APPENDIX A: ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET (SAMPLE)

ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

Surname

LETSHOLO
DORAH MMAKGOLOTHI

First Name/s

123004
Student Number

CORPORATE STRATEGY
Subject

1
Assignment Number
Tutors Name

GABORONE
Examination Venue

17 APRIL 2014
Date Submitted
)
Submission ()

First Submission

.resubmission

P O BOX 3988 GABORONE

Postal Address

dorahmotsilenyane@yahoo.com
E-Mail
(Work) 5777 226
(Home)71855440

Contact Numbers

(Cell) 71855440
MBA YEAR 2

Course/Intake
Declaration: I hereby declare that the assignment submitted is an original piece of work produced by myself.

Signature:

Date: 17/04/15

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
CONTENTS........2
Q1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
Q2..5
Q3.8
Q4.11
Q5.15

Q1.Critically discuss to what extent Harley is strategy aligned organisation

Strategic alignment is the process and the result of linking an organization's
structure and resources with its strategy and business environment (regulatory,
physical, etc.) Strategic alignment enables higher performance by optimizing the
contributions of people, processes, and inputs to the realization of measurable
objectives and, thus, minimizing waste and misdirection of effort and resources to
unintended or unspecified purposes. In the modern, global business environment,
strategic alignment should be viewed broadly as encompassing not only the human
and other resources within any particular organization but also across organizations
with complementary objectives (i.e., performance/business partners). There are
three factors that determine the right approach: the structural conditions in which an
organization operates its resources and capabilities, and its strategic mind-set. When
the structural conditions of an industry or environment are attractive and you have
the resources and capabilities to carve out a viable competitive position, the
structuralism approach is likely to produce good returns (see the exhibit Choosing
the Right Strategic Approach). Even in a not-so-attractive industry, the structuralism
approach can work well if a company has the resources and capabilities to beat out
the competition. In either case, the focus of strategy is to leverage the organizations
core strengths to achieve acceptable risk-adjusted returns in an existing market. It is
evident from the case study that Harleys strategy was not aligned. Cognisant to that
the Organisation did not take the environment into considerations; No alignment from
corporate to individual, their model was not ideal because there was no alignment to
the nature of industry at that particular time. No strategic orientation. It was a close
organisation not open to learning and innovation, not aligned to threats and
opportunities. Leaders not exemplary.
Political: These factors determine the extent to which a government may influence
the economy or Harley Davidson. [For example] a government may impose a new
3

tax or duty due to which entire revenue generating structures of Harley might
change. Political factors include tax policies, Fiscal policy, trade tariffs etc. that a
government may levy around the fiscal year and it may affect the business
environment (economic environment) to a great extent.
Economic: These factors are determinants of an economys performance that
directly impacts Harley and have resonating long term effects. [For example] a rise in
the inflation rate of any economy would affect the way companies price their
products and services. Adding to that, it would affect the purchasing power of a
consumer and change demand/supply models for that economy. Economic factors
include inflation rate, interest rates, foreign exchange rates, economic growth
patterns etc. It also accounts for the FDI (foreign direct investment) depending on
certain specific industries whore undergoing this analysis.
Social: These factors scrutinize the social environment of the market, and gauge
determinants like cultural trends, demographics, population analytics etc. An
example for this can be buying trends for Western countries like the US where there
is high demand during the Holiday season.
Technological: These factors pertain to innovations in technology that may affect
the operations Harley and the market favorably or unfavorably. This refers to
automation, research and development and the amount of technological awareness
that a market possesses.
Legal: These factors have both external and internal sides. There are certain laws
that affect the Harleys environment in a certain country while there are certain
policies that companies maintain for themselves. Legal analysis takes into account
both of these angles and then charts out the strategies in light of these legislations.
For example, consumer laws, safety standards, labor laws etc.
Environmental: These factors include all those that influence or are determined by
the surrounding environment. This aspect of the PESTLE is crucial for certain
industries particularly for example tourism, farming, agriculture etc. Factors of a
Harleys environmental analysis include but are not limited to climate, weather,
geographical location, global changes in climate, environmental offsets etc.
4

