In this article, the
author provides a detailed report for the sustainable
solutions paper J. C. Penney Company, Inc., commonly known as
JCPenney. Moreover, JCPenney is a
retailer company in the United States that is over 100 years old. As time passed, JCPenney experienced
challenges to stakeholder needs.
JCPenney has a value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational
strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with
existing synergies. In addition, the
distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less
customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s
strongest competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy &
Company and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores,
Incorporated. The existing CEO
introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring
people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain
ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement,
and a required different strategy revision.
Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney company
lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney
Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine value
chain process and is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying
practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing more value and lower
prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all
the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the
weaknesses revealed.
Executive Summary
The sustainable strategy
for JCPenney includes changes to the value chain processes. Consideration to value chain ideas
specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need
improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s
goals. Expectations and affiliations
with social identities do not match the values of an organization (Crane &
Ruebottom, 2011). The focus for JCPenney
should be in value creation, and social dynamic alignment for organizations to
maintain or sustain a competitive advantage (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Out of Peter Drucker’s eight long-term
survival objectives, JCPenney will benefit in correcting: (a) Market Standing;
(b) Innovation; (c) Profitability; (d) Management Capability; (e) Employee
Satisfaction & Performance; and (f) Obligations to Home Bound Communities
state an argument that organizations must have direction and purpose (Schulz
& Hofer, 1999). JCPenney is to scan
the environment to find trends (variable over time), events (happening now), or
forecasts (extension of the future) intercepting the industry. The survival tactic for JCPenney to implement
will include the long-term survival objectives as strategic intent. Performance changing metrics will assist in
providing scope to action plans required by the strategic intent (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). In
addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures
(WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Strategic intent represents a quick recovery to a drastic change in
opportunities and threats.
For the last three years, JCPenney executed a conventional strategic
plan to increase return of investment.
Moreover, JCPenney’s approach is in reducing the cost. The cost idea includes eliminating stores
with diminished returns and eliminating labor from those properties to include
corporate support. The strategy causes
organizational market value to decrease.
In addition, when the economy improves organizations meet with
difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless,
whenever a sluggish economy affects market behavior a return on investment
survives; however, when the issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws
because the actual culprit is missing.
From the facts about JCPenney’s diminishing returns, a strategic intent
enterprise level strategy will benefit the organization.
A consideration to JCPenney culture type includes identifying the
various different ethnic groups that represent JCPenney. Moreover, JCPenney organizational structure
is of different types of ethnic groups from various parts of the United States
and the world. Motivating different
types of ethnic groups in an organization setting is challenging due to
traditions. An organization practicing
old North American traditions in a business setting, when most of the employees
are not originally from the United States, is not a productive strategy. The prime idea is to incorporate a
motivational plan aligned with the values of traditional ethnic group origins.
Recently JCPenney terminated 2,200 employees affecting approximately
100 stores and the potential of 1,100 stores for future, cut backs in the future (Murray, 2013). Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet
dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining
similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years
shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement,"
2013). The last three years of cash flow
are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). The organizational strategy is causing
organizational market value to decrease.
In addition, when the economy improves organizations meet with
difficulty building up capital.
Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy affects market behavior a
return on investment survives; however, when the issue is due to loss in value
the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is missing.
JCPenney’s success is
mainly responsible for external forces (Chittihaworn, Islam, Keawchana, &
Yusuf, 2011). The external forces that
are of interest to JCPenney include: (a) products and services; (b) the way of
doing business; (c) management expertise; (d) entrepreneur characteristics; (e)
characteristics of the organization; (f) resources and finance; and (g)
Internet technology (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). The factors concerning the growth and
sustainability of JCPenney include the business capacity of leadership and team
(Mazzrol, Rebound, & Soutar, 2009).
To grow a business, the managers must implement a strategy that relates
to measurement of the expansion. Leaders
must understand the principles of economics state that as demand grows price
rises to reduce demand and supply increases to match demand (Stacey,
2011). The external constraints
to any technology-based organization are newer technologies, cost to implement,
and material availability to produce the technology (Kipping & Cailluet,
2010). Factors to reduce the threat of
entry include economies of scale, providing materials for the implementation of
technology just in time, producing a technology unique to the industry,
branding the industry, and induction to cartels (Kipping & Cailluet,
2010). In addition, JCPenney has to slow
the progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and fear of
executive job loss by strengthening industry placement (Martins & Meyer,
2012). Furthermore, JCPenney can improve
external and internal views of diversity by electing leaders that are diversity
friendly (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney can
become competent by realizing an organization that incorporates external a
friendly physical environment including behaviors and settings labor forces
require for a “Workplace Fun” environment (Pryor, Singleton, Taneja,
& Humphreys, 2010). The factors that
increase workplace fun for JCPenney comprise of higher moral: (a) lower
turnover; (b) increase creativity and innovation; (c) better performance; and
(d) higher commitment (Pryor et al., 2010).
JCPenney enthusiasm in changing its logo, hiring a new CEO and marketing
manager may provide its shareholders initial short run relief from pressing low
returns of revenues. The new CEO arrived
from the retail technology sector, not the clothing, kitchen, and home retail
sector. In addition, the new marketing
manager experience is from recreating a sugar water drink from the 1980s and
has no expertise the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. The CEO first introduced a new idea of “Everyday
Low Prices” that did not go over well with the public. Moreover, the CEO implemented a new pay scale
to employees. The pay scales does not
pay commission to sales staff.
Furthermore, the pay scale does not offer motivation to sales employees. Nevertheless, JCPenney has to embrace a more
sound strategy in evaluating organizational performance by concepts of the
value chain measurements.
JCPenney has alignment to customer’s shopping experience and customer
service within the organization.
JCPenney has a weakness in having enough personnel in the stores;
however, the untrained personnel attempt to engage with customers with a
welcome message. The online auction
experience does not offer the connection between customer and client
representing in less human interaction with the public. The misalignment challenges are causing JCPenney
in moving to a direction for solvency ("Balance sheet," 2013). In addition, JCPenney should connect the
mission statement to the daily activities for providing distinction and
customer definition (Anitsal, Anitsal, & Girard, 2012).
The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to
progress ("Balance sheet," 2013).
Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by
exploiting available resources. The
first improvement is into revamping the external forces of the VCA
infrastructure. A capability JCPenney
has in place is the brand that serves as a consistent parameter to
improvements. JCPenney has many
capabilities not yet realized for value creation. The capability to implement is utilizing
the abundance of information to introduce profit maximization. Moreover, JCPenney creates information from
all daily routines. A study of those
routines is mandatory to evaluate redundant practices and missed
opportunities. Other capabilities
include the existing employee base retains knowledge to utilize for value
creation.
The opportunity for JCPenney is to derive a model of interest to the
daily routines with the employment base, availability of human resources, and
the needs of communities (Stacey, 2011).
The intricate strategy is reliant on processing information and the
interaction of people within the organization.
In essence, JCPenney must overcome the differences human labor offers in
culture identification to unite the organization in offering a vision of value
to communities in a global scale.
The strategy JCPenney undertakes do not address needs to align
organizational strategy with values of communities. Moreover, JCPenney is in a culture shock i.e.
JCPenney is finding the new environment too complex to attempt to retain
organizational footing in a competitive business. Indeed, the direction taken by JCPenney
currently encompasses the strategy of exhausting capital assets and devaluing
infrastructure.
JCPenney needs to respond competition by using the opponents inertia to
balance position (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The advantage achieved by JCPenney is in
harmony when the strengths of the competition turn to weaknesses. The art of the strategy is when the
competition does not realize JCPenney is defending territory (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005).
JCPenney has in place a product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known
criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment
with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal
compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s
history and company culture …” (Lee, Fairhurst, & Wesley, 2009, p.
146). The corporate social
responsibility is not evident in the activities JCPenney makes. Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers
information on being a servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our
communities, our Associates, our Customers and the environment. What matters to
you matters to JCPenney."
(Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A
conclusion drawn from the two statements depict an organization wanting to be a
servant and committed to a lawful alignment with communities; however, the
concern for communities is ethics. The
ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing a link to the desires to stakeholders
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
JCPenney lacks the appropriate personnel at store level to assist in
implementing a strategic plan since the current people hired by JCPenney
reflect a misalignment with the needs of stakeholders. The attitude of the workers is without
motivation due to the compensation structure and the requirements by the
organization. The resources to implement
a strategic intent plan exists (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a
feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs. The best plans have back-up plans, hold
people responsible for those plans, are measurable and have a scheduled date of
implementation. The implementation
process will show the progress that is obvious to management. The difference in the implementation process,
success in implementation, and before implementation should reflect the change
in the positive direction. The metrics
for management to review include stakeholder reports, accounting reports, and
shareholder acceptance. Lastly, the
implementation and success of the implementation is tedious, should allow for
measurement, show ownership to unit goals, and be time driven.
The time line for implementation involves five key steps. The first objective to implement change is
when close knit teams exhaust current leadership (Stacey, 2011). Next, the organization grows by decentralization
and becoming autonomous (Stacey, 2011).
After growth through direction, the organization structures
decentralize, and the organization proceeds to delegation (Stacey, 2011). Afterwards, the directed efforts of
delegation bring the necessity for coordination by decreasing redundant
operations (Stacey, 2011). Cultural
bonding and cohesion assisted in reducing waste and the last time
implementation action process include forming habits that are in alignment with
the strategy (Stacey, 2011).
Organizations engaging in educating stakeholders the landscapes that
promote wealth will realize more growth than organizations that do not
communicate strategies to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Organizations must evaluate the competition
for flaws and measure the impact of competition (Stacey, 2011). The ideal position for an organization is to
defeat competition, to be the only existence in the market, and maintain the
highest landscape possible (Stacey, 2011).
Personal humility and professional will describe the personality of a
successful organization (Stacey, 2011).
Successful organizations maintain focus on; (a) a core business; (b)
closeness to customer; (c) productivity through people; (d) autonomy and entrepreneurship;
(e) hands-on; (f) value driven; (g) bias for action; (h) simple form and lean
staff; and (i) simultaneous loss-tight properties (Stacey, 2011).
JCPenney ought to realize the opportunities in a diverse work
force. Diversity is the variety of
culture and ethnic groups within an organization (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, diversity allows organizations to
adopt the best cultures to offer an environmental cohesive group (Stacey,
2011). Diversity enhances organizational
performance and provides improvements through planning (Stacey, 2011). Diversity also calls for culture adaptation
and acceptance of differences (Stacey, 2011).
Systems dynamics next phase is the study of hard systems thinking that
assumes interactions have a distinctive purpose (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, systems dynamics accept manager
pass retained knowledge to inexperienced workers (Stacey, 2011). Second order systems thinking connects to
constructivists’ psychology and has a basis to perception and observers
(Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, second order systems have observed systems
(Stacey, 2011). Level one-second order
systems single loop learning where mental models are similar (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, Level two-order second
systems double loop learning where mental models are different (Stacey,
2011). Level three-second order systems
have religious conversion and change (Stacey, 2011). Under level one-second order systems, agents
set goals (Stacey, 2011).
JCPenney failed to recognize the changing dynamics of society’s culture
and growing base of younger stakeholders.
In addition, the CEO placed more emphasis on vision to the dominant
discourse than alignment with stakeholder needs. The strategic plan of offering new products
through Martha Stewart represented the misalignment in understanding the needs
of a younger generation of stakeholders.
Moreover, JCPenney missed the opportunity in relating social
constructionism to stakeholders. In
essence, JCPenney realized the approach of supplying products and services to
an older stakeholder group that represented a small portion of social
groups.
JCPenney bombed to attempt to measure stakeholder response to strategic
planning. The CEO abandoned academic
views to interchange with personal tools.
The CEO did not examine core business alignment with customer, attempt to
realize entrepreneurship with stakeholders, and recognize the value. Moreover, evidence-based management
principles or TQM were not important for JCPenney. The CEO brought a mixture of conceptual
beliefs from past industries and attempted to realize gains from those
experiences. By not relocating to
corporate headquarters, the CEO did not bond with the culture of JCPenney,
therefore, could not correctly interpret the culture. The signals of communications were a miss by
not examining the communicative system of participants. Lastly, the CEO convoluted strategies were
successful at not yielding positive cash flows.
JCPenney is in a negative discourse aiming at devaluing
stakeholders. Social interaction
dynamics is essential for sustainability, and JCPenney has not shown interest
in identifying new emerging stakeholder base.
The retail industry has a difficult task of identifying
stakeholders. Much of the misalignment
is within how the internal stakeholders and external stakeholders
communicate. Majority of JCPenney
employees do not attempt to develop a personal relationship with customers,
therefore, JCPenney will find it difficult to learn customer’s
expectations. The center of mass of
customers perceptions maintains a distance from the misconceptions of
JCPenney. In summary, new, emergent
stakeholders emerge in external societies with boundaries not reachable by
JCPenney.
The booming JCPenney leader will enact measures of alignment with key
measures that result a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an
x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that nearly reaches sustainability with
noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey,
2011). Time and effort represent the
axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey,
2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable
as long as maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values
of creativity (Stacey, 2011).
Alignment to environmental responsibility is not just among
employees. The responsibility goes
further among the value chain to affect everyone within vertical and horizontal
support. The amount of alignment is dependent
how far off the center of mass is the organization processing activities. Leaders have to break any pre-existing
boundaries to dominate the competition.
Meeting the needs of stakeholders is only possible by realizing the
change in environmental responsibility and accepting diversity. The integration of environmental than is
apparent through measurements of metrics.
Quality management (QM) assists in the integration processes by
observing the alignment of common principles with the complex strategy of the
leader. The actual alignments made to
QM, and environmental have the basis of the function of individual
organizational needs, resources, and
environments (Rusinko, 2005).
Crisis management assists organizations by acknowledging unforeseen
events that can change barriers of entry to the organization. The focus is in social, political, cultural
and moral factors that can change sustainability. Moreover, the events include resource
depletion, environmental degradation, economic decline, competitive threats,
labor strife, financial crunch, technological risks, and health hazards (Shrivastava, 1993). The competitive advantage by crisis
management is in the response, time of response, change of processes, and
alignment to based processes.
JCPenney’s analysis of shareholder value includes risk reduction to
minimize waste, and emissions from operations (Senge et al., 2010). The industry has a number of internal threats
to the safekeeping of products within the department stores. Theft is common in an organization with
numerous produces roaming through each department store. Product displays originate from the same
products offered to the public; therefore, control of the items is a challenge. In addition, the items incur damages by
misuse. The supply chain incurs theft
and misalignment from the distances materials travel. The occurrence is a waste of resources.
Furthermore, the
reputation of JCPenney is now of an organization that offers products to a
demographic not popular among the majority of stakeholders. The accepted model by most stakeholders is of
an organization that offers discounts and built its reputation surrounding the
market value organizational frame. The
misalignment lacks connectivity to communities and does not incorporate a match
to the organizations’ mission statement.
Technology exploitation is necessary to sustain a low-cost
strategy. At this time, JCPenney hires
personnel to task redundant activities that can be reassign to automation
processes. The payoff is an innovative
organizational model that environmentally proficient and efficiently
productive. To maximize shareholder
value, JCPenney needs to reinvent its processes and reposition itself as a
dominant retail organization.
The challenge for JCPenney in globalization is economies of scale. Currently, the business model focuses on
product creation and assembly in regions of the world where labor costs are
minimum. Product transfers occur via the
supply chain by transportation methods to include oceanic, air travel, and
motor highway. The product destination
is the United States. The disabling
opportunity is that products made overseas have a high price for the local
communities in the overseas countries.
In addition, the waste from product creation made to communities of the
isolated countries represents resource depletion. In essence, the current business model is not
environmentally friendly and lacks overall long-term sustainability. The lack of alignment with environmental
concerns is the culprit to sustainability.
Summary Focus
The sustainable strategy for JCPenney includes changes to the value
chain processes. Out of Peter Drucker’s
eight long-term survival objectives, JCPenney will benefit in correcting: (a)
Market Standing; (b) Innovation; (c) Profitability; (d) Management Capability;
(e) Employee Satisfaction & Performance; and (f) Obligations to Home Bound
Communities state an argument that organizations must have direction and
purpose (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The
survival tactic for JCPenney to implement includes long-term survival
objectives as strategic intent. The
prime idea is to incorporate a motivational plan aligned with the values to a traditional
diversity group of employees. The new
strategic intent plan needs to stabilize cash flows and stakeholder
expectations. The external forces
triggering the need for change include: (a) products and services; (b) the way
of doing business; (c) management expertise; (d) entrepreneur characteristics;
(e) characteristics of the organization; (f) resources and finance; and (g)
Internet technology (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Factors to reduce the threat of entry include
economies of scale, providing materials for the implementation of technology
just in time, producing a technology unique to the industry, branding the
industry, induction to cartels and environmental sustainability (Kipping &
Cailluet, 2010; Stacey, 2011). JCPenney
has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and
fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry placement (Martins &
Meyer, 2012). In addition, JCPenney
should connect the mission statement to the daily activities for providing
distinction and customer definition (Anitsal, et al., 2012). Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a
feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs.
The time line for implementation involves five key steps. The first objective to implement change is
when close knit teams exhaust current leadership (Stacey, 2011). Next, the organization grows by
decentralization and becoming autonomous (Stacey, 2011). After growth through direction, the
organization structures decentralize, and the organization proceeds to
delegation (Stacey, 2011). Afterwards,
the directed efforts of delegation bring the necessity for coordination by
decreasing redundant operations (Stacey, 2011).
Cultural bonding and cohesion assisted in reducing waste and the last
time implementation action process include forming habits that are in alignment
with the strategy (Stacey, 2011).
For JCPenney to succeed, it has maintain focus on; (a) a core business;
(b) closeness to customer; (c) productivity through people; (d) autonomy and
entrepreneurship; (e) hands-on; (f) value driven; (g) bias for action; (h)
simple form and lean staff; and (i) simultaneous loss-tight properties (Stacey,
2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics
model on an x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that nearly reaches
sustainability with noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum
sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and
effort represent the axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent
variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly,
exploration is profitable as long as maximum sustainability does not equate
more than signal noise values of creativity (Stacey, 2011). Long-term sustainability calls for alignment
to internal controls, connectivity to communities, technology exploitation, and
environmental sustainability.
Key Takeaways
For the last three years,
JCPenney executed a conventional strategic plan to increase return of
investment. Moreover, JCPenney’s
approach is in reducing the cost. The
cost idea includes eliminating stores with diminished returns and eliminating
labor from those properties to include corporate support. The strategy causes organizational market
value to decrease. In addition, when the
economy improves organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy
affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the
issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is
missing.
A consideration to
JCPenney is not considering the challenges in leading diverse culture and change
dynamics from younger generations of employees.
Moreover, JCPenney organizational structure is of different types of
ethnic groups from various parts of the United States and the world. Motivating different types of ethnic groups
in an organization setting is challenging due to traditions. An organization practicing old North American
traditions in a business setting, when most of the employees are not originally
from the United States, is not a productive strategy. The prime idea is to incorporate a
motivational plan aligned with the values of traditional ethnic group origins.
Recently JCPenney
terminated 2,200 employees affecting approximately 100 stores and the potential
of 1,100 stores for future, cut backs in the future (Murray, 2013). Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet
dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining
similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years
shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement,"
2013). The last three years of cash flow
are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). The organizational strategy is causing
organizational market value to decrease.
In addition, when the economy improves organizations meet with
difficulty building up capital.
Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy affects market behavior a
return on investment survives; however, when the issue is due to loss in value
the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is missing.
JCPenney has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain
tacit knowledge, and fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry
placement (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Furthermore, JCPenney can improve external and internal views of
diversity by electing leaders that are diversity friendly (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney can become competent by realizing an
organization that incorporates external a friendly physical environment
including behaviors and settings labor forces require for a “Workplace Fun”
environment (Pryor et al., 2010). The factors that increase workplace fun for
JCPenney comprise of higher moral: (a) lower turnover; (b) increase creativity
and innovation; (c) better performance; and (d) higher commitment (Pryor et
al., 2010).
JCPenney enthusiasm in
changing its logo, hiring a new CEO and marketing manager may provide its
shareholders initial short run relief from pressing low returns of revenues,
but it does not communicate a true change of environmental sensitivity to
communities. The new CEO arrived from
the retail technology sector, not the clothing, kitchen, and home retail
sector. In addition, the new marketing
manager experience is from recreating a sugar water drink from the 1980s and
has no expertise the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. The CEO first introduced a new idea of “Everyday
Low Prices” that did not go over well with the public. Moreover, the CEO implemented a new pay scale
to employees. The pay scales does not
pay commission to sales staff.
Furthermore, the pay scale does not offer motivation to sales
employees. Nevertheless, JCPenney has to
embrace a more sound strategy in evaluating organizational performance by
concepts of the value chain measurements.
JCPenney has a weakness
in having enough personnel in the stores; however, the untrained personnel
attempt to engage with customers with a welcome message. The online auction experience does not offer
the connection between customer and client representing in less human
interaction with the public. The misalignment
challenges are causing JCPenney in moving to a direction for solvency
("Balance sheet," 2013).
JCPenney has in place a
product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known
criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment
with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal
compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s
history and company culture …” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 146). The corporate social responsibility is not
evident in the activities JCPenney makes.
Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers information on being a
servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our communities, our Associates,
our Customers and the environment. What matters to you matters to
JCPenney." (Anitsal et al.,
2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from
the two statements depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed
to a lawful alignment with communities; however, the concern for communities is
ethics. The ethical foundation of
JCPenney is missing a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005).
JCPenney lacks the
appropriate personnel at store level to assist in implementing a strategic plan
since the current people hired by JCPenney reflect a misalignment with the
needs of stakeholders. The attitude of
the workers is without motivation due to the compensation structure and the
requirements by the organization.
Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a feedback system that is in
alignment with stakeholder needs.
JCPenney failed to
recognize the changing dynamics of society’s culture and growing base of
younger stakeholders. In addition, the
CEO placed more emphasis on vision to the dominant discourse than alignment
with stakeholder needs. The strategic
plan of offering new products through Martha Stewart represented the
misalignment in understanding the needs of a younger generation of
stakeholders. Moreover, JCPenney missed
the opportunity in relating social constructionism to stakeholders. In essence, JCPenney realized the approach of
supplying products and services to an older stakeholder group that represented
a small portion of social groups.
JCPenney bombed to
attempt to measure stakeholder response to strategic planning. The CEO abandoned academic views to
interchange with personal tools. The CEO
did not examine core business alignment with customer, attempt to realize
entrepreneurship with stakeholders, and recognize the value. Moreover, evidence-based management
principles or TQM were not important for JCPenney. The CEO brought a mixture of conceptual
beliefs from past industries and attempted to realize gains from those
experiences. By not relocating to
corporate headquarters, the CEO did not bond with the culture of JCPenney,
therefore, could not correctly interpret the culture. The signals of communications were a miss by
not examining the communicative system of participants. Lastly, the CEO convoluted strategies were
successful at not yielding positive cash flows.
JCPenney is in a negative
discourse aiming at devaluing stakeholders.
Social interaction dynamics is essential for sustainability, and
JCPenney has not shown interest in identifying new emerging stakeholder
base. The retail industry has a
difficult task of identifying stakeholders.
Much of the misalignment is within how the internal stakeholders and
external stakeholders communicate.
Majority of JCPenney employees do not attempt to develop a personal
relationship with customers, therefore, JCPenney will find it difficult to
learn customer’s expectations. The
center of mass of customers perceptions maintains a distance from the misconceptions
of JCPenney. In summary, new, emergent
stakeholders emerge in external societies with boundaries not reachable by
JCPenney.
Integration of Concepts
A Low-Cost strategy is
challenging to sustain. The factors to
consider including environmental sustainability and economic value. Exploiting other sectors of the world to
achieve an efficient supply chain causes environmental misalignments and
shareholder grief. A Low-Cost strategy
and Differentiation Strategy represent companies attempting to offer products
or services at a lower price (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Retailers such as Wal-Mart have made the
suppliers lower their cost resulting in more profits to Wal-Mart (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The lower
cost strategy involves reducing over all costs lower than the competition
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Concepts such as “Continuous
Improvement In Operating Efficiency” involve all stakeholders to work
together in improving operating efficiency (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Companies can exploit employees
as employees gain experience. The
exploitation includes employees perform the same task in a less amount of time
than other employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Consequently, employees with experience offer
organizations a cost advantage based on the principles of the Experience Curve
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
In addition, maintaining low costs to supply chain processes results in
a company having a competitive advantage in cost leadership (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). Companies can
redesign product line to reduce manufacturing costs; therefore, creating a
competitive advantage in cost leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The best strategy is to create a low-cost
atmosphere among staff (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Offering quantitative value to customers
derives a stronger demand for the firm’s products (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005).
Observing the weakness of
competition is essential to turn the competition’s weakness into organizational
advantages (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Weaknesses to competitors are the areas where
customers are not receiving value (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Exploiting the weaknesses include the
introduction and analysis of new business to strategic regions (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The
exploitation to realize converges into areas where the competition is not
practicing. The conversions implement as
other implementation projects.
Specifically, JCPenney measures areas of exploitations to achieve value
where the competition fails to acknowledge.
The principle
organizations implement related to the concepts of Judo where footing holds
with consideration to movement, balance, and leverage (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Nevertheless, the
competition is not direct. In essence,
gains from competition reflect slow progression to business model that are not
noticeable in daily routines (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategy is best if the design does not
advert reaction from the competition (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). In contrast, when the competition
attacks JCPenney should hold footing by using the opponents inertia to balance
position (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Another strategy is
producing services or items that are specific to the organization (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Product
differentiation is essential to control the market and to derive pricing
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Based on elasticity of demand, products retain the best price (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The
successful strategy is to patent productions from the organization to retain
ownership to the rights of the product (Harvard Business School Press,
2005).
