Why firms adhere to or deviate from their strategic plans is poorly understood. However, theory and limited research suggest that the process through which such plans emerge may play a part. In particular, top management decision-sharing—consensus-oriented, team-based decision-making—may increase the (10) likelihood that firms will adhere to their plans, because those involved in the decision-making may be more committed to the chosen course of action, thereby increasing the likelihood that (15) organizations will subsequently adhere to their plans.
However, the relationship between top management decision-sharing and adherence to plans may be affected by a firm’s strategic mission (its fundamental approach to increasing sales revenue and market share, and generating cash flow and short-term profits). At one end of the strategic mission continuum, “build” strategies are pursued when a firm desires to increase its market share and is willing to sacrifice short-term profits to do so. At the other end, “harvest” strategies are used when a firm is willing to sacrifice marked share for short-term profitability and cash-flow maximization. Research and theory suggest that top management decision-sharing may have a more positive relationship with adherence to plans among firms with harvest strategies than among firms with build strategies. In a study of strategic practices in several large firms, managers in harvest strategy scenarios were more able to adhere to their business plans. As one of the managers in the study explained it, this is partly because “Typically all a manager has to do [when implementing a harvest strategy] is that which was done last year.” Additionally, managers under harvest strategies may have fewer strategic options than do those under build strategies; it may therefore be easier to reach agreement on a particular course of action through decision-sharing, which will in turn tend to promote adherence to plans. Conversely, in a “build” strategy scenario, individual leadership, rather than decision-sharing, may promote adherence to plans. Build strategies—which typically require leaders with strong personal visions for a firm’s future, rather than the negotiated compromise of the team-based decision—may be most closely adhered to when implemented in the context of a clear strategic vision of an individual leader, rather than through the practice of decision-sharing.
GWD3-Q24: The passage cites all of the following as differences between firms using build strategies and firms using harvest strategies EXCEPT A. their willingness to sacrifice short-term profits in order to build market share B. their willingness to sacrifice building market share in order to increase short-term profitability C. the number of strategic options available to their managers D. the relative importance they assign to maximizing cash-flow E. how likely they are to employ decision-sharing in developing strategic plans
我觉得D正确，以前的讨论帖也看过了 D正确的原因：At the other end, “harvest” strategies are used when a firm is willing to sacrifice marked share for short-term profitability and cash-flow maximization. 我觉得D可以用有关无关来排除，cash-flow maximization的重要性只能是对“harvest” strategies来说的，对于“build” strategies ，没有这点提出，因此这不能作为比较依据 E中decision-sharing在两个观点中都有比较说明，因此是比较依据
At the other end, “harvest” strategies are used when a firm is willing to sacrifice marked share for short-term profitability and cash-flow maximization.
最关键是要理解这句话与之前关于"build" strategies的句子通过At the other end表现出来的强烈直接对比关系。虽然"build" strategies中没提到cash-flow，但如果cash-flow不是成对比关系的话，他就不应该在这种直接对比的句子中出现。
E之所以不对，我觉得是因为原文中并没有明确讲到、甚至暗示build型的firm就不用decision-sharing，原文中强调的是在这两种firm中，decision-sharing对adhere to plan的影响。
注意第二段的第一句话：“However, the relationship between top management decision-sharing and adherence to plans may be affected by a firm’s strategic mission ”其实这句就暗示了，或许并非两种firm间使用decision-sharing的程度有区别，而是decision-sharing会被firm本身的形式影响其对adhere to plan的效果
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2010-1-22 15:08:31
收藏
收藏
楼主
