Long Range Planning, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 11 to 23, 1993 Printed in Great Britain

00246301/93 $6.00 + .OO 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd

0

11

Optimizing Profitability in Turbulent Environments A Formula for Strategic Success :

H. Igor Ansoff and Patrick A. Sullivan

This article describes a formula for strategic success which states that the profitability of a firm is optimized when its strategic behaviour is aligned with its environment. The formula was developed over a 25-year period and has been extensively field tested. The article briefly reviews other prescriptions for profit optimization which now compete for management attention, presents the formula, discusses the results of the field research, and describes a practical strategic diagnosis procedure which can be used to determine a firm’s preparedness to succeed in the future.

l

Strategic Planning (Ansoff 1965) Back to Baric$ Emerging Strategy (Mintzberg) Logical lncrementslism (Quinn) Stick to Strategic Knitting (Peters 8nd Waterman) * Return to the Core Business Put Your Customers First No Company is Going to Survive by Virtue of its History {Kuehler) Build the Future On Your Historical Strengths l

l

l

l

l

l

l

.l

The Problem For the first 50 years of the twentieth century the formula for optimizing profitability of firms appeared to be clear and unambiguous. Based on microeconomic theory, this formula was to manufacture an undifferentiated product at the least possible unit cost and to offer it to the market at the lowest price. This formula worked with outstanding success during the first 30 years of the twentieth century and was claimed to be universally applicable in all industries and market places. During the 1930s the first signs of difficulty appeared in the United States, and 10-20 years later in the increasing other industrialized countries. An number of firms found that the microeconomic success formula no longer optimized growth and profitability. As a result, managers and academics began to search for alternative formulas for profit optimization. Professor lgor Ansoff is a Distinguished Professor of Strategic Management at the U.S. International University in San Diego, California. He has been a leading pioneer in the development of strategic planning and strategic management and has published over 100 articles and books. Dr Patrick A. Sullivan is an Associate Professor of Strategic Management at US. International University in San Diego, California, and a partner in Sullivan & Associates, a management consulting firm.

Figure

1. Prescriptions

for optimizing

profitability

Over the years a long list of replacements for the microeconomic formula has appeared in business and academic literature. A selected list of these formulas is illustrated in Figure 1. All of these formulas have common characteristics: they are proposed by reputable researchers or experienced managers yet they all appear to contradict one another; most of the formulas have worked in some firms and failed in others, and each was claimed by its proponent to be a formula that would lead to profitability if properly applied. One of the important results of the research reported in this paper is that all of these formulas are valid under different environmental conditions. These conditions will be discussed later.

Historical

Success Patterns

A study of patterns of business success over the past 90 years begins to explain the paradoxical state of the success prescriptions described above. A somewhat simplified pattern of success behaviours, which evolved since the 1900s in the U.S., is

12

Long

Range

Planning

Vol.

26

October

shown in Figure 2. The milestone dates shown in the Figure apply to the U.S.A. and the same patterns have been observed 20 to 50 years later in other industrialized nations. As Figure 2 shows, during the first 30 years of the twentieth century success came to production driven firms which used the microeconomic success formula. The most visible example of such firms was the Ford Motor Company led by Mr Henry Ford I who pioneered the development of mass production technology and insisted on selling his cars ‘in any color so long as it was black’. In the 1930s some firms, notably those in consumer goods industries, became market driven by shifting their attention to satisfying customer needs and/or convincing the customer that their products were superior to those of competitors. The pioneer in this shift was the General Motors Corporation under the leadership of Alfred P. Sloan. About 1940 some other firms, primarily in industrial goods industries, shifted to product development driven behaviour by basing the firm’s success on the continual improvement of their products. The appearance of the Second Industrial Revolution in the 1940s led to a proliferation of research driven firms which succeeded through marketing products incorporating the latest state of the art technology. A majority of these firms were in the defence and aerospace industries. A significant number of firms such as pharmaceuticals and computers, showed that research driven behaviour could also be a success in civilian industries.

