisational
constraints, the strategic planning processes by the agencies
under the
Ministry of Justice can, in practice, be separated from routine
work. To do so,
these agencies need to improve the quality of personnel so that
they are goal-
oriented and can contribute to the organisational development to
adapt to
Page 41
changes and accomplish their goals and missions. Hellriegel et
al (2001 cited by
Sun & Xu 2012:70) suggest that organisations should
communicate with their
personnel about personal and organisational values, promote
team working

and recognition, and implement a reward-and-punishment
system for desired
behavioural outcomes. Many organisations can develop the
outcome-oriented
system and culture by building common understanding in their
personnel so
that they realise the importance of strategic planning. In some
organisations,
for example, strategic missions are on the agenda of monthly
meetings. Some
organisations require that new projects are aligned with
missions and
strategies (Hu, Kapucu, & O’Byrne 2014:93). Organisations
need to create
common understanding that strategic planning is a systematic
way that helps
the leaders to understand future environments in different
dimensions and
see how to achieve goals and visions. The strategic planning
comprises
methods and activities that inform how the achievements can
take place
(Gordon 2005:1). It is also a process whereby stakeholders
share opinions and
reach agreements about missions and priorities (Allison & Kaye
1997:1). In
addition, organisations should show that strategic planning can
benefit
individuals, groups, the organisations and communities and that
it can help the
organisations achieve their goals and create a better future for
younger
generations (Bryson 2004:8)..
RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS

Since the Ministry of Justice and others have extensively
implemented the
policy of strategic planning, the findings of the weak linkage
between elements
in the process point to an urgent need to conduct a study to find
out how to
strengthen the connection between these elements. It is
important that the
research focuses on the whole picture of the planning process,
which has been
missed by other studies that pay attention to specific elements,
eg leadership,
perception and understanding and organisational competence.
REFERENCES
Allison, M. & Kaye, J. (1997). Strategic Planning for Nonprofit
Organizations:A
Practical Guide and Workbook. New York, NY: John Wiley &
Sons.
Bailey, R.W. (1989). Strategic Planning and Large-City
Governance. Proceedings
of the Academy of Political Science 37(3): 167-179.
Bryson, J.M. (2004). Strategic Planning for Public and
Nonprofit Organizations:
A guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational
Achievement. San
Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Page 42
Choonhaklai, S. (2012). Organizational Administration
According to Public
Administration Theory. Nakon Pathom: Mistercopy.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative,
Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches. 2
nd
ed. London: Sage.
Denhardt, J.V. & Denhardt, R. B. (2007). The New Public
Services (Expanded
Edition): Serving not Steering. Armonk, New York: M.E.
Sharpe.
Gordon, G.J. (2005). Strategic Planning for Local Government.
Washington, DC:
ICMA.
Hansen, J.R., (2011). Application of Strategic Management
Tools after NPM –
Inspired Reform: Strategy as Practice in Danish Schools.
Administration &
Society 43 (7) 770-806.
Hu, Q., Kapucu, N., & O’Byrne, L. (2014). Strategic Planning
for Community-

Based Small Nonprofit Organizations: Implementation,
Benefits, and
Challenges. The Journal of Applied Management and
Entrepreneurship,
2014, Vol. 19, No. 1 (83-101).
Matzke, P., Kriebel, N. & Krauss, D. (2007). Four Steps To
Derive More Strategic
Value From Your SWOT Analysis. Retrieved June 23, 2011
from http:
//www.forrester.com/rb/
Research/four_steps_to_derive_more_strategic_value/q/id/4153
7/t/2
Mercer, J.L. (1991). Strategic Planning for Public Managers.
Westport, CT:
Quorum Books.
Nigro, F.A. & Nigro, L.G. (1984). Modern Public
Administration. 4th ed. New
York: Harper & Row Publisher.
Ocampo, Romeo B., (2000). Models of Public Administration
Reform: “New
public management (NPM)”. Asian Review of Public
Administration, vol. XII,
no. 1, pp. 248-255.
Office of Public Sector Development Commission. Annual
Report: 2004.
Bangkok: Author.
Pfiffner, J. P. (2004). Traditional Public Administration versus
the New Public
Management: Accountability versus Efficiency. Fairfax, VA:
School of Public

Policy, George Mason University. Pp: 443-454.
Poister, T.H., & Streib, G.D. (1999). Strategic Management in
the Public Sector:
Concepts, Models, and Processes. Public Productivity &
Management
Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, March 1999. 308-325.
Poister, T.H., Pitts, D.W. and Edwards, L.H. (2010). Strategic
Management
Research in the Public Sector: A Review, Synthesis and Future
Directions.
The American Review of Public Administration 40(5) 522-545.
Porter, M. E. (2008) The Five Competitive Forces That Shape
Strategy, Harvard
business Review, January 2008.
Pumipathanasuk, S. (2010). A Study of FM 93.5 Yes Radio
Retro Program's
Strategic Management. Independent Study. Master of Arts
Program in
Public and Private Administration, Silpakorn University.
Page 43
Rachamani, Y. (2011). Implementation of Strategic Plans by
Primary Schools in
the South. Master of Science Thesis in Applied Statistics,
National Institute

of Development Administration.
Rehfuss, J. (1973). Public Administration as Political Process.
New York: Charles
Scribnew’s Sons.
Robbins, S.P. (1990). Organization Theory: Structure, Design,
and Applications.
3
rd
ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Schein, Edgar H. (1990). Organizational culture. American
Psychologist 45
(2): 109-119.
Sun, S. & Xu, Z. (2012). Cultural Values and their Challenges
for Enterprises.
International Journal of Business administration. March 2012.
Vol. 3 No. 2
(68 – 73).
Copyright of International Employment Relations Review is the
property of International
Employment Relations Association and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 354
– 359
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
1877-0428 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This
is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the International Strategic
Management Conference.
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.026
ScienceDirect
10th International Strategic Management Conference
The Soft Element of Strategic Human Resource Management:
The
Employee’s Perception of Diversity Climate
Hakan Sezerel a , H. Zumrut Tonusb , a
aGumushane University, Gumushane, 29020, Turkey
b Anadolu University, Eskisehir, 26470, Turkey
Abstract
Workforce diversity imposes itself as an imperative for
organizations. Hence, today’s organizations distinguish the
diversified
workforce as a tool to leverage business opportunities. In order