Q2 Critically discuss the impact of Harleys leadership on the success of the

strategy with regards to strategy development
Introduction
In the global economy of the 21stcentury, competition is complex, challenging and
fraught with competitive opportunities and threats. Strategic leadership is
increasingly becoming the main focus for business and academics alike and is the
key issue facing contemporary organisations. Without effective strategic leadership,
the capability of a company to achieve or sustain a competitive advantage is greatly
constrained. More than 30 years of Harvard Business School research have shown
that aligned. The organisational effectiveness emanating from alignment is a
significant competitive advantage. Alignment is that optimal state in which strategy,
employees, customers and key processes work in concert to propel growth and
profits. Aligned organisations enjoy greater customer and employee satisfaction and
produce superior results. Can leadership make a difference? Some leaders do,
some do not and many more could
Effective strategic leadership can thus help organisations enhance performance
while competing in turbulent and unpredictable environments. However, there has
been little empirical evidence of the effects of strategic level leadership on
organisational
Processes that have distinctive strategic significance.
A greater understanding of the criteria that influence success in organisations will
enable organisations to take positive action to become more successful.
Strategic leadership means the ability to anticipate and envision the future, maintain
flexibility, think strategically and initiate
changes that will create a competitive advantage for the organisation in the
future(Daft, 2011:350). Despite the long history of research on leadership, only
recently have the organisation behaviour scholars started to single out strategic
leadership
as a focus of attention (Narayanan & Zane, 2009: 380).
Leadership at strategic level is one of the principal issues facing organisations in
5

the 21st century nevertheless, little empirical evidence has emerged on the effects of
leadership at strategic level on organisational processes with distinct strategic
importance (Elenkov, 2008: 37).

From a strategic management standpoint, organisational effectiveness is the degree

to which the composite outputs an
organisation produces align with the demands of its environment in order to achieve
a competitive advantage, and strategic leadership is a primary determinant of this set
of outputs. Identifying these out
puts and the process through which they contribute to effectiveness is the key to
understanding the organisational effectiveness construct (Sanders & Davey, 2011:
43-44).
The role of the Harleys leader appears to be fundamental to the success of
organisations. He once identifying the criteria that leaders require to make their
organisations successful will greatly enhance the possibility of leadership achieving
this goal in organisations.
Strategic leadership is the ability to influence others to voluntarily make day to day
decisions that enhance the organisations
Long term viability while at the same time maintaining its short term financial viability
(Rowe, 2001). Elenkovs (2008: 46) empirical study on strategic leadership
concludes that top managers who wish to influence innovations should not rely on
their hierarchical
position alone, but that they also need to possess relevant strategic leadership skills
that appear critical to their power base. 4
According to Waldman, Ramrez,House and Puranam (2001: 134),
strategic management theory has become increasingly concerned with top level
managers and their effects on strategy formulation and organisation performance.
Furthermore, House and Aditya (1997:441) argue that since the study of effective
organisationalpolicies and strategies has been one of the most prominent foci of
business school education since the founding of the earliest business schools, the
relative neglect of strategic leadership as a subject of empirical investigation is ironic.

Over the past few years, considerably more attention has been paid to the
significance of strategic leadership in organisations. Some studies have focused on
what strategic leaders actually do in their day today environment (Nyabdza, 2008;
Kotter, 2001).
In the past
20 years, the field of strategic management has become increasingly concerned with
top level managers and their effects on strategy formulation and organisation
performance (Waldman, Javidan & Varella, 2004: 356). Prior to the mid1980s,
however, there were few empirical studies on the influence of the
strategic leadership process on a strategic leaders behaviour (
House &Aditya, 1997:31). There is now a growing interest in the field of strategic
leadership of organisations. According to Fiedler(1996:243, 246)the most important
lesson we have learnt
over the past 40 years is probably that the leadership of groups is a highly complex
interaction between an individual and the social and task environment. He further
postulates that it seems safe to predict that managers who can capitalise on their
cognitive resources will substantially improve their organisations performance.
Elenkov (2008: 37) maintains that there is little empirical evidence
of the effects of leadership at strategic level on organisational processes that have
distinctive . Management of Harley needed to earn respect, keep promises, respect
individual and encourage intellectual curiosity. Incorporating all of these high moral
values into entire company structure and expecting nothing less from employees, at
all levels helped emphasise Harleys commitment to its team of workers.