Figure

2. Driving

forces

for

succcss

1993 The four success behaviours discussed above had one common feature. In each of them behaviour was dominated by one of the four key functional activities found in all firms: production, marketing, product development or advanced research. As Figure 2 shows, since the 1950s firms in each category began to shift to the environment driven behaviour. Such firms continually evaluate the future critical success factors in their businesses and recognize that, in the environment of the 199Os, no single function is the success-determining function. As a result, all functions that are important to the firm’s success are allowed to exert influence on the firm’s strategy. Consequently, general management, and not the management of one of the functions, is the dominant guiding force in environment driven firms; and it balances contributions of the four functions in a way which optimized the firm’s future profit potential. Furthermore, environment driven firms, unlike the single function driven firms, do not make the assumption that their markets will continue to grow and remain profitable in the future. They continually monitor the environment for signs of demand saturation, technology substitution, structural changes in consumer demand, social and political discontinuities, and assess the future inherent profitability and growth in their historical markets. And, if the prospects in any of the firm’s markets loom unprofitable, environment driven firms search for an enter new areas of opportunity, while they divest from the unpromising market.

Optimizing

Profitability

in Turbulent

Environments:

An example of such firms was the American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation which, following deregulation of the telecommunications industry, converted itself from a production driven into an environment driven firm. Similarly Apple computers and Hewlett Packard shifted from the technology driven to the environment driven behaviour. Typically, such firms become more they were before the transformation.

successful

than

A Formula

for Strategic

formula. We will call it the Success Formula OY CSSF.

Environmental

Success Contingent

13 Strategic

Turbulence

The Contingent Strategic Success Formula is based on three key variables. The first is the Environmental Turbulence which is a measure of the degree of changeability (or discontinuity) and predictability of the_tirm’s environment.

As Figure 2 suggests, while many firms are shifting to the environment driven orientation, others remain successful using their historical success formulas. Over the past 10 years Ansoffhas gathered data from more than a thousand firms, in developed and rapidly developing countries around the world, on the success formulas which these firms expected to use in order to succeed in the 1990s.

In the Contingent Strategic Success Formula, Environmental Turbulence is the external variable, whose values specify the type of behaviour necessary for success. It is described by five different turbulence levels. Each level is further described by four factors which determined the turbulence level.

The results of this research show that in the 1990s about 85 per cent of firms expect to be environment driven in at least one of their Strategic Business Units (SBUs). The remaining SBUs are likely to be using one of the other four success behaviours.’

(2) Familiarity

These results suggest an explanation of the paradoxical claims of universal applicability by the proponent of the respective success formulas shown in Figure 1. The explanation is simply that in the environment of the 1990s there is no single success _formula which has universal validity.

Descriptions of the four elements at each turbulence level are shown in Figure 3. The environment at turbulence level 1 is essentially unchanging. When change does occur, it is very slow and response is gradual over a long period of time.

The results also suggest a need for a contingent success formula which consists of a series of different formulas and identifies the conditions under which each formula becomes successful. The remainder of this paper is devoted to presenting such a contingent

Figure

COMPLEXITY

National Economic

FAMILIARI-W OF EVENTS

Familiar

RAPIDITY OF CHANGE

Slower Than Response

Comparable to Response

VISIBILITY OF FUTURE

Recurring

Forecastable

3. Environmental

turbulence

(1)

of the successive

occur

(4)

Visibility

of the consequences

in the en-

events;

(3) Rapidity with which the events evolve are first perceived; and

after they

of these events.

In an environment at turbulence level 2, change is slow incremental. Change is slow and a firm can respond in the time between initial and full impact. Changes is as fast incremental in an environment at turbulence level 3. The future is a logical extension

+

Global Socio-Political

Discontinuous Familiar

Discontinuous Novel

Regional Technological

+

Extrapolable

scale

of E vents which

Complexity vironment;

Faster Than Response Predictable

Partially Predictable

Much Faster Than Response Unpredictable Suprises

Long

14

Range

Planning

Vol.

26

October

1993

of the historical past. Firms at this level must have a forward-looking strategy so response can start before initial impact.

the focus of attention environment.

At turbulence level 4, change is very fast and and the future is only partially discontinuous, predictable. Since the future bears little or no resemblance to the historical past, firms must have both a forward-looking strategy, and an environmental scanning system that is not based on extrapolation of the past.

Responsiveness of General Management Capability

The environment at turbulence level 5 is full of surprises. Change is moving so fast, and the environment is so unpredictable that even wellmanaged firms will experience strategic surprises. In a particular environment, the turbulence level is determined by using Figure 3 to select the subvariable (complexity, familiarity, rapidity and visibility), which best describes the environment, and then computing their average.

