This week we will explore the process, necessary analysis, and key decision points related to setting the
direction of the organization. The strategy text by Gamble, Petraf & Thompson will provide an overview
to selecting the best path forward, while the Rumelt text of the process and key decision points related
will focus more on the underlying thought process. ‘The Decision Book’ by Krogerus & Tschappeler will
ller text give you an opportunity to evaluate if and/or how your decision models are changing, and the Ke
.will provide a solid Biblical worldview
Discussion Board Template
I usually receive questions on how to do the Discussion posts and how to include
an Annotated Bibliography. Here is an example of an excellent post. I especially
appreciate the headings and organization. This student did very well on both the
analysis and the AB. This format and writing style is a good model for you to
follow as you make your posts. Please carefully review the grading rubrics as I
follow these closely.
Introduction
The use of machine learning data has proven valuable in many firms such as 1-800-flowers and
Amazon to learn about the internal and external functions of the organization. However, more
recently, the effective use of machine learning has also been demonstrated in strategic decision
making. An organization that can effectively move from strategy to execution will be the firms
that are the most competitive and sustainable. Machine learning through data also creates an
alignment of the power of design of the strategic decision making and the power of force in the
organization. In other words, the power is not mutually exclusive but builds upon each other to
strengthen the organization. Many decision making models are available to the strategist to use
in the development of strategies, regardless of which framework is selected, having the power of
proactive key performance indicators will improve the outcomes toward goal achievement in the
firm.
Process: Effective Execution of Strategy
Effective execution is when the organization can move intentioned steps to actual action to
achieve goals as opposed to bad strategy which is when a strategy is based on mistaken
foundation (Rumelt, 2011). For an organization to effectively execute a strategy there are
several considerations that must be reflected about related to self-appraisal of the organization,
managerial tasks to achieve and level of quality of the data related to key performance
indicators. The understanding of the organization’s ability to execute requires an honest review
of capabilities.
According to Connell (2019) much of the honest review of capabilities must focus on areas that
reduce the gap between actionable strategic steps to organizational
performance. Connell suggests that there are some reference points that can assist the strategist
to complete the self-evaluation of the firm. The first reference point is to understand the value
proposition that the firm creates for the customer. Connell further defines the value proposition
as including the customer experience and promises made to customers and how well the
organization achieves those commitments. The second reference point is to understand that the
roles and responsibilities of those staff assigned to achieve the commitments and to what degree
those individuals perform toward that commitment. The third reference point is to outline and
understand the “explicit structures, systems, and measurements that will ensure that key activities
and tasks are satisfactorily performed, and the business' overall value is optimized?” (p. 1). The
fourth and fifth reference points are to understand the culture of the organization; and the
characteristics of the staff including their capabilities and competencies. The final reference
point to consider is understanding the milestones created and how best to measure success or
failure to achieve (Connell).
Gamble, Peteraf and Thompson (2019) echo Connell’s (2019) reference point list. However,
Gamble, et al. publish additional considerations for the strategist to consider and label the
additional considerations “managerial tasks.” The additional reference points they discuss is
ensuring a plan to effectively allocate resources to achieve the strategies and establish a
performance reward system that continues to energize the organization as steps are
achieved. Gamble et al., Connell and Anonymous (2018) all share that there is an importance of
ensuring that design of strategies and the implementation of the strategies have measurability in
the metrics. To achieve the most impactful and timely way to ensure the power of design of the
strategic plan and the power of focus is to have timely, consistent and understandable data. One
solution to achieve both design power while remaining focused is the use of machine learning
strategies.
Strategic Thinking: Power of Design vs. Power of Focus
Based on the report by Anonymous (2019), this student would assert that the concepts of power
of design and power of focus are not mutually exclusive in strategic decision making. In other
words, the concepts are not a “versus” but rather are complementary when the use of machine
learning is available in a firm. Anonymous posits that following considerations that the
strategist must consider to fully utilize data to maximize the power of design and focus: firms
must invest in trustworthy use of data and governance; practice and utilize machine learning data
to solve business problems; and utilize data for forward learning key performance indication of
success of failure rather than retrospective review where no change can occur quickly to course
correct.
Connell (2019) shares that the power of focus closes the gaps required for strategic
implementation by assessing the design of the business and continuously reviewing the literal
“changes in the physical environment and increased activism of board members, shareholders,
and other stakeholders” (p. 2). Understanding the changes outlined by Connell can be integrated
into key performance indicators (KPIs) that encapsulate both internal and external effective
machine learning knowledge. Anonymous (2019) shares that “with more forward-looking KPIs,
progressive leaders can treat strategic measures as high-octane data fuel for training machine-
learning algorithms to optimize business processes” (p. 3).