to acquire a competitive advantage from human resources,
diversity
management comes to the front for all organizations. Managing
diversity successfully requires a proper diversity climate for
employees in all levels of organizations. This study reports the
findings of a research study on the diversity climate among
employees of a hotel chain. Both the t-test and one way
ANOVA tests predict the perception of employees. The results
show that
diversity perceptions of employees predominantly depend on
managerial status.
© 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review
under responsibility of the 10th International Strategic
Management Conference
Keywords: Diversity climate, hotel industry, strategic human
resource management.
1. Introduction
The salient fact presenting a major challenge for an
organization’s agenda of the century is diversity. Since
the initial studies summoning managing diversity (Thomas,
1990; Cox, 1991; Thomas & Ely, 1996), the extant
literature on diversity management has emphasized that
benefitting from a diversified workforce and diminishing the
potential conflicts among the employees requires long-term
planning and strategic initiatives. The trend to posit
diversity management in strategic human resource management
(Kossek et al., 2006) directed the researchers towards
the hard elements of strategy; namely, strategy, structures, and
systems. From this point of view, diversity appears to
be an embedded phenomenon associated with power
relationships in organizations, and the success of diversity

depends on top management commitment (Cox & Blake, 1991),
best practices (Kreitz, 2008), and initiatives (Gilbert,
Stead, & Ivanchevich, 1999 ) . The research concentrates on the
hard elements usually interested in performance (Pitts,
2009). However, the soft elements can be titled as the climate,
values, and skills. This view relies on ethical and non-
Corresponding author. Tel. + 90-456-233-7170 fax. +90-456-
233-7427
Email address: [email protected]
© 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the International Strategic
Management Conference.
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.sbspro.2014
.09.026&domain=pdf
355 Hakan Sezerel and H. Zumrut Tonus / Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 354 – 359
discriminatory bases. Hence, the research stresses inclusion
(Pless & Maak, 2004; Barak et al., 1998 ), equity (Agocs
& Burr, 1996), among other aspects. However, both approaches
are considered to be instrumental (Janssens & Zanoni,
2005), and depend on the assumption that diversity can be
managed. Diversity management is an extensive managerial
approach which depends on a positive climate for all employees.
The organization’s diversity climate plays an
important role in structuring the diversity initiatives (Barry,
1996). In this study, diversity climate refers to the
perceptions and attitudes of individuals towards the differences

among employees in the workplace. It is asserted that
the positive diversity climate in an organization helps managers
to mitigate conflicts and negative attitudes, leverages
organizational performance, and provides an efficient workplace
(Herdman & McMillan-Capehart, 2010; Kossek &
Zonia, 1993), thus contributing to a highly tolerant climate
assists organizations to be more pluralistic (Cox, 1991).
Due to its very nature, the hospitality industry – especially the
hotel sector – is considered to be multicultural
and composed of a greater diversified workforce. The major
characteristics of the hotel industry include low pay, low
job security, high labor flexibility, high turnover, and gender
discrimination (Deery & Shaw, 1999; Walsh & Deery,
1999). In addition, the workers are usually unskilled laborers
(Gröschl &Doherty, 1999) and are underrepresented
women (Baum , 2013). These characteristics pose the hotel
industry as a promising field to examine. In this study, we
examine a hotel chain to ascertain the importance of diversity
climate in hotel chains. This study examines the
diversity climate of an organization from the employee’s view.
In the study, a brief literature about diversity climate is
presented and an empirical investigation reported. The research
question is provided below:
Do the demographic attributes of employees differentiate in
perceiving diversity climate?
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Diversity Climate
Diversity management is considered as a double edge sword that
has both positive and negative outcomes for

organizations. The proponents of diversity management tend to
see it as a strategic property for an organization and set
their arguments ton resource based view (Chrobot-Mason &
Aramovich, 2013).
The scholars of diversity management examine the diversity
climate on three levels: individual, group (working
group), and organization (Cox, 1993; Hicks-Clarke & Isles,
2000; Sawyerr, Strauss, & Yan, 2005). Individual level
states personal experiences of diversity workplace. (Bean et al.,
2001). On this level, personal perceptions of
employees are considered in order to measure and eloborate the
current position of an organization in diversity related
management. Group level is defined in a cognitive aspect as
exchanging information and perspectives within a group
(Joshi & Roh, 2009). Group level climate and relationships
increase problem solving capability (Gilbert, Stead, &
Ivanchevich, 1999). Organizational level indicates
organizational attitudes and responses to diversity, both
coherent
organizational climate and management of diversity, and
employees’ evaluations towards managers with whom they
are not directly dependent in diversity related issues. This level
is characterized with the choices of the decision
makers – in other words, the management.
3. Methodology
The research applied the quantitative method and data is
gathered via the questionnaire technique. The sampling
consisted of a hotel chain and the data collected from 285
respondents. Statistical analyses of the data were conducted
using the software programs SPSS (Version 15). In particular,
descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, means,
and standard deviations) were used in the data analysis.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent t-test was

employed to determine whether or not there was a difference in
perceived diversity climate according to hotel
worker’s demographic attributes.
3.1. Data Collection
The sample of the study consists of the employees of a hotel
chain which is one of the biggest in Turkey due to
number of owned hotels (10), rooms (1972), and beds (5,561).
The hotel chain, one of the first hotel chains in Turkey
which was founded in 1970, is a typical family owned business.
The hotels settled in Antalya and the hotel chain
provides an opportunity for diversity management researches
with its practices including corporate social
responsibility initiatives and raising awareness trainings for
employees.
The data gathered from six hotels of the chain all settled in
three regions of Antalya, Turkey. In order to gather
comprehensive data, quantitave and qualitative methods were
applied together. We visited six out of 10 hotels owned
by the chain distributed the questionnaries and made semi-
structured face-to-face interviews with the management
consultant of the chain (general coordinator of human resources
) and the human resource manager of the hotels. We
filled out a form which comprises the initiatives and practices
are present at the chains. Then, we handed the
questionnaries to the employees of the chain. The data was
collected between the period 20 May through 25 October,
2013.

3.2. Research Instrument
The Diversity Climate Survey: The survey conducted in the
study (Bean et al., 2001) consisted of 15 items and 10
demographic questions measuring three levels of the diversity
climate: namely, individual, work group/department,
and organization. Each level comprises issues related to respect,
equality, conflict, discrimination, and feelings about
diversity. The survey was used several studies in Turkey and
internal validity was approved. In addition, a pilot survey
conducted to provide reliability. The overall Cronbach alpha
score was 0.77 for the survey which lies between the
acceptable values.
3.3. The participants
The participants of the study are employees working in the hotel
chain for at least three years and who accepted to
contribute the research voluntarily. Table 1 demonstrates the
participants of the study.
Table 1.The Participants of The Study
1. Gender
N (%) 2. Education Level N (%)
Female 78 72,6 Primary 67 23,5
Male 207 27,4 Highschool 109 38,2
Total 285 100 Associate 43 15,1
3. Age N (%) Undergraduate 58 20,4