Strategic

Aggressiveness

The second variable in the formula is the Strategic Aggressiveness of a firm’s behaviour in the external environment. The level of strategic aggressiveness is determined by two elements: (1)Th e dg e ree 0fh c an gbt e e ween a firm’s successive strategic moves in the environment. (2) The database

used in choosing

Descriptions of the level of turbulence Figure 4. A firm’s determined just like

the moves.

two elements at the respective are shown in the lower part of strategic aggressiveness level is the turbulence level, except that

is now on thejirm

and not on the

The third variable in the CSSF is the Responsiveness of a jrm’s General Management. Description of the responsiveness levels is shown in the lower part of Figure 5. For purposes of this paper, general management responsiveness is measured by a single subvariable: The Way the Firm Manages Change. (In practical applications responsiveness is described by a number of elements (see Figure 5 below).

Contingent

Success Formula

Figure 6 summarizes Figures 3,4 and 5 and presents the formula in tabular form. In words the formula is stated as follows: For optimum profitability the levels of both the strategic aggressiveness andgeneral management responsiveness of the firm must be aligned with the environmental turbulence level.

Validation of the Contingent Strategic Success Formula The key concepts of the Contingent Strategic Success Formula were developed by Ansoff over a period of 25 years.‘” During this period Ansoff presented many occasions to senior managers,

the formula incorporated

DISCONTINUOUS SUPRISEFUL Discontinuous Discontinuous Predictable Change Unpredictable Change

ENVIRONMENTAL TURBULENCE

REPETITIVE No Change

EXPANDING Slow Incremental Change

CHANGING Fast Incremental Change

AGGRESSIVENESS

STABLE

REACTIVE

ANTICIPATORY

ENTREPRENEUR

CREATIVE

Discontinuous Novel

Figure

DEGREE OF CHANGE

Zero

Incremental

Incremental

Discontinuous Familiar

DATA BASE

Historical precedents

Historical Experience

Extrapolated

Future Opportunities

4. Matching

aggressiveness

to turbulence

Creativity

on it

Optimizing

Profitability

ENVIRONMENTAL TURBULENCE

CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Figure

5. Matching

STRATEGIC AGGRESSMNESS

RESPONSIVENESS OF GENERAL MANAGEMENT CAPABlLllY

6. Matching

in consulting practice.

No Change

mental Change

Supressess Change

Adapts to Change

Fast Incremental Change

Seeks Familiar Change

for Strategic

Success

15

DISCONTINUOUS Discontinuous Discontinuous Predictable Change Unpredictable Change‘

Seeks Related Change

Seeks Novel Change

to turbulence

EXPANDING Slow Incremental Change

CHANGING Fast Incremental Change

DlSCONTlNUOUS Discontinuous Predictable Change

SUPRISEFUL Discontinuous Unpredictable Change

STABLE Stabe based on Precedents

REACTIVE Incremental Change Based on Experience

ANTlClPATORY Incremental Change Based on Extrapolation

ENTREPRENEURAL Discontinuous New Strategies Based on Observable Opportunities

CREATIVE Discontinuous Novel Strategies Based on Creativity

STABILITY SEEKING Rejects Change

EFFICIENCY DRIVEN Adapts to Change

MARKET DRIVEN Seeks Familiar Change

ENVIRONMENT DRIVEN Seeks Related Change

ENVIRONMENT CREATING Seeks Novel Change

REPETITIVE No Change

aggressiveness

and responsiveness

and used it in consulting

On all of these occasions the formula received a favourable reception. However, such credibility test was also passed by most of the other success formulas described in Figure 1, and later turned out to be valid in some cases and invalid in others. Thus, the ‘favourable reception’ credibility test does not guarantee that any of the formulas will optimize the profitability of firms which use it. With this in mind, during the period from 1984 to 1992, the authors of this paper conducted a series of empirical tests of the CSSF” in The Strategic Management Doctoral Program at the U.S. International University in San Diego, California. These tests are summarized below.“‘” ‘CSSF=the

A Formula

CHANGING

EXPANDING Slow Incre-

turbulence,

intruments,

Environments:

REPEllTlVE

responsiveness

ENVIRONMENTAL TURBULENCE

Figure

in Turbulent

contingent strategic success formula.