The implementation process cannot be part of the creation process
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The two tasks set apart by a profound acknowledgement of business
practices (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizational success is relevant in how
closely firms separate the two concepts (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Organizations considering
strategy alignment will focus on: (a) people; (b) incentives; (c) supportive
activities; (d) organizational structure; (e) culture; (f) and the leadership
of the business (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The strategic implementation
process connects with the assistance of all personnel in the organization
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
To succeed in this process, organizations hold everyone accountable for
the implementation process (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The realization process by an organization
achieves the rewarding process according to responsibility (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). The assurance of
the implementation is in aligning the interest of employees to the strategic
plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The time line for implementation involves five key steps. The first objective to implement change is
when close knit teams exhaust current leadership (Stacey, 2011). Next, the organization grows by
decentralization and becoming autonomous (Stacey, 2011). After growth through direction, the
organization structures decentralize, and the organization proceeds to
delegation (Stacey, 2011). Afterwards,
the directed efforts of delegation bring the necessity for coordination by
decreasing redundant operations (Stacey, 2011).
Cultural bonding and cohesion assisted in reducing waste and the last
time implementation action process include forming habits that are in alignment
with the strategy (Stacey, 2011).
Lastly, Table 2 presented below depicts the action time line steps.
Stakeholder Identification and Value Analysis -Part I
To begin defining the emphasis of stakeholder identification, we must
understand the relationship key holders have towards businesses and the
like. An attribute to stakeholder
identification is the role of economic function in how it relates to
organizations (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011).
The interaction stakeholders participate include social economic bonds
gluing and adhering to value (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Consequently, organizations have to identify
the relationships key holders have with the organization (Crane &
Ruebottom, 2011). Depending on the organization, understanding relationships
between key holders and the organization is challenging (Crane & Ruebottom,
2011). The key holders comprise into
groups called social identities (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Self-defined groups, segmented groups, or
peculiar people have the potential in affecting demand and supply of resources
or products a firm offers (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Social identities vary among groups including
those based on gender, age, race, religion, nationality, sexuality, political
affiliation, interests, possessions, and those based on roles in society (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). Expectations and
affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization
(Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic
behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane &
Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not
being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. The focus is in how social identities mix and
relate to social groups and how they have an economic need in the firm (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). Moreover, social
identity represents a thorough process in mapping the potential in key holders
(Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). In
contrast to social identities, stakeholder identification mainly focuses on
groups or individuals affecting the welfare of the organization (Crane &
Ruebottom, 2011; Freeman & McVea, 2001).
The classical idea flawed if not combined with the theory of social
identity (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011).
The groups or individuals
consisting of stakeholders at times confuse identifying the roles they
participate (Freeman & McVea, 2001).
The focus should be in value creation, and social dynamic alignment for
organizations to maintain or sustain a competitive advantage (Freeman &
McVea, 2001). In addition, corporate
planning states the importance of stakeholders to understand the firms links to
derive bounds of operation (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Furthermore, the study
of stakeholder relationships is the key in understanding value creation
(Freeman & McVea, 2001).
Identification of stakeholders first introduced in 1965 did not consider
the stability of a firm (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Organizational leaders benefit in aligning
corporate strategy with the values stakeholders offer. Corporate planning states the importance of
stakeholders to understand the firms links to derive bounds of operation
(Freeman & McVea, 2001). Industry
circumstances linked to the bounds of operation when corporate planning was
first designed (Freeman & McVea, 2001).
Stakeholder relationships missed originally from corporate planning thus
lucrative profits preceded the concerns for society challenges (Freeman &
McVea, 2001). Moreover, stakeholder
relationships followed System Theory that signaled the development of
strategies linked to stakeholder (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Thompson 1967 first introduced the term
clientele that promoted a need to examine the relationships between external
and internal links of an organization (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Profile cases initiated a concern for social
responsibility by providing a medium to metrics (Freeman & McVea, 2001). The stakeholder approach reevaluates the firm
strengths and weaknesses (Freeman & McVea, 2001).
Identifying stakeholders offering value to shareholders is essential.
Contributions to all stakeholders are the basic purpose for business according
to the theory of Stakeholder Management (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). In marketing, the business purpose includes
the theory of Maximization of Sales Revenues & Market Share (Schulz &
Hofer, 1999). Moreover, in operations
the business purpose is the theory of Maximizing Product Quality and Facility
Throughout (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).
Similarly, in Organizational Behavior the business purpose is the theory
of Maximization of Employee Satisfaction (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Lastly, in the field of Strategic Management
the focus in business purpose is Economic Performance of the Total Organization
(Schulz & Hofer, 1999).
Peter Drucker’s eight long-term
survival objectives: (a) Market Standing; (b) Productivity; (c) Innovation; (d)
Physical & Financial Resources; (e) Profitability; (f) Management
Capability; (g) Employee Satisfaction & Performance; and (h) Obligations to
Home Bound Communities state an argument that organizations must have direction
and purpose (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).
Moreover, Peter Drucker’s eight objectives reflect the weaknesses of a
business (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). In
addition, Peter Drucker’s “Set of Measures” include the eight long-term
business objectives of business performance (Schulz & Hofer, 1999, p.
2). The accumulation of inquiries, requirements,
and performance metrics prompts the need to evaluate organizational value. Economic Value Added (EVA) is a response to
attempt to offer a single measure to measure overall business performance
(Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The theory
of EVA derives customer demand to services and products (Schulz & Hofer,
1999). Total Market Value (TMV) is
another theory to measure long-term organizational performance (Schulz &
Hofer, 1999). Moreover, TMV measures the
static value performance of an organization (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). TMV and EVA are directly proportional, and
the maximization of both theories offers an organization a competitive
advantage (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Lastly,
TMV and EVA derive organizational strategy (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).
Enterprise Level Strategy
Organizations are
susceptible to change. Competition and
barriers to entry challenges new up coming organizations. When an opportunity erupts, organizations
attempt to achieve results. As
competition results the end of an opportunity, organizations scram to engage
the threat. A conventional strategy plan
focuses on the evaluation of opportunity and threats to derive a plan of
action. Strategic intent is a “win all” or “lose all” scenario.
Conventional strategic
plans focus in action plans executed at unit levels (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Action plans are
goal-derived steps stipulating the methods in achieving a strategic plan
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Moreover, action plans are a precision measure of the strategic plan
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The deconstruction of action plans is a requirement to assure cohesion
at all levels of the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics provide measurement to
the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic
plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales,
and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and
time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In contrast to strategic intent, a
conventional strategy plan incorporates in one to three years (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005; Hamel &
Prahalad, 2005). In addition, the
management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005).
Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to
implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A conventional strategic plan is more
thorough than strategic intent.
Cultures vary in the
process of obtaining new business ventures.
Western cultures make acquisitions by expanding resources (Hamel &
Prahalad, 2005). In contrast, strategic intent
originates from eastern cultures that depend on intellectual capital (Hamel
& Prahalad, 2005). Competitive
Revitalization includes systems of competition for companies to become
resilient and adapt quickly by creating an unmatchable value system (Hamel
& Prahalad, 2005). Companies
implementing strategic intent model focus on evaluating the changing metrics to
competition including human, technical, and financial capital (Hamel &
Prahalad, 2005). The advantage of
evaluating changing metrics instead of vacuum metrics is in the ability to
evaluate changes in capital acquisition and growth (Hamel & Prahalad,
2005). Moreover, a snapshot of current
events do not depict the tactical information of resolution, stamina, and
ability of competitors (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). The implementation of strategic intent is
more feasible in the short run than in the long run (Hamel & Prahalad,
2005). Motivation by top managers is
essential in strategic intent to achieve shareholder value (Hamel & Prahalad,
2005). Companies with an innovative, and
congenial culture realize strategic intent due to the required motivation by
all internal stakeholders (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Strategic intent implements quickly hence the
need for cohesion at all organizational levels.
In contrast to strategic
intent, manager’s idea of a strategic plan is more closely related to current
events (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005).
Strategic intent represents a quick recovery to a drastic change in
opportunities and threats. Moreover,
conventional strategic plans require leadership to: (a) provide people with
inspiration to continue and direction; (b) promote an organization that
compliments motivation; (c) plan and make decisions carefully with structure
and responsive; and (d) create teams that are able to notice patterns (Vargo & Seville, 2011). In contrast, strategic intent is similar to
crises where the strategy develops, and actions by lead management are
essential (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005).
In addition, conventional strategic plans are typically implementing an
opportunity; whereas, strategic intents focus more on threats (Vargo &
Seville, 2011). Strategic planning
emphasizes in selecting the best strategic to gain an advantage. Moreover,
strategic planning deals with the future, vulnerabilities, threats, sets out a
plan, works with business structures and resources (Vargo & Seville,
2011). Strategic intent and strategic
planning use much of organizational resources (Vargo & Seville, 2011). Crisis management (strategic intent) inhibits
strategic management since it has: (a) to be done immediately; (b) crisis
management that does not allow control of the strategic plan; (c) the magnitude
of the crisis that can inhibit management from quickly deciding on actions
taken; and (d) the options of action that limits crises versus strategic.
Both strategies are goal
driven and results oriented. The actions
are necessary due to unforeseen, crisis, or opportunistic event that will allow
the organization to thrive or survive. In addition, both plans require
narration, focus, and execution.
Conventional strategic plans take months to implement, and provide
plenty of time to measure the effectiveness.
In contrast, strategic intent implement with force since there is no
substitution. Furthermore, strategic
intent is the end of the line and its success is essential for survival.
For the last three years,
JCPenney executed a conventional strategic plan to increase return of
investment. Moreover, JCPenney’s
approach is in reducing the cost. The
cost idea includes eliminating stores with diminished returns and eliminating
labor from those properties to include corporate support. The strategy causes organizational market
value to decrease. In addition, when the
economy improves organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy
affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the
issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is
missing.
JCPenney requires an appropriate tool of change. Quantifying the psychological nuances in
people is essential when those people are stakeholders of an organization. From the facts about JCPenney’s diminishing
returns, an enterprise level strategy will benefit the organization. The leap is in Enterprise Transformation
(ET). Moreover, ET poses a risk in
friction and resistance between stakeholders (Makins, Nagao, & Bennett, 2012). In addition, ET differs from internal change
in that the former is between external and internal stakeholders (Makins et al., 2012). The strategy makes a methodology in managing
extensive ET by focusing on resistance to social dynamics (Makins et al.,
2012). The approach is important because
Organizational Mindfulness is a stable form of identifying threats,
opportunities to an organization (Makins et al., 2012). The basis to importance is on the study of
business structures and practices (Makins et al., 2012).
Culture Type
The
consideration of culture type is the last of the strategic planning alignment
strategy leadership considers (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Strategic
plans and Humanistic Psychology integrate without and with peril. Formulating a strategic plan has to account
motivational factors to human presence (Stacey, 2011). Long-term sustainability, in addition, to
implementation works together with the value system shareholders envision the
organization to represent (Stacey, 2011).
Prominent leaders derive a strategy not only in creating an
organizational mission, but also in aspiring the organization to become in
harmony with its values, and vision (Stacey, 2011). The challenge for leaders to date has been
finding triggers to motivate the organization (Stacey, 2011). Moving forward, the challenge in motivating
people from different cultures is finding what people hold as the value outside
of monetary gains. Emotional content is
necessary to drive people to success and become the family to organizations
(Stacey, 2011).
Social
identities vary among groups including those based on gender, age, race,
religion, nationality, sexuality, political affiliation, interests,
possessions, and those based on roles in society (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Expectations and affiliations with social
identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom,
2011). The variations in economic and
non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is
in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. The focus is in how social identities mix and
relate to social groups and how they have an economic need in the firm (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). Moreover, social
identity represents a thorough process in mapping the potential in key holders
(Crane & Ruebottom, 2011).
A
consideration to JCPenney culture type includes identifying the various
different ethnic groups that represent JCPenney. Moreover, JCPenney organizational structure
is of different types of ethnic groups from various parts of the United States
and the world. Motivating different
types of ethnic groups in an organization setting is challenging due to
traditions. An organization practicing
old North American traditions in a business setting, when most of the employees
are not originally from the United States, is not a productive strategy. The prime idea is to incorporate a
motivational plan aligned with the values of traditional ethnic group origins.
Integrated Concepts
Conventional strategic plans focus in action plans executed at unit
levels (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Action plans are goal driven steps stipulating the methods in achieving
a strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, action plans are an accuracy
measure of the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The deconstruction of action plans is a
requirement to assure cohesion at all levels of the organization (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Performance
metrics provide measurement to the action plans that are essential in measuring
the scope to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Examples of metrics include accounting
measures such as revenues, sales, and sales by employees (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). A good measure is
measurable, specific, and time driven (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). In contrast to strategic intent,
a conventional strategy plan incorporates in one to three years (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005; Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans
is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership
by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). A conventional strategic
plan is more thorough than strategic intent.
Cultures vary in the process of obtaining new business ventures. Moreover, Western cultures make acquisitions
by expanding resources (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In contrast, strategic intent originates from
eastern cultures that depend on intellectual capital (Hamel & Prahalad,
2005). Competitive Revitalization includes
systems of competition for companies to become resilient and adapt quickly by creating
an unmatchable value system (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Companies implementing strategic intent model
focus on evaluating the changing metrics to competition including human,
technical, and financial capital (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). The advantage of evaluating changing metrics
instead of vacuum metrics is in the ability to evaluate changes in capital
acquisition and growth (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Moreover, a snapshot of current events does
not depict the tactical information of tenacity, stamina, and ability of
competitors (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005).
The implementation of strategic intent is more feasible in shorter
periods than longer periods (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Motivation by top managers is essential in
strategic intent to achieve shareholder value (Hamel & Prahalad,
2005). Companies with an innovative, and
friendly culture realize strategic intent due to the required motivation by all
internal stakeholders (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Strategic intent implements
quickly hence the need for cohesion at all organizational levels.
Evidence and Implications
For the last three years,
JCPenney executed a conventional strategic plan to increase return of
investment. Moreover, JCPenney’s
approach is in reducing the cost. The
cost idea includes eliminating stores with diminished returns and eliminating
labor from those properties to include corporate support. Recently JCPenney terminated 2,200 employees
affecting approximately 100 stores and the potential of 1,100 stores for future
cut backs in the future (Murray, 2013).
Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet
dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining
similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years
shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement," 2013). The
last three years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase
("Cash flow," 2013). The
organizational strategy is causing organizational market value to
decrease. In addition, when the economy
improves organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy
affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the
issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is
missing.
General Force Analysis: External – Remote Environment
Organizations have
threats (general forces) existing in the outside of an organization. The general forces that influence
organization’s performance include external forces such as economics,
technology, demographics, social, culture, government, legal, military, and
physical environment. Organizations must
analyze the external forces to gain footing with performance.
General Force Matrix Analysis
The idea is to scan the
environment to find trends (variable over time), events (happening now), or
forecasts (extension of the future) intercepting the industry. The size of an organization, status of
resources, and strategic choices state the capabilities of withstanding
external forces (Chittihaworn et al., 2011).
The outputs of an organization such as products, services, operational
performance, and financial performance are inherently dependent on external
forces (Chittihaworn et al., 2011). An
organization’s success is mainly responsible for external forces (Chittithaworn
et al., 2011). The external forces that
are of interest include: (a) products and services; (b) the way of doing
business; (c) management expertise; (d) entrepreneur characteristics; (e)
characteristics of the organization; (f) resources and finance; and (g)
Internet technology (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Organizations have the option in measuring
external against success to derive a statistic model (Chittithaworn et al.,
2011). The model provided to costumers
weighs the results definite to value (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). The factors addressed allows for continuity
and growth of an organization (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Moreover, social networks and government
support are additional external forces affecting organizational success
(Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Social
networks are available for organizations to reduce external threats and risks
(Chittithaworn et al., 2011). In
contrast, when social networks unconditioned to assist an organization legal
aspect result often in cost opportunity (Chittithaworn et al., 2011).
Economics.
The life cycle of an organization determines the resources to implement at
different levels (Mazzrol et al., 2009).
Initially, organizations begin the life cycle process with resources
initially to compensate for down cycles (Mazzrol et al., 2009). As organizations travel through the life
cycles and understand economic factors that involve transactions, intellectual
capital realizes the need for planning (Mazzrol et al., 2009). The planning phase of an organization
realizes the correct mix of input and outputs to sustain a competitive
advantage (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Organizations reaching maximum output seldom
make a decision to grow the organization (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Risk and uncertainty are factors to affect
growth and change (Mazzrol et al., 2009).
In addition, entrepreneurial competence, business orientation, and risk
behavior are other determinants (Mazzrol et al., 2009). The behaviors with connection to resist
organizational growth relates to family orientated businesses that incorporate
and emphasize entrepreneurial management (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Other factors affecting growth include the
business capacity of leadership and team (Mazzrol et al., 2009).
Organizations showing interest in growth will take the steps necessary
for expansion (Mazzrol et al., 2009).
Individuals with attention in expansion show a capacity to understand
the growth by reviewing calculated risks (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Refinement of growth expansion is possible by
accumulating interest in complex key barriers to entry information (Mazzrol et
al., 2009). To grow a business, the
managers must implement a strategy that relates to measurement of the
expansion. Leaders must understand the
principles of economics state that as demand grows price rises to reduce demand
and supply increases to match demand
(Stacey, 2011). In essence,
organizations interested in growth incorporate leaders that understand efforts
required to sustain change and evoke negative feedback to sustain change (Stacey,
2011).
Technology. The external constraints to any
technology-based organization are newer technologies, cost to implement, and
material availability to produce the technology (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). These factors represent barriers to entry
unless circumvented through concessions, litigation, or policy creation (Kipping
& Cailluet, 2010). In
addition, integration factors such as manufacturing cost derivation result to
constraints (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010).
Other threats include the cost of materials to create the
technology. Industry structure such as
the cost to transport technological creations can add cost to the supply chain (Kipping
& Cailluet, 2010). Moreover, local
laws reduce the momentum of technological advancements (Kipping & Cailluet,
2010).
Factors to reduce threat include economies of
scale, providing materials for the production of technology just in time,
producing a technology unique to the industry, branding the technology, and
induction to cartels (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). In addition, decentralizing the
production of technology to hold key management responsible for production
offers ownership of success (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Lastly, organizations benefit from
introducing synergies from technology-based production resulting in cost
reduction to implementation (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010).
Demographics / social / culture. Organizations have to evaluate human
resource decisions affecting a competitive advantage to the organization
(Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Retaining human capital through the cyclical cycles of the organization
is challenging. Moreover, organizations
overcome factors to loss of human capital through the evaluation of return on
investment (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Organizational knowledge ends at the turnover of employees (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, an
aging workforce results in loss of job data and job-related information
(Martins & Meyer, 2012). Moreover,
the downsizing of the organization and economic recession increase turnover
(Martins & Meyer, 2012). Recessions
disrupt the availability of education resulting in a reduction to intellectual
capital (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Few
organizations realize the importance in maintain tacit knowledge, and deviate
from maintaining skilled workers (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Other factors affecting the hiring of
intellectual capital include managers fearing job loss to talented
employees. In addition, professionalism
within the work environment is a challenge to maintain in the global
market. Work atmospheres without
professionalism result in management not able to realize the need of expert
knowledge (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Expert knowledge is essential in maintaining and sustaining a prime
level of efficiency (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Organizations not maintaining expert
knowledge and forgetting about less lucrative periods repeatedly attempt to
create newer methods to introduce the same productivity (Martins & Meyer,
2012). The results are in knowledge gaps
by introducing costly disruptions to the organization (Martins & Meyer,
2012). Organizations maximizing returns
from intellectual capital are wise to implement strategies in reducing
attrition (Martins & Meyer, 2012). A
study of organizational behavior resulting to turnover is necessary to sustain
a competitive advantage (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Government / legal / military. From the early years of immigration into the United
States, communities argued about the quality of work offered by immigrants and
the debauchery introduced into the North American culture (Fine &
Tichenor, 2009). The basis of difference from
immigrant workers to North American styled labor began labor law initiatives (Fine
& Tichenor, 2009). Moreover,
communities found an interest in regulating unethical Europeans behavior (Fine
& Tichenor, 2009). Labor standards
fueled by ethnic and racial differences began the campaign of labor law (Fine
& Tichenor, 2009). National reform to
labor practices was a premise in the United States until the 1980s (Fine &
Tichenor, 2009). Moreover, expansive and
restrictive immigration reforms began (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Labor advocacy of civil rights and
immigration reform from the late 1950s and 1960s initiated changes to the
direction of the acceptance of immigration labor law (Fine & Tichenor,
2009). Social dynamics respond
differently to mass immigration movements into the United States (Fine &
Tichenor, 2009). Labor law changes
determined by modern North American status dictate in government the control
imposed on organizations (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Furthermore, labor law acts as an external
threat to organizations. Mass
immigrations create a demand for cheaper labor; however, communities
self-regulate to loss of culture and traditions by commanding regulations to
labor. The regulations undermine the
competitive advantage offered by cheaper labor.
Physical environment.
Competent organizations
realize external threats to the physical environment include behaviors and
settings labor forces require for a “Workplace
Fun” environment (Pryor et al., 2010). The factors
that increase workplace fun comprise of higher moral: (a) lower turnover; (b)
increase creativity and innovation; (c) better performance; and (d) higher
commitment (Pryor et al., 2010). Workplace leaders and ethical standards by
the leaders result in negative workplace fun (Pryor et al., 2010). The ethical standards and hiring practices
link to organizational mission and values.
Top management creates a competitive advantage by continuously reviewing
staff’s fit to the organization (Pryor et al., 2010). A dysfunctional environment and negative
workplace culture build negative workplace fun (Pryor et al., 2010). A successful organization self-regulates
failures and realizes success by implementing causality feedback loops (Stacey, 2011). The norm in an organization is
productivity. Factors diminishing
productivity are patterns inconsistent to growth and sustainability of an
organization. Patterns such as bullying by
organizational leaders create an atmosphere of distrust and incompetence (Pryor et al., 2010). Management roles are essential for growth to
organizations (Pryor et al., 2010).
Essentially, management inadequacies including micromanagement,
unethical behavior, and lack of empowerment strongly discourage commitment from
talented employees (Pryor et al., 2010).
The returns from competent intellectual capital are vital to long-term
sustainability (Pryor et al., 2010).
Lastly, failings to the sustainability of causality feedback render
forecasting impossible to attain (Stacey, 2011).
Implications of General Forces
Entrepreneurial
competence is necessary to sustain strategies for organizational expansion
(Mazzrol et al., 2009). Shareholders
interested in expanding an organization invite leadership welcoming expansion
(Mazzrol et al., 2009). Moreover,
technological challenges represent an external threat to organizations (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Organizations implementing strategies in
360 degree scanning for sustainability, reduction in cost, synergies, and just
in time manufacturing to technologies implement a competitive advantage (Kipping
& Cailluet, 2010). Organizational
and tacit knowledge are essential to maintain (Martins &
Meyer, 2012). Competent organizations
implement strategic plans to maintain human resources that maintain the
organization brand (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Increasing profitability by reducing the cost of human capital is a
discouraging strategy to offer value.
Moreover, organizations adapting to change by acknowledging social
concerns and ethics of communities in alignment with a hiring strategy
experience higher returns in capital.
Organizations accepting the mentioned factors result in a better
analysis to SWOT, and improved formulation to forecasting.
Threats. Reviewing external threats
to organizations in the Economics area leaders find troubles with
entrepreneurial competence, business orientation, organizational growth, and
business capacity (Mazzrol et al.,
2009). Moreover, external threats to
technology include improved technologies, implementation costs, and material
availability (Kipping &
Cailluet, 2010). Demographics
threats comprises lost of organizational knowledge, aging workforce,
downsizing, economic recessions, unconfident leaders, and lost of knowledge to
human capital (Martins & Meyer,
2012). The losses of organizational
and tacit knowledge are the critical factors to organizations. Furthermore, external threats to legal
embrace labor law, conflicts with immigrant cultures, and competitive advantage
(Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Lastly, physical environment external threats
involve bullying leaders, micro managers, unethical behavior, and lack of
empowerment (Pryor et al., 2010). The focus in this group is bullying leaders
and unethical behavior representing an unfriendly work environment.
Opportunities. External forces to opportunities in economics
include understanding risk factors (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Ideally, an organization embraces higher
returns by hiring competent people to realize expansion. Moreover, technological external forces
contain concessions, litigation, policy creation, economies of scales, just in
time inventories, unique and branded products, introduction to cartels, and
introducing synergies (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). The focus in technology is to retain a
competitive advantage by exploiting technological creations mainly in economies
of scale and synergies. The rest of the
focus is in controlling barriers to entry by introducing concessions and
litigation (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010).
The opportunities to demographics are all at equal ranks including
return on investment (ROI), introduce professionalism, and study of
organizational behavior (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Cheap labor, economies of scale, and litigation
are the opportunities in retaining the advantage to immigrant hiring (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Lastly, several opportunities to providing a
positive physical environment including lower turnover, high moral, creativity
and innovation, commitment, and higher performance (Pryor et al., 2010). The concept of 360-degree reviews and mission
values perceived by the leadership structure assure a competitive advantage to
the organization. Changing times and
increase of immigrants in United States call for more attention to the physical
environment, legal, and economics in hiring practices.