18-30 10 3,5 Graduate (Master/PhD) 8 2,8
31-40 128 44,9 Total 285 100,0
41- 50 116 40,7 4. Marital Status N (%)
51-60 31 10,9 Married 178 62,5
Total 285 100 Single 107 37,5
5. Position N (%) Total 285 100,0
Manager 6 2,1 6. Department N (%)
Deputy Manager 10 3,5 Housekeeping 33 11,6
Department Manager 20 7,0 Front Desk 30 10,5
Department Chief 69 24,2 Restaurant 54 18,9
Non-managerial employee 180 63,2 Kitchen 55 19,3
Total 285 100 Other 113 39,6
7. Sectoral Experience N (%) Total 285 100
1-5 112 39,3 8. Appointment Type N (%)
5-10 79 27,7 Permanent 184 64,6
10-15 50 17,5 Non-permanent (Seasonal employee) 101 35,4
15-20 44 15,4 Total 285 100,0
Total 285 100 10. Hometown N (%)
9. Work Experience (In the Organization N (%) Antalya 119
41,8
1-5 164 57,5 Other 166 58,2
5-10 66 23,2 Total 285 100,0
10-15 30 10,5
15-20 25 8,8
Total 285 100

Table 1 shows the demographic attributes of the participants. A
total of 72.6 % of the participants were male
(N=207) and 27.4 % were female (N=78). Of the participants,
62,5 % were married (N=178); the majority was
between age 31-40 (44.9%) , and were high school graduates
(38.2%). The majority of the sample (57.5% of
participants) had been working for the hotel chain for between
1-5 years. The total sample size is 285.
3.4. Statistical Analysis
The data was analysed using the SPSS package program. In
order to determine whether a significant difference
exists regarding to the diversity climate perceptions among the
demographic groups, the independent sample t-test and
one way anova (Analysis of Variance) was applied. The
independent sample t-test and one way anova tests are used
when examining the difference among the groups on a
dependent variable. The independent sample t-test shows the
differences between two groups (i.e., the differences between
men and women towards diversity climate in workplace)
when one way anova presents the difference among more than
two groups (i.e., chiefs , supervisors, department
managers, and general managers’ perception). Pallant (2011:
238-264) suggests the one-way analysis of variance
involves one independent variable (diversity climate
perceptions) which has a number of different levels (individual,

wokgroup/ depatment, and organization in our case). The
significance level based on the p <0.05 for both analysis.
3.5. Results
This section presents the findings of the study. The independent
sample t-test and one way anova test were
used to conduct the differences among the employees’
perception towards diversity climate. Table 2 shows the
findings of the independent sample t-test.
Table2. Independent Sample T- test
*p <0.05
Level Appointment type N. Mean SD T P
Individual
Permanent 184 3,66 ,78
3,381 .00*
Temporary 101 3,30 ,95
Work
Group-
Department
2,441 .01*
Nonpermanent 101 3,22 ,56
Organization

1,385 .16
Nonpermanent 101 3,65 ,88
Level Marital status
Individual
Married 178 3,64 ,87
2,865 .00* Single 107 3,34 ,82
Work
Group-
Department
Married 178 3,44 ,69
3,394 .00* Single 107 3,19 ,55
Organization
Married 178 3,77 ,91
.352 .72 Single 107 3,73 ,87
Level Position
Individual
Managerial 105 3,75 ,78
3,388 .00* Non-managerial 180 3,40 ,88
Work
Group-
Department
2,751 .00* Non-managerial 180 3,26 ,59
Organization

1,978 .04* Non-managerial 180 3,67 ,91
The table 1 represents the results of the T-test. The t-test
exhibits that the perceptions of the employees are
significantly different. According to the findings, the
perceptions of the employees differ in appointment type, marital
status, and position variables.
Appointment type: Employees with permanent appointments are
more positive about the diversity climate at
individual and workgroup/department levels.
Position: When examining the comparison of managerial and
non-managerial employees, it appears that being in
managerial positions affect employees’ perceptions in a more
positive manner. The employees in managerial positions
are more likely to perceive diversity climate in favorable all
three levels when compared to those in non-managerial
positions which is consistent with the extant literature (Hicks-
Clarke&Isles, 2000).
Marital status: In the study, an association is found between
marital status and diversity climate perceptions. The
test findings suggest that married employees perceive more
positive than the single employees, in individual and
group levels. The study signifies a data that when supported by
a policy support (e.g., family allowance, flexible
working hours) marital status also can be differentaited in
regards to diversity climate (Hicks-Clarke & Isles, 2000).

Table 3. One Way ANOVA Test
Level Variable Position N X SSP F P
Individual
Manager 6 3,00 ,63246 6,373 .00*
Deputy Manager 10 3,52 ,82839
Department Manager 20 3,40 ,62912
Department Chief 69 3,96 ,75168
Non- managerial Employee 180 3,40 ,88714
Total 285 3,53 ,86551
Level Position
Work Group- Department
Manager 6 3,31 ,34427 3,228 .00*
Deputy Manager 10 3,23 ,41722
Total 285 3,34 ,65852
Level Position
Organization
Manager 6 4,0417 ,62082 1,844 .121
Deputy Manager 10 3,7000, 1,01926,

Total 285 3,7579 ,89976
p <0.05
Table 3 shows the statistically significant difference in
perceptions of diversity climate among employees in
individual and work group/ department levels. The one way
anova tests (including the Post Hoc-Scheffe tests) were
conducted in order to ascertain the difference among employees
due to their orientation through positive diversity
climate. The two grouping was statistically different at p <0.05.
The responses of the employees in non-managerial
positions are less positive about both the individual level (x
=3,40) and the workgroup/department level (x=3,26) when
compared to the department chiefs (x=3,96; 3, 55).
The findings of the study suggest the increase in organizational
position brings a more positive perception of
diversity climate. This fact coincides with the other studies in
the relevant literature. It is found that members of
management (Harris, Rousseau, &Venter, 2007) and particularly
senior managers (Hicks-Clark & Isles, 2000) are
more positive about diversity climate. Briefly, a higher step in
the organizational hierarchy brings career and
education opportunities with respect.
Discussion and Conclusion
It can be deduced from the findings that demographic variables
are very useful to elicit information on diversity
climate. The study shows that both hierarchical level and
marital status were important variables in determining
perceptions.Two main findings of the study indicates that

organizational level and being in the management or not
distinguishes diversity climate perceptions. Using t-tests and
ANOVA, relationships were shown to exist between the
level of management with employees' perceptions to their own,
their department, and the organization – becoming
more positive as management level increased. Marital status
also signifies that the diversity initiatives have an impact
on the climate’s perception. Being married is an accepted value
and is promoted (flexible working hours, child
allowance, food allowance, etc.) in the organization that causes
positive climate for those who are married. On the
other hand, this can lead a social trap (Barry & Bateman, 1996)
that diversity initiatives may continue in favor of the
groups whose values and lifestyles are already a social norm.
References
Agócs C., & Burr C. (1996) Employment equity, affirmative
action and managing diversity: assessing the differences.
International Journal of
Manpower, Vol. 17 No. 4/5, 1996, pp. 30-45.
Barak M.,Cherin M., & Berkman D. (1998)
SherryOrganizational and Personal Dimensions in Diversity
Climate: Ethnic and Gender Differences in
Employee Perceptions. The Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science 34: 82 104.
Barry, B., & Bateman T. S. (1996). A Social Trap Analysis of