Decision Model Key Decision Traps to Avoid
Achieving the most effective and efficient ability to achieve stellar strategies requires the
strategist to avoid decision models that do not foster an awareness of how to win versus
competition Connell (2019). The traps to avoid in selecting the decision model is to ensure the
model effectively accounts for the external environments. Connell asserts the model must
inform about the external to know how to “raise or lower costs, affect your customers’ choices,
and contribute to the gap between strategy and execution” (p. 3). Connell further asserts that the
“strategy can’t be static; it can’t be calendar-driven. Although there are annual, calendar-
constrained aspects of strategy, sensitivity to changes in the external environment requires that
strategy be a year-round activity led by the senior leadership of the organization” (p.
3). Anonymous (2019) asserts that additional information must be considered to avoid decision
model decision traps related to internal process evaluation. To address both the internal and
external traps, Anonymous provides three considerations to avoid the traps by evaluating if the
model through data can effectively “develop a single, integrated view of their target customer;
have the ability to drill down to see underlying KPI data” (p. 3) and that the machine learning
data can outfit leaders in the firm to review and report on KPI reports frequently. Keller
and Asldorf (2014) do caution that firms that utilize machines must not neglect the human role as
God values humans over the tools available to support humans.
Conclusion
The future of business competition and maximizing the power of force and the design of the
strategies can be achieved through machine learning. Machine learning data is proactive in
nature and requires leaders to adjust and course correct in a timely manner to ensure the longer-
term strategies achieve the intents. Choosing the decision making model is less critical than
assuring the model that is selected is able to account for the KPI data to move the organization
from low competitor to high-octane competitor.
References
Anonymous (2018). Improving strategic execution with machine learning. (2018). MIT Sloan
Management Review, 60(1), 2-7.
Connell, C. M. (2019). Women CEOs on making strategy happen. Strategic Direction, 35(7), 1-
4. doi:10.1108/SD-09-2018-0184
Gamble, J., Peteraf, M., & Thompson, A. (2019), Essentials of strategic management, McGraw -
Hill Higher Education (6th ed.), New York, NY. ISBN: 9781259927638.
Keller, T. & Asldorf, K. L. (2014), Every good endeavor, Riverhead Books, Penguin Group,
New York, NY. ISBN: 9781594632822.
Rumelt, R. (2011), Good strategy/bad strategy: The difference and why it matters., Crown
Business, New York, NY. ISBN: 9780307886231.
Annotated Bibliographies
Connell, C. M. (2019). Women CEOs on making strategy happen. Strategic Direction, 35(7), 1-
4. doi:10.1108/SD-09-2018-0184
Summary of Key Points
Implementing strategic plans requires a continual understanding of the intent of the
actions and reflection of key metrics to ensure success. If success is questioned or changes in the
external or internal environments change, strategists must effectively reassess and adjust as
necessary. While the article does not fully meet the rigor that one would assess is needed for
inclusion as a peer-reviewed journal, the details are helpful to consider as points of reference.
Evaluation of the Quality of the Publication
Strategic Direction is an essential management information resource for today's strategic
thinkers. As a unique service, the journal scans through the best 400 management journals in the
world and distill the most topical management issues and relevant implications for senior
managers out of the cutting-edge research. Strategic Direction regularly presents case study
reviews of the Fortune 500 companies. Each briefing (no more than 2 to 3 pages long) is
prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the
arguments in context. This student assess that the content is helpful but the nature of the peer-
review of the cited commentary is not able to be fully evaluated. Strategic Direction is closer to
a business magazine which rates the quality less than other publications in the research field.
Evaluation of the Quality of the Author(s)
Carol M. Connell is a professor and consultant on strategic management, and she has focused on
the activities that are necessary for leaders to create effective strategy and to execute
successfully. Connell is based at the Department of Business Management, Koppelman School
of Business – Brooklyn College, City University of New York, Brooklyn, New York, USA.
Where this fits into the discussion
Discussion in the article includes information related to the importance of execution,
playing to win, reassessing strategy and pitfalls to consider and address as strategies are
implemented.
Anonymous (2018). Improving strategic execution with machine learning. (2018). MIT Sloan
Management Review, 60(1), 2-7.
Summary of Key Points
The need to ensure that strategic actions are moving an organization forward in terms of
productivity and performance requires the use of data. The author discusses that machine
learning can help build the internal competencies of the organization to learn from automated
key performance indicators that guide the strategist to stay a course, adjust as needed or expire
strategic actions if required.
Evaluation of the Quality of the Publication
The MIT Sloan Management Review is a research-based magazine and digital platform for
business executives published at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The print edition is
published quarterly; the digital edition is updated daily.
Evaluation of the Quality of the Author(s)
The quality of the authors cannot be assessed since this article is listed as being authored by
“anonymous”. One could assume that the quality of the journal as a research-based magazine
provides adequate filtering to assume that the authors have some degree of quality to their work.
Paul Michelman, Editor in Chief, has spent the previous dozen years in leadership roles at two of
the other premier names in management publishing: As Harvard Business Review’s executive
editor and director of new editorial products, Michelman launched a suite of digital initiatives
that today comprise the core of HBR’s online brand.
