Three Strategic Frameworks (Mulcaster)

Three Strategic Frameworks (Mulcaster)

Mulcaster (2008) developed 3 strategic frameworks that can be useful both in decision making and in strategy. All three frameworks will be briefly explained below:
1. OPPOSING FORCES APPROACH: This is an approach in which the advantages and disadvantages are seen as forces that can maximize an organization’s added value if managed efficiently (see: Force Field Analysis). This differs from the general approach to an organization's pros and cons, in which the advantages and disadvantages are simply seen as two lists that can be compared so as to determine the net benefits of an organization.
2. MANAGING FORCES: Any strategy is influenced by multiple forces that need to be considered both in decision making and in strategy implementation (see: Stakeholder Analysis). However, because of the large number of forces, some of them are often forgotten or they are not seen as significant. The principal purpose of the managing forces approach is to help assure that managers will consider even those forces in their decision making and in strategy building. Besides this, another purpose of this framework is to support managers in the way that those forces can be managed.
3. PERCEIVED DIFFERENTIAL VALUE: The Differential Value refers to the extent to which an organization’s product or service has more value to their consumers in comparison to their competitors. This is a very important determinant of competitiveness and can be improved in several ways (see: Competitive Advantage). Examples of ways to increase differential value is to improve quality, reliability and to increase a product’s features. The term perceived is also important in this case, since reflects the importance of the fact that managers should focus on customer’s perceived value of a product rather than taking their own opinions reflects customer’s perceptions (see: Unique Selling Proposition (USP).
Source: W. Mulcaster (2008) “Three Strategic Frameworks” Business Strategy Series Vol. 10 Iss.1 pp. 68-75