Contrast organization strategy and operations strategy.NOTE: please base the answer on the given lesson below. If you think of goals as destinations, then strategies are the roadmaps for reaching thedestinations. Strategies provide focus for decision making. Generally speaking, organiza-tions have overall strategies called organization strategies, which relate to the entire or-ganization, and they also have functional strategies, which relate to each of the functionalareas of the organization. The functional strategies should support the overall strategies ofthe organization, just as the organizational strategies should support the goals and missionof the organization.Tactics are the methods and actions used to accomplish strategies. They are more spe-cific in nature than strategies, and they provide guidance and direction for carrying out ac-tual operations, which need the most specific and detailed plans and decision making inan organization. You might think of tactics as the "how to" part of the process (e.g., howto reach the destination, following the strategy roadmap) and operations as the actual "do-ing" part of the process.It should be apparent that the overall relationship that exists from the mission down toactual operations is hierarchical in nature. This is illustrated in Figure 2-1.A simple example may help to put this hierarchy into perspective. OPERATIONS STRATEGYThe organization strategy provides the overall direction for the organization. It is broad inscope, covering the entire organization. Operations strategy is narrower in scope, deal-ing primarily with the operations aspect of the organization. Operations strategy relates toproducts, processes, methods, operating resources, quality, costs, lead times, and sched-uling. Table 2-2 provides a comparison of an organization's mission, its overall strategy,and its operations strategy, tactics, and operations.In order for operations strategy to be truly etlective, it is important to link it to organi-zation strategy; that is, the two should not be formulated independently. Rather, formula-tion of organization strategy should take into account the realities of operations' strengthsand weaknesses, capitalizing on strengths and dealing with weaknesses. Similarly, oper-ations strategy must be consistent with the overall strategy of the organization, and for-mulated to support the goals of the organization. This requires that senior managers workwith functional units to forrpulate strategies that will support, rather than conflict with,each other and the overall strategy of the organization. As obvious as this may seem, itdoesn't always happen in practice. Instead, we may find power struggles between variousfunctional units. These struggles are detrimental to the organization because they pit func-tional units against each other rather than focusing their energy on making the organiza-tion more competitive and better able to serve the customer. Some of the latest approachesin organizations, involving teams of managers and workers, may reflect a growing aware-ness of the synergistic effects of working together rather than competing internally.Operations strategy can have a major influence on the competitiveness of an organiza-tion. If it is well designed and well executed, there is a good chance that the organizationwill be successful; if it is not well designed or executed, the chances are much less thatthe organization will be successful.In the 1970s and early 80s, operations strategy was often neglected in favor of mar-keting and financial strategies. That may have occurred because many chief executive of-ficers did not come from operations backgrounds and perhaps did not fully appreciate theimportance of the operations function. Mergers and acquisitions were common; leveragedbuyouts were used, and conglomerates were formed that joined dissimilar operations.These did little to add value to the organization; they were purely financial in nature. De-cisions were often made by individuals who were unfamiliar with the business, frequentlyto the detriment of that business. Meanwhile, foreign competitors began to fill the result-ing vacuum with a careful focus on operations strategy.In the late 1980s and early 90s, many companies began to realize this approach was notworking. They recognized that they were less competitive than other companies. Thiscaused them to focus attention on operations strategy. Toward that end, many firms aredeveloping strategies that have quality or time as their central concern.This correlates with a survey of manufacturing executives and managers who wereasked to identify strategic and tactical issues that U.S. manufacturers must focus on to beTABLE 2-2Comparison of mission,organization strategy, andoperations strategyoperations strategy The ap-proach, consistent with the or-ganization strategy, that is usedto guide the operationsfunction.

Question

Contrast organization strategy and operations strategy.NOTE: please base the answer on the given lesson below. If you think of goals as destinations, then strategies are the roadmaps for reaching thedestinations. Strategies provide focus for decision making. Generally speaking, organiza-tions have overall strategies called organization strategies, which relate to the entire or-ganization, and they also have functional strategies, which relate to each of the functionalareas of the organization. The functional strategies should support the overall strategies ofthe organization, just as the organizational strategies should support the goals and missionof the organization.Tactics are the methods and actions used to accomplish strategies. They are more spe-cific in nature than strategies, and they provide guidance and direction for carrying out ac-tual operations, which need the most specific and detailed plans and decision making inan organization. You might think of tactics as the &#34;how to&#34; part of the process (e.g., howto reach the destination, following the strategy roadmap) and operations as the actual &#34;do-ing&#34; part of the process.It should be apparent that the overall relationship that exists from the mission down toactual operations is hierarchical in nature. This is illustrated in Figure 2-1.A simple example may help to put this hierarchy into perspective. OPERATIONS STRATEGYThe organization strategy provides the overall direction for the organization. It is broad inscope, covering the entire organization. Operations strategy is narrower in scope, deal-ing primarily with the operations aspect of the organization. Operations strategy relates toproducts, processes, methods, operating resources, quality, costs, lead times, and sched-uling. Table 2-2 provides a comparison of an organization's mission, its overall strategy,and its operations strategy, tactics, and operations.In order for operations strategy to be truly etlective, it is important to link it to organi-zation strategy; that is, the two should not be formulated independently. Rather, formula-tion of organization strategy should take into account the realities of operations' strengthsand weaknesses, capitalizing on strengths and dealing with weaknesses. Similarly, oper-ations strategy must be consistent with the overall strategy of the organization, and for-mulated to support the goals of the organization. This requires that senior managers workwith functional units to forrpulate strategies that will support, rather than conflict with,each other and the overall strategy of the organization. As obvious as this may seem, itdoesn't always happen in practice. Instead, we may find power struggles between variousfunctional units. These struggles are detrimental to the organization because they pit func-tional units against each other rather than focusing their energy on making the organiza-tion more competitive and better able to serve the customer. Some of the latest approachesin organizations, involving teams of managers and workers, may reflect a growing aware-ness of the synergistic effects of working together rather than competing internally.Operations strategy can have a major influence on the competitiveness of an organiza-tion. If it is well designed and well executed, there is a good chance that the organizationwill be successful; if it is not well designed or executed, the chances are much less thatthe organization will be successful.In the 1970s and early 80s, operations strategy was often neglected in favor of mar-keting and financial strategies. That may have occurred because many chief executive of-ficers did not come from operations backgrounds and perhaps did not fully appreciate theimportance of the operations function. Mergers and acquisitions were common; leveragedbuyouts were used, and conglomerates were formed that joined dissimilar operations.These did little to add value to the organization; they were purely financial in nature. De-cisions were often made by individuals who were unfamiliar with the business, frequentlyto the detriment of that business. Meanwhile, foreign competitors began to fill the result-ing vacuum with a careful focus on operations strategy.In the late 1980s and early 90s, many companies began to realize this approach was notworking. They recognized that they were less competitive than other companies. Thiscaused them to focus attention on operations strategy. Toward that end, many firms aredeveloping strategies that have quality or time as their central concern.This correlates with a survey of manufacturing executives and managers who wereasked to identify strategic and tactical issues that U.S. manufacturers must focus on to beTABLE 2-2Comparison of mission,organization strategy, andoperations strategyoperations strategy The ap-proach, consistent with the or-ganization strategy, that is usedto guide the operationsfunction.

Accepted Answer

A strategy is a long-term action plan and a guiding tool to achieve organizational goals and…

Contrast organization strategy and operations strategy. NOTE: please base the answer on the given lesson below.