Porter’s Five Forces Industry Analysis: External –
Industry Environment
In this section of the sustainable solutions paper, the doctoral
student will provide
Porter’s five forces industry analysis: external – industry
environment. The general forces that
influence JCPenney’s performance include external forces such as economics,
demographics, social, culture, government, legal, military, physical
environment, and technology. The idea is
to scan the environment to find trends (variable over time), events (happening
now), or forecasts (extension of the future) intercepting the industry. The measurement of external forces assists
Porter’s Five Forces model (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, Porter’s Five Forces depict the
external influences businesses encounter regarding threats and opportunities
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The five forces include the threat to entry, customer bargaining power,
threat of substitute products or services, bargaining power of suppliers and
the industry attempting to balance itself against this counterbalances (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The actual
external forces undergoing strains to JCPenney include Technology, Social, and
Economics.
Five Forces Matrix Analysis
Within the review of external threats, economic changes is affecting
JCPenney in a trend format of mid degree (Hou and Elliot, 2010). JCPenney welcomed the online auction
experience as a test model to find a unique demographic group participating
(Hou and Elliot, 2010). The idea behind
online auctions and offering a family experience at JCPenney stores differs
greatly. The online auction experience
does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less
human interaction with the public. The
response from the online auction experience signals a change in the customer’s
buying preference thus affecting Economy.
Furthermore, JCPenney is to observe the dynamic differences to
anticipate a substantial change in the retail market.
The online auction research shows males to dominate the online auction
shopping experience (Hou and Elliot, 2010).
Within Porter’s Five forces, the change in shopping behavior shows a
change in bargaining power of customers (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, higher education equates to more
online auction attendance. JCPenney
should observe the general state of the population with correlation to
education and compare it to the census. The lack of alignment to a new emerging
group could invite a new competition as barriers to entry vary (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). In
addition, other factors affecting the online auction experience include: (a)
type of relationship a customer draws to the online shopping experience
(affiliation); (b) bargain hunting; (c) enjoyment seeking; (d) information
seeking; (e) convenience seeking; and (f) variety seeking (Hou and Elliot,
2010).
The change in technology
with lower cost and rapid changes is causing a change in purchasing behavior
(Barrientos, Mayer, Pickles, & Posthuma, 2011). The dramatic change is external and
represents a high level trend. Global
Production Networks (GPN) offer lower barriers to entries to companies needing
to offer cheaper value chains set up and cost by outsourcing the inputs needed
to value chains (Barrientos et al., 2011).
A competitive disadvantage is present to JCPenney attempting to compete
with companies that have in place GPN systems (Barrientos et al., 2011).
Technological challenges
do not end with changes in buying behavior.
Department stores are introducing “Just In Time” inventories
changing the scope of the supply chain (Anitsal, & Anitsal, 2011). The faster time to process and deliver
products to the supply chain improves organizational performance and improves
customer satisfaction scores (Anitsal, & Anitsal, 2011). Customers consider value to businesses that
offer products in a timely fashion.
The forecast for the
future includes robotization the cashier sections of department stores (Anonymous, 2012). Another technological change includes
robotization, changing the demand of labor (Anonymous, 2012). The opportunity to reduce organizational
costs is a method to sustain by JCPenney.
A careful analysis is important to measure the amount of organizational
staff required to run department stores. This measure aligns with customer engagement
and participation. Robotization, as
introduced in the automotive industry, represents a competitive advantage by
reducing costs and delivering timely output.
The adaptation to robotization will boost productivity and offer
customers quicker service.
The online buying
environment JCPenney has in place does no consider gender preferences to
customers practices (Porter, Donthu,
& Baker, 2012). Offering gender
base type assistance within the department stores results in higher motivation
and reduces the risk within the shopping experience (Porter et al., 2012). Consequently, gender differences represents a
social external threat and a mid level event. In contrast, gender
based-shopping is a competitive advantage and departments stores practice it
(Porter et al., 2012). Lastly, gender
based shopping offers customers more value as customers are more comfortable in
a setting of their choosing
(Freeman, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988).
The external forces
challenging the sustainability to JCPenney are a threat. The challenges to Social, Economic and
Technological factors are in profit maximization, value creation, and
efficiency. The specific external
threats include online auctions, GPN outsourcing, supply chain processes from
competition, robotization, and gender preferences. Value creation and maintenance require a
competitive advantage. A derived benefit
anticipates global social changes to determine a positive footing in the industry. Moreover, the Economic challenges to the
online auction represent the supply and demand of what customers are willing to
pay. Unfortunately, the online auction
process does add stability to the demographic patterns within the stores
environment. Consequently, customers may
dictate different shopping experiences.
Lastly, changes in technology represent both gains and losses in profits
if not managed correctly within organizational infrastructures. Robotization of the cashier centers
represents a competitive advantage.
Barriers to entry. In general, organizations
have barriers to entry including: (a) Supply-side economies of scale; (b)
Demand-side benefits of scale; (c) Customer switching cost; (d) Capital
requirements; (e) Incumbency advantages independent of size; (f) Unequal access
to distribution channels; and (g) restrictive government policy (Porter,
2008). Larger organizations apply fixed costs over
units resulting in economies of scale (Porter, 2008). In contrast, smaller organizations cannot
absorb the cost over the supply chain.
Larger organizations have a larger volume of buyers that add patronize
to the buying experience such as online bidding (Porter, 2008). Moreover, organizations acting as customers
to other organizations experience additional cost to training whenever changing
services or products to a competitor (Porter, 2008). Cash flows necessary for routing expenditures
compromise forecast and implementation of projects (Porter, 2008). Incumbents have fixed arrangements with other
competitors that could have preferential access to cheap raw materials (Porter,
2008). The access to distribution
channels offers difficulty to starting organizations (Porter, 2008). Lastly, government policy to protect existing
organizations introduces barrier to entry to competitors (Porter, 2008).
Organizations in the retail sector,
such as JCPenney, must focus introduction to market or to globalization in
unsaturated sectors of the world (Reinartz, Dellaert, Krafft, Kumar, &
Varadarajan, 2011). Factors to consider in globalization
strategies include: (a) retail formats; (b) branding; (c) assortment; (d)
process innovation; (e) customer experience; (f) information technology; (g)
new media; (h) handling of payment; and (i) order fulfillment (Reinartz et al., 2011). Supermarkets are popular in saturated
markets; however, supermarkets are excellent store formats for under develop
nations (Reinartz et al., 2011).
Differentiation, positioning, and assortment relate difficulty in
barriers to entry for new organizations (Reinartz et al., 2011). Retailers such as JCPenney overcome
challenges in barriers to entry by adapting market research and supply chain
management (Reinartz et al., 2011).
Store atmosphere, customized expertise by employees, and media
technology overcomes barriers to entries by introducing and aligning the
shopping experience to stakeholder value (Reinartz et al., 2011). Customized payment options to purchases and
personal experience to order delivery offers advantages to retail organizations
(Reinartz et al., 2011).
Substitutes. Convergence
is a factor that results to shareholder value (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). Acquiring similar organizations with similar
type organization structure offers a competitive advantage (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). The acquisition of similar organizations at
times when the organizations are close to insolvency is the time when to make
the union (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). A
value analyzes of the organization showing how the assets to convert result in
a competitive advantage is the stages of organizational conception (Cummins
& Weiss, 2009). The practice of risk
management will assist in making the change occur with minimum friction
(Cummins & Weiss, 2009). Retailers
observing the market for industrial derivatives offering a competitive
advantage in shareholder value make incremental equity to the organization
(Cummins & Weiss, 2009).
Bargaining power of suppliers. Suppliers of apparel, components, and
services (such as expertise) to the firm are a source of power for
organizations (Alrawashdeh, 2013).
The supplier control over customer prices is self-regulated in
organizations, and supplier control made by grouping of similar organizations
(Alrawashdeh, 2013). Organizations will
favor looking for substitutes when bargaining exists from suppliers
(Alrawashdeh, 2013). A competitive
advantage and shareholder value exist to organizations withdrawing from
purchasing supplies from one entity that can fluctuate the price of raw
materials. Not all products sold to
customers in the retail sector have a high elasticity of demand. Creating an industry that has high barriers
to entry has high overall power to suppliers.
In addition, the need to introduce a personalizing service to customers
is important not to allow suppliers sell directly to the demand and become
direct competitors (Alrawashdeh, 2013).
Lastly, organizations favor knowledge over the supplier base
(Alrawashdeh, 2013). In addition,
organizations realize substitutes to supplies with minimal cost (Alrawashdeh,
2013).
Bargaining power of buyers. One of the competitive forces to businesses is the
bargaining power of buyers (Neagle, 2010). The
force of the industry determines the profit organizations will earn, and the
severity of the force is determinant on the industry (Neagle, 2010). The forces change with time with the
progression of the industry and dynamics of demand of the product and services.
Competent organizations take a strategic analysis of complex external forces
affecting the bargaining power of buyers (Neagle, 2010). The metrics include macroeconomic factors
such as: (a) growth rates; (b) interest rates; (c) real value to currency; (d)
cultural changes; (e) technological; (f) environmental; and (g) changes within the law. In addition, capital formation is an external
force to measure (Neagle, 2010).
JCPenney encounters challenges with cultural changes driving the demand
of products and services to competitors.
Competitive rivalry. JCPenney has a value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational
strategy. The change is in foot traffic
from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now
heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest competitors
include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect
competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. Consideration to value chain ideas
specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need
improvement, and a required different strategy revision. The key links to improve from the value chain
include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management,
technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound
logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve
JCPenney’s goals. The comparative
advantage JCPenney has is offering better value by better use of IT and further
analysis of value creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen,
Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988). The
implementation of broad scope offers a company relationships between related industries,
geographic areas, and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985).
The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department
processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the
problems. The misguided process in support activities is in matching value from
new hires to project scope and studying the needs of the segmented customer
group (Porter & Millar, 1985; Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The missed opportunity for JCPenney company
lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney
Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and
Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Consequently, JCPenney failed to examine the
value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain
diagnosis. Buying practices have changed
for most consumers in pursuing more value and lower prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all the
challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the
weaknesses revealed.
Implications of Five Forces
The long-term
organizational performance shows decreasing value to stakeholders; therefore,
TMV is small (Schulz & Hofer,
1999). In addition, JCPenney’s
performance metrics proof the values to TMV.
Furthermore, JCPenney last three years performance shows a lack of
resilience to the challenges to market.
Organizations must scan the market for stated flaws to the welfare of
the organization containing differences in opportunities and threats. The five forces include the threat to entry,
customer bargaining power, threat of substitute products or services,
bargaining power of suppliers and the industry attempting to balance itself
against this counterbalances (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The actual external forces undergoing strains
to JCPenney include Technology, Social, and Economics.
Within the review of external threats, economic changes are affecting
JCPenney in a trend format of mid degree (Hou and Elliot, 2010). JCPenney welcomed the online auction
experience as a test model to find a unique demographic group participating
(Hou and Elliot, 2010). The idea behind
online auctions and offering a family experience at JCPenney stores differs
greatly. The online auction experience
does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less
human interaction with the public. The
response from the online auction experience signals a change in the customer’s
buying preference thus affecting Economy.
Furthermore, JCPenney is to observe the dynamic differences to
anticipate a substantial change in the retail market.
The online auction research shows males to dominate the online auction
shopping experience (Hou and Elliot, 2010).
Within Porter’s Five forces, the change in shopping behavior shows a change
in bargaining power of customers (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, higher education equates to more
online auction attendance. JCPenney
should observe the general state of the population with correlation to
education and compare it to the census.
The lack of alignment to a new emerging group could invite a new
competition as barriers to entry vary (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). In addition, other factors
affecting the online auction experience include: (a) type of relationship a
customer draws to the online shopping experience (affiliation); (b) bargain
hunting; (c) enjoyment seeking; (d) information seeking; (e) convenience
seeking; and (f) variety seeking (Hou and Elliot, 2010).
The change in technology
with lower cost and rapid changes is causing a change in purchasing behavior
(Barrientos et al., 2011).
The dramatic change is external and represents a high level trend. Global Production Networks (GPN) offer lower
barriers to entries to companies needing to offer cheaper value chains set up
and cost by outsourcing the inputs needed to value chains (Barrientos et al.,
2011). A competitive disadvantage is
present to JCPenney attempting to compete with companies that have in place GPN
systems (Barrientos et al., 2011).
Technological challenges
do not end with changes in buying behavior.
Department stores are introducing “Just In Time” inventories
changing the scope of the supply chain (Anitsal, & Anitsal, 2011). The faster time to process and deliver
products to the supply chain improves organizational performance and improves
customer satisfaction scores (Anitsal, & Anitsal, 2011). Customers consider value to businesses that
offer products in a timely fashion.
The forecast for the
future includes robotization the cashier sections of department stores
(Anonymous, 2012). Another technological
change includes robotization, changing the demand of labor (Anonymous,
2012). The opportunity to reduce
organizational costs is a method to sustain by JCPenney. A careful analysis is important to measure
the amount of organizational staff required to run department stores. This measure aligns with customer engagement
and participation. Robotization, as
introduced in the automotive industry, represents a competitive advantage by
reducing costs and delivering timely output.
The adaptation to robotization will boost productivity and offer
customers quicker service.
The online buying
environment JCPenney has in place does no consider gender preferences to
customers practices (Porter et al., 2012).
Offering gender base type assistance within the department stores
results in higher motivation and reduces the risk within the shopping
experience to JCPenney (Porter et al., 2012).
Consequently, gender differences represents a social external threat and
a mid level event. In contrast, gender based-shopping is a competitive
advantage and departments stores practice it (Porter et al., 2012). Lastly, gender based shopping offers
customers more value as customers are more comfortable in a setting of their
choosing (Freeman et al., 1988).
Threats. JCPenney’s threats include
competition (bargaining power of suppliers), social misalignments (bargaining
power of customers), and not using technology to offer a competitive advantage
(threats of substitutes, products, or services). Moreover, as JCPenney reduces in
organizational size, its competitive advantage in applying fixed costs to a
larger organization is diminishing; therefore, losing economies of scale (Porter, 2008).
Another threat is process innovation with supply chain processes. Customers that experience delays result in
exiting and pursuing the competition.
Store atmosphere, customized expertise by employees, and media
technology overcomes barriers to entries by introducing and aligning the
shopping experience to stakeholder value (Reinartz et al., 2011). The bargaining power of suppliers is in the
need to introduce a personalizing service to customers is important not to
allow suppliers sell directly to the demand and become direct competitors
(Alrawashdeh, 2013). JCPenney encounters
challenges with cultural changes driving the demand of products and services to
competitors. JCPenney’s strongest
competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company
and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores,
Incorporated. Consideration to value
chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities
need improvement, and a required different strategy revision.
The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department
processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the
problems. The misguided process in support activities is in matching value from
new hires to project scope and studying the needs of the segmented customer
group (Porter & Millar, 1985; Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The missed opportunity for JCPenney company
lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney
Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and
Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes,
2012). Consequently, JCPenney failed to
examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value
chain diagnosis. Buying practices have
changed for most consumers in pursuing more value and lower prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all the
challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the
weaknesses revealed.
Opportunities. Uses of Organizational
Mindfulness to derive opportunities are beneficial to organizations that will
make JCPenney a competent entity (Vogus & Sutcliffe, 2012). Moreover, opportunities achieved the OM
represents studying inherent business structures and practices (Vogus &
Sutcliffe, 2012). The key links to improve from the value chain include
support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management,
technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound
logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service
(Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping
Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The comparative advantage JCPenney has is
offering better value by better use of IT and further analysis of value
creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman,
1988). The implementation of broad scope
offers a company relationships between related industries, geographic areas,
and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985).
Detailed Value Chain Analysis: Internal Environment
Consideration to value
chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities
need improvement. Further analysis of
strategic links and recommendations are essential. The value chain involves the physical
creation of vertical support activities and horizontal primary activities to
measure the effectiveness of a business (Porter & Millar, 1985). Moreover, support activities includes the
firm infrastructure, human resource management, technology department, and
procurement (Porter & Millar, 1985).
Furthermore, the primary activities consist in inbound logistics,
operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter &
Millar, 1985). The appropriate
management of primary activities results in a positive margin (Porter &
Millar, 1985). The vertical and
horizontal activities connect stakeholder needs, strategy, and threats
(external and internal). The processes
between vertical and horizontal activities are the links that can offer a
competitive advantage.
JCPenney is experiencing lower returns from customers and is continuing
to downsize its infrastructure. The
existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and
focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. The missed opportunity for JCPenney company
lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Modern society engages in tech savvy
entertainment. Majority of the youth
communicates heavily through electronic texting. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales
strategy are no longer valid. Consumer
demand has shifted to Marketing and Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman &
Kesterson-Townes, 2012).
Furthermore, JCPenney does not have a competitive link between social media
and social environment within the store atmosphere. Consequently, the links between internal and
external horizontal primary activities are hindering a sustainable advantage.
Society has increased
concerns for environmental factors than in past decades (Lee et al., 2009). Society added an additional component to
demand of product requiring retail vendors such as JCPenney to make a corporate
responsibility to environmental concerns (Lee et al., 2009). Marketing and Sales as an opportunity to add
value to merchandise by examining the social concerns tied to product
development (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The external threats are high in not
supporting a strategic link to social concerns in the retail industry. Lastly, aligning systems to consider Growth
Path and Trajectory with Reputation and Legitimacy benefits retailer by
considering shareholder value to external and internal threats (Senge, Smith, Kruschwitz, Laur, &
Schley, 2010).
The value chain process
of separating organizational structures allows leadership to evaluate each link
independent from other sources.
Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine value chain process and is
introducing improper value chain diagnosis.
Buying practices have changed for most consumers. Information technology is the basis and
fundamental to society. In addition,
digital information encompasses at a broader spectrum, and customer base is
directly proportional to ethical alignment and media atmosphere. Lastly, implementing a solution based on internal
and external threats tied to shareholder value will show JCPenney a weakness in
its Marketing and Sales strategy.
JCPenney enthusiasm in
changing its logo, hiring a new CEO and marketing manager may provide its
shareholders initial short run relief from pressing low returns of
revenues. The new CEO arrived from the
retail technology sector, not the clothing, kitchen, and home retail
sector. In addition, the new marketing manager
experience is from recreating a sugar water drink from the 1980s and has no
expertise the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. The CEO first introduced a new idea of “Everyday
Low Prices” that did not go over well with the public. Moreover, the CEO implemented a new pay scale
to employees. The pay scales does not pay
commission to sales staff. Furthermore,
the pay scale does not offer motivation to sales employees. Nevertheless, JCPenney has to embrace a more
sound strategy in evaluating organizational performance by concepts of the
value chain measurements. The original
strategy offered by the first owner of JCPenney is no longer valid. A new modern society is in effect changing
the scope of retailers across the United States. Table 1 presented in the next section
analyzes the internal environment of JCPenney and competition.
Customized Value Chain of Activities in Table Form
The table below
introduces the VCA’s characteristics to JCPenney and competitors.
Table 1
Value Chain Analysis
Business
Process
|
JCPenney
|
Macys
|
Sears
|
Management
|
Excellent
|
Excellent
|
Excellent
|
R&D
|
Not Applicable
|
Not Applicable
|
Not Applicable
|
HR
|
Below Average
|
Below Average
|
Below Average
|
Procurement
|
Below Average
|
Average
|
Average
|
Inbound logistics
|
Below Average
|
Average
|
Average
|
Operations
|
Average
|
Average
|
Excellent
|
Outbound logistics
|
Below Average
|
Average
|
Average
|
Sales
|
Below Average
|
Average
|
Below Average
|
Service
|
Below Average
|
Average
|
Below Average
|
Company Skills / Capabilities
Management style represents weakness and opportunities in the
retail sector (Baldoni, 2010). Selecting
among micro management styles to macro management styles affects the culture of
the employees and in how the style reflects customers (Baldoni, 2010). The correct management style aligns with
mission, values, and vision (Baldoni, 2010).
JCPenney has alignment to customer’s shopping experience and customer
service within the organization. In
contrast, the challenges are in outsourced delivery services that are not the
image of JCPenney. Macys and Sears have
similar managerial styles; however, do not have an outsourced service to
delivery.
Human
Resources practices to training internal staff for transparency of products are
essential to offer value to stakeholders (Drumwright & Murphy, 2009). Retailers
concerned with lowering the cost to supply chain forgotten about the needs of
the public to connect merchandise to people (Drumwright & Murphy,
2009). JCPenney has a weakness in having
enough personnel in the stores; however, the untrained personnel attempt to
engage with customers with a welcome message.
Nonetheless, Sears and Macys have the same challenges.
Inbound and
Outbound logistics offered by JCPenney are impressive with the wide variety of
product mix (Bhatnagar & Chee-Chong, 2009). The size of
the organization is changing. JCPenney
has a mass transit system for inbound products to satisfy the supply
chain. The outbound logistics contracted
to outside organizations. Each year
JCPenney announces closings and terminations of employees affecting supply
chain and economies of scale (Murray,
2013). Nevertheless, smaller
organizations are able to streamline process chains to offer value to
customers; however, JCPenney is moving to a direction for solvency ("Balance
sheet," 2013). Finally,
JCPenney Inbound and Outbound Logistics are suffering from project scope and in
contrast to Macy’s and Sears, which have a proficient Inbound and Outbound
Logistics concept.
JCPenney
has a mission statement aligned with the connection to value shareholders,
communities, and customers desire (Anitsal
et al., 2012). The challenge for
JCPenney is to connect the mission statement to the daily activities for
providing distinction and customer definition (Anitsal et al., 2012). In general, mission statements connect the
operations of an organization and represent the environment the organization
promises to customers (Anitsal et al., 2012).
The processing of products has incremental cost and adds flaws to the VCA. The difference in the mission statements is
in focus in building relationships, providing assistance, and maximizing
technology (Anitsal et al., 2012).
Providing assistance is not the same as generating bonds between
stakeholders and the organization, which is the competitive advantage of
business (Anitsal et al., 2012).
Consideration of Sales
and Services made easily through the observation of performance metrics (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, a
review of Sears, Macy’s, and JCPenney performance metrics analyzed to performance
metrics will show which of the organizations has a better competitive advantage
in Sales and Services than the other.
Moreover, Macy’s net income increased in 2012 and borrowed capital
("Cash flow," 2013). Macy’s short-term debt increased in 2012 and
equity grew slightly ("Balance sheet," 2013). Furthermore, operating income
increased in 2012 ("Income statement," 2013). In 2013,
Sears delved to investments that generate capital ("Cash flows,"
2013). Sears has a lower amount of
retained earnings compared to previous years ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, Sears is announcing
no income for the entire year ("Income statement," 2013). Similarly,
JCPenney’s public balance sheet dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns
of equity while maintaining similar levels of the debt ("Balance
sheet," 2013). The amount of
profits in the last three years shows a diminishing value to sustainability
("Income statement," 2013).
The last three years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has
increase ("Cash flow," 2013).
Clearly, JCPenney is not utilizing resources in a way to offer value to
customers since it is failing to produce profits. Improvement to Information Technology serves
as the catalyst for profit maximization.
Implications of Competitive Analysis
Further analysis to JCPenney’s VCA is a necessity. The below sections shows the strengths and
weaknesses to the VCA JCPenney currently has in place. With a risk implementation strategy, JCPenney
can implement a solution to survive a few years longer.
Strengths. JCPenney has reserved
capital to strengthen weak areas. The
approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost
drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping
the external forces of the VCA infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand
that serves as a consistent parameter to improvements.
Weaknesses. JCPenney
has value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers
and dissatisfaction with existing synergies.
In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily
relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by
restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified
in correcting the problems. Consideration
to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary
activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve
JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily
within the horizontal primary activities.
Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer
valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to
examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value
chain diagnosis. Buying practices have
changed for most consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all the
challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the
weaknesses revealed.
Skills. JCPenney
has many skills not yet realized for value creation. The skills to implement are utilizing the
abundance of information to introduce profit maximization. Moreover, JCPenney creates information from
all daily routines. A study of those
routines is mandatory to evaluate redundant practices and missed
opportunities. Other skills include the
existing employee base retains knowledge to utilize for value creation.
Improvements to organizational management are necessary to maintain a
competitive advantage. Continuous
improvement to management is essential; however, not all organizations hold
continuous improvement as essential for long-term growth. In the past contemporary organizations were popular (Chang & Sun, 2007). Moreover, LO characteristics include
organizations learning from mistakes, realigning organizational processes to
offer value to customers (Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast, learning from mistakes has a
cost that organizations may not want to realize. Organizational knowledge retained by factors
of LO represents an advantage (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer, 2012). Organizational knowledge ends at the turnover
of employees (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
A LO adapts to changes and retains intellectual capital (Chang &
Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Furthermore, an aging workforce results in loss of job data and
job-related information (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Moreover, the downsizing of the organization
and economic recession increase turnover (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Recessions disrupt the availability of
education resulting in a reduction to intellectual capital (Martins & Meyer,
2012). Few organizations realize the
importance in maintain tacit knowledge, and deviate from maintaining skilled
workers (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Other factors affecting the hiring of intellectual capital include
managers fearing job loss to talented employees. In addition, professionalism within the work
environment is a challenge to maintain in the global market. Work atmospheres without professionalism
result in management not able to realize the need of expert knowledge (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Expert knowledge is
essential in maintaining and sustaining a prime level of efficiency (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Lastly, a LO adapts
quicker than TQM in amending organizational culture and in offering value to
external stakeholders (Chang & Sun, 2007).
Capabilities. The process of keeping eyes open and observing the
capabilities to organizations is important.
Organizations cannot operate simply from the trust external stakeholders
may have in knowing that organizations are open for business. The reality is in observing what issues can
affect the life of an organization.
