When the narrow military strategic analysis could no longer enable him to display his analytical ability, he left RAND Corporation and turned to the commercial field. 1956, he joined Lockheed Space Company and became a planner. In the analysis of the company's business, Ansoff believes that the company should diversify its business and begin to actively promote it. In the meantime, he published relevant articles in Harvard Business Review, and put forward the concept of product and market matching. He believes that the essence of enterprise management strategy is composed of four factors: existing products, future products, existing markets and future markets, which has become the prototype of the famous Ansoff matrix. Later, he was promoted to vice president of Lockheed Electronics. As a senior manager of the company, he needs to play the dual role of decision-maker and executor. He continued to use his product and market analysis to reorganize his business and organization drastically, reducing the high-tech department of 17 to three and reducing hundreds of engineers.
Ansoff left Lockheed in order to have enough time and energy to sum up strategic management experience and do further in-depth research. From 65438 to 0963, 45-year-old Ansoff entered the Graduate School of Management of Carnegie Mellon University and began to engage in professional strategic management research and teaching. His experience in Lockheed convinced him that "there are practical decision-making methods in commercial enterprises". This also became the motive force of his writing Enterprise Strategy, and this classic of strategic management became his famous work.
Ansoff believes that the difference between strategic management and previous management is that strategic management is a dynamic and continuous process from decision-making to realization facing the future. Ansoff defines business strategy as a strategic decision made by an enterprise to adapt to the external environment. Therefore, Ansoff believes that the core of enterprise strategy should be to find its own position, clarify its own goals, and clarify the actions that must be taken to achieve these goals. He limited the enterprise strategy to the scope of products and markets. He believes that the content of enterprise strategy includes four elements: product market scope, growth vector, competitive advantage and synergistic effect. He divided the decision-making of enterprises into three categories: strategy (about products and markets), administration (about structure and resource allocation) and daily operation (about budget, supervision and control). Ansoff believes that enterprise survival consists of environment, strategy and organization. Only when the three are coordinated and adapted to each other can the efficiency of enterprises be effectively improved. On the basis of these theories, he designed Ansoff model, the core of which is to determine effective enterprise strategy through the analysis of enterprises and markets. I'm afraid it's not an exaggeration to describe this situation with many schools of strategic management and various viewpoints one after another. Mintzberg, a famous strategic management scholar, described this situation as "the blind touch the elephant". In this case, revisiting H.Igor Ansoff, the originator of strategic management, grasping strategic management from the source and understanding "where I come from" is the best way to know "where I am going".
When the first enterprise strategy book "Enterprise Strategy" (1965) was just published, Ansoff clearly declared his strategic management proposition. In his view, the purpose of strategic management is to "develop a series of theories and procedures with practical value so that managers can use them to operate ... commercial companies can make strategic decisions with these practical methods." This is not only Ansoff's pursuit of establishing a theoretical system of strategic management, but also his mission as a corporate strategy researcher. History has proved that he did it, and it has been widely recognized in the world.
Because there are few Chinese translations of Ansoff's works in China, few readers in China have the opportunity to read Ansoff's works directly. In order to help readers quickly understand Ansoff and his thoughts, let's walk into Ansoff's magnificent life together.
When it comes to enterprise strategy theory, people will naturally associate it with military strategy. For example, the military strategy of China's ancient art of war, Zhu Gekongming's military strategy and so on. Indeed, the concept of enterprise strategy itself originated and formed from these military strategies. However, Ansoff strongly opposes simply applying military strategy, especially the model of military strategy, in the process of strategic management. We know that in the military field, the so-called strategy mainly refers to the connection between military intelligence collection, action plan, scheme layout and battlefield deployment. The biggest difference between military strategy and enterprise strategy is that the former aims at defeating each other, while the enterprise strategy aims at integrating resources and creating value, and resolutely opposes the vicious competition of cannibalism. Moreover, under the enterprise background, it is impossible for an authoritarian "family business" to create a culture of "obeying orders as its first duty", which determines that the enterprise strategy is completely different from the military strategy. In the last 20 years of the 20th century, many enterprises in China implemented their enterprise strategies by imitating military strategies, but none of them achieved good results.