In 2012, Michelman joined strategy+business as executive editor, where he spearheaded a digital
make-over of s+b. Transforming it from a print-centric, issue-based, publishing paradigm to a
more fluid digital model in which the web is the primary distribution platform, he also edited and
wrote some of the magazine’s most popular features and introduced new editorial techniques,
such as interactive assessments, to s+b’s story-telling toolkit.
Where this fits into the discussion
Data is powerful in strategic planning and execution, and this article outlines that key
performance indicators (KPI) and machine learning is valuable in today's corporate landscape.
The anonymous author identifies that data strongly suggests that data-driven organizations that
align incentives, KPIs, and machine learning (ML) capabilities have distinct advantages over
those that move too slowly to develop their data capabilities.
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page1of14
DiscussionBoard1MainThread
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐50PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Introduction
5Points
3.1to5points
Introductionprovidesancomplete
overviewofthediscussion
1.1to3points
Introductionprovidesanpartial
overviewofthediscussion
0.1to1points
Introductionpresentbutdoesnot
provideanoverviewofthe
discussion
0points
Notcompleted
Process
15Points
13.1to15points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionoftherequiredbusiness
processtopic.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysisand
evaluationofprocesssteps.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
5.1to13points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionoftherequiredbusiness
process.Demonstratessome
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofprocesssteps.Flowismostly
logicalandpartiallycited.Noless
thanminimumrequiredword
count.
0.1to5points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftherequiredbusiness
process.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisandevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
StrategicThinking
15Points
13.1to15points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysis,
evaluation,andsynthesisoftopic.
Flowislogicalandfullycited.No
lessthanminimumrequiredword
count.
5.1to13points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
andevaluationoftopic.Flowis
mostlylogicalandpartiallycited.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to5points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Lacksappropriate
levelofcriticalthinkingwithvery
littleornoanalysis,evaluation,or
synthesis.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
DecisionModel
10Points
8.1to10points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Complete
discussionofhowthemodel(s)aid
orhinderthestudent’sdecision
processtoincludewhy.Flowis
3.1to8points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Minimal
discussionofhowthemodel(s)aid
orhinderthestudent’sdecision
processtoincludewhy.Flowis
0.1to3points
Sectionprovidesanincomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Nodiscussionof
howthemodel(s)aidorhinderthe
student’sdecisionprocessto
includewhy.Nolessthanminimum
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page2of14
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
mostlylogicalandpartiallycited.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
requiredwordcount.
Conclusion
5Points
3.1to5points
Conclusionprovidesacomplete
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightskeypoints
1.1to3points
Conclusionprovidesapartial
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightsatleastonekeypoints
0.1to1points
Conclusionpresentbutdoesnot
summarizediscussionorhighlight
keypoints
0points
Notcompleted
Structure‐25PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
AnnotatedBibliography
20Points
16.1to20points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.Evaluationofthequalityof
thepublication.Evaluationofthe
qualityoftheauthor(s).Description
ofwherethearticlefitsintothe
discussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
6.1 to16 points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingorpartial:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to6points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingoneormore:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0points
Notcompleted
APAFormat&Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Nocoverpageand/orsection
headingsincluded.Metallofsome
requiredformatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page3of14
DiscussionBoard1Reply
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐20PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Summary
8Points
6.1to8points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowislogicalandfully
cited.Nolessthanminimum
requiredwordcount.
2.1to6points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowismostlylogicaland
partiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to2points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftheauthor’smain
thread.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Evaluation
12Points
9.1to12points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withandwhyaswellaswhatthe
studentdisagreedwithandwhy.
Demonstratescriticalthinkingto
includeanalysisandevaluationof
theauthor’smainthread.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
3.1to9points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withordisagreedwith.Limitedor
nodiscussionofwhy.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofthetopic.Flowismostlylogical
andpartiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to3points
Sectionispresentbutprovidesa
weakevaluationoftheauthor’s
paperwithoutanydiscussionof
whatthestudentdisagreedwithor
why.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisorevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Structure‐5PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
APAFormat&Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Twosources(notthetextbooks)
notincludedand/orincorrect
referencelisting.Nocoverpage
and/orsectionheadingsincluded.
Metallofsomerequired
formatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page4of14
DiscussionBoard2‐5MainThread
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐50PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Introduction
5Points
3.1to5points
Introductionprovidesancomplete
overviewofthediscussion
1.1 to3points
Introductionprovidesanpartial
overviewofthediscussion
0.1to1points
Introductionpresentbutdoesnot
provideanoverviewofthe
discussion
0points
Notcompleted
Process
15Points
13.1to15points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionoftherequiredbusiness
processtopic.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysisand
evaluationofprocesssteps.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
5.1 to13 points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionoftherequiredbusiness
process.Demonstratessome
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofprocesssteps.Flowismostly
logicalandpartiallycited.Noless
thanminimumrequiredword
count.
