Introduction
Developing a strategy or strategic options are a vital part of running a process, particularly for a business. Emily Shu, in her article about emergent strategy in entrepreneurial firms, had discussed different types of strategies and their adoption in context with the Lenovo especially about the strategies adopted by Lenovo in its formative years. The findings of this study claim that the company had adopted an emergent and progressive approach for strategy development instead of the deliberate and cautious methodology. The article also concluded that the emergent strategy is itself a process outcome of the entrepreneurial thoughts. And the entrepreneurial firms use their experiment and learning as a guiding process for their strategies. The article also provides an insight into the application of identified external and internal environmental factors by the entrepreneurial companies. The article in the end also discusses the significance of the adaptation of an emergent strategy by entrepreneurial firms with limited resources. Although, the findings of this research study are applicable to the Lenovo in real life does not seems to be pertinent to other entrepreneurial firms. Not only this but the case study itself has some constraints in justifying and evaluation of its findings and discussions. This paper, therefore, will critically analyze this article in terms of the strategy and the approach for the adaptation of the strategic options discussed in the article of Emily Shu.
Critical Analysis
In order to critically analyze “Emergent strategy in an entrepreneurial firm: The case of Lenovo in its formative years” by Emily Shu, a problem evaluation approach will be used. The problem in the statement of the articles will first be identified then a discussion and evaluation of that problem will be given. The critic will be supported by different principles, rules, and results from other similar studies.
Problem
“With regard to entrepreneurial strategy, firms with well-planned strategies are more likely to be successful than firms that follow a less comprehensive planning process”.
Discussion
This statement in the introductory part of the article does not seem to be in context with the findings and other statements of the article as the findings of this study concludes that entrepreneurial firms take their experience and knowledge as a guiding outline for the development of their strategies. The above statement suggests that in order to be successful a company especially the one that is based on entrepreneurial background, a well-established planning process is far more supporting and beneficial than an unplanned approach. However, in the context of Lenovo, this is totally opposite. The company, according to the very article does not have a planned strategy in its formative years, yet it was the most successful entrepreneur firm of its time.
Problem
As for the success of the Lenovo, the article gives a detailed insight into the formative years of the company and on the basis of the evaluation of that period suggest that the company overcome the limitations faced by it and survived and succeeded through the years.
Discussion
Although the article provides multiple supportive references from different studies for justifying the statement of the success, different points of this article, at the same time, opposes the findings of this article. The very first statement in this context is the reference statement of Krueger and fellows (2000), that clarifies that a little is known about the process of the development of successful entrepreneurship, particularly about the fact that how these firms overcome the limitations and constraints regarding the environmental factors and resources required. Similarly, the article itself concluded that for an entrepreneurial firm it is very difficult to adopt a straight path for the very beginning especially when it is suffering from the limitations of the resources not only this but also for the firm it is impossible to implement techniques. Another reference that somehow, questions the finding of this case study is the reference statement of Gioia and colleagues (2012). The statement also clarifies that it could be hard to develop a clear strategic path from the very beginning while working in an environment of ambiguity and uncertainty.
Problem
The case study also tries to give an insight into the procedure and processes that entrepreneurial firms use to cope with the environment and resources constraints while working in an unfavorable environment. The procedure or process identified during this case study is found to be the learning and experience.
Discussion
A lot of relevant and supportive statements are made throughout this case study in favor of this point. As referred by Zott and Huy (2007), the period before the actual production or offering of the firm, or simply the formative period prior to it is the key one in which company learns experience and gains knowledge regarding the future strategy. Another reference by Mintzberg and McHugh (1985), justifies that the strategy for the entrepreneurial firms can be defined as a learning process, that helps them in the future. Supported by Mirabeau and Maguire (2014), this statement also clarifies that it is the best approach to learn from the formative period of the firm. Although, these statements really provide justification for the statement but a conclusion stating that there is a need for further reading on the adoption and mobilizing of the limited resources available to the firm in an environment of uncertainty, since a small number of studies are available for this phenomenon, points out the integrity and relevancy of the statement of this study that claims to give a detailed insight into the problem.