Figures 3, 4 and 5 were expanded into a detailed questionnaire expressed in managerial language. The questionnaire was administered in nine different settings to senior managers of enterprises in seven different types of firms and five countries. A total of 420 firms was studied. The list of settings is shown in Figure 7. Managers used the questionnaire to diagnose the average environmental ?turbulence, strategic aggressiveness, and responsiveness of general management capability over the 5-year period immediately prior to administration of the questionnaire. In addition to responding to questionnaires, each firm also supplied data on their average financial performance. As the next step, the alignment of the firm’s strategy and capability with the environmental turbulence

16

Long

Range

Planning

Vol.

October

26

1993 Figure 8 illustrates the application of the gap concept to the measurement of alignment.

THE STARTEGIC SUCCESS FORMULA HAS BEEN STATlSTlCALLY PROVED IN THE FOLLOWlNG SETTINGS (A TOTAL OF 420 FIRMS):

Conclusions

from the Research*

(1) There

is no single success formula which can guarantee optimum profitability to all firms.

United States (Total 210) l Manufacturing Firms (43) l Retail and Service Firms tl6) l Federal Service Agency (69) l Regional Banks in San Diego (16) l Major U.S. Banks (28) l Savings & Loan Banks (39)

(2) Instead

formula level.

Strategic Success Formula provides a ‘conceptual umbrella’ which identifies the environmental turbulence levels at which success prescriptions found in management literature become valid. Figure 9 demonstrates this by matching names of distinguished management scientists who offered (apparently contradictory) success formulas with turbulence levels at which the formulas become valid.

Algeria (Total (34) l State-Owned Enterprises

Ethiopia (Total 54) l Statc&vvnad

Figure

7. Research

Manufacturing Firms

Manufacturing Firms

settings

was computed and compared performance of the firm.

with

the

financial

The alignment of environmental turbulence and a firm’s response was measured by the respective gaps between the level of turbulence and the level of strategic aggressiveness on the one hand, and general management responsiveness level on the other hand. For technical details of the research the reader is referred to Empirical Proof of A Paradigmic Theory of Success Behaviors in Environment Serving Organizations, Ansoff, Sullivan eta/., international Review of Strategic Management, Vol. 4 (II. E.. Hussey, ed), John Wiley and Sons, 1993.

CSSF deals only with (4) As its name implies, strategic behaviour of the firm. Once the strategic behaviour (which generates a firm’s pro@ potential in the form of new products, markets, and technologies and competitive strategies) is completed, the firm’s operating bchaviour must also be optimized before the firm can realize optimum profitability. The results of the research on CSSF show that firms which succeed strategically tend to be successful operationally.

Consequences 1990s

*For Research

,{ p

RESPONSIVENESS OF GENERAL MANGEMENT CAPABILITY

the gap concept

Findings,

see Appendix

.#r Aggresive-



8. Using

for Managing

to measure

alignment

in the

According to CSSF, firms which aspire to succeed during shifts in turbulence must anticipate and respond to such shifts.

AGGRESIVENESS

Figure

is a different contingent success each environmental turbulence

(3) The

United Arab Emirates (Total 25) l Western Banks

Indonesia tTotal(97) PrivatelyOwned

there for

,J? ness Gap 2’ 5: ;;c Capability Gap

1 % j, 2 $

1.

Optimizing

Profitability

in Turbulent

Environments:

A Formula for Strategic Success

17

Ansoff & McDonnell (19901 Henry Mintzberg (1990)

Ansoff 0970)

Cyert & March (1963)

Peters &Waterman (1982)

Ansoff, Declerk, Hays (1974)

Brian Quinn tl98Ot

Ansoff (3966)

Michael Porter (19801

Simon & March (1958)

Hemy Mintzberg* 11990) * Applies in Technology Driven Environments

I

I

J

3

4

5

A.P. Chandler (1962)

Cohen, March & Olsen (1972)

Lindblom (1959)

1

2

ENVIRONMENTAL TURBULENCE LEVEL

Figure 9. ‘Umbrella’ A mangement

nature of the contingent

system, derived from CSSF,

success formula application diagnosis.

called

Strategic Mangement provides practical management tools which assure that a firm’s profitability will be optimized in thefuture. These procedures are briefly

described below. (For a detailed description Strategic Management see ref. 6). (1) The first step is strategic diagnosis,

used at the beginning of a jirm’s cycle. The diagnosis identifies the gaps between a

firm’s present strategic aggressiveness and general management capability and the aggressiveness/capability which will be needed for success in the future (see ref. 16). Figure 10, which is a modification of Figure 9 , shows the

If both gaps are less than one, the firm is strategically ready for the future. (Although some improvements may be needed).