Realizing the threats to organizations, leaders must engage into problem
solving to better the sustainability of the organization.
The approximate four million in surplus
capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost
drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping
the external forces of the VCA infrastructure. A capability JCPenney has in place is the
brand that serves as a consistent parameter to improvements. JCPenney has many capabilities not yet
realized for value creation. The
capability to implement is utilizing the abundance of information to introduce
profit maximization. Moreover, JCPenney
creates information from all daily routines.
A study of those routines is mandatory to evaluate redundant practices
and missed opportunities. Other
capabilities include the existing employee base retains knowledge to utilize
for value creation.
Detailed SWOT Analysis
In this section, JCPenney
complexities have broken apart because of a SWOT analysis to identify the
potential and direction to follow in the future. The dynamics of threats along with
opportunities identify organizations that are not considering social aspects of
culture. Without the analysis, JCPenney
cannot survive the pressures of competition and understand to the needs of
communities.
SWOT Factor Matrix
JCPenney has reserved capital to
strengthen weak areas. The approximate
four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance
sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney
can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available
resources. The first improvement
is into revamping the external forces of the VCA infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand
that serves as consistent extent to improvements. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a
failed organizational strategy. The
change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing
synergies. In addition, the outbound
logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor
provides less customer service. The
existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and
focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas
specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need
improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve
JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity
for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary
activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing
and Sales strategy are no longer valid.
Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and
JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most
consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices.
JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable
solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social
identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom,
2011). The variations in economic and
non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is
in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating
Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer,
1999). The process of keeping eyes open
and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the
trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for
business. The reality is in observing
what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations,
leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the
organization.
The change of time causes changes to stakeholder’s value intention and
choice. Tools are available to identify
changes such as a strategic choice
(Stacey, 2011). Strategic choice
theory calls for individuals making a strategy not to think of themselves as
part of the organization, but part of a vision of change (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, the theory makes assumptions that
leaders have intentions to sustain change and assist shareholder maintain a
competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011).
Leaders implementing cognitive thinking to organizational changes in
shape, performance and future adapt to pressures of time (Stacey, 2011). Other techniques strategic planning includes
SWOT Analysis, Industry Structure and Value Chain Analysis, Product Life Cycle,
Experience Curves, and Product Portfolio (Stacey, 2011).
Tools for strategic
planning required by organizations implement through a learning process in
finding tools adequate for diverse goals (Chang & Sun, 2007). One of the tools available is the Learning
Organization (LO) process that enables organizations to study organizational
beliefs that introduce organizational change (Chang & Sun, 2007). Total Quality Management (TQM) offers
organizations a continuous improvement at all levels of the organization (Chang
& Sun, 2007). A fledgling
correspondence exists between the two outfits (Chang & Sun, 2007).
Strategic logic requests forecasting measures implement by highly
skilled leaders (Stacey, 2011). The
forecasting includes external strengths, threats, opportunities, and weaknesses
(Stacey, 2011). Obviously, SWOT analysis
is preemptive tactic to support the strategic plan. Moreover, organizations adapting to change
engineer systems to prepare it to change.
A tool organizations implement Industry Structure and Value Chain
Analysis offering the nature of competitive advantage to market, power and value
chain of a company (Stacey, 2011). The
Value Chain Analysis draws advantages from the raw materials utilized in the
value chain (Stacey, 2011). Similarly,
organizations study the Product Life Cycle to terms of strategy (Stacey, 2011). The competitive advantage in product life is
in the stages of production and use of raw materials (Stacey, 2011). As organizations develop products, experience
is possible through repetition and learning (Stacey, 2011). Organizational efficiency gathers through
repetition and rises of production to the best forms of production to raw
materials (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, market
share to production calculates by methods of Product Portfolio (Stacey,
2011). The infallible method considers
the different mix of products calculated against market share that provides a
measure of competitive capability (Stacey, 2011). The competitive capability prompts leaders to
take the measure of rate of growth in the market (Stacey, 2011). From the difference of market shares and
growth rates, the organization learns the strategies that offer a competitive
advantage (Stacey, 2011).
Fierce competition in the global markets initiated the need for TQM
(Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast to
LO, TQM offers a repetitive cycle of organizations reviewing threats and
opportunities to sustain environmental growth (Chang & Sun, 2007). TQM focuses on the organizations total
involvement, customer focus, and continuous improvement (Chang & Sun,
2007). The prerequisite for TQM is to
involve all stakeholders at internal level to review the needs of external
stakeholders continuously (Chang & Sun, 2007). The constant reviewing of customer needs
offers a competitive advantage by assuring external outputs have value (Chang
& Sun, 2007). The TQM environment
calls for the leadership to maintain a constant interest in changes to external
forces. In contrast, leadership, not in
alignment with constant reviewing will not ascertain the total value from TQM
implementation.
Improvements to organizational management are necessary to maintain a
competitive advantage. Continuous
improvement to management is essential; however, not all organizations hold
continuous improvement as essential for long-term growth. In the past contemporary organizations were
popular (Chang & Sun, 2007).
Moreover, LO characteristics include organizations learning from
mistakes, realigning organizational processes to offer value to customers
(Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast,
learning from mistakes has a cost that organizations may not want to
realize. Organizational knowledge retained
by factors of LO represents an advantage (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins &
Meyer, 2012). Organizational knowledge
ends at the turnover of employees (Martins & Meyer, 2012). A LO adapts to changes and retains
intellectual capital (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, an aging workforce results in
loss of job data and job-related information (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Moreover, the downsizing of the organization
and economic recession increase turnover (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Recessions disrupt the availability of
education resulting in a reduction to intellectual capital (Martins &
Meyer, 2012). Few organizations realize
the importance in maintain tacit knowledge, and deviate from maintaining
skilled workers (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Other factors affecting the hiring of intellectual capital include
managers fearing job loss to talented employees. In addition, professionalism within the work
environment is a challenge to maintain in the global market. Work atmospheres without professionalism
result in management not able to realize the need of expert knowledge (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Expert knowledge is
essential in maintaining and sustaining a prime level of efficiency (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Lastly, a LO adapts
quicker than TQM in amending organizational culture and in offering value to
external stakeholders (Chang & Sun, 2007).
Organizations adopt to change by implementing a strategic plan to offer
a competitive advantage. Organizations
attain change the study of prime methods that introduce a competitive
advantage. Changes made by an
organization are essential. The tools to
implement are a system of measures to metrics at each stage of production,
planning, and delivery of products and services to external stakeholders. Some of the tools are Strategic Choice
Theory, Cognitive Thinking, SWOT analysis, Industry Structure, Value Chain
Analysis, Product Life Cycle, Experienced Curves, Product Portfolio, Learning
Organization, and Total Quality Management.
The tools to change are not all without flaws. Strategic Choice Theory holds high self worth
of a leader and values the leader to represent perfection. In contrast, the theory assumes the leader has
good intentions and will not deviate from offering a competitive advantage to
shareholders. Moreover, Learning
Organization is a tool to draw ideas from experiences; however, not all
experiences represent value to an organization.
Nevertheless, cost exists through the learning process, but the aim is
to minimize the downcast business cycles.
JCPenney has a value chain threat due to a failed organizational
strategy. The change is in foot traffic
from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now
heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest competitors
include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect
competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. Consideration to value chain ideas
specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need
improvement, and a required different strategy revision. The key links to improve from the value chain
include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management,
technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound
logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service
(Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping
Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The comparative advantage JCPenney has is
offering better value by better use of IT and further analysis of value
creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman,
1988). The implementation of broad scope
offers a company relationships between related industries, geographic areas,
and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985). Threats
to JCPenney overcome by observing the implementation process of scope.
SO strategies. JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak
areas. The approximate four million in
surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet,"
2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify
the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping
the external VCA infrastructure. A
strength JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as consistent extent to
improvements.
ST strategies. JCPenney has a value chain threat due to a failed
organizational strategy. The change is
in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing
synergies. In addition, the distribution
of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer
service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest
competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company
and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores,
Incorporated. Consideration to value
chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities
need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. The key links to improve from the value chain
include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management,
technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound
logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter
& Millar, 1985). Revamping Marketing
and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals.
The comparative advantage JCPenney has is offering better value by
better use of IT and further analysis of value creation (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988). The implementation of broad scope offers a
company relationships between related industries, geographic areas, and value
chains (Porter & Millar, 1985). Threats to JCPenney overcome by observing the
implementation process of scope.
WO strategies. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a failed
organizational strategy. The change is
in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing
synergies. In addition, the outbound
logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor
provides less customer service. The
existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and
focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas
specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need
improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve
JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity
for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary
activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing
and Sales strategy are no longer valid.
Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and
JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most
consumers in pursuing more value and lower prices. JCPenney introduces all the challenges
required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social
identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom,
2011). The variations in economic and
non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is
in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating
Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).
WT strategies. The process of keeping eyes open and observing the
threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the
trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for
business. The reality is in observing
what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations,
leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the
organization.
The change of time causes changes to stakeholder’s value intention and
choice. Tools are available to identify
changes such as a strategic choice (Stacey, 2011). Strategic choice theory calls for individuals
making a strategy not to think of themselves as part of the organization, but
part of a vision of change (Stacey, 2011).
Moreover, the theory makes assumptions that leaders have intentions to
sustain change and assist shareholder maintain a competitive advantage (Stacey,
2011). Leaders implementing cognitive
thinking to organizational changes in shape, performance and future adapt to
pressures of time (Stacey, 2011). Other
techniques strategic planning includes SWOT Analysis, Industry Structure and
Value Chain Analysis, Product Life Cycle, Experience Curves, and Product
Portfolio (Stacey, 2011).
Tools for strategic planning required by organizations implement
through a learning process in finding tools adequate for diverse goals (Chang
& Sun, 2007). One of the tools
available is the Learning Organization (LO) process that enables organizations
to study organizational beliefs that introduce organizational change (Chang
& Sun, 2007). Total Quality
Management (TQM) offers organizations a continuous improvement at all levels of
the organization (Chang & Sun, 2007).
A fledgling correspondence exists between the two outfits (Chang &
Sun, 2007).
Strategic logic requests forecasting measures implement by highly
skilled leaders (Stacey, 2011). The
forecasting includes external strengths, threats, opportunities, and weaknesses
(Stacey, 2011). Obviously, SWOT analysis
is preemptive tactic to support the strategic plan. Moreover, organizations adapting to change
engineer systems to prepare it to change.
A tool organizations implement Industry Structure and Value Chain
Analysis offering the nature of competitive advantage to market, power and
value chain of a company (Stacey, 2011).
The Value Chain Analysis draws advantages from the raw materials
utilized in the value chain (Stacey, 2011).
Similarly, organizations study the Product Life Cycle to terms of
strategy (Stacey, 2011). The competitive
advantage in product life is in the stages of production and use of raw
materials (Stacey, 2011). As
organizations develop products, experience is possible through repetition and
learning (Stacey, 2011). Organizational
efficiency gathers through repetition and rises of production to the best forms
of production to raw materials (Stacey, 2011).
Lastly, market share to production calculates by methods of Product
Portfolio (Stacey, 2011). The infallible
method considers the different mix of products calculated against market share
that provides a measure of competitive capability (Stacey, 2011). The competitive capability prompts leaders to
take the measure of rate of growth in the market (Stacey, 2011). From the difference of market shares and
growth rates, the organization learns the strategies that offer a competitive
advantage (Stacey, 2011).
Fierce competition in the global markets initiated the need for TQM
(Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast to
LO, TQM offers a repetitive cycle of organizations reviewing threats and
opportunities to sustain environmental growth (Chang & Sun, 2007). TQM focuses on the organizations total
involvement, customer focus, and continuous improvement (Chang & Sun,
2007). The prerequisite for TQM is to
involve all stakeholders at internal level to review the needs of external
stakeholders continuously (Chang & Sun, 2007). The constant reviewing of customer needs
offers a competitive advantage by assuring external outputs have value (Chang
& Sun, 2007). The TQM environment
calls for the leadership to maintain a constant interest in changes to external
forces. In contrast, leadership, not in
alignment with constant reviewing will not ascertain the total value from TQM
implementation.
Improvements to organizational management are necessary to maintain a
competitive advantage. Continuous
improvement to management is essential; however, not all organizations hold
continuous improvement as essential for long-term growth. In the past contemporary organizations were
popular (Chang & Sun, 2007).
Moreover, LO characteristics include organizations learning from
mistakes, realigning organizational processes to offer value to customers
(Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast,
learning from mistakes has a cost that organizations may not want to realize. Organizational knowledge retained by factors
of LO represents an advantage (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer,
2012). Organizational knowledge ends at
the turnover of employees (Martins & Meyer, 2012). A LO adapts to changes and retains
intellectual capital (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, an aging workforce results in
loss of job data and job-related information (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Moreover, the downsizing of the organization
and economic recession increase turnover (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Recessions disrupt the availability of
education resulting in a reduction to intellectual capital (Martins &
Meyer, 2012). Few organizations realize
the importance in maintain tacit knowledge, and deviate from maintaining
skilled workers (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Other factors affecting the hiring of intellectual capital include
managers fearing job loss to talented employees. In addition, professionalism within the work
environment is a challenge to maintain in the global market. Work atmospheres without professionalism
result in management not able to realize the need of expert knowledge (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Expert knowledge is
essential in maintaining and sustaining a prime level of efficiency (Martins
& Meyer, 2012). Lastly, a LO adapts
quicker than TQM in amending organizational culture and in offering value to
external stakeholders (Chang & Sun, 2007).
Organizations adopt to change by implementing a strategic plan to offer
a competitive advantage. Organizations
attain change the study of prime methods that introduce a competitive advantage. Changes made by an organization are
essential. The tools to implement are a
system of measures to metrics at each stage of production, planning, and
delivery of products and services to external stakeholders. Some of the tools are Strategic Choice Theory,
Cognitive Thinking, SWOT analysis, Industry Structure, Value Chain Analysis,
Product Life Cycle, Experienced Curves, Product Portfolio, Learning
Organization, and Total Quality Management.
The tools to change are not all without flaws. Strategic Choice Theory holds high self worth
of a leader and values the leader to represent perfection. In contrast, the theory assumes the leader
has good intentions and will not deviate from offering a competitive advantage
to shareholders. Moreover, Learning
Organization is a tool to draw ideas from experiences; however, not all
experiences represent value to an organization.
Nevertheless, cost exists through the learning process, but the aim is
to minimize the downcast business cycles.
SCOT Factor Matrix
Social constructionist
approaches as collective attributions of rationality and justice to
organizations interaction with unskilled labor has challenges (Stacey, 2011). Communities allow organizations to exist upon
presentation of economic concepts of delivering products and services (Stacey,
2011). The cost effective methods in
delivering products and services set organizations apart from communities
attempting to satisfy individual interest in economic needs (Stacey,
2011). Organizations enacting their
environment satisfy value creation by extending the social complexities of
human behavior and offering products and services to satisfy needs (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, organizations set apart
by the alignment with the needs and culture of communities (Stacey, 2011). Strategy is then dependent on the
relationships between communities and the complex structure of the variety of
ethical standards within the community (Stacey, 2011). The value and interest is to satisfy the
needs of many, adapt to the differences in culture, and become the best in
realizing opportunities with various groups in communities (Stacey, 2011). Organizations set apart by alienating products
and services from consumers (Stacey, 2011).
To maximize strategy, organizations have to develop systems to coerce
people in accepting the differences in others and derive technology that sets
organizations apart from competitors.
Aligning the interest of organizations is systematic by adapting
principles of economic regression to learn the probabilities in dynamic
relationships.
SO strategies. The opportunity for JCPenney
is to derive a model of interest to the daily routines with the employment
base, availability of human resources, and the needs of communities (Stacey, 2011).
The intricate strategy is reliant on processing information and the interaction
of people within the organization. In
essence, JCPenney must overcome the differences human labor offers in culture
identification to unite the organization in offering a vision of value to
communities in a global scale.
ST strategies. The ideal strategy is to
align social constructivism principles to the needs of communities and to
implement systems to maximize technology (Stacey, 2011). In addition,
JCPenney should consider weaknesses of the VCA to encounter threats. Consideration to value chain ideas
specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need
improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and
Sales campaigns heavy on television
media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Moreover, identification of the social
identity that JCPenney represents to communities is essential (Stacey, 2011).
CO strategies. The opportunities are
heavily dependent on the information JCPenney produces from daily operations. The information to draw from the data include
the factors that represent individual behavior, do away with redundant
processes, and eliminate potential threats from the assessment. Statistical analysis assists in deriving
complex models to offer a competitive advantage.
CT strategies. The threat JCPenney
experiences are not understanding the factors that impede cohesion within the
organization (Stacey, 2011). Individual and social identification are
instrumental in existence to JCPenney (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, consideration error to noise ratios
is essential in determining the optimum statistical model.
Key Success Factor Matrix Analysis
The success factors
include a wide range of business principle in alignment with value
creation. The opportunity for JCPenney is to derive a model of interest to the
daily routines with the employment base, availability of human resources, and
the needs of communities (Stacey, 2011).
The intricate strategy is reliant on processing information and the
interaction of people within the organization.
In essence, JCPenney must overcome the differences human labor offers in
culture identification to unite the organization in offering a vision of value
to communities in a global scale. The ideal strategy is to align social
constructivism principles to the needs of communities and to implement systems
to maximize technology (Stacey, 2011). In addition, JCPenney should consider
weaknesses of the VCA to encounter threats.
Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and
horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different
strategy revision. Consumer demand has
shifted to Marketing and Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman
& Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Moreover,
identification of the social identity that JCPenney represents to communities
is essential (Stacey, 2011). The opportunities are heavily dependent on
the information JCPenney produces from daily operations. The information to draw from the data include
the factors that represent individual behavior, do away with redundant
processes, and eliminate potential threats from the assessment. Statistical analysis assists in deriving
complex models to offer a competitive advantage. The threat JCPenney experiences are not
understanding the factors that impede cohesion within the organization (Stacey,
2011). Individual and social
identification are instrumental in existence to JCPenney (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, consideration error to noise ratios
is essential in determining the optimum statistical model.
Macy’s
implemented a strategic plan that adds value to the organization by considering
factors of culture, ethics, and needs of the communities. In addition, Macy’s exploits technology to
measure pitfalls and strengths. To
satisfy and unite with communities, JCPenney should develop a different culture
that communities hold to value and exploit technology at the same level or
higher than the competition. In essence,
JCPenney should recreate its inner persona to deliver impact to social needs.
Implications of Analysis
For the last three years, JCPenney executed a conventional strategic
plan to increase return of investment.
Moreover, JCPenney’s approach is in reducing the cost. The cost idea includes eliminating stores
with diminished returns and eliminating labor from those properties to include
corporate support. Recently, JCPenney
terminated 2,200 employees affecting approximately 100 stores and the potential
of 1,100 stores for future cut backs (Murray, 2013).
The implications of not introducing strategic planning processes in
alignment with the analysis of SCOT analysis are in not sustaining value in the
challenging arena of retail sales.
Moreover, JCPenney will not last indefinitely financing daily activities
on borrowed basis. The idea is to break
apart all the complexities of the organization to derive a solid strategic plan
of progress.
Analyzing the Company Strategy Type -Part II
Every organization
strategy attempts to lower cost and maximize profits (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A Low-Cost strategy and Differentiation Strategy
represent companies attempting to offer products or services at a lower price
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Retailers such as Wal-Mart have made the suppliers lower their cost
resulting in more profits to Wal-Mart (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). The lower cost strategy involves
reducing over all costs lower than the competition (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Concepts such as “Continuous Improvement In Operating
Efficiency” involve all stakeholders to work together in improving
operating efficiency (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Companies can exploit employees as employees
gain experience. The exploitation include
employees perform the same task in a less amount of time (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Consequently, employees
with experience offer organizations a cost advantage based on the principles of
the Experience Curve (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, maintaining low costs to supply
chain processes results in a company having a competitive advantage in cost
leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Companies can redesign product line to reduce
manufacturing costs; therefore, creating a competitive advantage in cost
leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The best strategy is to create a low-cost
atmosphere among staff (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Offering quantitative value to customers
derives a stronger demand for the firm’s products (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005).
A firm can focus in
offering a commodity to a product such as fast delivery in marketing an item to
offer greater demand (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Strategy differentiation is only noticeable
among customers and value (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Customer relationship is essential in
long-term sustainability for a business (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Moreover, personal relationships
represent value by customers. Adding a
personal touch to client relationships is essential such as embracing habits
and lifestyles (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
A focused strategy
concentrates target groups with customer relationships to provide the best goal
to organizations (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, Customer Relationship Management
(CRM) is a system that studies the needs of customers (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Customer reliability and
repetition provide a basis to the elasticity of demand. As the cost of services increases, customers
will turn to competition for a better price point (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Lastly, by paying
attention to the SWOT analysis and organizations mission statement
organizations satisfy the alignment to the best possible strategic plan to
undertake (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). An alignment to the specific of the community
is essential to maximize profits (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Strategy Type
For the last three years,
JCPenney executed a conventional strategic plan to increase return of
investment. Moreover, JCPenney’s
approach is in reducing the cost. The
cost idea includes eliminating stores with diminished returns and eliminating
labor from those properties to include corporate support. The strategy causes organizational market
value to decrease. In addition, when the
economy improves organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy
affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the
issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is
missing.
The strategy JCPenney undertakes do not address needs to align
organizational strategy with values of communities. Moreover, JCPenney is in a culture shock i.e.
JCPenney is finding the new environment too complex to attempt to retain
organizational footing in a competitive business. Indeed, the direction taken by JCPenney
currently encompasses the strategy of exhausting capital assets and devaluing
infrastructure.
Supporting Argument
JCPenney’s current stature to the North
American economy is at shambles. The
stock price or perception of stability has diminishes return clearly seen with
a negative slop to stock value ("Stock price," 2013). The slope represents a year activity
including the years of 2012 until 2013 ("Stock price," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet
dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining
similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years
shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement,"
2013). The last three years of cash flow
are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). Clearly, JCPenney is not utilizing resources
in a way to offer value to customers since it is failing to produce
profits. Improvement to Information
Technology is the catalyst to profit maximization.
Analyzing the Company Strategy Moves
Observing the weakness of
competition is essential to turn the competition’s weakness into organizational
advantages (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Weaknesses to competitors are the areas where
customers are not receiving value (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Exploiting the weaknesses include the
introduction and analysis of new business to strategic regions (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The exploitation
to realize converges into areas where the competition is not practicing. The conversions implement as other
implementation projects. Specifically,
JCPenney measures areas of exploitations to achieve value where the competition
fails to acknowledge. The principle
organizations implement related to the concepts of Judo where footing holds
with consideration to movement, balance, and leverage (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Nevertheless, the
competition is not direct. In essence,
gains from competition reflect slow progression to business model that are not
noticeable in daily routines (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategy is best if the design does not
advert reaction from the competition (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). In contrast, when the competition
attacks JCPenney should hold footing by using the opponents inertia to balance
position (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The advantage achieved by JCPenney is in harmony when the strengths of
the competition turn to weaknesses. The
art of the strategy is when the competition does not realize JCPenney is
defending territory (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Another strategy is
producing services or items that are specific to the organization (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Product
differentiation is essential to control the market and to derive pricing
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Based on elasticity of demand, products retain the best price (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The successful
strategy is to patent productions from the organization to retain ownership to
the rights of the product (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Other strategies within the same scope
strategies are to acquire all the resources to secure the product (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The most
ambitious of all strategies is to invent a new industry altogether. Branding in the industry offers control of
resources and supplies. Moreover,
competition is not existent since the organization owns the rights of the
industry (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The strategy to attain or to control similar industries includes
strategic acquisition, merger, or joint venture partnership (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). Organizations with
enough capital venturing into join ventures are able to control the market
outputs (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Moreover, absorbing similar organizations that offer a competitive
advantage is another method to compete in the industry (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Success is never a
guarantee, processing the metrics and evaluating the results is the key to
success (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Lastly, all the noted strategies are important; however, practicality
calls for a strategic plan that is practical and attainable (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005).
Relevant Strategy Moves
The opportunity JCPenney can undertake is Strategy
Differentiation. The reason is that the
competition does not have a strategy based the cultural differences North
American is experiencing from a large influx of immigrants. Moreover, Strategy Differentiation is only
noticeable among customers and value (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Customer relationship is
essential in long-term sustainability for a business (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Moreover, personal relationships
represent value by customers. Adding a
personal touch to client relationships is essential such as embracing habits
and lifestyles (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Lastly, the strategy is in alignment with the
needs of stakeholders.
Supporting Argument
JCPenney has in place a product
strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known
criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment
with the legal principles of communities “A
deep commitment to legal compliance and ethical business practices is firmly
embedded in JCPenney’s history and company culture …” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 146). The corporate social responsibility is not
evident in the activities JCPenney makes.
Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers information on being a
servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our communities, our Associates,
our Customers and the environment. What matters to you matters to
JCPenney." (Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from the two statements
depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed to a legal
alignment with communities; however, the concern for communities is ethics. The ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing
a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business School Press,
2005).