the Management of Diversity. Academy of Management Review
21: 757-790.
Baum T. (2013). International perspectives on women and work
in hotels, catering and tourism, Bureau for Gender Equality
Working Paper 1/2013,
Sectoral Activities Department Working Paper No. 289, ILO :
Geneva.
Bean, R., Sammartino, A., O'Flynn, J., & Lau, K. (2001). Using
Diversity Climate Surveys: A Toolkit for Diversity
Management; Stephen
Nicholas. Australia: Australian Center for International
Business.
Chrobot-Mason D., & and Aramovich N. P. (2013). Group &
Organization Management, 38(6) 659– 689.
Cox, T. (1993), Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory,
Research & Practice, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco,
CA.
Cox, T. H., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing Cultural Diversity:
İmplications for Organizational Competiveness. Academy of
Management Executive,
5(3), pp. 45-56.
Cox, T. The multicultural organization. Academy of
Management Executive, 1991, 5(2), 34–47.
Deery, M. A., & Shaw, R. N. (1999). An Investigation of the
Relationship between Employee Turnover and Organizational
Culture. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, 23(4), pp. 387-400.
Gilbert, J. A., Stead, B. A., & Ivanchevich, J. M. (1999).
Diversity Management A New Organizational Paradigm. Journal
Of Business Ethics, 21
(1), pp. 61-76.

Gröschl, S., & Doherty, L. (1999). Diversity management in
practice Contemporary Hospitality Management. International
Journal of, 11(6), pp.
262 - 268.
Harris, C., Rousseau, G.G. &Venter, D.J.L. (2007) Employee
perceptions of diversity management at a tertiary institution :
management
South African Journal of Economic and Management, 10(1), pp.
51-71.
Herdman A., McMillan-Capehart A. (2010) Establishing a
Diversity Program is Not Enough: Exploring the Determinants
of Diversity Climate,
Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(1), pp. 39-53.
Hicks-Clarke, D. and Iles, P. (2000), “Climate for diversity and
its effects on career and organizational attitudes and
perceptions”, Personnel
Review, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 324-45.
Janssens, M, Zanoni, P, 2005, Many diversities for many
services: Theorizing diversity (management) in service
companies, Human Relations,
58(3) pp. 311-340.
Joshi, A., & Roh., H.2009, "The role of context in work team
diversity research: A meta-analytic review", Academy of
Management Journal, 52,
pp.599-628.
Kossek, E. and Zonia, S.C. (1993), “Assessing diversity
climate: a field study of reactions to employer efforts to
promote diversity”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 61-81.
Kossek, E.E., Lobel, S.A. and Brown, J. (2006), “Human

resource strategies to manage workforce diversity”, in Konrad,
A.M ., Prasad, P. and
Pringle, J.K. (Eds), Handbook of Workplace Diversity, Sage,
London, pp. 53-74.
Kreitz, P. (2008), “Best practices for managing organizational
diversity”, Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 101-20.
Pallant, J. (2011). Survival Manual: A step by step guide to data
analysis using SPSS (4. Baskı b.). Crows Nest, Avustralya:
Allen&Unwin.
Pitts, D. (2009), Diversity Management, Job Satisfaction, and
Performance: Evidence from U.S. Federal Agencies. Public
Administration Review,
69, pp. 328–338.
Reichenberg, N. E. (3 - 4 May 2001). Best Practices in
Diversity Management. I. P. Association (Dü.), United Nations
Expert Group Meeting on in
Managing Diversity in the Civil Service, (pp. 1-7). United
Nations Headquarters: New York.
Sawyerr, O. O., Strauss, J., & Yan, J. (2005). Individual Value
Structure and Diversity Attitudes. Journal of Managerial
Phsycology, 20(6), pp. 498-
521.
Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (1996). Making Differences Matter
A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity. Harward Business
Review, pp. 1-16.
Thomas, R. (1990). From Affirmative Action to Affirmative
Diversity. Harvard Business Review, pp. 107-117.
Walsh J., Deery S. (1999) Understanding the peripheral
workforce: evidence from the service sector Human Resource
Management Journal,

Volume 9, Issue 2, April 1999, pp. 50–63.
Strategic Agility: A State of
the Art
INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL
SECTION ON STRATEGIC AGILITY
Yaakov Weber
Shlomo Y. Tarba
In a chaotic environment in which markets emerge, collide,
split, evolve, anddie, one of the primary determinants of a
firm’s success is strategic agility, theability to remain flexible
in facing new developments, to continuously adjustthe
company’s strategic direction, and to develop innovative ways
to create
value. The competitive landscape has been shifting in recent
years more than ever.
Globalization, rapid technological change, codification of
knowledge, the internet,
talentandemployeemobility, increasedratesofknowledge transfer,
imitation, changes
in customer tastes, and the obsolescence of products and
business models have all
causeda turbulent environment andaccelerated
changesanddisruptions. These trends
are expected to continue, producing evermore rapid and
unpredictable changes.
Current concepts such as sustained competitive advantage,
resource-based
view, and strategic planning have been deemed vague,
tautological, and inadequate

for companies to cope with the rate and complexity of
environmental and market
changes.1 There are tensions between formal processes of
strategic planning and
opportunistic strategic agility. Strategic planning has been
criticized for preparing
plans for tomorrow based on yesterday’s actions, concepts, and
tools. Although stra-
tegic planning can help in specific situations, it usually creates
an inertia that prevents
fast adaptation when circumstances change or market
discontinuities occur.
There is an agreement on the importance of strategic agility in
light of com-
plexmanagerial challenges such as dynamic environment,
globalization, accelerating
rate of innovation, and mergers and acquisitions (as mentioned
by Jack Welch).2
Strategic agility requires inventing new business models and
new categories
rather than rearranging old products and categories. To cope
with growing strategic
discontinuities and disruptions, scholars have suggested the
creation of strategically
agile companies, including new ways for managing business
transformation and
CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 56, NO. 3
SPRING 2014 CMR.BERKELEY.EDU 5
renewal, developing dynamic capabilities, creating
imitation abilities, maintaining a high level of orga-