Military strategy and enterprise strategy are inextricably linked. Ansoff did not directly engage in military intelligence or military strategy before joining the enterprise strategy. However, his birthplace and the background nature of his first job are related to military or intelligence.
19 18, Ansov was born in Vladivostok, a city in the Far East in the Soviet era. His father is an American diplomat in the Soviet Union and his mother is a Soviet. He spent his childhood in Vladivostok and had a certain understanding of the cultural and social conditions of the Soviet Union. The opportunity of growing up in the Soviet Union gave him a better understanding of the military strategy of the Soviet Union, the number one enemy of the United States at that time, and a direct understanding of the strategic contest between the two military powers.
1924, 6-year-old Ansoff moved to Moscow with his family. 1936, his family moved to new york, USA. In the United States, Ansoff studied at Stevens Institute of Technology and received a doctorate in engineering mathematics. In the process of learning, Ansoff showed rigorous talent and ability in data analysis and mathematical analysis, and his ability in data analysis made him show outstanding advantages in intelligence and strategic analysis. However, judging from Ansoff's educational background, he is most likely to become an engineer or mathematician. However, after graduating from Stevens Institute of Technology, it coincided with the end of World War II. Because of Ansoff's background, ability and skills, he had the opportunity to engage in professional strategic development after the war. From 65438 to 0950, Ansoff joined the RandFoundation, a US military think tank, and participated in the formulation and planning of US military strategy. During his years in the RAND Foundation, he collected information, analyzed data and formulated strategies all day, which was an extremely rare exercise and laid a solid foundation for him to establish his own strategic theory in the future. Of course, if he had been a think tank all his life and studied strategy for the US military, he would never have become Ansoff, the originator of strategic management today. From 65438 to 0956, Ansoff left the Rand Foundation and worked for the famous airline LockheedCorporation, and later became the company's vice president. Initially, as the strategic planner of the company, Ansoff studied and implemented Lockheed's industrial diversification strategy. Not long after, due to his outstanding achievements, Ansoff was promoted to vice president of Lockheed Electronics, a subsidiary of Lockheed Group. In the electronics company, Ansoff started the business-related organizational structure adjustment according to the new business requirements, reduced the 17 high-tech department to three departments, and abolished hundreds of professional engineers. It was also during this period that he experienced many important decisions that affected others and his own life development. Due to the reorganization of organizational structure, many people's iron rice bowls have been broken, he has been scolded and confused, and he has also experienced difficulties and hardships in implementing the strategy. No one knows how much Lockheed's experience has influenced his future strategic theory and practice. The author believes that it is equally important for enterprises and employees to at least let him deeply understand whether strategic planning and management are appropriate. AnthonyRobbins, a famous American expert in organizational behavior with profound psychological background, once said that personal experience will be stored in his mind and become his "FabricofLife", which constitutes his belief and makes him go forward and accept challenges. A comprehensive survey of Ansoff's life experience in strategic research, teaching, consulting and promotion after leaving Lockheed shows that Lockheed's work experience has really had a great impact on his life. People all know Jack Welch of GE, and know the changes and brilliant achievements of GE. However, people often know little about the factors behind peter drucker. In the same way, when it comes to strategic management, people know that it is more of a flow of words from the resource school and the ability school, but few people really appreciate the core framework and development path in the jungle of strategic management. It should be said that no matter how developed the later school of strategic management is, no matter how dazzling new terms, new concepts, new tools and new methods are, it is difficult to fundamentally replace Ansoff's most basic exploration in strategic management: on the one hand, how to ensure the scientific nature of theoretical systems, on the other hand, how to make these theoretical systems become effective application tools in enterprise management and produce practical results. Due to the influence of the nature of management discipline, the speed of theoretical renewal is unmatched by other social sciences. In order to highlight their own value, various new theories do not hesitate to criticize the previous theories. As far as Ansoff's criticism is concerned, early criticisms such as mintzberg's are pertinent, but many criticisms after thirty years belong to "blind criticism". The reason is that the company's strategy, strategic planning and strategic management have been continuously improved after years of continuous exploration in Ansoff system. To put it more bluntly, Ansoff himself has long criticized and thoroughly reformed the criticisms made by many authors. Can the criticism made in this case have other functions besides flaunting its own purpose?
