Reading 2.1: Andrews

To what is Kenneth Andrews referring (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1), when he elaborates on strategy in terms of ‘might do’?
1. The resources the firm has at its command
2. The personal values, aspirations, ideals, and preferences of CEOs and their immediate associates
3. The opportunities presented by the environment
4. The expectations of society and the issue of public good.
To what is Andrews referring (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1), when he elaborates on strategy in terms of ‘can do’?
1. The personal values, aspirations, ideals, and preferences of the CEO and their immediate associates
2. The opportunities presented by the environment
3. The expectations of society and the issue of public good
4. The resources the firm has at its command.
To what is Andrews referring (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1), when he elaborates on strategy in terms of ‘want to do’?
1. The personal values, aspirations, ideals, and preferences of the CEO and their immediate associates
2. The resources the firm has at its command
3. The expectations of society and the issue of public good
4. The opportunities presented by the environment.
To what is Andrews referring (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1), when he elaborates on strategy in terms of ‘should do’?
1. The opportunities presented by the environment
2. The expectations of society and the issue of public good
3. The personal values, aspirations, ideals, and preferences of the CEO and their immediate associates
4. The resources the firm has at its command.
According to Andrews (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1), what is a strategic alternative that results from matching opportunity and capability at an acceptable level of risk?
1. A competitive strategy
2. An economic strategy
3. A competitive advantage
4. An economic advantage.
Which of the following statements is NOT a basic premise of Andrew’s thinking, in his article ‘The concept of corporate strategy’ (1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1)?
1. Structure follows strategy
2. Strategy, if it has to be implementable, should be formed from the ‘bottom up’
3. The clear distinction made between strategy formulation and strategy implementation
4. Intended strategies should be made explicit.
Does Andrews (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1) consider strategy formulation and implementation as two different and distinct processes?
1. No, he argues that strategy formulation and strategy implementation are two overlapping processes, and that realized strategy usually emerges from this messy, fragmented, and piecemeal development
2. Yes, and he argues that strategy formulation is an intellectual and analytical process, whereas strategy implementation is an administrative process
3. Neither of the above, he recognizes four different stages in strategy process: recognizing, analyzing, formulating and implementing.
What does Andrews (in ‘The concept of corporate strategy’, 1987, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 2.1) state about the implementation of strategy?
1. A It is primarily an administrative task
2. B It is a method for compensating unsound strategic decisions
3. C It predicated, on the organizational reality, that structure follows strategy
4. D It necessarily requires great leadership.