Q3 Discuss how specific critical success factors identified can impact on the
choice of alternative strategies that can improve Harley competitive
Introduction
A critical success factor drives the strategy forward, it makes or breaks the success
of the strategy (hence critical) According to Mancosa study guide, the common
types of industry key success factors factors include Technology-related,
manufacture related,distribution related, marketing related,skills and capability, cost
structure and overall low costs, convenient locations, ability to provide fast
convenient after sales repairs and services; a strong financial structure and access
to capital, especially in capital intensive and or high risk industries
Managing and developing people - People today want some direction and
structure, but they also want freedom and encouragement to develop their skills and
knowledge. Effectively managing people requires balancing constraining forces
(providing direction, structure, organization, some rules) with liberating forces
(encourage personal growth, development and creativity). If you as manager/leader
err too much in one direction or the other, your organization will be either too rigid or
too chaotic. To make it more complicated, each person has a different set of needs
for structure vs. freedom, order vs. opportunity, logic vs. personal values, factual
information vs. meaning and connections, and so on. Effective managers do not
manage all people the same, except for some basic rules. They manage each
person according to what he or she needs, what motivates them to do their best.
This can be complicated but is essential for success
.(2) Strategic focus - In todays rapidly changing world, its not just enough to have
a purpose for existing. Leaders have to focus the organizations resources on the
greatest opportunities, which shift with each new day. Just run through your mind
what has happened in the world or your organization in the past year or two, and
youll understand what we mean by the reality of constant change. Doors open and
doors close. Major customers or income sources can change or even go out of
8

business at any time. So its necessary for leaders to keep focused on the desired
end results such as increased sales and profits, or more satisfied customers, while
constantly steering the organization across the stormy waters of the marketplace. As
the illustration shows, the job of focused leaders is to connect and align all the
Success Factors for optimum performance.
(3) Operations, or what people do all day - What the people in your organization
do day in and day out to create value for customers, to earn or justify income,
strongly determines whether you succeed or fail. Like the other Top 5 Success
Factors, you cant separate operations from strategic focus which gives direction,
people which do the work, customers who pay the money and physical resources to
do the work. Effective operations ensure that customers get exactly what they want
at the right time, the right price and the right quality. Thus effective operations
management focuses on what is called cycle time (producing a product or service
from start to finish), cost control, and quality control (which requires some form of
measurement). Strategic focus is largely externally oriented, operations largely
internally oriented. Both need to be totally in sync with each other not something
that happens automatically but rather requiring constant effort. This is why
communication is the true lifeblood of a successful organization a high flow of
information so everyone and everything is connected. Easy to say, hard to do.

(4) Physical resources - Finances, facilities and equipment are the big 3 physical
resources. If you dont have enough money, you cant start or sustain an
organization. And one of the biggest expenses is providing adequate facilities and
equipment for people to work in and with. Experienced managers learn that cash
flow is king. It doesnt matter how much customers owe you, its when their money
enters your bank account so you can use it to sustain the organization. Failing to
manage cash flow is the No. 1 reason for business failure. Too many business
owners leave the money up to someone else and can easily get blind-sided when
suddenly the money isnt there to keep the doors open. And in a few rare,
unfortunate cases, the person tracking the money embezzles or cooks the books,
then you really are in trouble. Likewise nice facilities can be energizing, something to
feel proud about, but also very expensive. The economy is always cyclical, and if you
9

buy or lease really nice facilities when times are good, paying for them can be
difficult or impossible in a downturn.
(5) Customer relations - Customers are where the money comes from, so in many
ways this is the most important success factor. As the famous business guru Peter
Drucker said years ago, The purpose of a business is to get and keep customers.
Getting customers involves marketing indeed this success factor includes all kinds
of marketing and sales. The key to successful customer relations is to give them
what they need, not just what you want to sell. Effective sales and marketing begins
with asking existing and potential customers what they need, what problem they
want solved or deficiency filled. By keeping in touch with customers and asking these
questions often, youll do a better job of developing customer loyalty and keeping
competitors away. In the broadest sense customer relations can be considered the
organizations relationships with the external world. It involves tracking competitor
actions, analyzing changes in the market environment, and adapting according. This
is closely linked to Strategic Focus.