Alignment and Goals Analysis
Strategic intent focuses
on implementing strategies as actions that produce results (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). The implementation
process thus requires execution, doing, follow-through, Top-to-bottom,
Operational, and goal achieving actions to justify the strategic plan (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). In
contrast, strategy creation calls for analysis and planning, thinking,
initiate, at the top, entrepreneurial, and goal setting (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). The implementation
process cannot be part of the creation process (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). The two tasks set apart by a
profound acknowledgement of business practices (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Organizational success is
relevant in how closely firms separate the two concepts (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). Organizations
considering strategy alignment will focus on: (a) people; (b) incentives; (c)
supportive activities; (d) organizational structure; (e) culture; (f) and the
leadership of the business (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategic goals that intercept all
aspects of strategy alignment are essential for a competitive advantage
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The strategic implementation process connects with the assistance of all
personnel in the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). To succeed in this process, organizations
hold everyone accountable for the implementation process (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). The realization
process by an organization achieves the rewarding process according to
responsibility (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The assurance of the implementation is in
aligning the interest of employees to the strategic plan (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005).
To assure the
implementation is effective leaders adapt to a role model process (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The
guarantee is in alignment to leadership and role model ethics (Harvard Business
School Press, 2005). The hiring process,
training, logistics, pricing, and other activities realize by meshing the
support system of the strategy (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, leaders benefit from
understanding the potential of employees and motivating employees based on
potential (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, the organization culture must
reflect the ethics of the leadership (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). To achieve an ethic alignment
with organizational culture, leaders should pair heroes with novice employees
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Creating a culture base environment is challenging. Valued leaders will encounter difficulty in
effort, time, and disruptions to the creation (Harvard Business School Press,
2005).
A strategic plan then
realizes by incorporating action plans (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Moreover, the action plans state
the cause and steps to the goals of the plan (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). The best approach is to translate
the strategic plan into measurable action plan (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). The measurable steps deconstruct
to evaluate the efficiency of the implementation process and assign
responsibility to those actions (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The measurable steps set apart by corporate
strategic goals, unit goals, and team goals (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Performance metrics are the
methods used to achieve the strategic goals (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Similarly, performance metrics
address the factors that measure implementation (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Performance metrics provide measurement
to the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic
plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales,
and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and
time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans
is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership
by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). When performance metrics
reach a flaw, leaders should promptly review the interlocks with the use of
cross-functional collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is
through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership
by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). The responsibility to the
realization for performance metrics embed within the cross-functional
collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is through work
breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members
and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press,
2005).
Alignment Checklist and Unit Goals
Creating a checklist to strategy alignment requires that people have
the necessary skills to make the strategy work (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). JCPenney lacks the appropriate
personnel at store level to assist in implementing a strategic plan since the
current people hired by JCPenney reflect a misalignment with the needs of
stakeholders. The attitude of the
workers is without motivation due to the compensation structure and the
requirements by the organization. The
resources to implement a strategic plan exists (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Moreover, JCPenney does not offer
a feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs. The feedback system in practice relates the
employee to the performance of the business as a whole. The structure has optimization to implement a
sound strategy. The support strategy of
serving customers does not reflect the need of stakeholders. The organizational culture being on modest
pay, high fashion and products that are conservative do not serve the purpose
of the strategy.
The unit goals require JCPenney to support a strategy to improve the
organizational performance of HR, Procurement, Inbound and Outbound logistics,
Sales, and Service. The unit goals
provided at ground level to all employees and measured by managers as action
plans. The leaders measure the action
plans. The goal is for JCPenney to set
itself apart form the competition and offer services valued by customers.
Supporting Argument
JCPenney has reserved
capital to strengthen weak areas. The
approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress
("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover,
JCPenney can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting
available resources. JCPenney has a
value chain threat due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers
and dissatisfaction with existing synergies.
In addition, the distribution of products now heavily relied on an
outside vendor provides less customer service.
Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and
horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different
strategy revision. Revamping Marketing
and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals.
The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the
horizontal primary activities. The
opportunities are heavily dependent on the information JCPenney produces from
daily operations. The information to
draw from the data includes the factors that represent individual behavior, do
away with redundant processes, and eliminate potential threats from the
assessment. The threat JCPenney
experiences are not understanding the factors that impede cohesion within the
organization (Stacey, 2011). Lastly,
Individual and social identification are instrumental in existence to JCPenney
(Stacey, 2011).
Action Plan Analysis
The action plan to take
results in aligning unit goals to performance measures. In this area managers have to oversee the
effects of the unit goals in how the goals related to the stakeholders affected
by the unit goals. In addition, managers
have to evoke motivation principles for the unit goals to engage with
stakeholders and staff. Once the
motivation is in action, performance metrics analyzed for cohesion. To assist in motivation, managers design a
compensation plan that is in alignment with the unit goals. If the unit goals lack progress, the mangers
will check their checklist for responsibility of the unit goals. The best plans have back-up plans, hold
people responsible for those plans, are measurable and have a scheduled date of
implementation. The implementation
process will show the progress that is obvious to management. The difference in the implementation process,
success in implementation, and before implementation should reflect the change
in the positive direction. The metrics
for management to review include stakeholder reports, accounting reports, and
shareholder acceptance. Lastly, the
implementation and success of the implementation is tedious, should allow for
measurement, show ownership to unit goals, and be time driven.
The
time line for implementation involves five key steps. The first objective to implement change is
when close knit teams exhaust current leadership (Stacey, 2011). Next, the organization grows by
decentralization and becoming autonomous (Stacey, 2011). After growth through direction, the
organization structures decentralize, and the organization proceeds to
delegation (Stacey, 2011). Afterwards,
the directed efforts of delegation bring the necessity for coordination by
decreasing redundant operations (Stacey, 2011).
Cultural bonding and cohesion assisted in reducing waste and the last
time implementation action process include forming habits that are in alignment
with the strategy (Stacey, 2011).
Lastly, Table 2 presented below depicts the action time line steps.
Sustainable Action Time Line of Implementation
Processes in Table Form
Table 2
Action Time Line
Implementation Sequence
|
Action
|
Growth through creativity
|
Occurs when close knit
teams exhaust current leadership
|
Growth through direction
|
Organization grows by
decentralization and autonomy
|
Growth through delegation
|
Centralized power becomes
obsolete
|
Growth through
co-ordination
|
The organization finds and
deletes wasteful processes
|
Growth through
collaboration
|
Interpersonal relationships
grow at this last stage
|
Relevant Action Plan
A strategic plan then realizes by incorporating action plans (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). Moreover,
the action plans state the cause and steps to the goals of the plan (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The best
approach is to translate the strategic plan into measurable action plan
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
The measurable steps deconstruct to evaluate the efficiency of the
implementation process and assign responsibility to those actions (Harvard
Business School Press, 2005). The
measurable steps set apart by corporate strategic goals, unit goals, and team
goals (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Performance metrics are the methods used to achieve the strategic goals
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Similarly, performance metrics address the factors that measure
implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics provide measurement to
the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic
plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales,
and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and
time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans
is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership
by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). When performance metrics
reach a flaw, leaders should immediately review the interlocks with the use of
cross-functional collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is
through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key
members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). The responsibility to the
realization for performance metrics embed within the cross-functional collaboration
In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown
structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key
members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Supporting Argument
Action plans start with
ideas and provide steps in how to accomplish the ideas (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Moreover, top management
and goals derive quantifiable action plans (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Unit goals created from mission,
value, and vision of shareholders and top management (Harvard Business School
Press, 2005). Measurable, grounded and
time driven unit goals work in implementation (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Organizations should avoid vague
goal trends. Managers should allow the
owners of unit goals to ask as many questions needed to succeed in
implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). All unit goals and action plans require
ownership for recognition (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). As the staff takes ownership of all plans,
managers assure the organization has the resources to implement those plans
(Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Interlocks unwound and kept under management (Harvard Business School Press,
2005). Lastly, the action plans require
cost analyses (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
Fitness Landscape Analysis
Organizations engaging in educating stakeholders the landscapes that
promote wealth will realize more growth than organizations that do not
communicate strategies to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Organizations must evaluate competition for
flaws and measure the impact of competition (Stacey, 2011). The ideal position for an organization is to
defeat competition to be the only existence in the market and to maintain the
highest landscape possible (Stacey, 2011).
Classical sciences support calculation where the date shows a high
degree of correlation (Stacey, 2011). In
contrast, human activity predictions consider an event with a high
consideration of bias (Stacey, 2011).
Statistical regression analysis used to predict quantitative data
(Stacey, 2011). The challenge is
developing regression analysis models against many organizations (Stacey,
2011). Another way to perform data search
is to provide surveys to organizations, but the information has a high degree
of subjectivity (Stacey, 2011). Case
studies provide qualitative information that has to change to quantitative
(Stacey, 2011). Existing academic
journals are limited to a few hypotheses (Stacey, 2011). Notes from executives have bias information
(Stacey, 2011). Assumptions of efficient
and formative causality are the basic characteristics of data gathering for
scientific research (Stacey, 2011).
Connecting strategic planning to improved organizational performance
has been difficult (Stacey, 2011).
Identification of fewer opportunities and clear links among industry
organizations or leaders has been difficult (Stacey, 2011). Subjective judgment occurs with specialist
studies to business planning (Stacey, 2011).
Statistical analysis proves with considerably amount of probability
strategic planning is essential for organizations to sustain a competitive
advantage (Stacey, 2011). The theory of
strategic choice cannot be specific which aspect of leadership affected by
strategic planning (Stacey, 2011).
Personal humility and professional will describe the personality of a
successful organization (Stacey, 2011).
Successful organizations maintain focus on; (a) a core business; (b)
closeness to customer; (c) productivity through people; (d) autonomy and
entrepreneurship; (e) hands-on; (f) value driven; (g) bias for action; (h)
simple form and lean staff; and (i) simultaneous loss-tight properties (Stacey,
2011). Evidence-based management (EBM)
is the accumulation of business best practices research and adopts by
organizations plus improves profitability and less goal setting and performance
feedback (Stacey, 2011). Most managers
from organizations do not attempt to correct internal problems by asking
questions, therefore, damping the interest in goal setting (Stacey, 2011). Healthcare organizations do not automatically
implement best practices based on evidence (Stacey, 2011). Healthcare organizations ignore evidence that
results in a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). In essence, the healthcare industry does not
attempt to be innovative and attempts to argue evidence is insufficient to
implement changes (Stacey, 2011).
Total Quality Management (TQM) assists organizations in improving
operating performance, income, and long-run stock market performance (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, TQM also assists in
developing employment, total assets, and sales (Stacey, 2011). Six-sigma is another tool that aids improve
organizational performance (Stacey, 2011).
Human resource management and organizational performance is closely
related (Stacey, 2011). Mergers and
acquisitions are effective when the outcome results in increase revenues and
efficiency (Stacey, 2011). Mergers and
acquisitions are beneficial to organizations in the long-run, fit represents a
competitive advantage to overall company performance and company growth
(Stacey, 2011). Dominant discourse
provides improved measurements of uncertainty and unpredictability (Stacey,
2011).
The responsibility of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is to focus on
rational thoughts about aligning organizational potential of inter capabilities
to match with the values and ethics of stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Effective strategies formulate through
learning and discovering (Stacey, 2011).
Management and leadership discourse led by feelings does not equate to
metrics derived from studying value necessities from stakeholders (Stacey,
2011). With certainty, change initiates
uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). The
primitive format of strategy building is from past actions and experiences
(Stacey, 2011). Some leaders build
strategy plans through random ideas (Stacey, 2011). Emergences are patterns from action and are
not intentional (Stacey, 2011). Emergent
strategy and strategic learning are on the same level field (Stacey,
2011). Strategies form from growth value
intentions (Stacey, 2011).
Organizations are not formidable systems that cannot sustain formative
causality, invisible barriers, and transparency without observation (Stacey,
2011). Systems are necessary for the
development of human beings (Stacey, 2011).
Systems require users that are controlled and not autonomous (Stacey,
2011). Systems do not incorporate
social, human groups that interact (Stacey, 2011). Systems store information and do not process
it (Stacey, 2011). The rationale by the
term complex agents sinuates that all do not have differences (Stacey,
2011). Adaptive systems workflows allow
complexities of human interaction through tools that filter noise (Stacey,
2011).
Agents must believe in the organization of mission, and vision to stay
adaptively and motivated (Stacey, 2011).
Conflict is the struggle to defeat an opponent’s value makeup (Stacey,
2011). Diversity is the variety of
culture and ethnic groups within an organization (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, diversity allows organizations to
adopt the best cultures to offer an environmental cohesive group (Stacey,
2011). Diversity enhances organizational
performance and provides improvements through planning (Stacey, 2011). Diversity also calls for culture adaptation
and acceptance of differences (Stacey, 2011).
Human resource management calls for acceptance of diversity (Stacey,
2011). Diverse groups have different
ideas, standards, development, and methods to achieve goals (Stacey,
2011). Successful firms create
strategies to oversee the implementation of diverse groups in an organization
to achieve creativity and discourage discrimination (Stacey, 2011). Organizational initiatives to diversity include
equal opportunities, retention of employees, organizational flexibility,
improved public image, and better morale (Stacey, 2011). Diversity relationships are about social
dynamics not human power relationships (Stacey, 2011). Dominant discourse offers sanitized
acceptance view of diversity (Stacey, 2011).
Dominant discourse focuses realistic, beliefs systems, individualist
assumptions, and duality of rationalism, and formative causality (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, dominant discourse
assumes agents are autonomous and act rationally and irrational (Stacey, 2011). Dominant discourse acts on the organizational
alignments with visions, missions, targets, strategic plans, policy rules,
performance, efficiency and improvement (Stacey, 2011). Agents do not always act rationally (Stacey,
2011). Not all systems include
organizational societies and groups (Stacey, 2011). Every organization encountering modification
initiates changes at the end of prior business cycle (Stacey, 2011). Second order system thinking considers the
observer and the participant that offers dominant discourse plus more attention
to social interactions (Stacey, 2011).
Social constructionism disregards the connection to individual autonomy
and focuses on social realities (Stacey, 2011).
Moreover, social constructionism combines second order system thinking
to offer to learn capacities (Stacey, 2011).
Lastly, the last discourse focuses on habits and characteristics that
are unpredictable (Stacey, 2011).
Systems dynamics next phase is the study of hard systems thinking that
assumes interactions have a distinctive purpose (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, systems dynamics accept manager
pass retained knowledge to inexperienced workers (Stacey, 2011). Second order systems thinking connects to
constructivists’ psychology and has a basis to perception and observers
(Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, second order systems have observed systems
(Stacey, 2011). Level one-second order
systems single loop learning where mental models are similar (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, Level two-order second
systems double loop learning where mental models are different (Stacey,
2011). Level three-second order systems
have religious conversion and change (Stacey, 2011). Under level one-second order systems, agents
set goals (Stacey, 2011). Cybernetic
systems and mental models have a relationship of low-order goals (Stacey,
2011). Regress and mysticism are the
challenges with second order systems (Stacey, 2011). Second order system forecasting does not
address the issue of observant participant and is fundamental to all forms of
system thinking (Stacey, 2011).
Similarly, second order systems maintain a variable of interest outside
the norms of data (Stacey, 2011). In
contrast, analogies exist stating a relationship between physical entities and
organizations thus having distinct boundaries, structures, and functions
(Stacey, 2011).
Interactive planning composes ideas that members should realize goals
by envisioning the result (Stacey, 2011).
An interactive version of strategic choices states that members should
foresee a mirror image as participants of the organization (Stacey, 2011). Business leaders that understand value
creation should focus in design (Stacey, 2011).
The difference to the interactive model is in autonomy (Stacey,
2011). Churchman’s model makes a
distinction that the ideal decision maker or designer must deliberate values
rather than a participant (Stacey, 2011).
Human interaction intercepts rationalist causality and formative
causality (Stacey, 2011). Churchman’s
method allowed participant and members to share the strategy, therefore, giving
the voice of members the same priority (Stacey, 2011). Churchman’s ideas represent introducing
democratic participation systems that allow all to have a voice in strategic
thinking (Stacey, 2011). In theory, the
autonomous model is free for individuals that choose their own system (Stacey,
2011). In practice, the ideal model is
not free because all agents must participate realize the model, therefore,
innovation is difficult to attain (Stacey, 2011).
The approach to Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is that agents engage
impulses to implement strategies of change (Stacey, 2011). The action of change requires multiple links
in scenarios that predict the outcome (Stacey, 2011). The predictions should branch out with many
choices hypothesis (Stacey, 2011). The
hypothesis is subject of formative causality and best hypothesis forms a
conceptual system (Stacey, 2011). The
autonomous individuals are subjects of causality of freedom, and the system
represents formative causality (Stacey, 2011).
SSM has two types that are cultural consisting views, interventions,
rules, and logical analysis (Stacey, 2011).
Another concern to SSM methods is the interactions agents take with each
other that represent the complex commutative system of participants (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, SSM owes adaptive
aspects to mediate the complex relationships between agents to slow
consequences of alternative discourse and provide systematic learning (Stacey,
2011). Goals are not achievable by
complex interpersonal relationships until agents communicate effectively and
draw conclusions (Stacey, 2011). Rational
thinking is not by group consensus (Stacey, 2011).
Midgley makes an assumption that agents, as a group, have a common
problem (Stacey, 2011). Moreover,
Midgley argues that system problems are not confined to zones and that agent’s
inherent relationships overlap where no true boundaries exist (Stacey, 2011).
Furthermore, Midgley states agents have a systematic intervention (to make a
decision) in how ethics and values are a concern since the problem is bound to
a precise zone (Stacey, 2011). In
contrast, organizational challenges relates to everyone in the organization
(Stacey, 2011). Formulating critical
correction to bounded systems requires multiple hypotheses that consider all
areas affected by the hypothesis (Stacey, 2011). Boundary setting not explained by Midgley
(Stacey, 2011). Setting boundaries limit
agents’ creative process because limitations are set (Stacey, 2011). The process limits agents’ interest to think
further (Stacey, 2011). Jackson states
that system thinking places agents different beliefs in the center of the
issues where no boundary is needed (Stacey, 2011). Knowledge gathers through human thinking and
cognitive systems (Stacey, 2011).
Hegemony systems are the foundation to system thinking (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, system thinking provides a
methodology and theoretical steps to world paradigm (Stacey, 2011). System of system methodology (SOSM) offers
repairs to system thinking (Stacey, 2011).
Jackson makes a distinction between method, methodology, and
meta-methodology tying concepts to system tools, principles, and relationships
(Stacey, 2011). The SOSM can pair all
issues with system methodologies that system thinking fails (Stacey,
2011). The Total Systems Intervention
(TSI) analyzes issues and combines different ideas to stimulate thought
(Stacey, 2011). The components to
critical systems include pluralism, commitment, and improvement (Stacey,
2011). The dual causality of system
thinking combines autonomy with formative causality since the leader’s choice
affects their role (Stacey, 2011).
Pluralism is the common ground to critical systems and system thinking
(Stacey, 2011). Moreover, pluralism
recommends agents consider different dialogues to a problem and avoids
independent thinking (Stacey, 2011).
Change in dialogues is necessary because agents are part of a collective
and practicing one indefinite principle does not satisfy the needs of the
collective (Stacey, 2011).
Stakeholders value the creation of goods and services organizations
offer by allowing stakeholders to focus in other personal interest (Stacey,
2011). The offer to stakeholders
represents economic efficiency (Stacey, 2011).
Strategic leadership intercepts organizational focus by aligning the
offers to stakeholders that represent economic value (Stacey, 2011). The relationship of organizations and
stakeholders relate to the representation of culture, ethics, and value
(Stacey, 2011). Successful organizations
realize a competitive advantage by offering the correct mixture culture,
ethics, and value as a service or product to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). The realization is then measured as a
dominant discourse organizations match to stakeholders’ demands (Stacey, 2011).
Social constructionism represents: (a) fit of communication towards
stakeholders; (b) the understood meaning of communication by stakeholders from
organizations; (c) the relationships organizations and stakeholders assemble;
(d) the value social life of the relationship between firms and stakeholders;
and (e) the cultural traditions from the relationship among firms and
stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). In
contrast, constructionism is the interpretation of society’s culture by the
communities (Stacey, 2011). In essence,
social constructionism is the interchange by organizations to supply
stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Lastly,
organizations accept diverse communities by supplying cultural products and
services to stakeholders and not alienating social groups that are ethical to
communities (Stacey, 2011).
Social identity theory is different from mainstream emphasis of social
group memberships on identity formation (Stacey, 2011). Social behavior is proportional to social
processes (Stacey, 2011). Moreover,
social groups are permeable where stakeholders can switch between social groups
(Stacey, 2011). Social identity theory
places interest for organizations to understand the placement of stakeholders
among social groups and the boundaries to the social groups (Stacey,
2011). Lastly, organizations must understand
the internal inherent links between social dynamics (Stacey, 2011).
Description of Fitness Landscape and Analysis
Dominant discourse focuses realistic, beliefs systems, individualist
assumptions, and duality of rationalism, and formative causality (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, dominant discourse
assumes agents are autonomous and act rationally and irrational (Stacey,
2011). Dominant discourse acts on the
organizational alignments with visions, missions, targets, strategic plans,
policy rules, performance, efficiency and improvement (Stacey, 2011). Agents do not always act rationally (Stacey,
2011). Not all systems include
organizational societies and groups (Stacey, 2011). Every organization encountering modification
initiates changes at the end of prior business cycle (Stacey, 2011). Second order system thinking considers the
observer and the participant that offers dominant discourse plus more attention
to social interactions (Stacey, 2011).
Social constructionism disregards the connection to individual autonomy
and focuses on social realities (Stacey, 2011).
Moreover, social constructionism combines second order system thinking
to offer to learn capacities (Stacey, 2011).
Lastly, the last discourse focuses on habits and characteristics that are
unpredictable (Stacey, 2011).
Stakeholders value the creation of goods and services organizations
offer by allowing stakeholders to focus in other personal interest (Stacey,
2011). The offer to stakeholders
represents economic efficiency (Stacey, 2011).
Strategic leadership intercepts organizational focus by aligning the
offers to stakeholders that represent economic value (Stacey, 2011). The relationship of organizations and
stakeholders relate to the representation of culture, ethics, and value (Stacey,
2011). Successful organizations realize
a competitive advantage by offering the correct mixture culture, ethics, and
value as a service or product to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). The realization is then measured as a
dominant discourse organizations match to stakeholders’ demands (Stacey,
2011).
Social constructionism represents: (a) fit of communication towards
stakeholders; (b) the understood meaning of communication by stakeholders from
organizations; (c) the relationships organizations and stakeholders assemble;
(d) the value social life of the relationship between firms and stakeholders;
and (e) the cultural traditions from the relationship among firms and
stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). In
contrast, constructionism is the interpretation of society’s culture by the
communities (Stacey, 2011). In essence,
social constructionism is the interchange by organizations to supply
stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Lastly,
organizations accept diverse communities by supplying cultural products and
services to stakeholders and not alienating social groups that are ethical to
communities (Stacey, 2011).
Social identity theory is different from mainstream emphasis of social
group memberships on identity formation (Stacey, 2011). Social behavior is proportional to social
processes (Stacey, 2011). Moreover,
social groups are permeable where stakeholders can switch between social groups
(Stacey, 2011). Social identity theory
places interest for organizations to understand the placement of stakeholders
among social groups and the boundaries to the social groups (Stacey,
2011). Lastly, organizations must
understand the internal inherent links between social dynamics (Stacey,
2011).
JCPenney failed to recognize the changing dynamics of society’s culture
and growing base of younger stakeholders.
In addition, the CEO placed more emphasis on vision to the dominant
discourse than alignment with stakeholder needs. The strategic plan of offering new products
through Martha Stewart represented the misalignment in understanding the needs
of a younger generation of stakeholders.
Moreover, JCPenney missed the opportunity in relating social
constructionism to stakeholders. In
essence, JCPenney realized the approach of supplying products and services to
an older stakeholder group that represented a small portion of social
groups.
Implications of Analysis
JCPenney failed to
recognize the changing dynamics of society’s culture and growing base of
younger stakeholders. In addition, the
CEO placed more emphasis on vision to the dominant discourse than alignment
with stakeholder needs. The strategic
plan of offering new products through Martha Stewart represented the
misalignment in understanding the needs of a younger generation of
stakeholders. Moreover, JCPenney missed
the opportunity in relating social constructionism to stakeholders. In essence, JCPenney realized the approach of
supplying products and services to an older stakeholder group that represented
a small portion of social groups.
JCPenney bombed to
attempt to measure stakeholder response to strategic planning. The CEO abandoned academic views to
interchange with personal tools. The CEO
did not examine core business alignment with customer, attempt to realize
entrepreneurship with stakeholders, and recognize the value. Moreover, evidence-based management
principles or TQM were not important for JCPenney. The CEO brought a mixture of conceptual
beliefs from past industries and attempted to realize gains from those
experiences. By not relocating to
corporate headquarters, the CEO did not bond with the culture of JCPenney,
therefore, could not correctly interpret the culture. The signals of communications were a miss by
not examining the communicative system of participants. Lastly, the CEO convoluted strategies were
successful at not yielding positive cash flows.
Boid Analysis
The characteristics of Boids include keeping a minimum distance from
each other, match organizational velocities within each other, and all follow
the same center of mass (Stacey, 2011).
Boids are master agents masked to fit into society clusters destined to
drive a successful strategy by hiding intention, direction, and timing (Stacey,
2011). Boids are resourceful and
excellent camouflage of chaos (Stacey, 2011).
In addition, boids will adapt to environmental constraints; however, do
not follow a stable evolution (Stacey, 2011).
The laws of nature present actions that predict and change when forces
alter. Organizational strategies of the
modern world are simple in comparison to the complex and non-linear
relationships of agents. A growing
concern exists that leadership qualifications are not in motion for the current
challenges. The former principles of
leadership investigated cause and effect mysteries to misalignments to dynamic
leadership; whereas, the emerging principles of complexity leadership theory,
complex adaptive systems, and chaos theory examines the roles agents
participate in non-linear relationships with external and internal forces.