(3)

If the general management capability gap is greater than one, a discontinuous transformation of the general management capability must be made.

Figure 11 shows optimum profiles of general management capability at different turbulence levels. As the Figure shows, a gap of one requires a

FUTURE ENJ\IIRQNMENTAL TURBWLENCE ENVIRONMENtAL TURBULENCE

STf?ATEGIC AGGRESSIVENESS

RESPONSIVENESS OF GENERAL MANGEMENT CAPABIUTY

Figure 10. Strategic diagnosis



2

to strategic

(4

of

which should be annual planning

of gap measurement

3

4

6

Long

Range

Planning

KEY MANAGER(S)

I I

I I

26

October

Custodian

CULTURE

REWARDS

Vol.

Stabitty Seeking

I

FOR

/ Longetivity

PROBLEM SOLVING

KEY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Growth Leader

Entrepreneur

Efficiency Seeking

Growth Seeking

Opportunity Seeking

Profitability

Future Profti Potential

Creativity

Opportunity Finding

Opportunity Creating

Entrepreneurial Strategic Planning Strong Signal Issue Management

Entrepreneurial Stmtegic Planning Weak Signal Issue Management Suprise Management

1 Min~~tion

Optimizing

Diagnostic

Policies Procedures

l

l

l

Controller

I

Change Control

l

1993

Flnencial Control Budgeting

l

Extrapolative Strategic Planning

Creator

I

I

Opportunity Creating

I

I

I

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

KEY DATA BASE

I

I

Figure

Precedents

11. Optimum

general

Past Performance

Such discontinuous izational resistance

management

transformations to change.

Weak Signals

I

I

discontinuous transformation of key mindset, organizational culture, etc.

Vision of the Future

Extrapolation of Past Performance

capability

managers’

trigger

organ-

the general management capability (4) Therefore, transformation process must include anticipation, diagnosis, reduction and control of resistance to change (see part 6 of ref. 6). gap is greater than (5) If the strategic aggressiveness one, the competitive strategy of the firm must be transformed.6,‘7 11 shows, if the expected fittrre (6) As Figure environmental turbulence level is 4 or 5, the _firm must install three new key management systems: entrepreneurial strategic planning, issue management, and at level 5, surprise management. All three of these systems have been developed recently and are not yet widely used. Figure 12 describes the key differences between entrepreneurial strategic planning and extrapolative strategic planning (which is widely used in current practice). (For a description of the new systems see ref. 6.) The Strategic Management System must be used in turbulent environments. It consists of the following components :

1

I

profiles

In environments with frequent Turbulence Levels: (1)

Strategic

shifts in Environmental

Diagnosis

(2) Transformation ability

of General

(3) Transformation

of Strategy

(4) Anticipation, of resistance

diagnosis, to change.

environments

at Turbulence

In

Management

reduction

Levels

Cap-

and control

4 and 5:

(1) Entrepreneurial Strategic Planning (2) Real Time Strategic Response (Issue

Manage-

ment)

(3)

Surprise

(4)

Strategic

Management Control

Figure 13 shows a flow Management System.

diagram

of The

Strategic

Summary This paper presented a research-validated Contingent Strategic Success Formula which specifies the conditions under which a firm’s profitability is optimized.

Optimizing

I

I

Profitability

1. Turbulence Level

in Turbulent

1-3

I

2. Assumption About Future Environment

A Formula for Strategic Success

4-5

I

Extrapolation of the Past

Discontinuous From the Past

Strategy

Strategic Posture (Strategy + Capability + Strategic Investment)

Historical Success Which Matches ESO’s Strengths

+

Creatively Visualized Success Which Will Optimize ESO’s l Performance

Familiar

Unfamiliar

6. Organizational Renewal

Incremental

Discontinuous

7. Anticipation of Suprises

None

Active Anticipation

3. Planning of:

4. Planning Method

5. Type of Risk

I

Environments:

8. Control

I

I

Periodic/Operating

I

I

Real Time/Strategic

I

* ES0 = Environmental Serving Organfsattans

Figure 12. Comparison

of extrapolative

Figure 13. Strategic management

system

and entrepreneurial

strategic planning

19

I

I

I

20

Long

Range

Planning

Vol.