0.1to5points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftherequiredbusiness
process.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisandevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
StrategicThinking
15Points
13.1to15points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysis,
evaluation,andsynthesisoftopic.
Flowislogicalandfullycited.No
lessthanminimumrequiredword
count.
5.1to13points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
andevaluationoftopic.Flowis
mostlylogicalandpartiallycited.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to5points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Lacksappropriate
levelofcriticalthinkingwithvery
littleornoanalysis,evaluation,or
synthesis.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
DecisionModel
10Points
8.1to10points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Complete
discussionofdecisionmodel(s)
beingconsideredtoincludewhy.
Flowislogicalandfullycited.No
lessthanminimumrequiredword
3.1 to8points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Minimal
discussionofdecisionmodel(s)
beingconsideredtoincludewhy.
Flowismostlylogicalandpartially
cited.Nolessthanminimum
0.1to3points
Sectionprovidesanincomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Nodiscussionof
decisionmodel(s)beingconsidered
toincludewhy.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page5of14
count.
requiredwordcount.
Conclusion
5Points
3.1to5points
Conclusionprovidesacomplete
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightskeypoints
1.1 to3points
Conclusionprovidesapartial
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightsatleastonekeypoints
0.1 to1points
Conclusionpresentbutdoesnot
summarizediscussionorhighlight
keypoints
0points
Notcompleted
Structure‐25PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Annotated
Bibliography
20Points
16.1to20points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.Evaluationofthequalityof
thepublication.Evaluationofthe
qualityoftheauthor(s).Description
ofwherethearticlefitsintothe
discussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
6.1 to16 points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingorpartial:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to6points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingoneormore:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0points
Notcompleted
APAFormat&
Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Nocoverpageand/orsection
headingsincluded.Metallofsome
requiredformatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
DiscussionBoard2‐5Reply
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page6of14
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐20PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Summary
8Points
6.1to8points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowislogicalandfully
cited.Nolessthanminimum
requiredwordcount.
2.1to6points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowismostlylogicaland
partiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to2points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftheauthor’smain
thread.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Evaluation
12Points
9.1to12points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withandwhyaswellaswhatthe
studentdisagreedwithandwhy.
Demonstratescriticalthinkingto
includeanalysisandevaluationof
theauthor’smainthread.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
3.1to9points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withordisagreedwith.Limitedor
nodiscussionofwhy.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofthetopic.Flowismostlylogical
andpartiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to3points
Sectionispresentbutprovidesa
weakevaluationoftheauthor’s
paperwithoutanydiscussionof
whatthestudentdisagreedwithor
why.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisorevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Structure‐5PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
APAFormat&Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Twosources(notthetextbooks)
notincludedand/orincorrect
referencelisting.Nocoverpage
and/orsectionheadingsincluded.
Metallofsomerequired
formatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page7of14
DiscussionBoard6MainThread
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐50PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Introduction
5Points
3.1to5points
Introductionprovidesancomplete
overviewofthediscussion
1.1to3points
Introductionprovidesanpartial
overviewofthediscussion
0.1to1points
Introductionpresentbutdoesnot
provideanoverviewofthe
discussion
0points
Notcompleted
Process
15Points
13.1to15points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionoftherequiredbusiness
processtopic.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysisand
evaluationofprocesssteps.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
5.1to13points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionoftherequiredbusiness
process.Demonstratessome
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofprocesssteps.Flowismostly
logicalandpartiallycited.Noless
thanminimumrequiredword
count.
0.1to5points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftherequiredbusiness
process.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisandevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
StrategicThinking
15Points
13.1to15points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysis,
evaluation,andsynthesisoftopic.
Flowislogicalandfullycited.No
lessthanminimumrequiredword
count.
5.1to13points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
andevaluationoftopic.Flowis
mostlylogicalandpartiallycited.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to5points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftherequiredstrategic
thinkingtopic.Lacksappropriate
levelofcriticalthinkingwithvery
littleornoanalysis,evaluation,or
synthesis.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
DecisionModel
10Points
8.1to10points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofkeydecisiontrapsto
avoidtoincludewhytheyarekey.
Flowislogicalandfullycited.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
3.1to8points
Sectionprovidesaminimal
discussionofkeydecisiontrapsto
avoidtoincludewhytheyarekey.
Flowismostlylogicalandpartially
cited.Nolessthanminimum
requiredwordcount.
0.1to3points
Sectionprovidesaminimal
discussionofkeydecisiontrapsto
avoidandnodiscussionofwhythey
arekey.Nolessthanminimum
requiredwordcount.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page8of14
Conclusion
5Points
3.1to5points
Conclusionprovidesacomplete
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightskeypoints
1.1to3points
Conclusionprovidesapartial
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightsatleastonekeypoints
0.1to1points
Conclusionpresentbutdoesnot
summarizediscussionorhighlight
keypoints
0points
Notcompleted
Structure‐25PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Annotated
Bibliography
20Points
16.1to20points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.Evaluationofthequalityof
thepublication.Evaluationofthe
qualityoftheauthor(s).Description
ofwherethearticlefitsintothe
discussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
6.1 to16 points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingorpartial:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to6points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingoneormore:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0points
Notcompleted
APAFormat&
Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Nocoverpageand/orsection
headingsincluded.Metallofsome
requiredformatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page9of14
DiscussionBoard6Reply
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐20PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Summary
8Points
6.1to8points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowislogicalandfully
cited.Nolessthanminimum
requiredwordcount.