10

Q4 . Critically analyse how a Balanced score card approach may be used to

ensure effective strategy implementation within an organisation .Provide
examples to illustrates discussion
Introduction
Both prior literature and reported managerial practices have claimed that the
Balanced Scorecard is a management tool that can help organizations to effectively
implement strategies. Our starting point is that a proper formulation of strategy (goal
planning) and its subsequent implementation and evaluation (measurement and
monitoring of outcomes) is critical to the lasting success of any organization. From
that starting point, the purpose of the present article is to review ways in which a
specific management tool, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC), can lead to improvements
in strategic management and in particular to better strategy implementation and
evaluation.
Balance score card
Several studies in Europe and North America have shown that between 30% and
60% of medium-size and large organizations have significantly revised their
measurement systems in the last 10 years. The BSC is one of the most widely used
of the new generation of performance measurement systems. For example, a recent
report by the Bain consultancy indicated that, of a total sample of over 1200 large
companies, 44% used outcome measurement systems such as the BSC or similar.
Indeed, the purpose of the BSC, as it was originally conceived, was to address
problems relating to the measurement of organizational performance . As pointed out
by Kaplan and Norton, the authors of the BSC, the systems traditionally used to
measure results in the vast majority of organizations, centered exclusively, or almost
exclusively, on financial indicators. In some sectors (such as health) in which nonfinancial indicators were widely used for operational (clinical) management, there
was an undesirable dichotomy between the economic vision of the management
teams and the clinical view of the health care professionals, and measurement
systems were not able to effectively integrate or build bridges between the 2 visions.
The traditional systems used to measure results had several problems, although
they can, for the purpose of simplification, be grouped into 2 blocks. On the one
11

hand, either because of an over-emphasis on financial indicators or because

financial indicators are not sufficiently integrated with other indicators, the traditional
systems provide little in the way of multidimensional and integrated support for
managerial decision-making. Financial indicators are, by definition, lagging
indicators; they capture the impact of decisions taken but do not provide information
on the drivers of financial outcomes nor how they might be used to achieve the
desired results. Moreover, the absence of effective integration between financial and
other indicators provides mixed signals about the persistence of long-term success.
On the other hand, an emphasis on exclusively financial results or the unstructured
enumeration of different types of indicators does not provide management with a
clear picture as to how well strategy is being implemented or what actions are
needed to effectively implement it.
The first generations of BSC therefore proposed new avenues for measurement
systems through a structured combination of financial and non-financial metrics with
strategic implications. Expressed in its simplest form, a BSC will: a) identify the key
perspectives needed to provide a multifaceted view of organizational performance;
b) identify strategic objectives for each of those perspectives, and c) select indicators
and targets for each of the objectives (though only after the strategic objectives have
been established).
It is true that other management tools that aimed to combine financial and
nonfinancial indicators existed before the BSC (eg, dashboards, etc.). In this sense,
one could argue that the first generations of the BSC were not, in themselves, a
revolutionary innovation. However, despite their good intentions, most of the earlier
attempts did not achieve their purpose and generally ended up focusing on
indicators from a single dimension. In the traditional dashboards of many
organizations, the tendency was to concentrate exclusively on financial indicators.
Within the health sector, traditional dashboards tended to focus on activity indicators.
Moreover, the deployment of schemes such as Management by Objectives led to a
focus on strategic operational indicators. None of these earlier attempts provided a
true structured combination of financial and nonfinancial metrics with strategic
implications.