October

26

1993

PERFORMANCE OF 59 U.S. FIRMS VS STRATEGIC GAP ROI of Company / ROI of Industry

Small Gap e 1 DISSERTATION

PERFORMANCE OF 40 SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS VS MANAGER CULTURE PROFILE GAP Financial

Performance

Small Gap < 1

Large Gap > 1 PEIN WANG 1991

Figure 14. Strategic effectiveness vs performance loan associations, Indonesian firms

1986

PERFORMANCE OF 54 INDONESIAN VS STRATEGIC GAP

Index

DISSERTATION

Large Gap > 1

PETER HATZIANTONIOU

ROI & ROS of Company

Small Gap c 1 DISSERTATION

U.S.

manufacturing,

FIRMS

/ ROI & ROS of Industry

Large Gap > 1

SETIADI DJOHAR 1991

wholesale,

retail firms,

savings

and

Optimizing

Figure 15. Strategic Emirates banks

Profitability

effectiveness

in Turbulent

Environments:

vs performance

San Diego

A Formula

banks,

major

for Strategic

U.S.

banks,

Success

United

Arab

21

22

Long Range Planning Vol. 26

October

1993

Figure 16. Strategic effectiveness vs performance Ethiopian state owned enterprises, Algerian state owned enterprises, U.S. Federal public works organizations

Optimizing

Profitability

in Turbulent

Environments:

These conditions consist of five matching levels of environmental turbulence, strategic aggressiveness and the responsiveness of general management capability.

A Formula

for Strategic

Success

23

(11) Alfred Olanrewaju

Lewis, Strategic Posture and Financial Performance of the Banking Industry in California: A Strategic Management Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1989).

(12) Abainesh Mitiku, The Relationship of General Management Capability with Performance in State-Owned Industrial Enterprises in Ethiopia A Strategic Approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1991).

A systematic management process derived from the Success Formula-the Strategic Management System-was briefly described. (13)

Tamer Tamer Salameh, Analysis and Financial Performance of the Banking Industry in United Arab Emirates: A Strategic Management Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1987).

(14)

Patrick A. Sullivan, The Relationship Between Proportion of Income Derived From Subside and Strategic Performance of a Federal Agency Under the Commercial Activities Program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1987).

(15)

Pien Wang, Determinants of Perceptions of Environmental Turbulence and Strategic Responses of Savings and Loan Top Managers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1991).

(16)

H. lgor Ansoff, ANSPLAN-CD. Computer Based Interactive Program for Strategic Diagnosis (1992). (A proprietary product.)

(17)

H. lgor Ansoff, ANSPLAN-A Computer Based Interactive Program for Competitive Strategy Analysis (1990) (A proprietary product.)

References (1) H. lgor Ansoff, Management Expectations of Future Success Behaviors, unpublished results (1992).

(2) (3)

H. lgor Ansoff, Corporate Strategy, McGraw Hill (1965). H. lgor Ansoff, Roger Declerk, and Robert Hays, From Strategic to Strategic Management, John Wiley and Sons, London (1976)

Planning

(4)

H. lgor Ansoff, Strategic don (1979).

(5)

H. lgor Ansoff, Implanting London (1984).

(6)

Management,

Strategic

Macmillan Press, Lon-

Management,

Prentice Hall,

H. lgor Ansoff and Edward McDonnell, Implanting Prentice Hall, London (1990).

Strategic

Management,

(7)

Hassane Chabane, Restructuring and Performance in Algerian State-Owned Enterprises: A Strategic Management Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1987).

(8)

Setiadi Djohar, The Relationships Between Strategic Effectiveness, Competitive Efficiency and Performance in Indonesian Firms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1991).

(9)

Peter Hatziantoniou, The Relationship of Environmental Turbulence, Corporate Strategic Profile, and Company Performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1986).

(19)

Reuben Mietamuno Jaja, Technology and Banking: The Implications of Technological Change on the Financial Performance of Commercial Banks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Business and Management, United States International University (1989).

Appendix

1. Research

The contingent strategic success validated in all nine projects.

Findings hypothesis

was

strongly

The probability that the results were obtained by chance was very small. (p =0.04 to p

Optimizing Profitability in Turbulent Environments : A ...

The most visible example of such firms was the Ford Motor Company led by Mr Henry Ford I who pioneered the development of mass production technology.