Problem
Another problem found in this case study is related to the method or process of the emerging of the strategy. The conclusion of the study states that the findings of different researches show that there can be different causes for the emergence of the strategy, especially in entrepreneurial firms.
Discussion
There is also a difference in statements made in this case study of Lenovo by Emily Shu, regarding the process of the development of an emergent strategy. The writer in the theoretical background argues that different researches indicate that the strategy, particularly the merging one is the resultant of the different emerging events. Or simply it is not planned or learned but is total serendipity and miscalculation of the judgments. It can even be the resultant of the misalignment in between the upper and lower level of the management. She justified it with the references of the Pascale (1984), Burgelman (1996) and Boyett and Currie (2004). But within the very few lines oppose the findings of these researches and suggests that the emergence of the strategy in the entrepreneurial firm is due to the learning approach of trial and error methodology. Similarly, in the discussion part of the case study the author again emphasizes that the evolution of the emergent strategy in the Lenovo is due to the learning process of the trial and error methodology instead of being based on the rationalized plans or judgements.
Conclusion
The article about the “emergent strategy in an entrepreneurial firm: the case of Lenovo in its formative years”, researched and written by Emily Shu of the Kyushu University of Japan contains a lot of contradictions in it. The article tried to find out the different types of strategies particularly the emergent and the deliberated one. And discusses how they are adopted in Lenovo during the formative period of the company. Emphasizing, more on the emergent strategy, the case study further finds out that Lenovo adopted the progressive emerging approach as a strategy in its earlier years rather than utilizing the deliberated methodology. The article also finds out that the emergent strategy is the outcome of entrepreneurial thought and it is the one that is driven by the entrepreneurial forces rather than driving the entrepreneurial force. And entrepreneurial firms are found to be using the learning and experience of their formative days to build the strategy. The trial and error method is used in the building up of the emergent strategy in Lenovo. The article also studies the influence of the uncertainty of the environment along with the limitations and constraints followed by the entrepreneurial firms while developing the emergent strategy.
The critical analysis of this study, however, indicates a number of important mistakes that should be considered. These critical mistakes are spread throughout the case study and are usually related to the wrong justifications of the statements with unmatched references. The contradictions in the statements questioned the implementation of the findings of this study in real life scenarios of the entrepreneurial firms. These contradictions that have been critically evaluated in this paper can be rectified if the position of the context that they are used for, is changed. The statements are right in nature and authenticity but wrong in the place. Despite the number of contradictions in the case study by Emily Shu, the article about the emergent strategy of the Lenovo in its formative years provide with a detailed insight in the different ups and downs that the company had faced in its earlier days. The article also sets Lenovo as an example for the new entrepreneurial firms, while suffering from the uncertainty of different environmental factors and resource constraints.
References
Boyett, I. and Currie, G. (2004). Middle Managers Molding International Strategy. Long Range Planning. 37, 51-66.
Burgelman, R. A. (1996). A process model of strategic business exit: Implocations of an evolutionary perspective on strategy. Strategic Management Journal. Summer Special Issue 17, 39-54.
Gioia, D. A., Nag, R. and Corley, K. G. (2012). Visionary ambiguity and strategic change: The virture of vagueness in launching major organizational change. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21, 364-375.
Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D. and Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing. 15, 411-432.
Mintzberg, H. & McHugh, A. (1985). Strategy Formation in Adhocracy. Administrative Science Quarterly. 30(2), 160-197.
Mirabeau, L. and Maguire, S. (2014). From autonomous strategic behavior to emergent strategy. Strategic Management Journal. 35, 1202-1229.
Pascale, RT. (1984). Perspective on strategy: The real story behind Honda’s success. California Management Review. 26, 47-72.
Shu, E (2017). Emergent strategy in an entrepreneurial firm: The case of Lenovo in its formative years. International Journal of Emerging Markets. 12(3), 625-636.
Zott, C. and Huy, Q. N. (2007). How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources. Administrative Science Quarterly. 52(1), 70-105.