12

How does the BSC avoid falling into the same trap? First of all, this trap is avoided
because it is based around an explicit reflection on the different perspectives needed
to provide an overview of multifaceted organizational performance. In its initial
formulation, the BSC aimed to establish objectives and indicators from 4
perspectives: a) financial; b) clients or users; c) internal processes, and d) learning
and resource development. However, the tool is flexible both in terms of the number
of perspectives that can be considered as well as with regard to which specific
perspectives need to be incorporated to represent a particular organizational reality.
A second way in which the BSC avoided the errors inherent in earlier proposals was
simply by proposing a pattern or template that graphically highlights the presence of
multiple perspectives . It is therefore less likely that managers who design or use the
instrument will limit their choice to indicators with a single dimension.
CONCLUSION
In short, the first generation of BSC implied the multidimensional measurement of
results based on the integration of financial and nonfinancial indicators, and
highlighted the advantages of this approach compared with the battery of exclusively
financial, activityor operationally-basedindicators or the mere unstructured
enumeration of indicators.
As they developed their proposals, Kaplan and Norton realized that, although BSC
represented a qualitative improvement in performance measurement systems, the
first generation of these instruments did not fully ensure that the chosen indicators
were indeed drivers of success in an organization or that the strategies actually
ended up being implemented. They therefore evolved the model by proposing that,
when developing a BSC, the starting point should not be either the targeting or the
selection of new metrics (and certainly not the mere classification of an existing
metric from a number of different perspectives). On the contrary, they suggested that
for the second generation of BSC the starting point should include a narrative
description of strategy, expressed in highly concrete terms. They therefore
suggested that classification of the strategic objectives in the form of perspectives
(eg, financial, client, process, learning) should help to identify causal relationships
between objectives and, ultimately, allow effective graphical representation of the
strategy. Consequently, strategy maps became a basic component of the second
13

generation of BSCs . A strategy map is a graphic, highly visual representation of an

organization's strategy; it is set out in a logical fashion, which helps to illustrate how
the strategy will be implemented through a series of cause-effect relationships
between objectives. It also relates, for example, the development of resources
(people, technologies, information systems, etc.) with the quality of internal
processes or the intensity of innovation with a portfolio of products or services, and
thereby links the various objectives with the final results or intended effects. Strategy
maps are therefore the foundation for the second generation of BSC (although the
specification of indicators often leads to a further review of the strategic map). In
other words, the mission of the second generation of BSC is to provide relevant
indicators to measure the objectives outlined in the strategy map. The indicators are
chosen only after strategic objectives are defined in the strategy map.
http://www.revespcardiol.org/imatges/255/255v65n10/255v65n10-90155071fig1.jpg

14

Q5. Critically discuss the role of Vision and Mission statement in the strategic
management process organisation such as Harley Davidson
Organization s Vision, Mission, and Objectives
The Harley-Davidson's vision is as follows: "Harley-Davidson, Incorporated, is an
action-oriented, international company-a leader in its commitment to continuously
improve the quality of profitable relationships with stakeholders (customers, dealers,
employees, suppliers, shareholders, government, and society). Harley-Davidson
believes the key to success is to balance stakeholders' interests through the
empowerment of all employees to focus on value-added activities." An effective
mission statement describes the firm's fundamental, unique purpose. An important
part of this description indicates how a firm is unique in its scope of operations and
its product or service offerings. In simple yet powerful terms, a mission statement
proclaims corporate purpose. This proclamation indicates what the organization
intends to accomplish, identifies the market(s) in which the firm intends to operate,
and reflects the philosophical premises that are to guide actions. Mission statements
are also intended to provide motivation, general direction, an image of the
company's character, and a tone, or set of attitudes, through which actions are
guided. Furthermore, because mission statements embody a company's soul, they
are often inspirational. The mission statement answers the question, Why do we
exist? It gives the organization purpose and meaning and speaks to why people
want to work for your company. It begins to answer the question, what is strategic
management and planning. If youre a for-profit organization, the fundamental
mission of the business is to create shareholder wealth, but that wont attract anyone
to come work for you, and it does not give rise to a bigger corporate purpose. Every
organization needs to define its fundamental purpose, philosophy, and values. The
mission statement answers the basic questions of why your company exists and
describes the needs your company was created to fulfil. This is not about the
products and services you provide; rather, it is about why you provide them. For
instance, the mission of my company achieves it, is to help organizations execute
smarter, faster, and better. To my team, it is about accelerating the results curve. We
come to work every day driven by the idea of transforming businesses by helping
them get more and better results faster whether for our own company or for the
15