nizational flexibility and ambidexterity, developing
learning and knowledge transfer skills, using adap-
tive corporate culture, devising post-acquisition
integration approaches, and more.3 While the con-
cept of strategic agility was introduced about two
decades ago, the concept remains ill defined, and
relatively little has been done in terms of specifica-
tion and operationalization of the measures.
Strategic agility is not about one particular change that an
organization
deals with—for instance, as a response to a major threat or
crisis. Instead, strategic
agility implies that a firm possesses a constant ability to
effectively change its
course of action in order to sustain its competitive advantages.4
Agile organiza-
tions have the ability to initiate continuous renewal that
includes adapting exist-
ing competencies to an ever-changing environment and
simultaneously
reconfiguring themselves in order to survive and thrive for the
long term.5
Characteristics (and Considerations) of Strategic Agility
While the concept of strategic agility has received increasing
attention, it has
neither received consistent treatment nor clear articulation of its
effects on a firm’s
performance. Instead, strategic agility has remained an elusive
term with many
definitions across various situations. However, some common
themes have emerged
in the last two decades. First, strategic agility involves a set of
actions taken by an

organization that operates in an environment characterized by
rapid and unpredict-
able change. Agile organizations are those firms that
successfully adapt to this disrup-
tive environment.6 Second, strategic agility requires changes
that are different from
other regular and routine types of changes. The changes that
result from strategic
agility are specified as continuous, systematic variations in an
organization’s prod-
ucts, processes, services, and structures.7 The intensity and
variety of these changes
are high, thus agile organizations are those that demonstrate
high flexibility.8 Third,
speed is needed to sense the environmental changes and to
adequately respond.9
Therefore, strategic agility requires a significant investment of
resources to maintain
the high levels of flexibility and speed necessary to be able to
respond to sudden envi-
ronmental threats and opportunities.
High flexibility is an increasingly valuable core competence of
the firm in gen-
eral, and of interorganizational partnerships in particular.10 The
importance of high
flexibility lies not only in the existing products and services,
but also in the overall
organizational design. It can reduce cost and difficulty in
adaptive coordination,
thereby increasing the strategic agility of the firm.11 Finally,
adopting modular archi-
tectures, which are at the heart of strategic agility, leads to
changes not only in the
nature of the technological work performed in an organization,

but also in the kinds
of knowledge assets the organization creates, the way learning
occurs at both individ-
ual and organizational levels, and the human resource
characteristics of the organisa-
tion.12 Thus in order to attain strategic agility, it is important
for the organizations to
Yaakov Weber is a professor of
management at the School of Business
Administration, College of Management,
Rishon Lezion, Israel, and president of the
strategic management consulting firm
Strategy, Implementation, Results.
<[email protected]>
Shlomo Y. Tarba is a Lecturer in Strategic
Management atManagement School, The
University of Sheffield, UK.
<[email protected]>
Strategic Agility: A State of the Art
6 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY VOL. 56, NO.
3 SPRING 2014 CMR.BERKELEY.EDU
develop the key capabilities needed to accelerate the renewal
and transformation of
the existing business models.13
Exploration and Exploitation
Strategic agility consists of dual major capabilities. The first
capability is

emphasized by leadership: sensing the direction for a needed
change and putting
together the right resources for strategy execution. The second
capability pertains
to organizational design that includes the necessary structural
adaptation and
mechanisms to implement the course of action. However,
neither is sufficient
on its own, and it is crucial that both of them complement each
in order to enable
enduring strategic agility.
Strategic agility includes both the ability to identify and sense
major opportu-
nities and threats as well as to respond as needed to such
environmental surprises.
Therefore, we define strategic agility as the ability of
management to constantly
and rapidly sense and respond to a changing environment by
intentionally making
strategic moves and consequently adapting the necessary
organizational configura-
tion for successful implementation.
One of the important examples of strategic agility refers to
devising and
applying a post-acquisition integration approach in M&A deals.
A report on
M&As produced by the Boston Consulting Group14 showed that
the widely held
assumptions about M&A are actually based on unrepresentative
averages derived
invariably from studies originating from particular industries
and relatively narrow
time frames. Moreover, this approach has fueled a dangerous
“one-size-fits-all”

approach to M&As, contributing to their persistently high
failure rate. In addition,
as highlighted by a Deloitte report onM&As,15 sometimes the
need to move rapidly
is essential throughout the implementation of the M&A process,
but the speed of
post-merger integration must be balanced against other
considerations. On some
issues, it is advisable to move deliberately; on others, however,
more trenchant
action may be necessary, depending on a variety of factors such
as strategic fit,
synergy potential, and cultural differences between
amalgamating entities.
Oftentimes, a high level of post-acquisition integration may be
required to
realize the much-anticipated benefits of the acquisitions.16
However, a high level of
integration may eventually result in cultural clashes, destruction
of the knowledge-
based resources of the acquired firm due to senior management
and key employee
turnover, and disruption of organizational routines.17
There is a clear trade-off between levels of applied integration
and exploited
synergy. High levels of integration may be needed to exploit
high levels of synergy,
but a high level of integration may cause intense culture clash
and human resource
problems that can destroy the value of the acquired firm and
increase costs to an
extent that offsets the benefits expected from the merger. The
reason for the poor
performance of acquiring companies can be the failure to adopt

the right post-
acquisition integration approach required in each individual
case of an M&A.18
Another interesting example of strategic agility involves the
application of
HR practices by the acquiring firms while coping with cross-
cultural situations
and their impact on development of post-acquisition integration
capabilities.
While HR practices are significantly associated with M&A
performance, these rela-
tionships are complex and vary across different countries. While
there are some
similarities between M&As in general, there are still substantial
differences in
the approaches taken by the acquiring entities. The effect of HR
practices on
M&A performance accentuates the need to match the acquiring
firm’s nationality
to the post-acquisition training methods, cross-cultural
communication, and the
autonomy granted to acquirer HR managers. For instance,
acquirer managers
and employees coming from a culture of high power distance
(acceptance of sta-
tus differences between instructor/manager and trainees) and
strong uncertainty

avoidance (unwillingness to take risks and try new approaches)
are likely to per-
form better in training programs that rely more heavily on
structured and passive
learning techniques, such as reading assignments and lectures.
Yet, employees
coming in with a cultural background that emphasizes a culture
of weak uncertainty
avoidance and low power distance are likely to perform better
with experiential
training techniques, such as on-the-job training. This may
explain the positive
relationships found between on-the-job training and the
performance of Danish
acquirers characterized by low uncertainty avoidance and low
power distance.
Similarly, it may explain the negative relationship between on-
the-job training
and the performance of Belgian acquirers characterized by high
uncertainty
avoidance and high power distance.19
Ambidexterity Design
The strategic agility process entails contradicting efforts and
tradeoffs between
the use of resources for both routine processes and new business
models. This trade-
off becomes even more complex when considering that strategic
agility has various
levels and amounts of change and speed that required high
balance and alignment
of systems and resources—namely, organizational
ambidexterity, which can be sum-
marized as an organization’s capacity to address two
incompatible (or sometimes

mutually exclusive) aims and/or processes equally well.20
Furthermore, in order to
be successful at ambidexterity, leaders must be able to
orchestrate the allocation of
resources between the old and the new business domains. How
they actually do this
is seldom addressed in the research on ambidexterity but is at
the core of the leader-
ship challenge.21
There has been substantial, though often inconsistent, research
on
approaches to managing the conflicts between exploration and
exploitation. For
example, Im and Rai22 arrived at the conclusion that both
explorative and exploit-
ative knowledge sharing lead to attaining long-term relationship
performance
gains. In the same vein, Kauppila23 underscores the importance
of balancing
explorative and exploitative partnerships in order to create a
sustainable innova-
tion pipeline within an organization. Specifically, firms that
balance exploration
and exploitation—through research and development alliances,
collaboration with
their prior partners, or by forming marketing and production
alliances—achieve
better profitability and higher market value.24
8 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY VOL. 56, NO.
3 SPRING 2014 CMR.BERKELEY.EDU