2.1to6points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowismostlylogicaland
partiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to2points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftheauthor’smain
thread.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Evaluation
12Points
9.1to12points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withandwhyaswellaswhatthe
studentdisagreedwithandwhy.
Demonstratescriticalthinkingto
includeanalysisandevaluationof
theauthor’smainthread.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
3.1to9points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withordisagreedwith.Limitedor
nodiscussionofwhy.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofthetopic.Flowismostlylogical
andpartiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to3points
Sectionispresentbutprovidesa
weakevaluationoftheauthor’s
paperwithoutanydiscussionof
whatthestudentdisagreedwithor
why.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisorevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Structure‐5PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
APAFormat&Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Twosources(notthetextbooks)
notincludedand/orincorrect
referencelisting.Nocoverpage
and/orsectionheadingsincluded.
Metallofsomerequired
formatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page10of14
DiscussionBoard7MainThread
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐75PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Introduction
5Points
3.1to5points
Introductionprovidesancomplete
overviewofthediscussion
1.1to3points
Introductionprovidesanpartial
overviewofthediscussion
0.1to1points
Introductionpresentbutdoesnot
provideanoverviewofthe
discussion
0points
Notcompleted
BusinessIntegrity
20Points
16.1to20points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthepowerofbusiness
integrity.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysisand
evaluationofprocesssteps.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
6.1to16 points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionofthepowerofbusiness
integrity.Demonstratessome
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofprocesssteps.Flowismostly
logicalandpartiallycited.Noless
thanminimumrequiredword
count.
0.1to6points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsofthepowerofbusiness
integrity.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisandevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
God’sPerspectiveon
BusinessIntegrity
25Points
18.1to25points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofGod’sperspectiveon
businessintegrity.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
andevaluationofprocesssteps.
Flowislogicalandfullycited.No
lessthanminimumrequiredword
count.
8.1to18 points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionofGod’sperspectiveon
businessintegrity.Demonstrates
somecriticalthinkingtoinclude
analysisofprocesssteps.Flowis
mostlylogicalandpartiallycited.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to8points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsGod’sperspectiveon
businessintegrity.Lacks
appropriatelevelofcriticalthinking
withverylittleornoanalysisand
evaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
DecisionModel
20Points
16.1to20points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Complete
discussionofthechangesinthe
student’sdecisionmodeltoinclude
why.Flowislogicalandfullycited.
6.1to16 points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Minimal
discussionofthechangesinthe
student’sdecisionmodeltoinclude
why.Flowismostlylogicaland
0.1to6points
Sectionprovidesanincomplete
discussionofthestudent’scurrent
decisionmodel(s).Nodiscussionof
thechangesinthestudent’s
decisionmodeltoincludewhy.No
lessthanminimumrequiredword
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page11of14
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
partiallycited. Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
count.
Conclusion
5Points
3.1to5points
Conclusionprovidesacomplete
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightskeypoints
1.1to3points
Conclusionprovidesapartial
summaryofthediscussionand
highlightsatleastonekeypoints
0.1to1points
Conclusionpresentbutdoesnot
summarizediscussionorhighlight
keypoints
0points
Notcompleted
Structure‐25PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Annotated
Bibliography
20Points
16.1to20points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.Evaluationofthequalityof
thepublication.Evaluationofthe
qualityoftheauthor(s).Description
ofwherethearticlefitsintothe
discussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
6.1 to16 points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingorpartial:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0.1to6points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
SummaryofKeyPointsinthe
article.
Missingoneormore:
1)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
publication.
2)Evaluationofthequalityofthe
author(s).
3)Descriptionofwherethearticle
fitsintothediscussion.
Nolessthanminimumrequired
wordcount.
0points
Notcompleted
APAFormat&
Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Nocoverpageand/orsection
headingsincluded.Metallofsome
requiredformatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page12of14
DiscussionBoard7Reply
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐20PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Summary
8Points
6.1to8points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowislogicalandfully
cited.Nolessthanminimum
requiredwordcount.
2.1to6points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
summaryoftheauthor’smain
thread.Flowismostlylogicaland
partiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to2points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsoftheauthor’smain
thread.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Evaluation
12Points
9.1to12points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withandwhyaswellaswhatthe
studentdisagreedwithandwhy.
