Boston Consulting Group on Strategy Conformity

Today, management of various organizations are obligated to ensure success is achieved despite the plexity and dynamism of the current business environment. It thus largely depends on the organization structure as well as the appropriateness of the strategies formulated by the management. Apparently, the business strategies need planning gurus who can align business projections with short term and long term objectives. Besides, group influence plays a critical role in one’s ability to formulate decisions. In most cases, an individual may decide to take a particular decision just to conform to group norms. This discussion, therefore, has addressed Yves Morieux contributions on organization strategy and Asch conformity experiment to examine individual conformity to group thinking. Yves Monrieux assertion concerning structure and strategy conforms to the current management imperatives (Yves & Peter, 2014). Today, the success of business greatly relies on the ability of the management to establish effective operational and strategic aims. These goals are supposed to be timely instituted, and affirmative action is taken to ensure they have implemented accordingly. The success needs an administration structure that is flexible and making new decisions based on the situation. There should be smooth coordination and understanding within the departments to enhance a mon focus on the organizational objectives. Thus, it is notable that the blog presents the following ideas: Soundness of the management to the success of the business. The importance of the enactment of effective goals. The relevance of flexibility in the administrative structure. The management levels matter most in determining the responsible authorities in handling various issues. A good administration structure should be the one that roles are clearly assigned and everyone better knows the power to report to (Carl and Michael, 2006, p. 162-190). The ever-changing business environment requires sound business strategies to maintain a petitive edge.   With the consumers varying needs, measures need to be established to ensure the pany is fully satisfying their needs. To remain petitive, businesses are investing in technology, and further encouraging creativity and innovation among staffs to ensure profit is maximized. Notably, a good organization structure enacts operational strategies based on the research and findings. The support of such initiatives is only experienced in an organization where individuals work as a team towards a mon purpose (Lim, et al. 2010).   People hold positions based on the qualifications and capability. And it significantly helps the management understands plans that are relevant to the business, set aside appropriate financial resources and further monitor and evaluate the plans accordingly. Good administrative structures empower employees through training programs, coaching and more to make them relevant to organization needs. Good strategies borrow from the management tools such as SWOT and PESTLE. A thorough understanding both internal and external business environment aids in the formulation of the right business plan (Butler, 2000, p. 39-43). Therefore, it is imperative for the current managers to ensure that the administration structure put in place facilitates the achievement of the business goals and objectives. The structure should facilitate faster decision making, support productive activities intended to propel the organization towards prosperity and that gives the pany petitive edge (Haslam, et al. 2011, p. 23-67). Usually, human beings have various characters and behave differently based on the situation. Getting a plete understanding of an individual regarding how he/she will respond to different scenarios is quite difficult (Griggs, 2015, p. 137). Based on the blog, the following ideas can be extracted: People are influenced by circumstances in making decisions. Personal decisions can also be influenced by individuals around us. One should remain objective in formulating decisions while holding management positions. Group conformity is real and can be avoided if one is required to disclose a solution via writing and further if the matter is a subject of personal accountability. People are however, influenced by various factors in making a personal decision. For example, the student can respond to a perceptual question posed by the instructor, based on the other bright student suggestion even if he know the answer is wrong (Aronson, et al. 2010, p. 99-120). Therefore, personal decision making depends on the circumstances facing the individuals and the people around. Before I discovered my capabilities, I used to make decisions based on views from my friends and individuals around. Even if I knew they were wrong, I just planned according to their suggestions to conform and fit the group. This group conformity justifies Asch Conformity Experiment regarding the power of the group. In most cases, the primary forces that determined my decision making when I was in a group were normative and informational factors (Eysenck, 2004, p. 345-370). The primary reason why I conformed to group norms was to avert punishments, rejection and further gain from social rewards associated with the members. Also, lack of information due to unfocused minds in class used to affect my conscience in answering perceptual questions. Thus, I could just stick on what a group member’s opinion. Currently, I make a decision based on the objective. The knowledge I have gained in the university is significant to allow me stand alone but stick to the truth. The present organization's requirements need leaders who understand themselves and have abilities to align the business goals with strategic plans. Therefore, buying groups’ suggestions just to be accepted at the expense of the firm can lead to business failure (Breckler, et al. 2006, p. 126). Usually, some people who lack leadership qualities and cannot stand alone from a group are susceptible to conformity to group norms. This conformity should not be the case. If we realize the relevance of staying objective to every matter in the organization set up, elements like creativity and innovation will be natured.   As a result, individuals can grow and always feel free to contribute to the organizational management. However, a group can force an individual to conform to its norms because of the following factors: Difficulty of the task, ambiguous situation, lack of information and identification purposes. First, when a group discovers that the job is tough, it can force a knowledgeable member to take the groups’ stand so that they cannot be judged as failures (Turner, 2005, p. 1-22). Secondly, an ambiguous situation may make a group to require its members to behave in the same way. Further, when a group lacks adequate information about a subject, it may force members to adopt one stand. Finally, a group can force a member to conform to the norms for identification purposes. Appearing different may portray a wrong image of the group. To sum up, organization strategy is a roadmap that guides the management about the organization priorities. The establishment of the right strategies and strict implementation increases the chances of business success. However, the effectiveness of the strategies depends on the administration structure and the support it has regarding the organization objectives. Besides, group conformity is real, and members conform because of various reason. Managers should thus, always focus on organization needs than following workers thought just to be accepted. Aronson, T. D.,Wilson, R. M., Akert, E. (2010). Social Psychology (7 ed.). Pearson.p. 99-120 Butler Jr., J.K. (2000). A global view of informal organization: Academy of Management Journal, 51, 3, 39-43. Breckler, S. J., Olson, J. M., & Wiggins, E. C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, p.126 Carl W. Stern and Michael S. Deimler. (2006). The Boston Consulting Group on Strategy: A collection of articles on strategy and management, p. 162-190 Eysenck, M. W. (2004). Psychology: An International Perspective. New York: Psychology Press, LTD, p.345-370 Griggs, R. A. (2015). "The Disappearance of Independence in Textbook Coverage of Asch's Social Pressure Experiments":   Teaching of Psychology, 42 (2): 137. Haslam, S., Reicher, S.D., Platow, M. J. (2011). The new psychology of leadership: Identity, influence and power. New York, NY: Psychology Press, 23-67 Lim, M., G. Griffiths, and S. Sambrook. (2010). Organizational structure for the twenty-first century: Presented the annual meeting of The Institute for Operations Research and The Management Sciences, Austin. Turner, J. C. (2005). "Explaining the nature of power: A three-process theory": European Journal of Social Psychology. 35: 1–22. Yves Morieux & Peter T. (2014). Six Simple Rules: How to Manage plexity without Getting plicated, 87-100.