Research Goals
The goal of this special section in CMR on strategic agility is to
stimulate
other researchers and authors to redefine the spectrum of means
and processes
available to create and use strategic agility. This section
challenges researchers to
provide the frameworks that managers can use to integrate,
develop, and recon-
figure the competences and resources required to deal with
hypercompetitive
markets. Given markets discontinuities and the rapidly
increasing pace of change,
companies need new and agile paradigms.
In the first article, Fourné, Jansen, and Mom25 identify three
dynamic
capabilities—sensing local opportunities, enacting global
complementarities,
and appropriating local value—by which MNEs are able to
operate successfully
across emerging and established markets. They show that for
MNEs in these
markets, strategic agility is a meta-capability that involves not
only allocating
sufficient resources to the development and deployment of all
three dynamic
capabilities, but also staying agile by balancing those
capabilities dynamically
over time. This balancing act is crucial because such firms face
unprecedented
heterogeneity and unpredictable changes as they operate across
established
and emerging markets. By reassessing the relative emphasis to

be put on each
dynamic capability, large global firms regenerate their
competitive advantages
over time.
In the second article, Brueller, Carmeli, and Drori26 emphasize
that strategic
agility is an invaluable capability that enables a firm to turn on
a dime without losing
momentum, which increases its viability in uncertain, volatile,
and rapidly changing
environments. In order to create an agile organizational system,
firms need to
develop three enabling capacities: making sense quickly,
making decisions nimbly,
and redeploying resources rapidly. This study highlights the
differences between
platform acquisitions and bolt-on acquisitions, and then
describes the scenarios in
which the M&As are applicable: diversifying into a new
domain, promoting growth
in an adjacent product category, or acquiringmissing
technological knowledge. Their
findings show how these different acquisition types can enhance
strategic agility in
distinct ways along different time horizons. They elucidate how
acquisitions, when
properly managed, facilitate the gradual accumulation of the
capabilities underlying
strategic agility.
In the third article, Lewis, Andriopoulos, and Smith27 explore
the paradoxi-
cal leadership that enables strategic agility. They encourage
leaders to view strategic
agility as a continual balancing act as they work through

competing demands
simultaneously. This study suggests that leaders must encourage
“paradoxical
thinking,” in which a tension is identified, its contradictory
elements and their links
are explored, and new insights into existing problems are
reached. Once managers
understand and accept contradictions, they aremore likely to
embrace tensions and
benefit from them. Furthermore, this article stresses the
importance of remaining
wary of mismanaging paradox, avoiding the potential for
anxiety to foster
defensiveness and counterproductive responses that inhibit fast-
paced and
adaptive decision making.
Notes
1. E.L. Chen, R. Katila, R. Mcdonald, and K.M. Eisenhardt,
“Life in the Fast Lane: Origins of
Competitive Interaction in New vs. Established Markets,”
Strategic Management Journal, 31/3
(December 2010): 1527-1547; J. Kraaijenbrink, J.-C. Spender,
and A.J. Groen, “The
Resource-Based View: A Review and Assessment of its
Critiques,” Journal of Management,
36/1 (January 2010): 349-372; A.A. Lado, N.G. Boyd, P.
Wright, and M. Kroll, “Paradox and

Theorizing within the Resource-Based View,” Academy of
Management Review, 31/1 (January
2006): 115-131.
2. N. Tichy and R. Charan, “Speed, Simplicity, Self-
Confidence: An Interview with Jack Welch,”
Harvard Business Review, 67/5 (September/October 1989): 112-
118.
3. Y.L Doz and M. Kosonen, “The Dynamics of Strategic
Agility: Nokia’s Rollercoaster Experi-
ence,” California Management Review, 50/3 (Spring 2008): 95-
118; Y.L Doz and M. Kosonen,
“Embedding Strategic Agility,” Long Range Planning, 43/2-3
(April 2010): 370-382; K.M. Eisenhardt
and J.A. Martin, “Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They?”
Strategic Management Journal, 21/10-
11 (October/November 2000): 1105-1121; P. Junni, R.M.
Sarala, V. Taras, and S.Y. Tarba,
“Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: A Meta-
Analysis,” Academy of Management
Perspectives, 27/4 (November 2013): 299-312; O. Shenkar,
Copycats: How Smart Companies Use Imi-
tation to Gain a Strategic Edge (Boston, MA: Harvard Business
Press, 2010); Y. Weber, C. Öberg,
and S.Y. Tarba, A Comprehensive Guide to Mergers &
Acquisitions: Managing the Critical Success Factors
Across Every Stage of the M&A Process (Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Financial Times Press, 2014);
Y. Weber and S.Y. Tarba, “Exploring Integration Approach in
Related Mergers: Post-Merger
Integration in the High-Tech Industry,” International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, 19/3
(2011): 202-221; Y. Weber, S.Y. Tarba, and Z. Rozen Bachar,
“Mergers and Acquisitions Perfor-
mance Paradox: The Mediating Role of Integration Approach,”

European Journal of International
Management,” 5/4 (2011) 373-393; Y. Weber, S.Y. Tarba, and
Z. Rozen-Bachar, “The Effects
of Culture Clash on International Mergers in the High Tech
Industry,” World Review of Entre-
preneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 8/1
(2012): 103-118.
4. S.L. Goldman, R.N. Nagel, and K. Preiss, Agile Competitors
and Virtual Organizations: Strategies for
Enriching the Customer (New York, NY: Van Nostrand
Reinhold, 1995); K. Preiss, S.L. Goldman,
and R.N. Nagel, Cooperate to Compete: Building Agile
Business Relationships (New York, NY: Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1996).
5. R. Agarwal and C.C. Helfat, “Strategic Renewal of
Organizations,” Organization Science, 20/2
(March/April 2009) 281-293; L. Dyer and J. Ericksen, “In
Pursuit of Marketplace Agility:
Applying Precepts of Self-Organizing Systems to Optimize
Human Resource Scalability,”
Human Resource Management, 44/2 (Summer 2005): 183-188;
R.A. Shafer, L. Dyer, J. Kilty,
J. Amos, and J. Ericksen, “Crafting a Human Resource Strategy
to Foster Organizational Agility:
A Case Study,” Human Resource Management, 40/3 (Fall 2001):
197-211.
6. P.S. Adler, B. Goldoftas, and D.I. Levine, “Flexibility versus
Efficiency? A Case Study of Model
Changeovers in the Toyota Production System,” Organization
Science, 10/1 (January/February
1999): 43-68; A. Franken and H. Thomsett, “When It Takes a
Network: Creating Strategy and
Agility through Wargaming,” California Management Review,