2MB Sizes 31 Downloads 207 Views

Recommend Documents

Customer Profitability in a Supply Chain
Applying the model to data from a large wholesaler/distrib- utor, we demonstrate .... can identify its best prospects and target the most profitable ones differently from ..... utor's warehouse first and then shipped at the customers' demand. Let HR|

Customer Profitability in a Supply Chain
from a large distributor that supplies to grocery and other retail businesses. In recent years ... In summary, the costs of purchasing, inventory, .... both the management accounting and marketing literature. ... ing program (what he calls "concentra

Hierarchical structures in a turbulent free shear flow
(m s. –1. ) U (x = 300 mm). U (x = 400 mm). U (x = 500 mm) y (mm). Figure 2. ..... Shen & Warhaft (2002), a cylinder wake flow result by Bi & Wei (2003), and a.

bondi-hoyle accretion in a turbulent medium
Oct 13, 2005 - creting interstellar gas during galaxy mergers. In such cases, one .... In x 3 we describe numerical simulations we have conducted to test our ...

TURBULENT THERMAL CONVECTION IN A SPHERE I ... - CiteSeerX
by a coarse grid using ordinary computers. ... However, application to magnetohydrodynamics is not known and, ... facilities, but not a very powerful computer.

TURBULENT THERMAL CONVECTION IN A SPHERE I ... - CiteSeerX
space grid points or of the spectral functions. N cannot be too large ... The control parameter for flows is the Reynolds number Re = V L/νM, where V ,. L are the ...

Strategic Leadership in Turbulent Times -
A Graduate in Mechanical Engineering from. Jadavpur University, Kolkata, Ayan has many years' exposure to working with Fortune 500 companies in India and abroad in Project. Management, as well as in risk management and financial services. He has led

A Preliminary Experience in Optimizing the Layout of ...
content adapted to needs and constraints of mobile devices. So, it is becoming ..... Average fitness behavior for Service Page by varying the population size.

Towards a Model for Optimizing Technical Debt in Software Products
Mar 26, 2013 - debt at various lifecycle stages of a software product. We discuss the use ... limited view, failing to account for the evolutionary way in which the ...

A Clustering Algorithm for Radiosity in Complex Environments
Program of Computer Graphics. Cornell University. Abstract .... much of the analysis extends to general reflectance functions. To compute the exact radiance ...

Photophysics of norharmane in micellar environments: A fluorometric ...
In aqueous solution at pH 7, excitation of the neutral species promotes a rapid ..... The micellar solutions were prepared freshly ...... A 101 (1997) 768–775. w. 20.

Optimizing Discrimination-Efficiency Tradeoff in ...
sifiers, different types of features can be included in one big ... The main advantages of our approach compared to the .... increasing demand of training data w.r.t. the number of fea- ... Discriminative Analysis (LDA) to find a linear projection.

Turbulent Laser - Flow Visualization
The image was cropped in Photoshop and the contrast along with the sharpness was increased. The color curves were also used to bring out the green in the ...

A Distributed Speech Recognition System in Multi-user Environments
services. In other words, ASR on mobile units makes it possible to input various kinds of data - from phone numbers and names for storage to orders for business.

Optimizing Budget Constrained Spend in Search Advertising
Feb 8, 2013 - implementing it in the Google ads serving system and run- ... ∗The author is currently at Facebook, Inc., Menlo Park, CA,. USA. The work ...

species richness in fluctuating environments
The promotion of competition in the delivery of electricity, telecommunication, water and other infrastructure ... providers in the sector would be large enough to allow competition for the market to be effective. .... solutions adopted in this paper

Conifers in cold environments synchronize maximum ... - CiteSeerX
Sep 7, 2005 - Summary. • Intra-annual radial ... ments of photoperiod could act as a growth constraint or a limit after which the rate of tree-ring formation tends ...

Custom execution environments in the BOINC middleware
large user base, it suffers from two fundamental limitations: first, it can only ... pend on external software, having the same dependencies as BOINC itself. This ... advantage of not requiring any modifications to the BOINC client but is tied to ...

Turbulent Laser - Flow Visualization
course. The objective of the photo was to capture the cross section of a ... The image was cropped in Photoshop and the contrast along with the sharpness was.

Custom execution environments in the BOINC middleware
such as VMWare[6] and Xen[2], or application level sandboxes such as Native ..... B. Customizable execution environments with virtual desktop grid computing.