Wiki contents


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

The readings for this week and Monday¿s lecture revolved around the topic of strategies. Personally I think it would have been more beneficial to have covered this topic two weeks ago or even last week. The only reason that I say this is that now we are unable to go offline and practice and Solo Mike is very different to NetMike therefore, it makes us slightly hesitant in the deciding and implementation of new strategies as it is a big risk and if it goes badly does not just affect the individual, but there entire team. Although in saying this I also see the positive of having the lecture topics ordered the way that they were. In the real world, in real organisations it is extremely unlikely that you will ever get to practice the decisions you would like to make or the organisational strategy – in the real world these are risks that you will have to take based on research and useful information gathered.

I think that all the readings this week were very relevant to the topic. Magretta (2002) discussed the importance of having a business model as it was described as the ¿story of an organisation¿. I agree with that statement completely as without a business model in place the entire team has no idea what they are doing. Discuss, plan and develop and effective business model and you will already be putting yourself ahead of the majority of your competition as you and your team will know exactly what the organisation is hoping to achieve and how it will be achieved.
This then leads me to the Kim & Mauborgne (2002) reading where they discuss the ¿strategy canvas¿ which basically just tells how that you have to take a step back and look the big picture. In order to achieve the greatest outcome you have to know and understand the market and the organisation¿s competitors. For your company to succeed it doesn¿t just have to perform well, it needs to out-perform its competitors and in order for something like this to be achieved, an understanding of the market, the opportunities, and the competitors is required as well as a humble approach. Never assume that you know everything that is happening, think you know enough and always be aware and cautious of what is going on and decisions that are being made.
The final reading Kim & Mauborgne (2004) approached the idea of strategy from the angle of creating your OWN market or demand either inside or outside of the existing market. While this is a very good idea, it is risky and difficult to implement. Regardless of whether the organisation is going to develop its market internally or externally, a point of differentiation is required that the consumers are going to require. Trying to be innovative and uncover this idea could be something very simple or the most complex process; either way it will need to be well researched and tested thoroughly. If an organisation is effective in creating its own demand the success that the organisation would receive would be great due to the venture into an untapped market of consumers.

If I was to the look at all three readings conjunctively and how they relate to my position as CEO and my team in NetMike; I would still agree with the messages from all three readings however, I am not sure if I would follow them all. Magretta (2002) and Kim & Mauborgne (2002) most definitely, I fully agree that a good business model is required for a team to work effectively and achieve organisational goals, as a business model is basically a step-by-step guide or map to success for an organisation. I think that without a business model, members of team will go astray; a business model is the guide or map that keeps them on the correct path – the path to success. Understanding the market and organisational competitors is also a big factor, in NetMike I am continuously checking what the market is looking like and what my competition is doing; organisations market share as well as other information as well as trying to predict, but never assuming to fully comprehend what your competitors are doing is very important to try and stay ahead of the game per se. Kim & Mauborgne (2004) is slightly more risky and NetMike is not something that I would personally refer to as an area of expertise therefore I wouldn¿t take any risks without the rest of the team agreeing unanimously.

Overall I thought it was a good week in regards to the lecture, the readings and NetMike. The lecture was fairly informative and the readings were enjoyable with some good ideas incorporated into the discussions; and as for NetMike I believe that my team is in a strong position, but it is still early and only time will tell how strong we really are.


Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. (2002). Charting your company¿s future. Harvard Business Review, 80(6), 76--83

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

Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 80(5), 86--92


  1. Hi Emilio

    Definitely in my opinion one of the better reflective journals that i have read over the past few weeks. I like how you give your opinion on what the readings say and then tie in all together and look at it from the perspective of being the CEO of your team.

    In terms of the learning barrier i think you have managed to break through it by explaining how the different 'messages' from the readings can be applied to your team in MikeBikes. You may like to focus more on this then on the readings in future journals and potentially 1 of the readings rather then all of them so you can 'get stuck into' what it is trying to say in more detail.

    In terms of how i think it can improve my future journals, i think i will use your basic style of approach by reflecting on the content of the readings first and then on how what they are saying can be applied my current team as well as past teams.



  2. Hi Emilio,

    Thank you for the opportunity to review your learning journal. The main thing of which you have demonstrated learning is the importance of having a business model and the difference between that and strategy.

    In terms of how well I followed Daudelin's approach, I think that I outlined one problem and analysed it well, however through re-reading Daudelin and my journal I can see that I have still got room for improvement. I nneed to make sure that I focus on all parts of Daudelin's four steps, as I barely touched on step four.

    The highest level of Bloom's Taxonomy that I showed was application through refering what I learnt from the readings back to experiences I had in my team.

    Suggestions for next time would be to follow Daudelin more closely and to try demonstrate higher levels in Bloom's taxonomy.

    Thank you for sharing your work, through critiquing my work this week I now understand better on how to improve my journals in the future.