Demonstratescriticalthinkingto
includeanalysisandevaluationof
theauthor’smainthread.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
3.1to9points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
evaluationoftheauthor’spaperto
includewhatthestudentagreed
withordisagreedwith.Limitedor
nodiscussionofwhy.Demonstrates
criticalthinkingtoincludeanalysis
ofthetopic.Flowismostlylogical
andpartiallycited.Nolessthan
minimumrequiredwordcount.
0.1to3points
Sectionispresentbutprovidesa
weakevaluationoftheauthor’s
paperwithoutanydiscussionof
whatthestudentdisagreedwithor
why.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisorevaluation.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Structure‐5PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
APAFormat&Structure
5Points
3.1to5points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metallofthe
requiredformatting.
1.1 to3points
Twosourcesincluded(notthetext
books).Correctreferencelisting.
Propercoverpageandsection
headingsincluded.Metmostofthe
requiredformatting.
0.1to1points
Twosources(notthetextbooks)
notincludedand/orincorrect
referencelisting.Nocoverpage
and/orsectionheadingsincluded.
Metallofsomerequired
formatting.
0points
Nostructureorformatting
provided
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page13of14
LiteratureReview
CriteriaLevelsofAchievement
Content‐220PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
Introduction
10Points
8.1to10points
Introductionprovidesacleartheme
andacompleteoverviewofthe
literaturereview
4.1to8points
Introductionprovidesaweak
themeand/orapartialoverview
oftheliteraturereview
0.1to4points
Introductionpresentbutdoesnot
provideaclearthemeand/oran
overviewoftheliteraturereview
0points
Notcompleted
ResearchQuestion1
65Points
60.1to65points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofhowindividualand
groupdecisionprocessesaidor
impedebusinessdecisionmaking.
Comparesandcontrastsmultiple
views.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysis,
evaluation,andsynthesis.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan8
pagesinlengthwithnolessthan6
scholarlysourcesnotincludingthe
texts.
30.1to60 points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionofhowindividualand
groupdecisionprocessesaidor
impedebusinessdecisionmaking.
Failstocompareandcontrast
multipleviews.Demonstratessome
criticalthinkingtoincludesome
analysisandevaluation.Flowis
mostlylogicalandmostlycited.No
lessthan8pagesinlengthwithno
lessthan6scholarlysourcesnot
includingthetexts.
0.1to30 points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsofhowindividualand
groupdecisionprocessesaidor
impedebusinessdecisionmaking.
Failstocompareandcontrast
multipleviews.Lacksappropriate
levelofcriticalthinkingwithvery
littleornoanalysisandevaluation.
Flowisnotlogicaland/orpoorly
cited.Lessthan8pagesinlength
and/orlessthan6scholarly
sourcesnotincludingthetexts.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
ResearchQuestion2
65Points
60.1to65points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofthenewestdirections
intheprocessofstrategy
developmentandexecution.
Comparesandcontrastsmultiple
views.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysis,
evaluation,andsynthesis.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan8
pagesinlengthwithnolessthan6
scholarlysourcesnotincludingthe
texts.
30.1to60 points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionofthenewestdirections
intheprocessofstrategy
developmentandexecution.Fails
tocompareandcontrastmultiple
views.Demonstratessomecritical
thinkingtoincludesomeanalysis
andevaluation.Flowismostly
logicalandmostlycited.Noless
than8pagesinlengthwithnoless
than6scholarlysourcesnot
includingthetexts.
0.1to30 points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsofthenewestdirectionsin
theprocessofstrategy
developmentandexecution.Failsto
compareandcontrastmultiple
views.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisandevaluation.Flowisnot
logicaland/orpoorlycited.Less
than8pagesinlengthand/orless
than6scholarlysourcesnot
includingthetexts.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
BUSI770 GradingRubrics
07May2018 Page14of14
ResearchQuestion3
65Points
60.1to65points
Sectionprovidesacomplete
discussionofhowthestudent’s
academicdiscipline,asafunction
withintheorganization,impactsthe
processofbusinessstrategy
developmentandexecution.
Comparesandcontrastsmultiple
views.Demonstratescritical
thinkingtoincludeanalysis,
evaluation,andsynthesis.Flowis
logicalandfullycited.Nolessthan8
pagesinlengthwithnolessthan6
scholarlysourcesnotincludingthe
texts.
30.1to60 points
Sectionprovidesanearlycomplete
discussionofhowthestudent’s
academicdiscipline,asafunction
withintheorganization,impacts
theprocessofbusinessstrategy
developmentandexecution.Fails
tocompareandcontrastmultiple
views.Demonstratessomecritical
thinkingtoincludesomeanalysis
andevaluation.Flowismostly
logicalandmostlycited.Noless
than8pagesinlengthwithnoless
than6scholarlysourcesnot
includingthetexts.
0.1to30 points
Sectionispresentbutmissesmany
elementsofhowthestudent’s
academicdiscipline,asafunction
withintheorganization,impactsthe
processofbusinessstrategy
developmentandexecution.Failsto
compareandcontrastmultiple
views.Lacksappropriatelevelof
criticalthinkingwithverylittleorno
analysisandevaluation.Flowisnot
logicaland/orpoorlycited.Less
than8pagesinlengthand/orless
than6scholarlysourcesnot
includingthetexts.