55/3 (Spring 2013): 107-133;
R. Grewal and P. Thansuhaj, “Building Organizational
Capabilities for Managing Economic
Crisis: The Role of Market Orientation and Strategic
Flexibility,” Journal of Marketing, 65/2 (April
2001): 67-80; W.Q. Judge and A. Miller, “Antecedents and
Outcomes of Decision Speed in
Different Environmental Contexts,” Academy of Management
Journal, 34/2 (June 1991): 449-463;
A.D. Smith and C. Zeithaml, “Garbage Cans and Advancing
Hypercompetition: The Creation
and Exploitation of New Capabilities and Strategic Flexibility
in Two Regional Bell Operating
Companies,”Organization Science, 7/4 (July/August 1996): 388-
399; K.Wilson and Y.L. Doz, “Agile
Innovation,” California Management Review, 53/2 (Winter
2011): 6-26.
7. P.P. Tallon and A. Pinsonneault, “Competing Perspectives on
the Link between Strategic Informa-
tion Technology Alignment and Organizational Agility: Insights
from a Mediation Model,” MIS
Quarterly, 35/2 (June 2011): 463-486; P. Weill, M. Subramani,
and M. Broadbent, “Building IT
Infrastructure for Strategic Agility,” MIT Sloan Management
Review, 44/1 (Fall 2002): 57-65.
8. S.A. Mohrman and C. Worley, “Dealing with Rough Times: A
Capabilities Development
Approach to Surviving and Thriving,” Human Resource
Management, 48/3 (May 2009): 433-445;
S. Sarker and S. Sarker, “Exploring Agility in Distributed
Information Systems Development
Teams: An Interpretive Study in an Offshoring Context,”
Information Systems Research, 20/3
(September 2009): 440-461; S. Thomke and D. Reinertsen,

“Agile Product Development:
Managing Development Flexibility in Uncertain Environments,”
California Management Review,
41/1 (Fall 1998): 8-30.
10 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY VOL. 56,
NO. 3 SPRING 2014 CMR.BERKELEY.EDU
9. R. Sanchez, “Strategic Flexibility in Product Competition,”
Strategic Management Journal, 16
(Summer 1995): 135-159; K. Shimizu and M.A. Hitt, “Strategic
Flexibility: Organizational Pre-
paredness to Reverse Ineffective Strategic Decisions,” Academy
of Management Executive, 18/4
(November 2004): 44-59; H.W. Volberda, “Building Flexible
Organizations for Fast-Moving
Markets,” Long Range Planning, 30/2 (April 1997): 169-183;
H.W. Volberda, Building the Flexible
Firm: How to Remain Competitive (New York, NY: Oxford
University Press, 1999).
10. H.W. Volberda, “Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain
Vital in Hypercompetitive Envi-
ronments,” Organization Science, 7/4 (July/August 1996): 359-
374; C. Young-Ybarra and
M. Wiersema, “Strategic Flexibility in Information Technology
Alliances: The Influence of Trans-
action Cost Economics and Social Exchange Theory,”
Organization Science, 10/4 (July/August
1999): 439-459.
11. R. Sanchez and J.T. Mahoney, “Modularity, Flexibility, and

Knowledge Management in Prod-
uct and Organization Design,” Strategic Management Journal,
17 (Winter Special Issue 1996):
63-76.
12. R. Sanchez, “Modular Architectures, Knowledge Assets and
Organizational Learning: New
Management Processes for Product Creation,” International
Journal of Technology Management,
19/6 (2000): 610-629; N. Worren, K. Moore, and P. Cardona,
“Modularity, Strategic Flexibility,
and Firm Performance: A Study of the Home Appliance
Industry,” Strategic Management Journal,
23/12 (December 2002): 1123-1140.
13. A J. Bock, T. Opsahl, G. George, and D.M. Gann, “The
Effects of Culture and Structure on
Strategic Flexibility during Business Model Innovation,”
Journal of Management Studies, 49/2
(March 2012): 279-305.
14. Boston Consulting Group, “The Brave New World of M&A:
How to Create Value from Mergers
and Acquisitions,” report, 2007.
15. Deloitte Research and Economist Intelligence Unit,
“Strategic Acquisitions amid Business
Uncertainty: Charting a Course for Your Company’s M&A,”
report, 2007.
16. P. Puranam, H. Singh, and M. Zollo, “A Bird in the Hand or
Two in the Bush? Integration Trade-
Offs in Technology-Grafting Acquisitions,” European
Management Journal, 21/2 (April 2003):
179-184; P. Puranam, H. Singh, andM. Zollo, “Organizing for
Innovation:Managing the Coordina-

tion-Autonomy Dilemma in Technology Acquisitions,”
Academy of Management Journal, 49/2 (April
2006): 263-280; P. Puranam andK. Srikanth, “What They
Knowvs.What They Do: HowAcquirers
Leverage Technology Acquisitions,” Strategic Management
Journal, 28/8 (August 2007): 805-825.
17. M. Lubatkin, D. Schweiger, and Y. Weber, “Top
Management Turnover in Related M&A’s:
An Additional Test of the Theory of Relative Standing,” Journal
of Management, 25/1 (1999):
55-74; J. Krug, P. Wright, and M. Kroll, “Top Management
Turnover Following Mergers
and Acquisitions: Solid Research to Date but Much Still to be
Learned,” Academy of Management
Perspectives, published ahead of print February 4, 2013
(doi:10.5465/amp.2011.0091);
P. Puranam, H. Singh, and S. Chaudhuri, “Integrating Acquired
Capabilities: When Structural
Integration is (Un)Necessary,” Organization Science, 20/2
(March/April 2009): 313-328;
A.L. Ranft and M.D. Lord, “Acquiring New Knowledge: The
Role of Retaining Human Capital
in Acquisitions of High-Tech Firms,” Journal of High
Technology Management Research, 11/2
(Autumn 2000): 295-319.
18. Y. Weber, S.Y. Tarba, and A. Reichel, “International
Mergers and Acquisitions Performance
Revisited—The Role of Cultural Distance and Post-Acquisition
Integration Approach,” in
C. Cooper and S. Finkelstein, eds., Advances in Mergers and
Acquisitions, Volume 8 (New York,
NY: JAI Press, 2009), pp. 1-17; Y. Weber, S.Y. Tarba, and A.
Reichel, “International Mergers
and Acquisitions Performance: Acquirer Nationality and