Cause and effect principles allow people to adjust nature (Stacey,
2011). Similarly, managers finesse
business structures to change results (Stacey, 2011). The pieces of flaws in organizational culture
derive the interaction between them (Stacey, 2011). System flaws analyze by observing linearity
between missing links (Stacey, 2011).
Some links with prior introduction of negative and positive feedback
still do not show linearity, but some other complex phenomenon (Stacey,
2011). Theories of complex sciences
focus on the macro level flaws, which are non-linear and deterministic (Stacey,
2011). The theories claim no two actions
correlate; therefore, predictions cannot forecast (Stacey, 2011). Complex adaptive systems refer to a strategy
of interactions to depend of local inputs instead of a master blue print
(Stacey, 2011).
Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep
organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects
to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011).
In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are unpredictable
and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable;
therefore, managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to
self-adjust (Stacey, 2011). Organizational
challenges serve as linear and non-linear relationship (Stacey, 2011). The adjustment of such systems represents a
strange attractor (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational problems that complicate prediction should be broken
apart in shorter periods or smaller slices to forecast (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior and path are not
proportional (Stacey, 2011). Moreover,
organizational behavior has a pattern and qualitative shape (Stacey,
2011). Pattern behavior thus has shape
and dynamic principles that forecast (Stacey, 2011). Chaotic behavior represents healthy form of
existence (Stacey, 2011). Organizational
behavior patterns require an external force to move in a direction cyclical and
maintain control of the dynamic system to hold a minimum radius (Stacey, 2011). Once thought as random behavior is non-linear
and linear relationship between stability and instability (Stacey, 2011). In essence, small movements away from
equilibrium invite new patterns of complex structures to organizations.
Interactive dynamics allows measuring to episodes of interaction
between agents (Lichtenstein, Uhl-Bien, Marion, Seers, Orton, & Schreiber,
2006). The interactions are events that
occur over time (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).
Moreover, the interactions include space such as bracket events,
systematic data, interaction cues, longitudinal models, and relational
qualities (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).
Bracketing and identifying events include utilizing radiological
procedures (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).
Analyzing organizational processes often reveal event interactions that
are in misalignment (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Interdependency cues often have spaces
between events that require explanation by agents (Lichtenstein et al.,
2006). Agents’ perceptions and qualities
change over time thus amending forecasting over time is necessary (Lichtenstein
et al., 2006). The types of forecasting
necessary for predictions include dynamic modeling, discrete event simulation,
agent-based modeling, network modeling, and dynamical network analysis (Lichtenstein
et al., 2006). In contrast, normative or
plausible data methods to forecast incorporate computational modeling
(Lichtenstein et al., 2006). New
analytical techniques are necessary to forecast non-linear fractal dynamic
agent relationships (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Dynamic network analysis forecast non-linear
fractal dynamic relationships by considering complex relationships qualities,
and complex relationships interaction among agents (Lichtenstein et al.,
2006). The developments of adaptive
models of Poisson regression are the focus of grounded theory, pattern
matching, visual mapping, narrative techniques, temporal bracketing, and
quantification (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).
Lastly, the generalization of fluctuation dynamics, positive feedback,
feedback dynamics, stabilization dynamics, and recombination dynamics acted as
drivers to agent events (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).
The complex interactions among agents introduce disruptions in the
forecasting of business cycles.
Organizations adapt to change in the environment by empirically deriving
methods to break apart the complexities among agents. Leaders applying negative feedback to
adaptive systems result in changes that do not participate a competitive
advantage. The resulting complex systems
initiate a response to study theories of complex sciences to focus on macro and
micro level strategies that yield a competitive advantage.
The focus in deriving purpose and explanations to agents devises
complex complicated tactics result in the formulation of the system and
understanding of fractal tendencies.
Complex agents formulating changes to organizational structure devise
entrepreneurial strategies away from form organizational plans. The once though of as random behavior has
patterns of linear and non-linear tendencies.
Where the opportunity exists in understanding the complex patterns, lies
in the common denominator that all agents must cooperate to co-exist within the
organization.
Forecasting strategies are thus in development to assist in
leadership. The complex and dynamic
relationships introduce a modern form of business structures. Dynamic leadership is no longer a modern
style of leading organizations. Lastly,
organizations result to maneuvering key agents to lead complex structures.
Organizations that consider the dynamics of agent interaction will
succeed in forecasting complex structures within the dynamics of the
organization. Dynamic agent interaction
that are similar and dissimilar have a common denominator of weighted
averages. Moreover, organization can attempt
to correct disruptions by applying negative feedback; however, unfavorable
results are then a measure of complex interactions within dynamic agents. The spacing between negative feedback and
equilibrium also represent time differences.
The ideal forecast strategy relies in how close the misalignment
processes against time and weighted differences.
“Boid Analysis” Systems Description and Analysis
Dominant discourse acts
on the organizational alignments with visions, missions, targets, strategic
plans, policy rules, performance, efficiency and improvement (Stacey,
2011). Agents do not always act
rationally (Stacey, 2011). Not all
systems include organizational societies and groups (Stacey, 2011). Every organization encountering modification
initiates changes at the end of prior business cycle (Stacey, 2011). Second order system thinking considers the
observer and the participant that offers dominant discourse plus more attention
to social interactions (Stacey, 2011).
Social constructionism disregards the connection to individual autonomy
and focuses on social realities (Stacey, 2011).
Moreover, social constructionism combines second order system thinking
to offer to learn capacities (Stacey, 2011).
Lastly, the last discourse focuses on habits and characteristics that
are unpredictable (Stacey, 2011).
The characteristics of
Boids include keeping a minimum distance from each other, match organizational
velocities within each other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey,
2011). Boids are master agents masked to
fit into society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding
intention, direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011). Boids are resourceful and excellent
camouflage of chaos (Stacey, 2011). In
addition, boids will adapt to environmental constraints; however, do not follow
a stable evolution (Stacey, 2011).
JCPenney is in a negative
discourse aiming at devaluing stakeholders.
Social interaction dynamics is essential for sustainability, and
JCPenney has not shown interest in identifying new emerging stakeholder
base. The retail industry has a difficult
task of identifying stakeholders. Much
of the misalignment is within how the internal stakeholders and external
stakeholders communicate. Majority of
JCPenney employees do not attempt to develop a personal relationship with
customers, therefore, JCPenney will find it difficult to learn customer’s
expectations. The center of mass of
customers perceptions maintains a distance from the misconceptions of
JCPenney. In summary, new, emergent
stakeholders emerge in external societies with boundaries not reachable by
JCPenney.
Implications of Analysis
JCPenney bombed to
attempt to measure stakeholder response to strategic planning. The CEO abandoned academic views to
interchange with personal tools. The CEO
did not examine core business alignment with customer, attempt to realize
entrepreneurship with stakeholders, and recognize the value. Moreover, evidence-based management
principles or TQM were not important for JCPenney. The CEO brought a mixture of conceptual
beliefs from past industries and attempted to realize gains from those
experiences. By not relocating to
corporate headquarters, the CEO did not bond with the culture of JCPenney,
therefore, could not correctly interpret the culture. The signals of communications were a miss by
not examining the communicative system of participants. Lastly, the CEO convoluted strategies were
successful at not yielding positive cash flows.
The challenge is in
maintain social relationships with an emergent customer base that has a
different social dynamic. JCPenney is in
a negative discourse aiming at devaluing stakeholders. Social interaction dynamics is essential for
sustainability, and JCPenney has not shown interest in identifying new emerging
stakeholder base. The retail industry
has a difficult task of identifying stakeholders. Much of the misalignment is within how the
internal stakeholders and external stakeholders communicate. Majority of JCPenney employees do not attempt
to develop a personal relationship with customers, therefore, JCPenney will
find it difficult to learn customer’s expectations. The center of mass of customers perceptions
maintains a distance from the misconceptions of JCPenney. In summary, new, emergent stakeholders emerge
in external societies with boundaries not reachable by JCPenney.
Industry Evolution Modeling
The laws of nature present actions that predict and change when forces
alter (Stacey, 2011). Cause and effect
principles allow people to adjust nature (Stacey, 2011). Similarly, managers finesse business
structures to change results (Stacey, 2011).
The pieces of flaws in organizational culture and process derive the
interaction between them (Stacey, 2011).
System flaws analyze by observing linearity between missing links
(Stacey, 2011). Some links with prior
introduction of negative and positive feedback still do not show linearity, but
some other complex phenomenon (Stacey, 2011).
Theories of complex sciences focus on the macro levels flaws, which are
non-linear and deterministic (Stacey, 2011).
The theories claim no two actions correlate; therefore, predictions
cannot forecast (Stacey, 2011). Complex
adaptive systems refer to a strategy of interactions to depend of local inputs
instead of a master blue print (Stacey, 2011).
Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep
organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects
to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011).
In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are
unpredictable and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable;
therefore, managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to
self-adjust (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational challenges serve as linear and non-linear relationship
(Stacey, 2011). The adjustment of such
systems represents a strange attractor (Stacey, 2011). Organizational problems that are too
complicated to predict should be broken apart in shorter periods or smaller
slices to forecast (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational behavior and path are not proportional (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, organizational behavior
has a pattern and qualitative shape (Stacey, 2011). Pattern behavior thus has
shape and dynamic principles that forecast (Stacey, 2011). Chaotic behavior represents healthy form of
existence (Stacey, 2011). Organizational
behavior patterns require an external force to move in a direction cyclical and
maintain control of the dynamic system to hold a minimum radius (Stacey,
2011). Lastly, random behavior is
non-linear and linear relationship between stability and instability (Stacey,
2011).
Non-linear systems far from
equilibrium set small movements eventually to form its own structures (Stacey,
2011). Organizational behavior can exist
at equilibrium and can reside at rest (Stacey, 2011). When external and internal
forces away from equilibrium push behavior out the differences in equilibrium
require negative feedback to correct (Stacey, 2011). Observation of chaotic patterns is necessary
to control organizations (Stacey, 2011).
Destructive pattern in organizational behavior when at a tipping point
to form bonds to create new identities (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization occurs when chaotic patterns
excite behavior to form new unplanned patterns (Stacey, 2011). Strategic change occurs when organizational
behavior experiences forces to dissipate equilibrium and introduces
self-organization with neutral fluctuations (Stacey, 2011). Destabilization occurs to organizational
cultures when broken apart; however, introduction of leadership adheres by
motivating and manifesting structures (Stacey, 2011). When value systems are broken, encouragement
from external forces causes organizations dis-equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). Broken values cause other departments to
follow fractal tendencies to the point of unsustainability (Stacey, 2011). The nature of human behavior is to change the
directive path of equilibrium, and outside influences bifurcate norms of
existence (Stacey, 2011). Some organizational
system exists in the norms of stable instability where the patterns are
predictably unstable (Stacey, 2011).
Instability on itself represents unknown factors not understood but
influenced (Stacey, 2011). Unstable
systems far from equilibrium cannot forecast because the needed change is
distant from equilibrium (Stacey, 2011).
Accounting for misalignments is possible by creating systems-non linear
equations that arrive from a process of spontaneous self-organization (Stacey,
2011).
Complex adaptive systems have a common denominator that targets
population of agents to have a single common principle (Stacey, 2011). Complex system reacts to a new introduction
of a common denominator by changing the behavior of a respected stakeholder
(Stacey, 2011). The changed behavior transpires as a new common denominator and
complex pattern for all agents (Stacey, 2011).
Societies have proven the interaction and manipulation of agents through
complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Genetic
algorithms take the complexity of introducing new agents (Stacey, 2011). Organizations introduce the same principles
by introducing original change stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Fractal types of complex social systems have
a common denominator with the need to interact (Stacey, 2011). Complex systems have the inherent nature of
creating unplanned or anticipated evolutionary evolving outcomes (Stacey,
2011). Complex systems do not progress
out of planning and do not develop out of random events (Stacey, 2011). Organizations engaging in educating
stakeholders the landscapes that promote wealth will realize more growth than
organizations that do not communicate strategies to stakeholders (Stacey,
2011).
Organizations must evaluate the competition for flaws and measure the
impact of competition (Stacey, 2011).
The ideal position for an organization is to defeat competition to be
the only existence in the market and maintain the highest landscape possible
(Stacey, 2011). The best strategy for
organizations includes one that is difficult to measure, to anticipate, and
view as intuitive by the competition (Stacey, 2011). The fractal strategy does
not guarantee to defeat the strength of competitive forces and provide a high
landscape (Stacey, 2011). Small
adjustments to organizational strategy may result to a positive direction, but
only the strategic intent with a large adjustment sustains a competitive
advantage (Stacey, 2011). A healthy
organization has chaos in daily operations and is a prerequisite for
sustainability (Stacey, 2011).
Competition, internal conflicts, dynamic operation, and constraints are
the normal list of options for the internal dynamic healthy organizations
(Stacey, 2011). Chaos and conflicting
constraints are the attributes of a valued agent (Stacey, 2011). The characteristics of Boids include keeping a
minimum distance from each other, match organizational velocities within each
other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey, 2011). Boids are master agents masked to fit into
society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding intention,
direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011).
Boids are resourceful and excellent camouflage of chaos (Stacey,
2011). In addition, boids will adapt to
environmental constraints; however, do not follow a stable evolution (Stacey,
2011). Competition sets the stage for a
healthy organizational environment (Stacey, 2011). Without healthy organizational environments,
organizations would welter (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational strategy does not have to follow a set of structured
rules; in fact, flawed agents not following strict rules carry a successful
strategy (Stacey, 2011).
A survival tactic mimics the competition’s role mission, values, and
vision through benchmarking i.e. mimicking the fundamentals to the point where
the two organizations depict clone traits and the benchmark continue until a
new fundamental strategy implements (Stacey, 2011). Assimilating the organization has its
drawbacks (Stacey, 2011). Both
organizations must exist to survive; therefore, leaders cannot utterly
terminate the competition host existence (Stacey, 2011). Organization must accept the placement among
the hierarchy of order or destroy the competitive forces to retain dominance in
the market (Stacey, 2011). The nature of
competition requires a dominant entity to supersede alternate competition at
all costs (Stacey, 2011). In the
long-run organizational clones do no co-exist (Stacey, 2011). The introduction of chaos to organizational
strategy results in both emergence and destruction of agents (Stacey,
2011). Self-organization introduces new
agents that morph the competitive forces to survive that would yield positive
or negative implementation results (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization strategies create
exponential growth in spontaneous and emergent diverse agents (Stacey,
2011). In addition, the competition of
agents in the complex self-organizing model generates exploitation among agents
(Stacey, 2011). Evolution factors occur
from generated competition factors (Stacey, 2011). The genetic genes of agents have predetermined
physical attributes and do not contribute to the survival morphogenetic fields
of formative causality (Stacey, 2011).
Causality transforms agents to digest spontaneous evolution of forms
(Stacey, 2011). The difference in
causality adaptation to agents is in the organizational change that occurs at
micro levels, and agents are not homogeneous (Stacey, 2011). Combining causality with chaos theory to the
adaptive systems of agents results in developing new forms of adaptive systems
(Stacey, 2011). Evolutionary emergence
occurs at predestined genetic and social markers intrinsic to the complex
nature of agents (Stacey, 2011). A
twisting relation between organizational value and emergent agents exists,
however, organizations cannot rely on emergent agents in the long run (Stacey,
2011). Emergent agents create new
complex systems that are not self-regulating (Stacey, 2011). Langton concludes the agent interactions at
micro levels (Stacey, 2011). Cybernetic
systems perform well under closed loop cognitive environments (Stacey,
2011). Cybernetic systems have a linear
correlation and maintain a recursive rule system governing self-organization
predictability (Stacey, 2011).
Non-linear equations depict the actions of industrial supply chain
production (Stacey, 2011). Short-term
forecasting is possible with chaos theory; however, the requirement is for
longer periods (Stacey, 2011). Utilizing
the concerns of a learning organization and systems dynamic based theory,
organizations implement computer programming to relate the business model challenges
(Stacey, 2011). As complex organization
system modeling occurs within the computer environment, the human
characteristics of fractal agent conductivity are difficult to mimic (Stacey,
2011).
The necessity of exploitation of technologies develops low-cost
strategies (Stacey, 2011). Improvements
to technologies are possible by organizations to maximize low-cost strategies
(Stacey, 2011). New technologies have a weakness
of branding reducing the barriers of entry and offering a competitive advantage
to differentiation and low-cost strategy (Stacey, 2011). The instability and stability of change
industries creates enthusiasm and stressors to the vulnerability and ease of
sustainability to emergent organizations (Stacey, 2011). Industry models at the edge of chaos
represent sensitive dependence by the inability to observe threats and
opportunities due to complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Not all organizations are sustainable in the
edge of chaos industry model (Stacey, 2011).
Organizations that have an edge of chaos business model are not aware of
future sustainability, however, can choose social dynamics (Stacey, 2011). A characteristic of edge of chaos is change
dynamics brought by the exploitation of products (Stacey, 2011). Organizations with an edge of chaos industry
maintain an impersonal social culture dynamics driven by the constant certainty
and uncertainty of sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Patterns of human action emerge from
organizations as edge of chaos invites selfish behavior from agents (Stacey,
2011). Irrational behavior provides
emergence of prominent business ideas to organizational leaders (Stacey,
2011). Deviant behavior becomes
necessary for shareholder value due to uncertainty of organizational diligence
(Stacey, 2011).
Human interaction within complex organizations assists the evolution of
sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Moreover,
human interaction is challenging through diversity, therefore, making the
evolution of interaction necessary (Stacey, 2011). Self-interest and diversity signal a need to
measure the growth rate of human interaction through differential equations
(Stacey, 2011). Ignorance marked as
error by the differential equations depicted by growth rates show the threat to
sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Leaders
are most effective when exploiting curve to sustainability and are most
vulnerable when exploring sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Exploration to low-cost opportunities is
unpredictable, nevertheless, can lead to dimensions in strategy formation (Stacey,
2011). Exploitation of strategies
results in the evolution of dominating errors and gaining successful
performance, whereas, exploration results to uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, statistical modeling provides
metrics to control uncertainty (Stacey, 2011).
The statistical models provide probability of success transposed as
certainty (Stacey, 2011). Uncertainty,
even though erratic, realizes facts when statistical predictions have
correlation (Stacey, 2011). Exploration
does not mean leaders will generalize about outcomes without certainty of
actions (Stacey, 2011). The successful
leader will enact measures of alignment with key measures that result a
competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011).
The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an x-axis and y-axis has a
growth rate that almost reaches sustainability with noise equating to
uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and effort represent the axis and
sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as
maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of
creativity (Stacey, 2011).
Organizations that adopt
principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) learn the costs involved due to
Globalization. For example, an
organization that improves transportation systems by adapting to vehicle
transportation of goods has an added cost of pollution into the environment. The interdependence of transportation systems
has a side effect. The added cost of
waste not accounted by organizations from toxic air, polluted air, and
contaminated water passes to society
(Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions grow proportionally to globalization. The increase of consumption led by the rise
of population and productivity initiates an accumulation of waste (Senge et
al., 2010). Some industries progress the
problem with consumer electronics and automobiles by adding landfills around
the world (Senge et al., 2010).
Moreover, toxic waste develops health problems including cancer and
intoxication (Senge et al., 2010). The
amount of waste grows to unsustainable levels (Senge et al., 2010). Taking short cuts to production require an
overview of long-run added costs (Senge et al., 2010). The regenerative aspects of globalization
necessitate monitoring for comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a
return of investment (Senge et al., 2010).
Lean organizations must provide resources that have minimum travel time
and distance to be effective value creators (Senge et al., 2010). Healthy lean system strategies are realistic
about the capacity of an organization due to the limitation that exists from long-term
sustainability (Senge et al., 2010).
Moreover, people learn what is truly beneficial and organizations must
align with those values (Senge et al., 2010).
Principal agents must work together to foster, protect, and build the
fundamental infrastructure of a valued organization (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations that build up three fundamental
systems to support organizations for economic value i.e. seeing, collaborative,
and creation attain long-term competitive advantage (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, organizations must focus to the big picture
i.e. sustaining environmental and society measures that improve the quality of
life (Senge et al., 2010).
Industry Evolution Modeling Description and Analysis
The laws of nature present actions that predict and change when forces
alter (Stacey, 2011). Cause and effect
principles allow people to adjust nature (Stacey, 2011). Similarly, managers finesse business
structures to change results (Stacey, 2011).
The pieces of flaws in organizational culture and process derive the
interaction between them (Stacey, 2011).
System flaws analyze by observing linearity between missing links
(Stacey, 2011). Some links with prior
introduction of negative and positive feedback still do not show linearity, but
some other complex phenomenon (Stacey, 2011).
Theories of complex sciences focus on the macro levels flaws, which are
non-linear and deterministic (Stacey, 2011).
The theories claim no two actions correlate; therefore, predictions
cannot forecast (Stacey, 2011). Complex
adaptive systems refer to a strategy of interactions to depend of local inputs
instead of a master blue print (Stacey, 2011).
Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep
organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects
to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011).
In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are
unpredictable and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable;
therefore, managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to
self-adjust (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational challenges serve as linear and non-linear relationship
(Stacey, 2011). The adjustment of such
systems represents a strange attractor (Stacey, 2011). Organizational problems that are too
complicated to predict should be broken apart in shorter periods or smaller
slices to forecast (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational behavior and path are not proportional (Stacey,
2011). Moreover, organizational behavior
has a pattern and qualitative shape (Stacey, 2011). Pattern behavior thus has
shape and dynamic principles that forecast (Stacey, 2011). Chaotic behavior represents healthy form of
existence (Stacey, 2011). Organizational
behavior patterns require an external force to move in a direction cyclical and
maintain control of the dynamic system to hold a minimum radius (Stacey,
2011). Lastly, random behavior is
non-linear and linear relationship between stability and instability (Stacey,
2011).
Non-linear systems far from
equilibrium set small movements eventually to form its own structures (Stacey,
2011). Organizational behavior can exist
at equilibrium and can reside at rest (Stacey, 2011). When external and internal
forces away from equilibrium push behavior out the differences in equilibrium
require negative feedback to correct (Stacey, 2011). Observation of chaotic patterns is necessary
to control organizations (Stacey, 2011).
Destructive pattern in organizational behavior when at a tipping point
to form bonds to create new identities (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization occurs when chaotic patterns
excite behavior to form new unplanned patterns (Stacey, 2011). Strategic change occurs when organizational
behavior experiences forces to dissipate equilibrium and introduces
self-organization with neutral fluctuations (Stacey, 2011). Destabilization occurs to organizational
cultures when broken apart; however, introduction of leadership adheres by
motivating and manifesting structures (Stacey, 2011). When value systems are broken, encouragement
from external forces causes organizations dis-equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). Broken values cause other departments to
follow fractal tendencies to the point of unsustainability (Stacey, 2011). The nature of human behavior is to change the
directive path of equilibrium, and outside influences bifurcate norms of
existence (Stacey, 2011). Some organizational
system exists in the norms of stable instability where the patterns are
predictably unstable (Stacey, 2011).
Instability on itself represents unknown factors not understood but
influenced (Stacey, 2011). Unstable
systems far from equilibrium cannot forecast because the needed change is
distant from equilibrium (Stacey, 2011).
Accounting for misalignments is possible by creating systems-non linear
equations that arrive from a process of spontaneous self-organization (Stacey,
2011).
Complex adaptive systems have a common denominator that targets
population of agents to have a single common principle (Stacey, 2011). Complex system reacts to a new introduction
of a common denominator by changing the behavior of a respected stakeholder
(Stacey, 2011). The changed behavior
transpires as a new common denominator and complex pattern for all agents
(Stacey, 2011). Societies have proven
the interaction and manipulation of agents through complex systems (Stacey,
2011). Genetic algorithms take the
complexity of introducing new agents (Stacey, 2011). Organizations introduce the same principles
by introducing original change stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Fractal types of complex social systems have
a common denominator with the need to interact (Stacey, 2011). Complex systems have the inherent nature of
creating unplanned or anticipated evolutionary evolving outcomes (Stacey,
2011). Complex systems do not progress
out of planning and do not develop out of random events (Stacey, 2011). Organizations engaging in educating
stakeholders the landscapes that promote wealth will realize more growth than
organizations that do not communicate strategies to stakeholders (Stacey,
2011).
Organizations must evaluate the competition for flaws and measure the
impact of competition (Stacey, 2011).
The ideal position for an organization is to defeat competition to be
the only existence in the market and maintain the highest landscape possible
(Stacey, 2011). The best strategy for
organizations includes one that is difficult to measure, to anticipate, and
view as intuitive by the competition (Stacey, 2011). The fractal strategy does
not guarantee to defeat the strength of competitive forces and provide a high
landscape (Stacey, 2011). Small
adjustments to organizational strategy may result to a positive direction, but
only the strategic intent with a large adjustment sustains a competitive
advantage (Stacey, 2011). A healthy
organization has chaos in daily operations and is a prerequisite for
sustainability (Stacey, 2011).
Competition, internal conflicts, dynamic operation, and constraints are
the normal list of options for the internal dynamic healthy organizations
(Stacey, 2011). Chaos and conflicting
constraints are the attributes of a valued agent (Stacey, 2011). The characteristics of Boids include keeping a
minimum distance from each other, match organizational velocities within each
other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey, 2011). Boids are master agents masked to fit into
society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding intention,
direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011).
