I. Implementable Strategic Alternatives (about 1 page)

In this section, you should identify and develop three alternatives that the firm could pursue. They should take into account the internal and external assessment (feasibility), be consistent with the organization’s mission (legitimacy) and should provide a way of dealing with the underlying issue(s) of the case (relevance). The alternatives should also be representative of the full range of feasible, legitimate, and relevant choices that management has at the time of the decision making without gaining the advantage of hindsight. A good set of alternatives, therefore, must involve major differences (and real choices) rather than different variations of the same strategy. This should produce alternatives that are mutually exclusive because strategy requires commitment and risk-taking. It involves selecting some paths and rejecting others. However, if there is a compelling case to follow two alternatives simultaneously then combine them into a separate “composite” alternative and compare it to other composite alternatives. Keep in mind that the alternatives need to be comparable. If one alternative is clearly superior to others then it is not a fair comparison. Sometimes, students tend to come up with other weak alternatives to make their preferred alternative look better. It is not a good practice and should be avoided .

Alternatives must be strategic (not operational) in nature and consider the usual planning horizon for organizations, which is three to five years. Any alternative that deals with the issues for the next six months to one year and then asks the management to re-assess its situation is an operational alternative and may be suitable for a functional-area case analysis but not for a strategic management case analysis.

These alternatives may be framed in terms of business strategies and corporate strategy terms, depending on the issues of the case. However, do not neglect consideration of other important issues that may hinder implementation of your strategies. Therefore, consider issues of structure, systems, resources, culture, etc. when formulating alternatives, developing criteria, evaluating alternatives, and making recommendation. For example, it is important to think of a multilateral match of environment, strategy, structure, systems, technology, culture, etc. before recommending a major strategic change. It is never easy to match several different elements so creativity with a solid foundation is important for the paper. It is essential that the paper flows from one section to another and this section is an important linchpin in building that flow.

To help you think of the strategic alternatives, we have attached Exhibit C. You are required to complete this form for each of the alternatives (three exhibits) and attach it with your paper and concisely describe the alternative in the text. Do not refer to the alternatives by number. Use a short name (for example: the low-cost strategy) as an identifier. All exhibits must also be typewritten or word-processed (not handwritten).

Keep in mind that the point is to strategically manage the company and thus simply selling the company or the status quo are not acceptable alternatives.

You also need to offer an Exhibit like this:

EXHIBIT C

COMPREHENSIVE STRUCTURE OF A STRATEGIC ALTERNATIVE

(Use bullet points rather than complete sentences;

Fill in the answers using wordprocessor in the space provided)

Name of the Alternative or Strategic Goal Identifier

(Name of the strategy with any special characteristics, e.g., Focused low cost with expansion to Mexico)

Customer Needs

(If fulfilling multiple needs, be sure to specify which needs in what markets; see chapters 3, 5, & 6)

Customer Groups

(may involve geographic, demographic or other market segmentation parameters; chapters 3, 5 & 6)

Basis for Competition (Be sure to be specific in non-generic terms. For example, for Low Cost, is it superior efficiency due to low cost production or something else? For Differentiation, is it based on superior quality, innovation, and/or customer responsiveness; for Focus, what parameters, e.g., is it customer segment, product segment, market segment, etc.; see chapters 3, 5 & 6)

Corporate Strategies (Single business, vertical integration, horizontal integration, related diversification, unrelated diversification, strategic alliances, outsourcing, etc. see chapters 9 & 10).

Placement in the Value System

(e.g., retailer, wholesaler/distributor, manufacturer, importer, or combination thereof; chapters 9 & 10)

Other (could include points related to functional strategies (chap. 4, 6 & 7), global strategies (chapter 8), implementation (chapters 12 & 13), or anything else that is important for the alternative)

Key Issue(s) Addressed by this Alternative

FEASIBILITY JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS STRATEGIC ALTERNATIVE

Environmental Opportunity(ies) (evidence, independent of the organization, which suggests that this alternative could meet with success) Environmental Threats, Risks (Threats/risks, outside of the organization, that could limit the organization’s success in this alternative. Be sure to address how these can be overcome)

Present Corporate Attributes relevant and sufficient to this alternative:

Missing and/or insufficient Corporate Attributes 

(Attributes that would have to be acquired and/or improved in order to implement this alternative. Be sure to address how these can be overcome)