Integration Approaches,” International
Studies of Management & Organization, 41/3 (2011): 9-24.
19. R.M. Sarala, P. Junni, C.L. Cooper, and S.Y. Tarba, “A
Sociocultural Perspective on Knowledge
Transfer in Mergers and Acquisitions,” Journal of Management
(forthcoming, doi: 10.1177/
0149206314530167); Y.Weber, D. Rachman-Moore, and S.Y.
Tarba, “HumanResource Practices
during Post-Merger Conflict and Merger Performance,”
International Journal of Cross-Cultural
Management, 12/1 (April 2012): 73-99; Y. Weber and S.Y.
Tarba, “Human Resource Practices
and Performance of Mergers and Acquisitions in Israel,” Human
Resource Management Review, 20
(2010): 203-211.
20. J.M. Birkinshaw and K. Gupta, “Clarifying the Distinctive
Contribution of Ambidexterity to
the Field of Organization Studies,” Academy of Management
Perspectives, 27/4 (November
2013): 287-298.
21. C.A. O’Reilly and M.L. Tushman, “Organizational
Ambidexterity: Past, Present, and Future,”
Academy of Management Perspectives, 27/4 (November 2013):
324-338.
22. G. Im and A. Rai, “Knowledge Sharing Ambidexterity in

Long-Term Interorganizational Rela-
tionships,” Management Science, 54/7 (July 2008): 1281-1296.
23. O.-P. Kauppila, “Creating Ambidexterity by Integrating and
Balancing Structurally Separate
Interorganizational Partnerships,” Strategic Organization, 8/4
(November 2010): 283-312.
24. D. Lavie, J. Kang, and L. Rosenkopf, “Balance Within and
Across Domains: The Performance
Implications of Exploration and Exploitation in Alliances,”
Organization Science, 22/6 (November/
December 2011): 1517-1538.
25. S. Fourné, J. Jansen, and T. Mom, “Strategic Agility in
MNEs: Strategic Agility in MNEs: Man-
aging Tensions to Capture Opportunities across Emerging and
Established Markets,” California
Management Review, 56/3 (Spring 2014).
26. N. Brueller, A. Carmeli, and I. Drori, “How Do Different
Types of Mergers and Acquisitions
Facilitate Strategic Agility,” California Management Review,
56/3 (Spring 2014).
27. M. Lewis, C. Andriopoulos, and W. Smith, “Paradoxical
Leadership to Enable Strategic Agil-
ity,” California Management Review, 56/3 (Spring 2014).
California Management Review, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 5–12. ISSN
0008-1256, eISSN 2162-8564. © 2014 by
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Request permission to photocopy or
reproduce article content at the University of California Press’s
Rights and Permissions website at
http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintinfo.asp. DOI:

10.1525/cmr.2014.56.3.5.
12 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY VOL. 56,
NO. 3 SPRING 2014 CMR.BERKELEY.EDU
Copyright of California Management Review is the property of
California Management
Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
International Journal of Advanced Research in ISSN: 2278-
6236
Management and Social Sciences Impact Factor: 5.313
Vol. 4 | No. 10 | October 2015 www.garph.co.uk IJARMSS | 19
AN ASSESSMENT OF THE CONNECTION OF ELEMENTS IN
A STRATEGIC PLAN:
A CASE STUDY OF SABIC COMPANY
Hana J. M. Alotaibi*
Abstract: A strategic plan consists of several elements that can

be grouped into
determinants, strategic planning and outcomes. An important
consideration is how well the
elements fit together. An investigation was conducted on a
Saudi public-private company in
the petrochemicals sector on the strength of the connection
between its elements based on
analysis of documents and interviews. Although strategic
planning takes place and analytical
tools are used, several issues were uncovered pertaining to this
connection, and major
obstacles noted include the lack of communication of the plans
at lower levels, and the high
level of bureaucracy. Moreover, the analytical tools are not used
effectively to guide the
planning. Recommendations are made both for the organisation
investigated and for further
research.
Keywords: Strategic planning, Strategic plan elements,
Connection of elements.

*College of Business- Umm Al-Qura University- Makkah- Saudi
Arabia
6236
I. INTRODUCTION

Strategic planning is characterised by a systematic and
formalised effort by an organisation
that defines its objectives, policies and strategies (Steiner,
1979). Strategic plans usually
contain detailed information on implementing policies and
strategies for achieving the
desired objectives and thereby help the company attain its
purpose. Similarly, Hax & Majluf
(1996) explained that strategic planning is a well-defined effort
with the aim of completely
satisfying the organisation's strategy by assigning
responsibilities for its implementation.
Moreover, a strategic plan positions a company in its selected
market area in an attempt for
it to compete successfully and achieve its desired performance
or other desired outcomes.
Many organisations are increasingly adopting the practice of
strategic planning in both the
private and public sectors in anticipation of improved
performance (K'Obonyo & Arasa,
2012).
Although no one strategic model would be suitable for all
organisations and contexts, there
are certain basic elements that tend to be common in a strategic

plan. The typical elements
are a statement of mission, values, and vision; defining goals,
aims, and objectives;
conducting a SWOT analysis and developing a scorecard, and
specifying actions plans and
an organisation-wide strategy. Another important consideration
however, is how well the
elements fit together. In other words, what is the strength of the
linkage between the
elements? Do they work well together? This study examined the
strategic plan of a
particular organisation, namely Sabic Company in Saudi Arabia,
for the quality of the
connection between its elements, that is, between the
determinants, strategic planning,
and outcomes.
II. BACKGROUND OF SABIC
The company selected for the investigation was Sabic. This was
established in 1976 as a
public company, is one of the world's largest manufacturers of
petrochemicals. Its
headquarters are in Riyadh, and it also operates in Al-Jubail and
Yanbu, and has a global
presence with regional offices in MENA, Asia, the Americas

and Europe and operations in 40
countries. Its management team is overseen by a board of
directors that include members
from both the private sector and government. The proportion of
Saudi government shares
and private shares of Saudi and other GCC investors are 70%
and 30% respectively. The
company has six business units: chemicals, polymers,
performance chemicals, fertilizers,
6236
metals, and innovative plastics.
The company claims to have a corporate culture that is
“characterized by its ability to adapt
quickly” to its customers' needs and requirements; that its
“tradition of ingenuity has
driven continuous improvement” with respect to its operations
and drive for growth. It also
claims to be forward looking and invests heavily in technology
and innovation having

Strategic planning linkage qualitative study Thai justice ministry

Strategic planning linkage qualitative study Thai justice ministry

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Strategic planning linkage qualitative study Thai justice ministry

Similar to Strategic planning linkage qualitative study Thai justice ministry (20)

More from felicidaddinwoodie

More from felicidaddinwoodie (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Strategic planning linkage qualitative study Thai justice ministry