0points
Notcompletedornotrelated
torequirementsforthe
section
Conclusion
15Points
12.1to15points
Conclusionprovidesacomplete
summaryoftheliteraturereview
andhighlightskeypointsfromeach
section.
6.1to12 points
Conclusionprovidesapartial
summaryoftheliteraturereview
andhighlightskeypointsfromat
leasttwosections.
0.1to6points
Conclusionpresentbutdoesnot
summarizetheliteraturereviewand
/orhighlightkeypoints.
0points
Notcompleted
Structure‐25PointsAdvancedProficientDevelopingNotpresent
APAFormat&
Structure
22.1to25points
Propercoverpage.Levelone
headingsforintroduction,research
questions,andconclusion.
Minimumoftwolevelsofheadings
withineachresearchquestion.One
inchmargins,doublespaced,12
pointfont.TableofContentsto
includeallleveloneandleveltwo
headings.Properlyformatted
referencesection
APAFormattingthroughout.
11.1 to22 points
Propercoverpage.Levelone
headingsforintroduction,research
questions,andconclusion.Oneinch
margins,doublespaced,12point
font.TableofContentstoinclude
allleveloneheadings.Properly
formattedreferencesection
APAFormattingthroughout.
0.1to11 points
Coverpage.NoTableofContents
and/orsectionheadingsincluded.
Metsomerequiredformatting.
0points
Minimalstructureand/or
formattingprovided
1
Deciding on the Strategic Direction
Name
Institution Affiliation
Course Name
Instructor
Date
2
Introduction
The decision on the strategies that a firm should adopt requires a clear strategic direction.
The strategic direction clarifies the future that a firm envisions, its overall purpose, and the
values that ought to guide its operations (Gamble et al., 2019). Without a clear picture of the
future that an organization envisions, its overall purpose, and the principles that guide an
organization, it would be difficult to develop strategies that will benefit the organization
immensely. The strategic direction development process can ensure that a firm adopts a fitting
strategic vision. Effective strategic thinking is also critical to the adoption of the right strategic
direction. A decision model, like the SWOT model, can help adopt a fitting strategic direction.
Strategic Direction Setting Process
Organizations should follow several steps when deciding on the strategic direction to
adopt. Step one is to wrestle on the directional path that the firm should take (Gamble et al.,
2019). The wrestling involves strategic thinking regarding the direction the firm should take and
discussing and debating on the same. When wrestling concerning strategic direction, the firm
should consider the products or services it considers to offer customers, markets and customers
to target, and technologies to adopt (Gamble et al., 2019). Step two in the process is the creation
of a strategic vision. A vision statement articulates a firm’s aspiration (Gamble et al., 2019). A
strategic vision aids steer a company towards the desired future.
Step three in the strategic direction setting process is the setting of a strategic mission. A
strategic mission communicates the overall purpose of an organization. A strategic mission for a
business organization specifies the firm’s customer-market-technology focus (Gamble et al.,
2019). The achievement of a firm’s strategic mission helps a firm move closer to achieving its
strategic vision (Bowen, 2018). Step four in the strategic direction setting process is agreeing on
3
core values. Core values are principles that ought to guide organizations employees on how to
act and behave (Bowen, 2018). The fifth step in the process is linking the vision and mission
statements with core values (Gamble et al., 2019). The linkage helps ensure that the values guide
the pursuit of the vision and mission.
Strategic Thinking
When engaging in strategic thinking regarding the strategic direction to adopt, a firm
should seek to discover its power. Rumelt (2011) argues that the discovery of an organization's
power is critical to the adoption of a good strategy. Rumelt (2011) also observes that a natural
advantage that many good strategies possess arises from an adequate understanding of strengths
and weaknesses when developing the strategies. Understanding a firm’s powers in the strategic
direction development process would help develop an excellent strategic direction. The strategic
thinking directed towards the development of an organization’s strategic direction should focus a
lot on discovering an organization’s powers and weaknesses.
Rumelt (2011) uses David and Goliath's Biblical story to highlight the crucial importance
of discovering powers and weaknesses in the strategic planning process. Goliath was a Philistine
soldier who was over nine feet tall and hard to defeat in battle (Rumelt, 2011). David was a small
boy who was not old enough to be a soldier. David understood his strengths and weaknesses
quite well, and the understanding led him to adopt a fighting strategy that would help him with
the battle. David used a sling to throw a stone at Goliath, and the stone killed the huge soldier.
An adequate understanding of a firm’s strengths and weaknesses can help the firm adopt a
winning strategic direction like it helped David a strategy that was effective in defeating Goliath.
4
Decision Model
One of my favorite decision models that would apply in the strategic direction
development process is the SWOT analysis model. The wrestling regarding the directional path
to adopt requires a detailed analysis of a firm's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
Such an analysis would help select the best strategic direction (Krogerus & Tschäppeler, 2018).
