Strategic Management Business & Marketing Article Critique

Reflections on Strategic Management Concepts
Student’s name
Institutional affiliation
Reflections on Strategic Management Concepts
Lord Nelson’s Victory against Napoleon
A French leader, Napoleon Bonaparte is best famed for the enviable success of his military strategies. His gifts and prowess saw him conquer so much of Europe that he deemed it time to go outside the continent for more. He, however, met his match in Lord Nelson Horatio, who managed to come up with a plan that not only defeated the military genius but also brought the beginning of the end to what is commonly referred to as the Napoleonic Wars.
In his overseas ambitions, Napoleon was convinced that the invasion and conquering of England would add another medal to his already colorful collection. He already had control of the European North Sea and Atlantic coasts. Also, he had managed to get Spain to fight alongside him in what came to be famously known as the battle of Trafalgar. In his hunger for victory and the prestige that would be borne of it, Napoleon overlooked several loopholes in his military strategy that eventually spelled his doom and the miserable end of an illustrious career.
One of the greatest mistakes committed by Napoleon in the planning for the Battle of Trafalgar is underrating the ability of his enemy. The French and Spanish fleets were much bigger than the English fleet. He, therefore, assumed that because his material resources were far more than those possessed by England’s naval force, he would easily triumph. In this, he failed to recognize the part that skill, experience and the forces of nature would play in determining whether he won or lost. In other words, he had been used so much to winning and conquering that he could hardly envisage any chance that would lead to his loss and, thus, eliminates it.
On the other hand, Lord Nelson was more hesitant and unassuming. He knew that he had not only to work but think hard for his victory. He also knew that, like himself, his men were better trained and experienced than their French-Spanish rivals. He was, however, outnumbered. He, thus, came up with an innovative plan which included getting his adversaries by surprise.
Naval combat traditionally involved fighting ships firing at close range and slow speed. Also, the ships fought at parallel lines. Lord Nelson, against the French and Spanish coalition plans attacked from the rear and front. He also attacked at high speed in an attempt to reduce his casualties by lowering the amount of fire hitting his fleet. The innovativeness of his strategy earned him victory in the form of 18 destroyed enemy ships out of the 21 that went to sea and a high number of his adversary’s casualties.
Lord Nelson’s valor and leadership by example played a part in his victory. Even when he was warned that his four-star jacket would make him a prized target for the enemy, he did not back down, claiming that it was too late to remove it.
On the other hand, Napoleon sent out a less experienced Admiral Villeneuve to lead his battleship. By the time the battle began, Napoleon knew that he was defeated. This culminated in the capture of the admiral and his death by suicide later after parole. He and Lord Nelson – who was mortally wounded in the battle – died as a result of the military campaign. They, however, left different impressions and levels of honor on strategists.
Strategic Management and Conformity Problems
There are great efforts by practitioners as well as academics in coming up with progressive approaches to strategy. Nevertheless, a lot of effort, resources and time are still spent on traditional methods and theories that have dominated the field for a long time. This, in other words, means that innovation and creativity are denied a chance in teaching, practice, and research in strategic management. More clearly put, the tendency to conform to rigid ideas and models have hampered the progression and efficiency of strategic planning not only for students but also researchers, teachers, and practitioners.
Many of the texts used in the University lecture rooms seem to rely on an unproven model mainly taking into account analysis, formulation and implementation of the strategy. The model has been universally accepted and acts as a guide in business schools. This, in the end, provides a dominant model which is usually generic.
A good example of a conformity model is the common structure and description of strategic models. Usually, the text begins with an analysis in the first few chapters. Strategy formulation by observing the rules of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) model is a common feature in the first chapter. Close at the heels is strategy formulation. In many cases, managers and other professionals are coaxed into accepting that unforeseeable trends which are, in fact, beyond their jurisdiction, are indeed predictable and they must attempt to do it. This eventually results in the improper use of business resources, efforts and time.
Porter’s theories have also been used to stamp the dominance of traditional models that give no room for strategic innovativeness. Common among them is a PESTEL analysis (political, economic, social, technological, ecological and legal). Other Porter theories include the five forces model. It takes into account substitute products, the threats brought about by new entrants into the market, the power of suppliers and buyers as well as existing rivalry. These are assumed to be the necessary measures in determining how attractive an in...