In 197 1, Ansoff published the acquisition behavior of American manufacturers 1946- 1965. The book describes in detail the behavior of American enterprises in mergers and acquisitions, and on this basis, it deeply analyzes the reasons for the success or failure of mergers and acquisitions. The following year, he published another striking article: The Concept of Strategic Management. In his article, he pointed out that strategic management measures should be comprehensively applied to every procedure of enterprise management, not just considering its application in strategic planning. 1973, under the sponsorship of IBM and GeneralElectric, Ansoff organized an international conference on interdisciplinary strategic management. At the meeting, business management scholars and managers from all over the world gathered together and put forward their own opinions and experiences on strategic management. This meeting can be understood as a consultation meeting before Ansoff's strategic management theory was formed, and it can also be understood as an important direct communication or interview conducted by Ansoff in the process of seeking the answer to the "analysis paralysis" question. On the basis of full case study and consultation, Ansoff published From Strategic Planning to Strategic Management in 1974. It can be said that this book is a harvest of Ansoff's search for the answer to the question "ParalysisbyAnalysis" for many years, and the direct source of this book is the result of the international conference 1973. Ansoff believes that the function of an organization is mainly to implement the strategy: everything, including the organizational structure and hierarchy, should be designed and operated according to the strategic plan. Under the influence of Ansoff's strategic planning proposition, GM formally established the position of strategic manager. This position is mainly responsible for revising and supervising the implementation of the relevant planning contents formulated in the company's strategic planning document Blue Book. Later, GM created brilliant achievements and kept them for quite a long time. This shows the great contribution of Ansoff's strategic management.
Shortly after the international conference 1973, Ansoff went to teach at the European Institute for Advanced Management (EIASM) in Belgium. As mentioned above, Ansoff has spent decades exploring and overcoming the problems and defects in the company's strategy and strategic management. Although the literature does not record the most fundamental motivation of Ansoff's trip to Europe, we can contact him to make such a hypothesis about his efforts in exploring strategic management contradictions and problems: in order to fundamentally solve the problem of "paralysis caused by analysis", he studied many American cases, held international conferences for extensive consultation, and conducted experiments in famous enterprises such as General Motors, but these efforts were limited to the American background. So, as the birthplace of modern industry, what is the background of Europe? Therefore, we can guess that the fundamental purpose of Ansoff's transfer to Europe is to further explore and improve the enterprise strategy theory, absorb the excellent nutrients of enterprise strategy from Europe, and further verify the strategy theory in Europe. In fact, these speculations in this book are not groundless and can be verified by Ansoff's main activities in Europe. In Europe, in addition to teaching, Ansoff also led a number of pan-European strategic management projects, and conducted in-depth thematic research on enterprise management strategy, social development strategy and strategic management in chaotic environment, exploring its success factors and measures to prevent mistakes. During his stay in Europe, Ansoff also taught at Stockholm School of Economics. After six years' training in Europe, Ansoff's "cultivation" in strategic management can be said to have reached a higher level. Later, he not only put forward a complete theoretical system for strategic management, but also provided a series of practical methods and measures for effectively implementing his strategic management thoughts. The strategic management published by 1979 and the implantable strategic management published by 1984 are important symbols of his achievements in this field.