Boids are resourceful and excellent camouflage of chaos (Stacey,
2011). In addition, boids will adapt to
environmental constraints; however, do not follow a stable evolution (Stacey,
2011). Competition sets the stage for a
healthy organizational environment (Stacey, 2011). Without healthy organizational environments,
organizations would welter (Stacey, 2011).
Organizational strategy does not have to follow a set of structured
rules; in fact, flawed agents not following strict rules carry a successful
strategy (Stacey, 2011).
A survival tactic mimics the competition’s role mission, values, and
vision through benchmarking i.e. mimicking the fundamentals to the point where
the two organizations depict clone traits and the benchmark continue until a
new fundamental strategy implements (Stacey, 2011). Assimilating the organization has its
drawbacks (Stacey, 2011). Both
organizations must exist to survive; therefore, leaders cannot utterly
terminate the competition host existence (Stacey, 2011). Organization must accept the placement among
the hierarchy of order or destroy the competitive forces to retain dominance in
the market (Stacey, 2011). The nature of
competition requires a dominant entity to supersede alternate competition at
all costs (Stacey, 2011). In the
long-run organizational clones do no co-exist (Stacey, 2011). The introduction of chaos to organizational
strategy results in both emergence and destruction of agents (Stacey,
2011). Self-organization introduces new
agents that morph the competitive forces to survive that would yield positive
or negative implementation results (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization strategies create
exponential growth in spontaneous and emergent diverse agents (Stacey,
2011). In addition, the competition of
agents in the complex self-organizing model generates exploitation among agents
(Stacey, 2011). Evolution factors occur
from generated competition factors (Stacey, 2011). The genetic genes of agents have predetermined
physical attributes and do not contribute to the survival morphogenetic fields
of formative causality (Stacey, 2011).
Causality transforms agents to digest spontaneous evolution of forms
(Stacey, 2011). The difference in
causality adaptation to agents is in the organizational change that occurs at
micro levels, and agents are not homogeneous (Stacey, 2011). Combining causality with chaos theory to the
adaptive systems of agents results in developing new forms of adaptive systems
(Stacey, 2011). Evolutionary emergence
occurs at predestined genetic and social markers intrinsic to the complex
nature of agents (Stacey, 2011). A
twisting relation between organizational value and emergent agents exists,
however, organizations cannot rely on emergent agents in the long run (Stacey,
2011). Emergent agents create new
complex systems that are not self-regulating (Stacey, 2011). Langton concludes the agent interactions at
micro levels (Stacey, 2011). Cybernetic
systems perform well under closed loop cognitive environments (Stacey,
2011). Cybernetic systems have a linear
correlation and maintain a recursive rule system governing self-organization
predictability (Stacey, 2011).
Non-linear equations depict the actions of industrial supply chain
production (Stacey, 2011). Short-term
forecasting is possible with chaos theory; however, the requirement is for
longer periods (Stacey, 2011). Utilizing
the concerns of a learning organization and systems dynamic based theory,
organizations implement computer programming to relate the business model
challenges (Stacey, 2011). As complex
organization system modeling occurs within the computer environment, the human
characteristics of fractal agent conductivity are difficult to mimic (Stacey,
2011).
The necessity of exploitation of technologies develops low-cost
strategies (Stacey, 2011). Improvements
to technologies are possible by organizations to maximize low-cost strategies
(Stacey, 2011). New technologies have a
weakness of branding reducing the barriers of entry and offering a competitive
advantage to differentiation and low-cost strategy (Stacey, 2011). The instability and stability of change
industries creates enthusiasm and stressors to the vulnerability and ease of
sustainability to emergent organizations (Stacey, 2011). Industry models at the edge of chaos
represent sensitive dependence by the inability to observe threats and
opportunities due to complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Not all organizations are sustainable in the
edge of chaos industry model (Stacey, 2011).
Organizations that have an edge of chaos business model are not aware of
future sustainability, however, can choose social dynamics (Stacey, 2011). A characteristic of edge of chaos is change
dynamics brought by the exploitation of products (Stacey, 2011). Organizations with an edge of chaos industry
maintain an impersonal social culture dynamics driven by the constant certainty
and uncertainty of sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Patterns of human action emerge from
organizations as edge of chaos invites selfish behavior from agents (Stacey,
2011). Irrational behavior provides
emergence of prominent business ideas to organizational leaders (Stacey, 2011). Deviant behavior becomes necessary for shareholder
value due to uncertainty of organizational diligence (Stacey, 2011).
Human interaction within complex organizations assists the evolution of
sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Moreover,
human interaction is challenging through diversity, therefore, making the
evolution of interaction necessary (Stacey, 2011). Self-interest and diversity signal a need to
measure the growth rate of human interaction through differential equations
(Stacey, 2011). Ignorance marked as
error by the differential equations depicted by growth rates show the threat to
sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Leaders
are most effective when exploiting curve to sustainability and are most
vulnerable when exploring sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Exploration to low-cost opportunities is unpredictable,
nevertheless, can lead to dimensions in strategy formation (Stacey, 2011). Exploitation of strategies results in the
evolution of dominating errors and gaining successful performance, whereas,
exploration results to uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, statistical modeling provides
metrics to control uncertainty (Stacey, 2011).
The statistical models provide probability of success transposed as
certainty (Stacey, 2011). Uncertainty,
even though erratic, realizes facts when statistical predictions have
correlation (Stacey, 2011). Exploration
does not mean leaders will generalize about outcomes without certainty of
actions (Stacey, 2011). The successful
leader will enact measures of alignment with key measures that result a
competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011).
The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an x-axis and y-axis has a
growth rate that almost reaches sustainability with noise equating to
uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and effort represent the axis and
sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as
maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of
creativity (Stacey, 2011).
Implications of Analysis
The pieces of flaws in
organizational culture and process derive the interaction between them (Stacey,
2011). System flaws analyze by observing
linearity between missing links (Stacey, 2011).
Some links with prior introduction of negative and positive feedback
still do not show linearity, but some other complex phenomenon (Stacey,
2011). Connecting business and chaos
theory results in attempting to keep organizational environment at equilibrium
such that negative feedback injects to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney should provoke motivation to
sustainability by promoting the missing links.
In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are unpredictable
and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable;
therefore, JCPenney’s managers need to introduce negative feedback for the
organization to self-adjust (Stacey, 2011).
Non-linear systems far from equilibrium set small movements eventually
to form its unique structures (Stacey, 2011).
JCPenney’s organizational behavior can exist at equilibrium and can
reside at rest (Stacey, 2011). When
external and internal forces away from equilibrium push behavior out the
differences in equilibrium require negative feedback to correct (Stacey,
2011). Observation of chaotic patterns
is necessary to control JCPenney’s value chain (Stacey, 2011). Destructive pattern in JCPenney’s
organizational behavior unfolds when at a tipping point to form bonds to create
new identities (Stacey, 2011). Complex
systems have the inherent nature of creating unplanned or anticipated
evolutionary evolving outcomes (Stacey, 2011).
Complex systems do not progress out of planning and do not develop out
of random events (Stacey, 2011).
Moreover, JCPenney should provide education to stakeholders promoting
healthy landscapes that promote wealth (Stacey, 2011). The ideal position for JCPenney is to defeat
competition, be the only existence in the market, and maintain the highest
landscape possible (Stacey, 2011). The
best strategy for JCPenney includes one that is difficult to measure, to
anticipate, and view as intuitive by the competition (Stacey, 2011). Competition, internal conflicts, dynamic
operation, and constraints are the normal list of options for the internal
dynamic healthy organizations (Stacey, 2011).
Chaos and conflicting constraints are the attributes of a valued agent
(Stacey, 2011). The characteristics of
Boids include keeping a minimum distance from each other, match organizational
velocities within each other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey,
2011). JCPenney’s boids include changing
product scope to provide a service that is specific to the industry. Boids are master agents masked to fit into
society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding intention,
direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011).
Non-linear equations depict the actions of industrial supply chain
production (Stacey, 2011). Short-term
forecasting is possible with chaos theory; however, the requirement is for
longer periods (Stacey, 2011). Utilizing
the concerns of a learning organization and systems dynamic based theory,
organizations implement computer programming to relate the business model
challenges (Stacey, 2011). As complex
organization system modeling occurs within the computer environment, the human
characteristics of fractal agent conductivity are difficult to mimic (Stacey,
2011).
The necessity of
exploitation of technologies develops low-cost strategies (Stacey, 2011). New technologies have a weakness of branding
reducing the barriers of entry and offering a competitive advantage to
differentiation and low-cost strategy (Stacey, 2011). The instability and stability of change
industries creates enthusiasm and stressors to the vulnerability and ease of
sustainability to emergent organizations (Stacey, 2011). Industry models at the edge of chaos
represent sensitive dependence by the inability to observe threats and
opportunities due to complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Organizations that have an edge of chaos
business model are not aware of future sustainability, however, can choose
social dynamics (Stacey, 2011). A
characteristic of edge of chaos is change dynamics brought by the exploitation
of products (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney has
an edge of chaos industry model that maintains an impersonal social culture
dynamics driven by the constant certainty and uncertainty of sustainability
(Stacey, 2011). Patterns of human action
emerge from organizations as edge of chaos invites selfish behavior from agents
(Stacey, 2011). Irrational behavior
provides emergence of prominent business ideas to organizational leaders
(Stacey, 2011). Deviant behavior becomes
necessary for shareholder value due to uncertainty of organizational diligence
(Stacey, 2011).
Leaders are most
effective when exploiting curve to sustainability and are most vulnerable when
exploring sustainability (Stacey, 2011).
Exploration to low-cost opportunities is unpredictable, nevertheless,
can lead to dimensions in strategy formation (Stacey, 2011). Exploitation of strategies results in the
evolution of dominating errors and gaining successful performance, whereas,
exploration results to uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, statistical modeling provides
metrics to control uncertainty (Stacey, 2011).
The successful JCPenney leader will enact measures of alignment with key
measures that result a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an
x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that nearly reaches sustainability with
noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey,
2011). Time and effort represent the
axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as
maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of
creativity (Stacey, 2011).
Life Cycle Assessment
Strategic opportunities are available when organizations expand views
about waste and resources (Senge et
al., 2010). Waste introduces to
serve as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al., 2010). Natural nutrients from the environment are
biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et al., 2010). Some waste from natural resources reform to
other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge et al., 2010). The life cycle assessment (LCA) process
depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy (Senge et al.,
2010). Reducing waste by optimizing
resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of inputs to
equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010).
Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by regeneration
encounter a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable
environment (Senge et al., 2010).
JCPenney extracts furniture from overseas by providing natural
resourced products such as furniture to North American families and families
eventually depositing used furniture into landfills, however, JCPenney is not
intercepting the deposits from families (Senge et al., 2010). The LCA only works properly if inputs and
outputs affect the entire organization (Senge et al., 2010). The goals are for an organization to have
zero waste, which entails JCPenney to be a regenerative circular organization
(Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, becoming
environmentally friendly by requesting old goods from families and trade for
newer goods expands an organization’s mission scope (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs for the trade represent a
competitive advantage when the gains are greater than costs (Senge et al.,
2010). Furthermore, JCPenney encounters
heavy transportation costs to supply chain, and pollution is the side effect to
the environment from transportation (Senge et al., 2010). Utilizing local resources and renovating
local waste assists communities by helping the environment and injecting the
economy with more demand for labor (Senge et al., 2010). Recycling materials adds advantage to
organizations with assurance either from other organizations or by itself
(Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the LCA
process implements best as a team than a single person to ascertain aspects of
inputs and outputs (Senge et al., 2010).
The
economic model John Adams once envisioned is no longer sustainable in the modern
era. Society increased its potential by creating
tools to generate growth and a higher standard of living. Those same systems initiated failures in the
infrastructure to societies welfare and work life balance. An effort by society to align family and home
values is essential for long-term sustainability. The adaptive business model depicts an eco
friendly environment and the welfare of generations.
The industrial revolution changed society’s views of home, family, and
employment (Senge et al., 2010). England
suffered from the industrial revolution (Senge et al., 2010). The suffering was from toxic air, polluted
air, and contaminated water (Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
grew proportional to the industrial revolution.
The increase of consumption led by the increase of population and
productivity initiated an accumulation of waste (Senge et al., 2010). A progressing problem occurred with consumer
electronics and automobiles as both amassed landfills around the world (Senge
et al., 2010). Moreover, toxic waste
develops health problems including cancer and intoxication (Senge et al.,
2010). The amount of waste grew to
unsustainable levels (Senge et al., 2010).
Taking short cuts to production require an overview of long-run added
costs (Senge et al., 2010). The
regenerative aspects of some types of industrial systems in organizations
necessitate monitoring for comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a
return of investment (Senge et al., 2010).
The inherent problem with mismanaged waste is in the availability of
adequate resources (Senge et al., 2010).
The increasing amount of waste made communities exhaust topsoil,
fisheries, and forests (Senge et al., 2010).
The ecosystems cannot regenerate from the consistent abuse of waste and
neglect (Senge et al., 2010). The
imbalance of ecosystems is resulting from society effects such as increases of
anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Moving away from social problems is
constantly more difficult due to space and time having an inter connection
(Senge et al., 2010). Regenerative
industrial systems require supervision not to neglect its capability (Senge et
al., 2010).
Sustainability is more than environmental health. Sustainability is the overall addition of
interlocking environmental values including environmental, economic, and social
(King, 2008). The responsibility of sustainability masked
by the creation of governmental agencies shifts the impact of social problems
(Senge et al., 2010). Organizations with
a high amount of social conflict within the organization such as high turn over
will unlikely consider devotion to environmental problems (King, 2008). Standard of living and economic
sustainability is not sustainable (King, 2008; Senge et al., 2010). Equilibrium resulting to environmental health
is the give and take relationship between standard of living and economic
sustainability (King, 2008). Lastly,
sustainability is the mixture of healthy eco systems and a higher standard of
living (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations are suffering from the increase of anxiety, overwork,
stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations, which do not recognize the
link to environmental misalignment, respond by placing blame to agents (Senge
et al., 2010). The breakdown of social
communities ability to find adequate resources triggered a relocation process
into unsustainable urban communities (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations that overwhelm society with
unsustainable gains in standard of living should evaluate for neglect in
environmental flaws (Senge et al., 2010).
Society, in general, does not consider environmental impacts when
strategizing for productivity (Senge et al., 2010). Government does not recognize the need for a
work-balance that is sustainable. System
thinking is about evaluating system patterns and deriving effective plans that
yield a competitive advantage (Senge et al., 2010). Industrial systems near large community
systems are troublesome in the generation of waste and in managing waste (Senge
et al., 2010).
An analogy to the
industrial revolution describes the misalignment and potential misses to key
milestones organizations can take in developing strategic plans. Unsustainable growth and productivity
requires monitoring to align with environmental and society concerns. Organizations that grow exponentially may
regard the concerns for environmental impacts.
The best business model is an organization that is regenerative and eco
friendly. The long-run sustainability
for organizations involves interlocking environment, economics and social
values. As productivity in general
organization increases to achieve a higher standard of living, society fails with
increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger. Lastly, the perfect balance is between
healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living.
LCA Modeling Description and Analysis
Strategic opportunities are available when organizations expand views
about waste and resources (Senge et al., 2010).
Waste introduces to serve as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al.,
2010). Natural nutrients from the
environment are biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et
al., 2010). Some waste from natural resources
reform to other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge et al.,
2010). The life cycle assessment (LCA)
process depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy (Senge
et al., 2010). Reducing waste by
optimizing resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of
inputs to equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010).
Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by regeneration
encounter a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable
environment (Senge et al., 2010).
JCPenney extracts furniture from overseas by providing natural
resourced products such as furniture to North American families and families
eventually depositing used furniture into landfills, however, JCPenney is not
intercepting the deposits from families (Senge et al., 2010). The LCA only works properly if inputs and
outputs affect the entire organization (Senge et al., 2010). The goals are for an organization to have
zero waste, which entails JCPenney to be a regenerative circular organization
(Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, becoming
environmentally friendly by requesting old goods from families and trade for
newer goods expands an organization’s mission scope (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs for the trade represent a
competitive advantage when the gains are greater than costs (Senge et al.,
2010). Furthermore, JCPenney encounters
heavy transportation costs to supply chain, and pollution is the side effect to
the environment from transportation (Senge et al., 2010). Utilizing local resources and renovating local
waste assists communities by helping the environment and injecting the economy
with more demand for labor (Senge et al., 2010). Recycling materials adds advantage to
organizations with assurance either from other organizations or by itself
(Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the LCA
process implements best as a team than a single person to ascertain aspects of
inputs and outputs (Senge et al., 2010).
The economic model John Adams once envisioned is no longer sustainable
in the modern era. Society increased its
potential by creating tools to generate growth and a higher standard of
living. Those same systems initiated
failures in the infrastructure to societies welfare and work life balance. An effort by society to align family and home
values is essential for long-term sustainability. The adaptive business model depicts an eco
friendly environment and the welfare of generations.
The industrial revolution changed society’s views of home, family, and
employment (Senge et al., 2010). England
suffered from the industrial revolution (Senge et al., 2010). The suffering was from toxic air, polluted
air, and contaminated water (Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
grew proportional to the industrial revolution.
The increase of consumption led by the increase of population and
productivity initiated an accumulation of waste (Senge et al., 2010). A progressing problem occurred with consumer
electronics and automobiles as both amassed landfills around the world (Senge
et al., 2010). Moreover, toxic waste
develops health problems including cancer and intoxication (Senge et al.,
2010). The amount of waste grew to
unsustainable levels (Senge et al., 2010).
Taking short cuts to production require an overview of long-run added
costs (Senge et al., 2010). The
regenerative aspects of some types of industrial systems in organizations
necessitate monitoring for comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a
return of investment (Senge et al., 2010).
The inherent problem with
mismanaged waste is in the availability of adequate resources (Senge et al.,
2010). The increasing amount of waste
made communities exhaust topsoil, fisheries, and forests (Senge et al., 2010). The ecosystems cannot regenerate from the
consistent abuse of waste and neglect (Senge et al., 2010). The imbalance of ecosystems is resulting from
society effects such as increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear
and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Moving
away from social problems is constantly more difficult due to space and time
having an inter connection (Senge et al., 2010). Regenerative industrial systems require
supervision not to neglect its capability (Senge et al., 2010).
Sustainability is more than environmental health. Sustainability is the overall addition of
interlocking environmental values including environmental, economic, and social
(King, 2008). The responsibility of
sustainability masked by the creation of governmental agencies shifts the
impact of social problems (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations with a high amount of social conflict within the
organization such as high turn over will unlikely consider devotion to
environmental problems (King, 2008).
Standard of living and economic sustainability is not sustainable (King,
2008; Senge et al., 2010). Equilibrium
resulting to environmental health is the give and take relationship between
standard of living and economic sustainability (King, 2008). Lastly, sustainability is the mixture of
healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations are
suffering from the increase of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and
anger (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations, which do not recognize the link to environmental misalignment,
respond by placing blame to agents (Senge et al., 2010). The breakdown of social communities ability
to find adequate resources triggered a relocation process into unsustainable
urban communities (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations that overwhelm society with unsustainable gains in
standard of living should evaluate for neglect in environmental flaws (Senge et
al., 2010). Society, in general, does
not consider environmental impacts when strategizing for productivity (Senge et
al., 2010). Government does not
recognize the need for a work-balance that is sustainable. System thinking is about evaluating system
patterns and deriving effective plans that yield a competitive advantage (Senge
et al., 2010). Industrial systems near
large community systems are troublesome in the generation of waste and in
managing waste (Senge et al., 2010).
An analogy to the industrial revolution describes the misalignment and
potential misses to key milestones organizations can take in developing
strategic plans. Unsustainable growth
and productivity requires monitoring to align with environmental and society
concerns. Organizations that grow
exponentially may regard the concerns for environmental impacts. The best business model is an organization
that is regenerative and eco friendly.
The long-run sustainability for organizations involves interlocking
environment, economics and social values.
As productivity in general organization increases to achieve a higher
standard of living, society fails with increases of anxiety, overwork, stress,
mistrust, fear and anger. Lastly, the
perfect balance is between healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living.
A new CEO for JCPenney will sustain environmental friendliness by
aligning value chains to add value. At this
time, JCPenney’s supply chain is not profitable due to the complexities of
travel and transportation. By providing
communities with goods and services that are locally available assist the
environment by maximizing environment value and, in addition, opening up
possibilities to recycle waste from the communities to resemble a regenerative
model. Lastly, Figure 1 below represents
the current LCA model JCPenney holds.
Figure 1. The diagram depicts the full cycle
of a natural resource (wood) transformed into a commodity and regenerated into
again into a natural resource.
Implications of Analysis
JCPenney extracts
furniture from overseas by providing natural resourced products such as
furniture to North American families and families eventually depositing used
furniture into landfills, however, JCPenney is not intercepting the deposits
from families. The LCA only works
properly if inputs and outputs affect the entire JCPenney’s supply chain. The goals are for an organization to have
zero waste, which entails JCPenney to be a regenerative circular
organization. Moreover, becoming
environmentally friendly by requesting old goods from families and trade for
newer goods expands an organization’s mission scope. The added costs for the trade represent a
competitive advantage when the gains are greater than costs. Furthermore, JCPenney encounters heavy
transportation costs to supply chain, and pollution is the side effect to the
environment from transportation. Utilizing
local resources and renovating local waste assists communities by helping the
environment and injecting the economy with more demand for labor. Recycling materials adds advantage to
organizations with assurance either from other organizations or by itself. Lastly, the LCA process implements best as a
team than a single person to ascertain aspects of inputs and outputs.
The industrial revolution
changed society’s views of home, family, and employment (Senge et al.,
2010). England suffered from the
industrial revolution (Senge et al., 2010).
The suffering was from toxic air, polluted air, and contaminated water
(Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions grew proportional to the industrial revolution. The increase of consumption led by the
increase of population and productivity initiated an accumulation of waste
(Senge et al., 2010). A progressing
problem occurred with consumer electronics and automobiles as both amassed
landfills around the world (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, toxic waste develops health
problems including cancer and intoxication (Senge et al., 2010). The amount of waste grew to unsustainable
levels (Senge et al., 2010). Taking
short cuts to production require an overview of long-run added costs (Senge et
al., 2010). The regenerative aspects of
some types of industrial systems in organizations necessitate monitoring for
comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a return of investment (Senge
et al., 2010).
The inherent problem with mismanaged waste is in the availability of
adequate resources (Senge et al., 2010).
The increasing amount of waste made communities exhaust topsoil,
fisheries, and forests (Senge et al., 2010).
The ecosystems cannot regenerate from the consistent abuse of waste and
neglect (Senge et al., 2010). The
imbalance of ecosystems is resulting from community effects such as increases
of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al.,
2010). Moving away from social problems
is constantly more difficult due to space and time having an inter connection
(Senge et al., 2010). Regenerative
industrial systems require supervision not to neglect its capability (Senge et
al., 2010).
Sustainability is more
than environmental health.
Sustainability is the overall addition of interlocking environmental
values including environmental, economic, and social (King, 2008). The responsibility of sustainability masked
by the creation of governmental agencies shifts the impact of social problems
(Senge et al., 2010). Organizations with
a high amount of social conflict within the organization such as high turn over
will unlikely consider devotion to environmental problems (King, 2008). Standard of living and economic
sustainability is not sustainable (King, 2008; Senge et al., 2010). Equilibrium resulting to environmental health
is the give and take relationship between standard of living and economic
sustainability (King, 2008). Lastly,
sustainability is the mixture of healthy eco systems and a higher standard of
living (Senge et al., 2010).
JCPenney needs to
eliminate the increase of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger
(Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, JCPenney
does not recognize the link to environmental misalignment, respond by placing blame
to agents (Senge et al., 2010). The
breakdown of social communities ability to find adequate resources triggered a
relocation process into unsustainable urban communities (Senge et al.,
2010). JCPenney is overwhelming society
with unsustainable gains in standard of living that neglect environmental
concerns (Senge et al., 2010). Society,
in general, does not consider environmental impacts when strategizing for
productivity (Senge et al., 2010).
Government does not recognize the need for a work-balance that is
sustainable. System thinking is about
evaluating system patterns and deriving effective plans that yield a
competitive advantage (Senge et al., 2010).
Industrial systems near large community systems are troublesome in the
generation of waste and in managing waste (Senge et al., 2010).
An analogy to the
industrial revolution describes the misalignment and potential misses to key
milestones organizations can take in developing strategic plans. Unsustainable growth and productivity
requires monitoring to align with environmental and society concerns. JCPenney’s failure involves not aligning
organizational strategy with environmental concerns. The best business model is an organization that
is regenerative and eco friendly. The
long-run sustainability for organizations involves interlocking environment,
economics and social values. As
productivity in general organization increases to achieve a higher standard of
living, society fails with increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust,
fear and anger. Lastly, the perfect
balance is between healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living.
Terminated CEO Ronald B. Johnson took
over the JCPenney Corporation in the year of our lord 2011 with pre-existing
negative sales returns (Clifford, 2013). Mr. Johnson refused to relocate to Plano,
Texas for the new position and refused to communicate with executives within
the value chain (Clifford, 2013). In
addition, Mr. Johnson initiated new strategic sales plans without considering
the feedback from the value chain and the values of the customer base
(Clifford, 2013). Attempting to run the
organization based on mimicking the competition, past feelings, and without
consideration to environmental concerns, Mr. Johnson terminated out of the
organization by the recruiter that brought him into the organization (Clifford,
2013).
Mr. Johnson credentials
include an M.B.A. degree from Harvard University (Clifford, 2013). In essence, Mr. Johnson is aware the
importance in offering value to internal and external stakeholders. Furthermore, the M.B.A. from Harvard showed
Mr. Johnson the essentials for concerns in sustaining environmental value. In addition, Mr. Johnson is mindful to the
need for ethical standards in the value chain operations. The sale ideas incorporated by Mr. Johnson
failed at regional levels. Moreover, Mr.
