Strategic consensus in operations strategy

Abstract

Abstract Many companies' operations strategies resemble roadmaps: they are very detailed, yet poorly communicated across the organization and inflexible in reacting to environmental changes. In contrast, an operations strategy which is clearly outlined, widely understood and allows flexibility to adapt to changes in the environment more closely resembles a compass. For a strategy to be effective it must not only be appropriate (i.e., be well‐fitted to its competitive environment) but it also must be communicated and widely understood throughout the organization. This research examines the theoretical arguments regarding why such strategic consensus is important and presents an exploratory analysis of data from seven manufacturing plants. One of the weaknesses of the extant literature on operations strategy is that the majority of studies rely on responses provided by a single informant per company. This study employs a combination of survey and case study methods to gather data from seven manufacturing plants within the metalworking industry. The results of the study suggest that there are strategic areas where there is substantial disagreement between levels of the firm. Across the sample, operators tended to rate investments in technology disproportionately higher than managers. In addition to this systematic variation, individual case studies revealed that operators and managers in some firms exhibited significant inconsistencies in their manufacturing priorities, indicating a lack of strategic consensus. Furthermore, the methodology employed in this study illustrates one approach to obtaining more holistic, multiple respondent research on operations strategy.