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

Once again, this past week flew by really quickly. This week¿s theme was on strategy in which I found that out of all the readings, I felt that the reading about the Blue Ocean Strategy to be the most interesting. I find that what Kim and Mauborgne have done in this article; splitting up the market into two different sectors; the red ocean that contains all the existing companies and the blue, containing the unknown, or rather, the market that none has attempted to venture into, to be rather useful and helpful, not only for those who are wanting to get into the innovation/production sector, but just about everyone else in the world today (2004). The reason being is that even if you may not be in the IT industry, (oftentimes when people think of innovation, the brand Apple/IBM/Sony comes into mind, all of which pertains to the technology sector), but by applying it to my own situation, for instance, the film industry instead, one would require at least a rough knowledge of what is and was existing in the industry already, for instance, the types of genres that had been produced, the cinematography techniques that had been and are still engaged with today and even the actors that had or are still stars today. Not only are these things important, but by knowing them, one would also know what or who else has not entered the market. Hence, seeing how one of the main points highlighted in the article is about how setting up your strategy in the ¿blue ocean¿ opposes one¿s common way of thinking/setting up a strategy, for instance, evident in how it does not support the common way of thinking that a strategy basically being a decision ¿between differentiation and low cost¿ but believes that one can still be successful by going after differentiation and low cost at the same time (Chan and Mauborgne, 2004, p. 82), it reflects on the success of Easy Rider (1969), which instigated the entire New Hollywood phrase, in which it saw major studios being able to make profit from low-budget films, and creating the success of unknown actors as well (this was a film that contributed to Jack Nicholson¿s rise to fame). 

Also, as this week¿s topic was on strategy, as mentioned earlier, the lecture on Monday saw us not only covering Porter¿s generic strategies, but different strategies such as ¿low cost strategy, differentiation strategy, focus strategy¿ and seeing which are the two strategies that we may choose to go for in regards to MikesBikes. For my team, I would say that we might have actually come up with a pretty different and unique strategy if compared to others. As of now, it is a definite to say that we do not know how our final results would eventually be but it would be pretty interesting to see how things work out. Also, applying these strategies to the Blue Ocean article, I wonder if there are many, like us, who may actually choose to venture away from the ¿safe¿ market and actually aim towards the unknown¿  

References:

Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategy. Harvard Business Review, 82(10, 75--84 

2 Comments

  1. Hi Priscilla,

    First of all, thank you for the opportunity to review your learning journal. The main thing of which you have demonstrated learning is through your knowledge on the readings. This was shown with how you explained Kim & Mauborgnes blue ocean strategy, then went on to how the New Hollywood phrase was instigated. I appreciate how you related Peter's lecture on Monday to the readings and tried implementing such content to your teams strategy for Mikes Bikes.

    However, my only bit of advice is for future journals to reflect more upon what you actually found difficult from the week. Ask yourself questions about what the content is really saying and analyse more in depth so that you gain a stronger understanding of the topic. In other words, try and follow Daudelin's steps to learning and the Blooms taxonomy article in terms of analysing the readings more in depth to show your level of learning from the week. Try and tie in how the readings relate to your own personal experiences more so that we can see that you really do have strong grasp on the topic.

    In saying that, you have helped me see that I need to improve my journals more by sharing my knowledge of the readings also, so thank you and keep up the good work.

  2. Hi there Priscilla!

    Okay this feels a bit weird having to review your own but here goes! I think it was good that you have relate your own experience from your other courses and with what you have learnt the past week, be it from the lectures and readings.

    Based on what you have written above, the highest level that you have reached on the Bloom's Taxonomy is the analysis level. This means that you have achieved analysing what you think is going on in your team, in relation to the week's reading and what the lectures are about. 

    However, to improve your journal even further, like what Josephine mentioned above, perhaps you can go further in-depth and reflect even more, especially in regards to the articles by Daudelin and the Bloom's Taxonomy. It would be good to perhaps go back and reread these articles to get an even better and clearer understanding of what they are in order to apply them to your future journals. All the best and continue persisting for this course!!