Johnson is not ready to lead the organization.
Consequently, Mr. Johnson does show interest to bringing JCPenney to
environmentally sustainability.
A new CEO for JCPenney will sustain environmental friendliness by
aligning value chains to add value. At
this time, JCPenney’s supply chain is not profitable due to the complexities of
travel and transportation. By delivering
communities goods and services that are locally available assist the environment
by maximizing value and, thus, opening up possibilities to recycle waste from
the communities to resemble a regenerative model.
Compliance to Innovation Analysis
Organizations must follow the provided mission, values, and vision
(Senge et al., 2010). When organizations
do not commit to the mission statement that represents beliefs, environmental
views, and long-term vision stakeholders will not value the organizations
products and services (Senge et al., 2010).
In addition, when some of the organizational strategies do not fully
implement organizations remain in the planning phases of strategic plans (Senge
et al., 2010). The failure is due to
leaders failing to measure strategic plan costs, time for implementation, and
plan scope (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations first attempt to identify value in a strategic plan until
the reactive phase for non-compliance results in unforeseen added costs (Senge
et al., 2010). At what time
organizations attempt to infuse proactive measurements to compliance
measurements, the organization realizes stable growth and commitment from
stakeholders (Senge et al., 2010). The
integrated strategy when sustainability is obvious from measuring metrics and
applying at all levels of organizational leadership (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs and gains clearly engage this
level (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover,
leaders can sustain the purpose mission stage by staying positive and proactive
about feedback (Senge et al., 2010).
Additional companies can join the final stage by showing the
organization is profitable, meets compliances, and embarks into environmental
friendliness (Senge et al., 2010).
Lastly, a thriving organization can reach the last stage by staying
preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image,
influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al.,
2010).
Environmental responsibility is essential for organizations to sustain
value in diverse and eco conscious modern world (Rusinko, 2005). The purposes for environmental responsibility
include conservation stewardship, supervisory requirements, enhanced municipal
images, and the potential to expand the patron base (Rusinko, 2005). Stakeholder alignment to environmental
responsibility is the key to success (Rusinko, 2005). The amount of environmental concerns for
stakeholders is the indicator in organizational alignment (Rusinko, 2005). Environmental management systems (EMS), life
cycle analysis (LCA), and (ISO) standards assist in implementing
environmentally sustainable practices (Rusinko, 2005). In contrast, the three analyses do not
provide alignment with environmental responsibility (Rusinko, 2005). Organizational leadership manages the
sustainability of environmental responsibility through quality management
(Rusinko, 2005).
Alignment to environmental responsibility is not just among
employees. The responsibility goes
further among the value chain to affect everyone within vertical and horizontal
support. The amount of alignment is
dependent how far off the center of mass is the organization processing
activities. Leaders have to break any
pre-existing boundaries to dominate the competition. Meeting the needs of stakeholders is only
possible by realizing the change in environmental responsibility and accepting
diversity. The integration of
environmental than is apparent through measurements of metrics. Quality management (QM) assists in the
integration processes by observing the alignment of common principles with the
complex strategy of the leader. The
actual alignments made to QM, and environmental have the basis of the function
of individual organizational needs, resources, and environments (Rusinko,
2005).
Crisis management assists organizations by acknowledging unforeseen
events that can change barriers of entry to the organization. The focus is in social, political, cultural
and moral factors that can change sustainability. Moreover, the events include resource
depletion, environmental degradation, economic decline, competitive threats,
labor strife, financial crunch, technological risks, and health hazards
(Shrivastava, 1993). The competitive
advantage by crisis management is in the response, time of response, change of
processes, and alignment to based processes.
Organizational Sustainability
guides change through the observation of organizational process. Misalignments found by agents specify
organizational leaders to find the missing links through organizational tools
such as QM and crisis management to sustain change. Quality management bridges the gap between
environmental and economics sustainability.
Moreover, crisis management conducts pre-emptive narrations of systems
that could enter into a mess. The amount
of change furnished by key metrics delegate the amount of distance from the
center of mass organizational leaders must dissect. The organizational tools award agents by
addressing change before chaos.
The economic model John Adams once envisioned is no longer sustainable
in the modern era. Society increased its
potential by creating tools to generate growth and a higher standard of
living. Those same systems initiated
failures in the infrastructure to societies welfare and work life balance. An effort by society to align family and home
values is essential for long-term sustainability. The adaptive business model depicts an eco
friendly environment and the welfare of generations.
The inherent problem with mismanaged waste is in the availability of
adequate resources (Senge et al., 2010).
The increasing amount of waste made communities exhaust topsoil,
fisheries, and forests (Senge et al., 2010).
The ecosystems cannot regenerate from the consistent abuse of waste and
neglect (Senge et al., 2010). The
imbalance of ecosystems is resulting from society effects such as increases of
anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Moving away from social problems is
constantly more difficult due to space and time having an inter connection (Senge
et al., 2010). Regenerative industrial
systems require supervision not to neglect its capability (Senge et al.,
2010).
Sustainability is more than environmental health. Sustainability is the overall addition of
interlocking environmental values including environmental, economic, and social
(King, 2008). The responsibility of
sustainability masked by the creation of governmental agencies shifts the
impact of social problems (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations with a high amount of social conflict within the
organization such as high turn over will unlikely consider devotion to
environmental problems (King, 2008).
Standard of living and economic sustainability is not sustainable (King,
2008; Senge et al., 2010). Equilibrium
resulting to environmental health is the give and take relationship between
standard of living and economic sustainability (King, 2008). Lastly, sustainability is the mixture of
healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living (Senge et al., 2010).
The industrial revolution
changed society’s views of home, family, and employment (Senge et al.,
2010). England suffered from the
industrial revolution (Senge et al., 2010).
The suffering was from toxic air, polluted air, and contaminated water
(Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions grew proportional to the industrial revolution. The increase of consumption led by the
increase of population and productivity initiated an accumulation of waste
(Senge et al., 2010). A progressing
problem occurred with consumer electronics and automobiles as both amassed
landfills around the world (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, toxic waste develops health
problems including cancer and intoxication (Senge et al., 2010). The amount of waste grew to unsustainable
levels (Senge et al., 2010). Taking
short cuts to production require an overview of long-run added costs (Senge et
al., 2010). The regenerative aspects of
some types of industrial systems in organizations necessitate monitoring for
comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a return of investment (Senge
et al., 2010).
Compliance to Innovation Description and Analysis
Organizations must follow the postulated mission, values, and vision
(Senge et al., 2010). When organizations
do not commit to the mission statement that represents beliefs, environmental
views, and long-term vision stakeholders will not value the organizations
products and services (Senge et al., 2010).
In addition, when some of the organizational strategies do not fully
implement organizations remain in the planning phases of strategic plans (Senge
et al., 2010). The failure is due to
leaders failing to measure strategic plan costs, time for implementation, and
plan scope (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations first attempt to identify value in a strategic plan until
the touchy phase for non-compliance results in unforeseen added costs (Senge et
al., 2010). When organizations attempt
to infuse proactive measurements to compliance measurements, the organization
realizes stable growth and commitment from stakeholders (Senge et al., 2010). The integrated strategy when sustainability
is obvious from measuring metrics and applying at all levels of organizational
leadership (Senge et al., 2010). The
added costs and gains clearly engage this level (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, leaders can sustain the purpose
mission stage by staying positive and proactive about feedback (Senge et al.,
2010). Additional companies can join the
ultimate stage by showing the organization is profitable, meets compliances,
and embarks into environmental friendliness (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, a thriving organization can reach the
last stage by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors,
improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events
(Senge et al., 2010).
Strategic opportunities are available when organizations expand views about
waste and resources (Senge et al., 2010).
Waste introduces to serve as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al.,
2010). Natural nutrients from the
environment are biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et
al., 2010). Some left-over from natural
resources reform to other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge
et al., 2010). The life cycle assessment
(LCA) process depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy
(Senge et al., 2010). Reducing waste by optimizing
resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of inputs to
equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010).
Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by renaissance
confront a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable
environment (Senge et al., 2010).
JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak areas. The approximate four million in surplus
capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the
environmental drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources
enabling JCPenney to focus on reactive and proactive strategic agents Senge et
al., 2010). The first improvement
is into revamping the external forces of the motivation infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand
that serves as consistent extent to improvements. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a
failed organizational strategy. The
change is in foot traffic from customers, value creation, diversity workforce,
and dissatisfaction with existing synergies.
In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily
relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by
restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified
in correcting the problems. Consideration
to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary
activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve
JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity
for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary
activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing
and Sales strategy are no longer valid.
Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and
JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most
consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices.
JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable
solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social
identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom,
2011). The variations in economic and
non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is
in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating
Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer,
1999). The process of keeping eyes open
and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the
trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for
business. The reality is in observing
what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations,
leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the
organization. Lastly, JCPenney can reach
the last stage of strategic implementation by staying preemptively to
environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing
stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).
Implications of Analysis
JCPenney must follow the
postulated mission, values, and vision (Senge et al., 2010). By JCPenney committing to the mission
statement that represents beliefs, environmental views, and long-term vision
stakeholders will not value the organizations products and services (Senge et
al., 2010). In addition, when JCPenney
strategies do not fully implement the planning phases of the strategic plan
will remain (Senge et al., 2010). The
failure is due to leaders failing to measure strategic plan costs, time for implementation,
and plan scope (Senge et al., 2010).
Organizations first attempt to identify value in a strategic plan until
the touchy phase for non-compliance results in unforeseen added costs (Senge et
al., 2010). When organizations attempt
to infuse proactive measurements to compliance measurements, the organization
realizes stable growth and commitment from stakeholders (Senge et al.,
2010). The integrated strategy when
sustainability is obvious from measuring metrics and applying at all levels of
organizational leadership (Senge et al., 2010).
The added costs and gains clearly engage this level (Senge et al.,
2010). Moreover, the new CEO can sustain
the purpose mission stage by staying positive and proactive about feedback
(Senge et al., 2010). Additional
companies can join the ultimate stage by showing the organization is
profitable, meets compliances, and embarks into environmental friendliness
(Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, JCPenney
can thrive by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors,
improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events
(Senge et al., 2010).
Strategic opportunities
are available when organizations expand views about waste and resources (Senge
et al., 2010). Waste introduces to serve
as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al., 2010). Natural nutrients from the environment are
biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et al., 2010). Some left-over from natural resources reform
to other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge et al.,
2010). The life cycle assessment (LCA)
process depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy (Senge
et al., 2010). Reducing waste by
optimizing resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of
inputs to equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010).
Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by renaissance
confront a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable
environment (Senge et al., 2010).
JCPenney has reserved
capital to strengthen weak areas. The
approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress
("Balance sheet," 2013).
Moreover, JCPenney can identify the environmental drivers to eliminate
waste by exploiting available resources enabling JCPenney to focus on reactive
and proactive strategic agents Senge et al., 2010). The first improvement is into revamping
the external forces of the motivation infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand
that serves as consistent extent to improvements. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a
failed organizational strategy. The
change is in foot traffic from customers, value creation, diversity workforce,
and dissatisfaction with existing synergies.
In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily
relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by
restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified
in correcting the problems. Consideration
to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary
activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve
JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity
for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary
activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing
and Sales strategy are no longer valid.
Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and
JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most
consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices.
JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable
solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social
identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom,
2011). The variations in economic and
non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane
& Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is
in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating
Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer,
1999). The process of keeping eyes open
and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the
trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for
business. The reality is in observing
what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations,
leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the
organization. Lastly, JCPenney can reach
the last stage of strategic implementation by staying preemptively to
environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing
stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).
Sustainable Value Framework Analysis
Leaders wanting to
survive technological and sociological advances are drifting from social
acceptance (Senge et al., 2010).
Moreover, leaders experience a growing gap between social concerns and
profit maximization (Senge et al., 2010).
The elements of shareholder value describe a method for accounting and
deriving lost value in an organization (Senge et al., 2010). Broken apart by the x-axis and y-axis, the
elements of shareholder value represent innovation for the first quadrant,
growth for the second quadrant, risk reduction for the third quadrant, and
reputation for the fourth quadrant (Senge et al., 2010). The vertical axis represents time, and the
x-axis represents the comparison between external and internal threats (Senge
et al., 2010). Lastly, shareholder
represents the balance between all quadrants (Senge et al., 2010).
Moreover, organizational
value creation builds around two dimensions i.e. time and space (Senge et al.,
2010). An organizations strategic
decision logically balances all four quadrants of the elements of shareholder
value (Senge et al., 2010). The
innovation quadrant includes drivers of disruption, clean tech, and footprint
(Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, the
growth quadrant represents climate change, resource depletion, and poverty
(Senge et al., 2010). Furthermore, the
reputation quadrant consists of civil society, transportation, and connectivity
(Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the risk
reduction quadrant entails factors of pollution, material consumption, and
waste (Senge et al., 2010). All the
quadrant explanations involve drivers and payoffs (Senge et al., 2010). The payoffs for quadrant one are innovation
and repositioning (Senge et al., 2010).
Similarly, quadrant two has payoffs of sustainable growth and trajectory
(Senge et al., 2010). Quadrant three
represents payoffs of reputation and legitimacy (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the fourth quadrant involves cost and
risk reduction (Senge et al., 2010).
Industrialization has
strong points and introduces problems in waste creation (Senge et al.,
2010). In addition, civil society
stakeholders experience a downfall of ethical concerns (Senge et al.,
2010). Technology introduces redundant actions
led by groups of labor rendered as obsolete (Senge et al., 2010). The game change is causing stressors to
organizations (Senge et al., 2010).
Social problems include offering a sustainable driver including food,
shelter, sanitation, and medical assistance (Senge et al., 2010). DuPont is a good example of a company with
concerns in maximizing the value of profit and social stability (Senge et al.,
2010). The formula environmental
stability is social concern driver to equal cost plus risk plus economic foot
print reduction (Senge et al., 2010).
Risk reduction includes finding ways in reducing risks and costs (Senge
et al., 2010). Consequently, DuPont
reduced risks and costs by improving reduction in waste and emissions (Senge et
al., 2010). Partnerships with
non-government entities can yield improvements in reputation and legitimacy
(Senge et al., 2010). Planning can
expand innovation and repositioning (Senge et al., 2010). A company’s research and development strategy
can advance innovation and repositioning (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, innovation and repositioning strategies
can only work if all stakeholders anticipate value creation (Senge et al.,
2010). Growth and path trajectory are
the quadrant where companies need to consider who can improve the quality of
people’s lives (Senge et al., 2010).
Value creation and sustainability are essential to embrace sustainable
growth (Senge et al., 2010). Similarly,
sustainable growth strategy needs an introduction at a company’s mission
statement for mission values to align with value creation (Senge et al.,
2010). Lastly, sustainable growth equals
shareholder value plus society’s value (Senge et al., 2010).
Detailed Analysis of All Four Quadrants
JCPenney’s analysis of
shareholder value includes risk reduction to minimize waste, and emissions from
operations (Senge et al., 2010). The
industry has a number of internal threats to the safekeeping of products within
the department stores. Theft is common
in an organization with numerous produces roaming through each department
store. Product displays originate from
the same products offered to the public; therefore, control of the items is a
challenge. In addition, the items incur
damages by misuse. The supply chain
incurs theft and misalignment from the distances materials travel. The occurrence is a waste of resources.
Furthermore, the
reputation of JCPenney is now of an organization that offers products to a
demographic not popular among the majority of stakeholders. The accepted model by most stakeholders is of
an organization that offers discounts and built its reputation surrounding the
market value organizational frame. The
misalignment lacks connectivity to communities and does not incorporate a match
to the organizations’ mission statement.
Technology exploitation
is necessary to sustain a low-cost strategy.
At this time, JCPenney hires personnel to task redundant activities that
can be reassign to automation processes.
The payoff is an innovative organizational model that environmentally
proficient and efficiently productive.
To maximize shareholder value, JCPenney needs to reinvent its processes
and reposition itself as a dominant retail organization.
The challenge for JCPenney in globalization is economies of scale. Currently, the business model focuses on
product creation and assembly in regions of the world where labor costs are
minimum. Product transfers occur via the
supply chain by transportation methods to include oceanic, air travel, and
motor highway. The product destination
is the United States. The disabling
opportunity is that products made overseas have a high price for the local
communities in the overseas countries.
In addition, the waste from product creation made to communities of the
isolated countries represents resource depletion. In essence, the current business model is not
environmentally friendly and lacks overall long-term sustainability. The lack of alignment with environmental
concerns is the culprit to sustainability.
The current risk
reduction strategy to minimize waste and reduction is not providing effect
returns of shareholder value. The
strategy is sustaining current leaderships misuse of resources by incorporating
false value of capital assets. The
payoff is in the short run, however, is not sustainable in the long-run. The correct process is to implement internal
controls that represent relevancy to capital assets.
JCPenney’s out view of
potential customers does not match the return on investment. The current strategy does not result to
benefit in the short-run or the long-run.
The ideal corrective strategic intent is to perform an analysis on the
threat of competition and realize the available demographical market. The payoff is economic sustainability. The strategy requires a continuous scanning
of the environment for economic and cultural changes.
The current technology
utilized by JCPenney is old. Current
employees learned the technical weaknesses to exploit the results. Consequently, management does not have
accurate information of date transformation from sale activities and supply
chain processes. The payoff is not to
shareholders, but to employees undermining the organization. The change needed is in adapting to higher
levels of technological advancements that will sustain JCPenney to new economic
levels. The change will forego redundant
processes, enable internal controls, and provide accurate feedback from
organizational processes.
In the oceans, when human activity is close to the seas to migrate in a
specific geographic area, humans tend to pollute the sea life’s natural
resources. The ocean is healthier when
human interaction is at a minimum and sea life finds nourishment that arrive
from the ocean currents. The undisturbed
currents carry all the vitamins and minerals to sustain sea life at different
depths. Only when humans plunder current
oceans suffer.
Natural resources are
best when undisturbed by the accumulation of human traffic. Moreover, natural resources when unmolested
offer more nutrition to sustain life.
The answer is in providing and finding interest in education for every
person in the planet to know how to tap into the natural resources that will
assist in sustaining long-term life.
Efficiency serves best when natural resources transport at minimum
distances or no transportation at all.
Consequently, natural resources are more economical within local
communities.
The optimum strategy for
growth is in providing material world wide and observing environmental
challenges. The current model exploits
overseas workers, does not offer employment to local communities in the United
States, and does not offer value to customers overseas. The model is not sustainable due to waste in
transportation, exploitation of resources, and lack of vision of the
environment. The table below depicts
cost and opportunities from the sustainable Value Framework.
Sustainable Value Framework of Activities in Table
Form
Table 3
Sustainable Value Framework
|
Changes for Tomorrow
|
Practiced Today
|
External
|
Strategy: Improved pricing model and product differentiation
Payoff: economic sustainability
|
Strategy: Return On Investment
Payoff: None so far
|
Internal
|
Strategy: Improved internal controls and technology
Payoff: shareholder value, capital retention
|
Strategy: Return On Investment
Payoff: None so far
|
Note.
The table represents an
analysis of the sustainable value framework to JCPenney.
Argument in Support of Conclusions
JCPenney has a value
chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot
traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now
heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by
restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified
in correcting the problems.
Recently JCPenney terminated 2,200 employees affecting approximately
100 stores and the potential of 1,100 stores for future, cut backs in the
future (Murray, 2013). Moreover,
JCPenney’s public balance sheet dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns
of equity while maintaining similar levels of the debt ("Balance
sheet," 2013). The amount of
profits in the last three years shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income
statement," 2013). The last three
years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash
flow," 2013). The organizational
strategy is causing organizational market value to decrease. In addition, when the economy improves
organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy
affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the
issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is
missing.
JCPenney has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain
tacit knowledge, and fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry
placement (Martins & Meyer, 2012).
Furthermore, JCPenney can improve external and internal views of
diversity by electing leaders that are diversity friendly (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney can become competent by realizing an
organization that incorporates external a friendly physical environment
including behaviors and settings labor forces require for a “Workplace Fun” environment (Pryor et al., 2010). The factors that increase workplace fun for
JCPenney comprise of higher moral: (a) lower turnover; (b) increase creativity
and innovation; (c) better performance; and (d) higher commitment (Pryor et
al., 2010).
JCPenney has alignment to
customer’s shopping experience and customer service within the
organization. JCPenney has a weakness in
having enough personnel in the stores; however, the untrained personnel attempt
to engage with customers with a welcome message. The online auction experience does not offer
the connection between customer and client representing in less human
interaction with the public. The
misalignment challenges are causing JCPenney in moving to a direction for
solvency ("Balance sheet," 2013).
In addition, JCPenney should connect the mission statement to the daily
activities for providing distinction and customer definition (Anitsal et al.,
2012).
JCPenney has in place a
product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known
criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment
with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal
compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s
history and company culture …”
(Lee et al., 2009, p. 146). The
corporate social responsibility is not evident in the activities JCPenney
makes. Moreover, JCPenney’s mission
statement offers information on being a servant “JCPenney is committed to
serving our communities, our Associates, our Customers and the environment.
What matters to you matters to JCPenney." (Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from the two statements
depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed to a lawful alignment
with communities; however, the concern for communities is ethics. The ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing
a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).
JCPenney
failed to recognize the changing dynamics of society’s culture and growing base
of younger stakeholders. In addition,
the CEO placed more emphasis on vision to the dominant discourse than alignment
with stakeholder needs. The strategic
plan of offering new products through Martha Stewart represented the
misalignment in understanding the needs of a younger generation of
stakeholders. Moreover, JCPenney missed
the opportunity in relating social constructionism to stakeholders. In essence, JCPenney realized the approach of
supplying products and services to an older stakeholder group that represented
a small portion of social groups.
JCPenney is in a negative
discourse aiming at devaluing stakeholders.
Social interaction dynamics is essential for sustainability, and
JCPenney has not shown interest in identifying new emerging stakeholder
base. The retail industry has a
difficult task of identifying stakeholders.
Much of the misalignment is within how the internal stakeholders and
external stakeholders communicate.
Majority of JCPenney employees do not attempt to develop a personal
relationship with customers, therefore, JCPenney will find it difficult to
learn customer’s expectations. The
center of mass of customers perceptions maintains a distance from the
misconceptions of JCPenney. In summary,
new, emergent stakeholders emerge in external societies with boundaries not
reachable by JCPenney.
Implications of Analysis
The current risk
reduction strategy to minimize waste and reduction is not providing effect
returns of shareholder value. The
strategy is sustaining current leaderships misuse of resources by incorporating
false value of capital assets. The
payoff is in the short run, however, is not sustainable in the long-run. The correct process is to implement internal
controls that represent relevancy to capital assets.
JCPenney’s out view of
potential customers does not match the return on investment. The current strategy does not result to
benefit in the short-run or the long-run.
The ideal corrective strategic intent is to perform an analysis on the
threat of competition and realize the available demographical market. The payoff is economic sustainability. The strategy requires a continuous scanning
of the environment for economic and cultural changes.
The current technology
utilized by JCPenney is old. Current
employees learned the technical weaknesses to exploit the results. Consequently, management does not have
accurate information of date transformation from sale activities and supply
chain processes. The payoff is not to
shareholders, but to employees undermining the organization. The change needed is in adapting to higher
levels of technological advancements that will sustain JCPenney to new economic
levels. The change will forego redundant
processes, enable internal controls, and provide accurate feedback from
organizational processes.
In the oceans, when human activity is close to the seas to migrate in a
specific geographic area, humans tend to pollute the sea life’s natural
resources. The ocean is healthier when
human interaction is at a minimum and sea life finds nourishment that arrive
from the ocean currents. The undisturbed
currents carry all the vitamins and minerals to sustain sea life at different
depths. Only when humans plunder current
oceans suffer.
Natural resources are
best when undisturbed by the accumulation of human traffic. Moreover, natural resources when unmolested
offer more nutrition to sustain life.
The answer is in providing and finding interest in education for every
person in the planet to know how to tap into the natural resources that will
assist in sustaining long-term life.
Efficiency serves best when natural resources transport at minimum
distances or no transportation at all.
Consequently, natural resources are more economical within local
communities.
The optimum strategy for
growth is in providing material world wide and observing environmental challenges. The current model exploits overseas workers,
does not offer employment to local communities in the United States, and does
not offer value to customers overseas.
The model is not sustainable due to waste in transportation,
exploitation of resources, and lack of vision of the environment.
Conclusion
JCPenney has to respond with strategic intent strategy to survive
sustained years of failed decisions, low return on investment, and depreciation
of assets. The new strategic intent plan
needs to stabilize cash flows and stakeholder expectations. Moreover, JCPenney has to slow the
progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and fear of
executive job loss by strengthening industry placement. In addition, JCPenney should connect the mission
statement to the daily activities for providing distinction and customer definition. Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a
feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs. Long-term sustainability calls for alignment
to internal controls, connectivity to communities, technology exploitation, and
environmental sustainability. JCPenney’s
out view of potential customers requires continuous scanning of the environment
for economic and cultural changes.
Furthermore, JCPenney’s technology requires renewing of the
infrastructure. The change will forego
redundant processes, enable internal controls, and provide accurate feedback
from organizational processes. The optimum
strategy for JCPenney will sustain community alignment, diversity, low-cost
products and services, and long-term environmental sustainability.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.