Wiki contents

Journals

2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This week’s rollover (particularly the decision making process) was, I guess, the most interesting ever because my team started considering a number of different and (incredibly) unique ways to improve our company performance without changing our goal or strategy. I could feel other members’ passion for our firm and was surprised at their ability to come up with a stunning idea. One of readings in this week about how to seize the opportunities to grow or improve performance seemed quite beneficial for our firm to realize whether or not our decision making has been truly appropriate. I think that our decision making and growth strategy has been accurate but our way of growth seems a bit different from what competitors are currently doing. In my opinion, this is not an issue but such difference cannot be ignored.

 

First, according to the reading “Is your growth strategy flying blind? (Baghat, 2009)”, a more granular approach is required to enable a firm to grow. In terms of understanding market potential, I think that my team members have enough capability to assess segments and markets and our strategy to increase market share seems to be recognized as a precise manner (Baghat, 2009). On the other hand, however, our competitors are good at sizing up by the other way such as acquisitions. Considering the density of market entry of firms in the country we are operating in, I reckon that it is fairly hard to find or guess the market segment which has the best potential because what we think is the best may be the same or similar to other firms’ expectation. Ironically, too much guessing will usually lead us and competitors to the same direction (I don’t know why though…). In this situation, acquisitions seem really good way to gain the source of growth with low risks of such guessing war and, in that sense, some of competitors are currently doing well and seem talented enough for us to compete with.

What I still do not know is how much those different sources of growth make a difference in performance between my firm and competitors. As I mentioned, acquisitions seem critical but critical way or idea sometimes includes more risks in terms of costs in particular. In MikesBikes, firms can takeover a firm to gain more market potential but there is the possibility that such potential cannot cover the costs because potential is just potential. Therefore, my team needs to consider whether or not other firms can take an advantage from the takeover and, if so, to what extent they can. Depending on our thoughts about those questions, we need to come up with more precise plan to beat them.

Overall, this week’ journal was quite interesting and clearly indicated that our company and competitors’ action in the last couple of rollovers were appropriate and different approaches have made our competition much more interesting. Now that we just only have two weeks to go in terms of MikesBikes simulation so I really hope that those following team activities will lead us to our long term goal (smile)

 

Reference

Baghai, M., Smit, S., & Viguerie, P. (2009). Is your growth strategy flying blind? Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 86---96.

2 Comments

  1. Hello!

    First of all I wanted to say that I am sorry for the feedback I left on your journal in week 4; at the time I was pulled over on the side of the road trying to do the reviews with my mobile phone which is why it was a very lacklustre effort. I hope I am able to provide better feedback this time around!

    So after re-reading your week four learning journal I can definitely still say it is a fantastic one. You did a very good job following Daudelin's structure by identifying a problem, analyzing it, coming up with a way to solve it, and then executing the idea.

    There really was not much to critique in your learning journal, which is quite astonishing for only being 4 weeks in. Like I said then, there were a few grammatical mistakes; looking back at it now it was actually a little more than that. Although all the content was spot on, I did find it somewhat challenging to read and often found my self having to read a sentence two or three times.

    So... has this aspect approved over the weeks? In short, yes, it has. Although there were still a few small grammar errors this is too be expected in any first draft (there are probably even more in this feedback submission).

    Keep up the good work, I am sure you will have no issues getting a great grade on the final assignment. 

    Good luck with the last week of Mikesbikes as well.

  2. Hi,

    The improvements that your have made from your week four journal are obvious. I commented on grammar and sentence structure, these were minor errors but you have taken this on board and as a result this journal is clearer to read. I am able to easily follow what you are reflecting on.
    An improvement for this journal would be to make your problem clearer. It doesn't hurt to outline it, then dive deeper into the ideas and foundations behind it.