clients we serve. How we do this is through our software suite and related support
services, which are continually being enhanced to drive improved results. But how
we accomplish our mission today may be different from how we accomplish it
tomorrow. The mission statement points us in the right direction. Our strategic and
operational plans become the road map. Without the guidance of our mission
statement, programmatic priorities would be difficult to establish and the process of
strategic planning would become muddled. A mission statement, therefore, provides
the basis for judging the success of an organization and its programs. It helps to
verify if the organization is on the right track and making the right decisions. It
provides direction when the organization must adapt to new demands. Attention to
mission helps the organizations adhere to its primary purpose and serves as a
touchstone for decision-making during times of conflict. With a strong mission
statement in place, it is very easy to identify your goals, objectives, strategies and
tactics. Mission statements can also be used as a tool for resource allocation.
Powerful mission statements attract staff, donors, volunteers, and community
involvement.

competencies.
Mr. Richard Teerlink age 59 joined Harley-Davidson in 1981 and was elected to the
board of directors in 1982. In 1988 he was appointed President, and he was named
Chief Executive Officer in 1989 (Wheelen). Mr. Teerlink is also on the Boards of
Directors of Johnson Controls, Incorporated and Snap-On Incorporated (Rethinking
Leadership). Mr. Teerlink has been the leader in developing a value-based culture at
Harley. His focus is on the importance of establishing mutually beneficial
relationships with all of stakeholders has served the company well in the past.
Teeklink believes that top management is responsible for creating an operating
environment that can allow continual learning (Harley Davidson Home Page). Unlike
the traditional executive leader who is focused on structure and strategy, Teerlink
thinks about the operating environment in less tangible ways. Teeklink has a quality
focus and has initiated a just in time inventory system along with a value-added
approach to manufacturing (Wheelen). The Mission Statement Provides a Beginning

16

In addition to the focus on a quality product, Teeklink is also focused on growth and
corporate governance, which is reflected in the company s vision. In a speech at
Yale University Teerlink said that, "the Motor Company expects its market share to
be bolstered by increased production in the next few years. Teerlink stated the
company expects to produce 200,000 units annually by the year 2003, compared to
about 100,000 in 1995. Teerlink added in his speech, "We have not found any
reduction in the demand for Harley-Davidson,". He said the Milwaukee firm had close
to 50 percent of the 651cc-and-above U.S. motorcycle market. Teerlink also said that
almost 30 percent of the company's motorcycles are traditionally sold outside the
United States. "Harley-Davidson seeks a patient and careful approach to overseas
expansion. It's our intention to be very successful in all markets," Teerlink added.
"We are taking time to develop markets, rather than just going in and putting a dealer
on every corner and have them sell motorcycles. Because we're capacityconstrained, we've been losing some market share, but we're not losing market
share because people don't want to buy our product." According to Teerlink, HarleyDavidson now has distributors in Peru, Singapore, Indonesia, South Africa and other
emerging markets. He said Harley-Davidson had no immediate plans to diversify
beyond its traditional strength in large-displacement motorcycles. Teerlink also noted
that women now make up about eight percent of new Harley-Davidson buyers, as
opposed to only two percent in the past (Online Magazine).

17

Conclusion
Research has shown that a vision
Motivates people and facilitates recruitment of talents
When shared by members of an organisation energises people by connecting them
to the purpose of the organisation.
Enables people to see how their efforts contribute to the large picture
Causes employee motivation, pride and an increase in performance where it
conveys clear managerial values.
Provides focus and direction, often avoiding overemphasising the short term
Provides a context for decision making

18

Bibilography
1.https://hbr.org/2009/09/how-strategy-shapes-structure (accessed on 12/04/15)
2.http://pestleanalysis.com/what-is-pestle-analysis/( accessed on 12/04/15)

3.Elenkov, D.S. 2008. Effects of leadership at strategic level and its

moderators on innovation: an international empirical
study.International Journal of
Business Strategy
4.Nyabdza, G.W. 2008. The lived experience of the strategic leader:
what effective CEOs do, how they do it and an exploration into how
they think about it. DBL thesis, University of South Africa
, Pretoria
5.Narayanan, V.K. & Zane, L.J. 2009. Inventing a future for strategic
leadership: phenomenal variety and epistemic opportunities.
Journal of Strategy and
Management,

6.Kotter, J.P. 2001. What leaders really do. Harvard Business

Review, December:8596.
19

20