Without an adequate understanding of a firm’s internal strengths and weaknesses and the
opportunities and threats existing in its operating environment, it would be difficult to adopt
strategic visions and missions that would steer the firm towards success (Sammut‐Bonnici &
Galea, 2015). The technique can also be used to analyze competing directional paths and select
the path that will maximize returns for a firm.
Conclusion
A firm has to agree on the strategic direction to adopt strategies that will help move in the
set direction. Steps in the strategic direction setting process are wrestling on the directional path
to take, strategic vision creation, strategic mission creation, agreeing on core values, and linking
vision and mission to score values. The discovery of powers and weaknesses is critical in
strategic thinking regarding the selection of a strategic direction. The SWOT analysis is a potent
model in the discovery of powers and weaknesses.
5
References
Bowen, S. A. (2018). Mission and vision. The international encyclopedia of strategic
communication, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0111
Gamble, J., Peteraf, M., & Thompson, A. (2019). Essentials of Strategic Management, McGraw
- Hill Higher Education (6th ed.), New York, NY.
Krogerus, M., & Tschäppeler, R. (2018). The decision book: 50 models for strategic thinking. W.
Norton & Company, Inc., New York, NY.
Rumelt, R. (2011). Good strategy/bad strategy: The difference and why it matters. Crown
Business, New York, NY.
Sammut‐Bonnici, T., & Galea, D. (2015). SWOT analysis. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management,
1-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom120103
6
Annotated Bibliography
Bowen, S. A. (2018). Mission and vision. The international encyclopedia of strategic
communication, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0111
Summary of Key Points
The publication discusses what vision statements and mission statements are and
their importance to organizations. According to Bowen (2018), vision and mission
statements are critical to organizations' success as they give the organization strategic
direction. Bowen (2018) observes that vision statements specify where an organization
would like to be eventually. Thus, vision statements determine the long-term goals
adopted by organizations. The author differentiates mission from vision statements by
arguing that mission statements are concrete and prioritize organizational activities. The
article also emphasizes the importance of core values to the development of missions and
visions.
Quality of the Publication
The publication is of superior quality. The publication is of superior quality
because it is a research article published in a peer-reviewed journal. The article is
published in the International Encyclopedia of Strategic Communication journal. The
particular journal is well respected and publishes great quality articles. The second reason
why the publication is of superior quality is that it is thoroughly researched.
Quality of the Author(s)
The publication is authored by a great quality author. Shannon A. Bowen is a
scholar whose research focus is on management and strategy, among other areas. Bowen
has published several other peer-reviewed research papers.
7
Where the Article Fits in the Discussion
The area where the article fits in the discussion is in the discussion of the steps of
strategic direction development. Vision statements and mission statements are critical to
the development of a strategic direction. The article discusses the importance of the two
statements to an organization's strategic direction and the link between an organization’s
core values and the statements.
Sammut‐Bonnici, T., & Galea, D. (2015). SWOT analysis. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management,
1-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom120103
Summary of Key Points
The purpose of the research article is to expound on the SWOT analysis decision
model to the reader. The publication states that the SWOT analysis is a tool that helps
organizations analyze issues in their internal and external environments that may enhance
or hinder their performance. Sammut‐Bonnici and Galea (2015) observe that the SWOT
tool's strengths and weaknesses regard the organization's internal environments while the
opportunities and threats components regard external environments. The authors
emphasize the importance of the tool in organizational strategic planning. The tool
informs the area of improvement and factors that provide businesses competitive
advantages.
Quality of the Publication
The publication is of great quality. One reason why the article is of great quality is
that it is a thoroughly researched scholarly article. The authors of the publication cite
reliable sources to defend the claims made in the article. Another reason why the article is
8
of great quality is that it is a peer-reviewed article published in a reputable journal. The
article is published in the Wiley Encyclopedia of Management journal.
Quality of the Author(s)
The publication is authored by great quality authors. Tanya Sammut‐Bonnici and
David Galea have published many other peer-reviewed scholarly articles on business and
economics topics. The two academics are quite experienced in writing a superior quality
article.
Where the Article Fits in the Discussion
In the decision model section of the article, the SWOT analysis model is
discussed as a useful model the strategic direction development. The article explains the
usage of the SWOT model, and it provides vital support for the usefulness of the model
in analyzing an organization's internal and external environments for planning reasons.
Introduction
I. The decision on the strategies that a firm should adopt requires a clear strategic direction.
Strategic Direction Setting Process
I. Organizations should follow several steps when deciding on the strategic direction to
adopt.
Strategic Thinking
I. When engaging in strategic thinking regarding the strategic direction to adopt, a firm
should seek to discover its power.
Decision Model
I. One of my favorite decision models that would apply in the strategic direction
development process is the SWOT analysis model.
Conclusion
I. A firm has to agree on the strategic direction to adopt strategies that will help move in the
set direction.