Review on 'Strategy as Revolution' Essay
After reading what precisely the article expounds and analyses, revolution stays as the core of strategy. 'The article 'Strategy as Revolution' clarifies the role revolution plays in the markets and declared ten principles to help a company discover revolutionary strategies and put into practice. All the third kinds of companies mentioned in the article have opportunities to reach what they want, however, the different roles determine the market hierarchy. 'In a growing number of industries, innovation is increasingly disrupting existing patterns of competition(Andersen & Strandskov, 2008),' just like what Gary Hamel (2000) said, the simple phrase, 'Familiarity is the enemy'(Chris Lauer , 2008).
The title should …show more content…
The article for the Harvard Business Review, 1996 elaborates principles to discover revolutionary strategies and embodies how a companies could liberate its revolutionary spirit, which contributes to reminding the incumbents of revolutionary strategy. It is a guidance to all, especially those who are intent on overturning the industrial order.
Generally, the core thought of this article is certified with strong arguments orderly. Apparently, this is more accessible for reader to understand and apply in detail. Since acknowledging the factors influencing revolution, companies have more opportunities to unearth the revolutionary strategies.
But business world is never machine-parsable so that strategies can not be applied mechanically straight. 'Few successful incumbents adopted either extreme strategy of wholly ignoring or completely embracing revolution(D'Aveni, 2002)'. A combination of revolution and convention would be appropriate for a majority of companies. However, what 'Strategy as Revolution' really highlights is to stay eager for revolution.
Not only in the very late 20th century the revolutionary strategy had great effects on business, but in the next (21st) century, 'innovation will be the core competency, as Peter Drucker said'. Here obviously under the assumption that innovation is partial