From 65438 to 0983, Ansoff returned to the United States and served as a senior professor of strategic management at American International University in San Diego, California, offering master's and doctoral programs in strategic management. Before his death, Ansoff was distinguished professor of American International University, president of Ansoff Friendship Association and director of Gemini Consulting Company. His strategic management consulting company specializes in providing strategic planning and strategic management consulting services for enterprises. While teaching, researching and providing consulting services, one of Ansoff's important tasks is to publicize his strategic management theory, with the aim of effectively "implanting" strategic management into the hearts of business management professionals. Ansoff's efforts not only gave him many practical opportunities, but also expanded the number of supporters.
On July 14, 2002, Ansoff died in San Diego, California at the age of 83. As the saying goes, the final judgment is final. Today, we can completely characterize the originator of strategic management-of course, it is the characterization of his corporate strategic thinking and the evaluation of his academic value and practical significance of corporate strategy. From the academic point of view, the rise and development of strategic management can be said that Ansoff's most outstanding contribution lies in his pioneering and laying the foundation for enterprise strategy and strategic management. Before Ansoff, strategic planning was only a small part of enterprise management, and it didn't have much status in university forums or in the minds of enterprise management practitioners, and the related works were even less. Ansoff introduced strategic planning and strategic management into the management hall, and he also cast them into the hearts of enterprise management practitioners. What's more, he wrote one strategic masterpiece after another, which provided indispensable "nutrients" for later enterprise strategists and practitioners. By the same token, Ansoff naturally sat on the steps of the management temple with these contributions, and became one of the gods of management and the object of worship by later management scholars.
China is in a period of great transformation of economic and social development, accompanied by painful expectation and agitation. At the same time, the domestic strategic management theory research innovation is insufficient, and the applied research is not operable. The former lies in the fact that few articles clearly define the difference between their own research achievements and existing achievements, and the latter lies in the difficulty in defining the tool application nature, application scope and evaluation method of their own achievements. These problems show that China's strategic management needs to continue to develop and mature. From this perspective, Ansoff's strategic management theory not only provides us with valuable theoretical resources, but also brings us mature research concepts and methods.
In the book Strategic Management published by 1979, Ansoff systematically put forward eight elements of strategic management: external environment, strategic budget, strategic power, management ability, power, power structure, strategic leadership and strategic behavior. It is clearly pointed out that the essence of strategic management is to systematically manage "enterprise strategy" as an object and function. If the book "Enterprise Strategy" is mainly a systematic exposition of the concept and operation method of enterprise strategy, then "Strategic Management" is a systematic study of enterprise strategic management under the highly turbulent development environment after fourteen years. Dr Ansoff, the father of strategic management, put forward Ansoff matrix in 1975. Taking product and market as two basic aspects, it is one of the most widely used marketing analysis tools to distinguish four products/market portfolio and corresponding marketing strategies. Ansoff matrix is a 2X2 matrix, which represents four choices that enterprises try to increase their income or profits. The main logic is that enterprises can choose four different growth strategies to achieve the goal of increasing income. As shown in the figure:
1. Market penetration)-Facing existing customers with existing products, focusing on its product market portfolio, and striving to increase the market share of products. Adopt the strategy of market penetration, persuade consumers to switch to different brands of products by promoting sales or improving service quality, or persuade consumers to change their habits and increase their purchases.
2, market development (market development)-to provide existing products to open up new markets, enterprises must find users and customers with the same product needs in different markets, which often product positioning and sales methods will be adjusted, but the core technology of the product itself does not need to be changed.
3. Product development-introduce new products to existing customers, adopt the strategy of product extension, and leverage existing customer relationships. Usually it is to expand the depth and breadth of existing products, introduce new generation or related products to existing customers, and increase the market share of manufacturers in consumers' pockets.
4, diversification (diversification)-to provide new products to new markets, here because the existing professional knowledge and ability of enterprises may be useless, so it is the most risky diversification strategy. Among them, most successful enterprises can achieve some synergy in sales, channels or product technology, otherwise the probability of diversification failure is very high.