Reading Strategic Management Process “Strategic management is the process of assessing “what we are” and deciding and implementing “what we intend to be and how we are going to get there. ” Strategy describes how an organization intends to compete with the resources available in the existing and perceived future environment. “Strategic management is about the organizational success now and in the future.
This management and research approach concentrates on the firm’s ability to organize its routines, capabilities and resources for success. As mentioned in the scenario, Foundation Schools is the largest provider of special needs and have managed to meet its financial targets in the last two years. Strategic management is the process of identifying, deciding and implementing the intent and how the company will get there. Strategy describes how an organization intends to compete with the resources available in the existing and perceived future environment.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
To remain competitive and provide low cost for its students, Foundation Schools must determine additional ways to increase funding without a major increase in tuition. Gray & Larson, (2006). Pg. 22 Project Management StructureThe stakeholders decide project Structure. Key players such as the chairperson and the executive director have the initial input as far as the structure of the project; however, this structure has to be approved by other members of the Board of Directors. John Thomas has grown revenues by nearly 10 per cent per year, making the company more profitable.
With his strong business background and excellent leadership skills, his goal is to improve the financial outlook for the schools upcoming year. Although he has mentored Nancy who is the Executive Board of Director he works closely to choose other members based on business as opposed to education and their backgrounds. The first obstacle for John is to get Nancy and the other members to buy into the new vision of the direction of the organization. Secondly, the other major underlying issue that was overlooked was whether or not someone had a funding background.
Without this notable player on the team Foundation Schools runs the risk of loosing instead of making a profit. Obviously, the possible effect of the non-funding background has on the school and their employee has not been researched to the fullest. “Anyone who has worked for more than one organization realizes that there are often considerable differences in how projects are managed within certain firms with similar structures—It is important for project managers and participants to know the ‘lay of the land’ so that they can avoid obstacles and take advantage of pathways to complete their projects” Gray & Larson, (2006).
Pg. 55 Defining Project Scope Defining the project scope sets the stage for developing a project plan. Project scope is the keystone interlocking all elements of a project plan. While selecting projects for implementation in an organization, a major factor that influences project selection, funding, resource allocation or prioritization is the extent of individual and organizational politics. John Thomas and the members from the Board of Directors have defined the project objective of increased revenues. This is based on employing new board members, which will improve the school’s effectiveness and expand their organization.
The deliverables are set on a timeline of 3 years with the first deliverable being completed and waiting for board approval. Foundation Schools have placed more focused on the financial milestone that they need to go back to the drawing board to determine what and where they will get additional donations for the school. There are no set milestones along the way and this is because of not having established deliverables. The funding of the school was left up to a person who does not have a funding background but merely hired to manage the funds and acquire new ideas for additional funding.
Thus the limits and exclusions of the project were never defined or even considered that the additional monies would come from new students and not existing ones. After experiencing a few obstacles the school is now getting feedback that revenue is not where it should be and can pose a threat to the financial outcome in the long run. The project scope was not thoroughly defined; it was only lightly thought of on a whim by John based on past history Gray & Larson, (2006). Pg. 100 End State Goals “End State Goals are those goals that must be obtained and fulfilled at the conclusion of the implementation plan”.
Foundation School’s main goal is financial. Its ultimate end state goal is to improve the school’s effectiveness and expand the enterprise while maintaining success at meeting its financial targets. Gray & Larson, (2006). Project Selection Committee Project Selection Committee is expected to enable the company to choose projects to align with strategic objectives. It is pretty clear who the PSC people are in the scenario. John Thomas, Jane Kilpatrick, Cindy Richards, Andy Antonio, Nancy Anderson, Jeff White and Jennifer Chin.
All of above referenced individuals have an input as to which the project will be measured based on last year’s resultsGray & Larson, (2006). Pg. 14 References Gray, C. , & Larson, E. (2006). Project Management: The Managerial Process, Chapter 2: Organization Strategy and Project Selection. The McGraw-Hill Companies. Retrieved January 8, 2009, from University of Phoenix, eBook Collection University of Phoenix (2009). Week One Overview. Retrieved January 9, 2009 from University of Phoenix, Week One resource. MMPBL510-Implementing Organizational Initiatives – Foundation Schools Scenario.