The Strategic Game Board is a concept championed by McKinsey & Co. Interestingly enough, if you try to look it up on the site of the McKinsey Quarterly, you won’t find anything. Probably an indication that it’s not one of the most recent or frequently used frameworks. But I sometimes find it quite useful anyway.
The basics of this framework are fairly self explanatory: Where to compete, how to compete and when to compete. In many cases, the Where and How is interpreted as a matrix of geographies and products. A good example of that is Pfizer’s efforts over the last few years to radically refocus their efforts, exit a number of market but push harder in others, reduce the number of products they area active in, simplify their manufacturing base, etc.
The more strategic view of the game board, however, is to combine it with the fundamental options a company faces: Where to compete is fundamentally a question of whether one wants to focus on serving a niche market really well, or whether a company has aspirations of being a mass market player. How to compete is linked to the question of structural change: Do we play the old game really well, or are we trying to take advantage of innovation (on a product specific level, or on a more structural, market specific level)?
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий