Joseph Stalin Essay -- Russian History, Politics

Joseph Stalin ruled the Soviet Union from 1922 until his death in 1954. He is widely recognized as a dictator, an oppressor, and a ruthless ruler who took the Soviet Union from economic shambles to a superpower, but with the high cost of human sacrifice and his paranoia of opposition. Stalin saw himself as the natural successor of Leninism-Marxism, but in actuality he created a system of his own which did not go according to the philosophy of Karl Marx and Engels. Stalin’s early political career began just like everyone else who gained prominence in the Bolshevik takeover of the Russian Empire. Lenin had successfully launched his revolution in October, 1917 and became the leader of the Russian Communist Party until his death in January 1924. Stalin played only a minor role in the October Revolution and a relatively inconspicuous part in the Civil War (Lee 1). Stalin was sent to exile in Siberia for committing crimes in Russia, and after his return he became a member of the Cen tral Committee of the Bolshevik Party in 1912. Stalin worked to gain support in the Communist party during its early stages. He created close contacts that he would later betray, and others which he would use to help him become the next leader of the Soviet Union. He accumulated the posts of People’s Commissar for Nationalities in 1917, liaison official between the Politburo and the Orgburo in 1919, and General Secretary of the Party in 1922 (Lee 1). Soviet books and propaganda always portrayed Stalin having a close relationship with Lenin, as seen in textbooks, propaganda posters, and Stalin himself who always spoke highly of his friendship with Lenin. However, Lenin and the Bolsheviks thought differently of Stalin. The 1920s and early 1930s saw the rise a... ...’s unorthodox rise to power, to his brutal economic policy, it was a form of true dictatorship and turned the Soviet Union into a totalitarian state. Karl Marx wrote that the techniques of exploitation by the bourgeoisie would lead to a violent revolution by the proletariat, and it would change the economic and social order of the state. In this case, Stalin exploited his proletariat and acted as a bourgeoisie, using the labor force for his personal gain and what he thought would be the best way the Soviet Union would ever become a superpower. Joseph Stalin took the idea of Marxism and added his own theory to it, distorting it and creating a new system of politics that is coined â€Å"Stalinism.† It has its similarities, but largely it is a split in ideology that would cause the deaths of 20 million people during his rule, something Karl Marx, or Lenin never intended.

Montessori method of education Essay

Dr. Maria Montessori is the laminitis of the Montessori method of instruction. She started her foremost schoolroom â€Å"Casa dei Bambini† or Children’s House in 1907. Montessori method of instruction stresses the importance of esteeming kids – â€Å"Help me to assist myself† . Montessori instruction celebrates its hundredth twelvemonth in 2007. The ends of a Montessori instruction were to develop centripetal preparation. linguistic communication acquisition. arithmetic. physical instruction. practical life accomplishments and abstract thought through the instruction of the whole kid and the integrating of the household into the early instruction system. Montessori began her educational experiences by working with particular demands kids. At the clip of Montessori. particular needs kids were thought of as a â€Å"lost cause† . They could non larn how to go members of society because intelligence was fixed. She strongly opposed to the perceptual experiences on cognitive abilities of these kids at the clip. and believed that they could larn how to go members of society through particular learning techniques that utilized centripetal instruction and hands-on experience. Her purpose was to learn kids faculty members through practical life experiences and to â€Å"†¦to develop the whole personality of the kid through motor. sensory. and rational activity† ( Hainstock. 1997. 35 ) . Montessori – The Montessori schoolroom is a meticulously prepared environment designed specifically to run into the demands of the kid both physically and emotionally. One facet of the prepared environment includes the Practical Life activities. Many Practical Life activities are tasks the kid sees routinely performed in the place. They each serve a meaningful intent as the kid Masterss each piece of work such as binding places. pouring H2O. brushing. or run uping and cookery. Through Practical Life activities. a kid will besides develop and polish societal accomplishments. These accomplishments developed through Practical Life construct self-esteem. finding and independency. The pupil learns to take attention of him and the surrounding environment. Maria Montessori explains in. The Discovery of the Child. â€Å"Through practical life exercisings of this kind the kids develop a true ‘social feeling. ’ for they are working in the environment of the community in which they live† ( 5. pg. 97 ) . Additionally. all right motor accomplishments are improved through usage of the Practical Life stuffs. Through repeated undertakings which enable a kid to polish concentration. coordination. independency. and order. a child’s sense of self-worth grows. The Practical Life accomplishments are an indispensable constituent in the Montessori schoolroom. Not merely do they supply a nexus between place and school for the new Montessori pupil. but they provide a foundation for life-long love of While looking rather simple and insistent. Practical Life activities are extremely purposeful. A kid engaged in such activities demonstrates high degrees of concentration. sense of order. and polish of all right motor accomplishments. Besides. they show a sense of independency through caring for oneself and the environment. Furthermore. they show respect for schoolmates and instructors and develop a sense of pride. Not merely are these accomplishments and qualities necessary to come on in the Montessori schoolroom. but they are besides needed as an single develops into maturity. Practical Life activities can be divided into six chief classs. First. are Preliminary Exercises which assist in making modus operandi and order in the environment and are requirements for other activities. How to a axial rotation a mat. transport a chair. or how to open and shut a door are illustrations of Preliminary Exercises. Practical life exercisings besides include Fundamental Skills such as pouring. spooning. or tonging. As with all lessons in the Montessori schoolroom. these activities follow a consecutive order and ideally. each lesson builds upon the last. Another class is Care of Self. Activities such as rinsing custodies. buttoning. or binding shoe laces assist the kid to go physically independent. Care of Environment is another class affecting activities such as brushing. irrigating. cleansing. etc. Control of Movement is an country of Practical Life which encompasses lessons such as walking the Line and the Silence Game. Additionally. societal Grace and Courtesy lessons are introduced to the kid. These may include lessons on how to state please and thank you. disrupting person. or presenting friends and familiarities. Montessori stressed the relationship of these exercisings to the general felicity and good being of the kid. â€Å"A kid who becomes a maestro of his Acts of the Apostless through long and repeated exercisings [ of practical life ] . and who has been encouraged by the pleasant and interesting activities in which he has been engaged. is a kid filled with wellness and joy and remarkable for his composure and discipline† ( The Discovery the Child. 5. pg. 93 ) . Changing types of presentations can be used by the instructor to present Practical Life activities. First is a corporate debut given the kids at one time. This could include proper table manners. how to disrupt person. how to talk with an inside voice. or how to turn the page of a book. Another method is a group presentation given to a little assemblage of kids. The last method of debut is Individual. given merely to one kid at a clip. Montessori believed the prepared environment is straight correlated to the child’s development. The schoolroom is a specifically designed country arranged entirely for the kids. There should be a assortment of motion and activity and all work operates together through the subjects. Montessori besides believed in the importance of aesthetically delighting schoolrooms. Children respond well to beauty. order. and quality in their environment. Through the Practical Life activities in the Montessori schoolroom. a kid non merely learns concentration. coordination. independency and order. but besides how to interact with others and derive an apprehension and grasp of the environment. The kid begins to construct himself from within while larning to handle him and others with regard and self-respect. These apprehensions finally prepare the kid for entry into society and a life-time of self-respect and self-worthiness. Practical Life activities in the Montessori schoolroom finally provide the foundation for success in all countries of life. Movement – Montessori said- â€Å"one of the greatest errors of our twenty-four hours is to believe of motion by itself. as something apart from the higher functions† ( The absorbent head. pg 151 ) – it is non every bit clear as to how scientists and instructors have failed to observe the supreme importance of activity in the edifice up of the adult male to adult male be! It was during the clip of Dr Maria Montessori who felt it was clip to stress more on â€Å"movement† in educational theory – Mental development must be connected with motion. Like man’s nervous system is divided into three parts-BrainSense organs- collect feeling and go through them to the encephalonMuscles – the nervousnesss transmits nervous energy to the musculuss and this energy controls the motions of the musculuss. Motion is the concluding consequence to which the working of all these delicate mechanisms leads up and it is because of motion that personality can show itself ( The absorbent head. pg 148 ) ! The great philosophers must utilize address or composing to convey his thoughts and this involves muscular motion. What would be the value of his ideas if he gave them no look? This he can merely make by doing usage of his musculuss. Psychologists regard the musculuss as a portion of the cardinal nervous system ( works as a whole to set adult male in relation with his milieus ) and this whole setup of Brain. Senses and Muscles is called – the system of relationship- it puts adult male in touch with his universe ( populating or non life and with other people ) and without its aid a adult male could hold no contact with his milieus or his chaps. The vegetive systems merely help their proprietor to turn and be. It is the system of relationship which puts him into contact with the universe! There is nil in the universe which plays no portion in the cosmopolitan economic system. and if we are endowed with religious wealths. with aesthetic feelings and a refined scruples. it is non for ourselves. but so that these gifts shall be used for the benefit of all. and take their topographic point in the cosmopolitan economic system of religious life. Nature has given us many abilities and these must be developed and used. We know that for the enjoyment of good wellness. bosom. lungs and stomache must all work together. We must use the same regulation to the system of relationship. the cardinal nervous system†¦ . . if we have a encephalon. sense variety meats and musculuss. all these must collaborate. The system must exercise itself in all its parts. none of them being neglected for illustration we want to stand out in encephalon p ower but to win in this we must include the other sides excessively. To hone any given activity â€Å"movement† will be needed as the last phase of the rhythm. In other words a higher spiritualty can be reached merely through action and this is the point of position from which motion has to be judged. one of the greatest errors of our twenty-four hours is to believe of motion by itself. as something apart from the higher maps. we think of our musculuss as variety meats to be used merely for wellness intents. We â€Å"take exercise† or make â€Å"gymnastics† to maintain ourselves fit. to do us take a breath or to eat or kip better. It is an mistake which has been taken over by the schools. It is merely as though a great prince were being made the retainer of the shepherd. The prince – the muscular system –is merely being used to assist the vegetive life. Such premises will take to enquiry†¦there comes about a separation between the life of motion and the life of idea. Since the kid has a organic structure and mind both. games must be included in the course of study so as to avoid pretermiting any portion of n ature’s proviso. To maintain believing about the head on one manus and the organic structure on other manus is to interrupt the continuity that should reign between them. This keeps action off from thought. The true intent of motion is to function the terminals of being – that is the development of the head ( The absorbent head. pg 151 ) . All motion has most intricate and delicate machinery. but in adult male none of it is established at birth. It has to be formed and perfected by the child’s activity in the universe. Movement and activity are natural maps of childhood and acquisition comes through them. Activity becomes progressively of import to development. It is the motion that starts the intellect working†¦ Till now all pedagogues have thought of motion and the muscular system as AIDSs to respiration. or to circulation. or as a agency of constructing up physical beef up our new construct the position is taken that motion has great importance in mental development itself. provided that the action which occurs is connected with the mental activity traveling on. Both mental and religious growing are fostered by this. without which neither upper limit advancement nor maximal wellness ( speech production of the head ) can be. A kid is a inventor. He is an formless splendid being in hunt of his ain signifier. For illustration in the development of address. we see a turning power of understanding travel side by side with an drawn-out usage of those musculuss by which he forms sounds and words. Observations made on kids – the universe overconfirms that the kid uses his motions to widen his apprehension. Movement helps in development of head and this finds renewed look in farther motion and activity ( The absorbent head. pg 154 ) . The kid additions experience through exercisings and motion. He coordinates his ain motion and records the emotions he experiences in coming into contact with the external universe. The importance of physical activity or motion in a psychic development should be emphasized. The kid has an internal power to convey about cordinations. which he creates himself. and one time these have begun to be he goes on honing them by pattern. He himself is clearly one of the chief originative factors in their production. The motions the kid acquires are non chosen randomly but are fixed. In the sense that each returns out of a peculiar period of development. When the kid begins to travel. his head being able to absorb. has already taken in his milieus. He Is directed by a cryptic power. great and fantastic that he incarnates small by small. In this manner. he becomes a adult male. He does it with his custodies. by experience. foremost in drama so through work. The custodies are the instruments of man’s intelligence. He constructs his mind measure by measure boulder clay it becomes possessed of memory. the power to understand and the ability to believe. â€Å"The child’s head can get civilization at a much earlier age than is by and large supposed. but his manner of taking in cognition is by certain sorts of activity which involves movement†¦ . † ( Montessori notes ) It is really interesting to analyze the mechanical development of motion. non merely because of its elaborateness but because each of the stages it passes through is clearly seeable. Man’s pes can be studied from three points of position: the psysiological. the biological and the anatomical and all of them are most interesting. The manus is in direct connexion with the man’s psyche. but besides with different ways of life that work forces have adopted on the Earth in different topographic points and at different times. The accomplishments of man’s manus are bound up with the development of his head. and in the visible radiation of history we see it connected with the development of civilisation. The custodies of adult male express his idea and from the clip of his first visual aspect upon the Earth hints of his handicraft besides appear in the records of history. Hence. the development of manual accomplishment keeps gait with mental development. We are told that St. Francis of Assisi – possibly the simplest and purest of human psyches used to state – â€Å"Look at these great hills! They are the walls of our temple and the aspiration of our Black Marias! † ( The absorbent head. pg 163 ) The truth is that when a free spirit exists. it has to happen itself in some signifier of work and for this custodies are needed. ( The absorbent head. pg 163 ) The manus are connected with mental life. allows the head to uncover itself and enables the whole being to come in into particular relationship with its environment. His custodies under the counsel of his intellect transform this environment and therefore enable him to carry through his mission in the universe. The instruction of the motions is really complex. as it must match to all coordinated motions which the kid has to set up in his physiological being. The kid if left without counsel is disorderly in his motions and these disorderly motions are the particular features of the small kid. The kid is seeking the exercisings in these motions which will form and organize the motions that are utile to a adult male. The kid follows direction/instructions and if his motions are made a small definite so the kid grows quiet and contended and becomes an active worker. a being composure and full of joy. This instruction of motions is one of the chief factors in bring forthing that outward v isual aspect of â€Å"discipline† to be found in the â€Å"children’s house† . ( Montessori notes ) Importance of motion: –Movement leads to:Muscle development. both all right and gross – demand freedom for motion to take topographic point Stimulates the headStimulates the sensesDevelops concentrationDevelops independencyDevelops assurance ( through agility/balance and co-ordination ) Develops subject and willDevelops linguistic communicationLeads to standardizationConsequences in a healthy organic structure and headEmotional and rational development through motion: – Emotions are the impacting mental phases. organized by external thoughts of state of affairss and ever move while accompanied by bodily and mental exhilaration. However. when we talk about emotional development in kids. we find that kids show a broad scope of emotional reactions. Sometimes they are excited and ebullient and at other times they are down and sullen and some other clip they are merely angry. throwing fits. We find assorted sunglassess of emotions in them even at an early age. The word emotion originates from the Latin word â€Å" Emovere† which means to be excited. So. an emotion implies that province of head which excites a individual when adult male is influenced by emotion he gets aroused and his natural province of equilibrium is lost. Pattern of emotional development – if we have to understand the emotions of a kid of school age. it is indispensable to take into consideration his emotional development during the early old ages. Sometimes. freshly born babies behave as though they are violently aroused. If such vigorous behaviour means the strength of his feelings. so we must reason that emotional experiences can be as intense during this early period as at any ulterior phase of growing. Again we see that a new born kid is comparatively unresponsive to many stimulations which are likely to elicit him in later phases. Children are capable of rich and varied emotional experiences in the class of their development till they are grownups. Children from birth to 2 old ages go through a assortment of emotions and goes through many emotional experiences that may act upon his attitude towards life. Studies show that at birth there are general exhilarations largely refering his hungriness and amenitiess. after 2-3 months the kid shows definite marks of hurt along with delectation. By 6 months with his exposure of different sorts of stimulations the kid starts demoing other sunglassess of emotions like hurt or uncomfortablenesss develops into fright. disgust and choler. With the satisfaction of his demands he feels delighted and by the clip kid completes one twelvemonth this delectation differentiates itself from fondness. the kid recognizes emotions in others and responds to it clearly. But his emotions are non so strong as respect to joy and felicity when he turns one as they are at the age of 2. Therefore we conclude that by the terminal of 2nd twelvemonth the kid has already developed assorted emotions and feelings. Factors impacting emotional development – There are many factors that affect the emotional development among kids. the major 1s are – Fatigue – tired and exhausted kidIll wellnessOrder of birthIntelligenceEnvironmentParental attitudes The child’s emotions are still pure of contrasts. He loves because he takes in. because nature orders him to make so. And what he takes and absorbs to do it a portion of his ain life. so as to make his ain being ( The secret of childhood. pg 80 ) . The kid follows the adults and the words of a adult are supernatural stimulations. The kid is enchanted and fascinated by his actions and words. What the grown up Tells him remains engraved in his head like words incised by a chisel on a rock. The grownup should number and mensurate all his words before the kid. for the kid is hungry to take from him. he is an collector of love. The developing kid non merely acquires the modules of adult male: strength. intelligence. linguistic communication. but at the same clip. he adapts the being he is building to the conditions of the universe about him. The kid has a different relation to his environment from ours. The things he sees are non merely remembered ; they form portion of his psyche. He incarnates in himself all in the universe about him that his eyes see and his ears hear. In us the same things produce no alteration but a kid is transformed by them. This critical sort of memory which absorbs is called â€Å" Mneme† . In this procedure of soaking up. acquisition. geting. accommodating the kid is building non merely physically but emotionally or psychic as good. The minute the kid understands his environment he learns to work and accommodate to it and so further wants to get the hang in it which leads to alterations consequently. In this complete procedure the undermentioned emotions are built ; Self esteemAssuranceFeeling of capablenessSense of accomplishmentTherefore. kids enjoy procedure non purpose!The distinguishable difference between adult male and carnal – Montessori tends to follow a different point of view from many modern psychologists. Most of the psychologists place great accent upon the â€Å"inherited inclinations to behavior† which adult male has in common with animate beings. They maintain that everything we do is based on the natural impulses of human act. Therefore ; the love of cognition is but the sublimed inherent aptitude of wonder. For Montessori. she believes that adult male differs from carnal creative activity non merely in grade but besides in sort. She states that the most important thing about the kid development is non natural inclinations that are in common with animate beings. but the capacity to ground which distinguishes us from them. Here. she is non seeking to deny or minimize the significances of their findings. but she is stating that these simple psychic forces are merely a portion of the inquiry and a lesser portion. her strong belief is – â€Å"Animals have simply to rouse their inherent aptitudes towards their specified behaviour and their psychic life is limited to this. But in adult male there is other fact –the creative activity of human intelligence ( Montessori. notes ) . Unlike adult male. one can foretell the behaviour of animate beings. whereas for adult male. what he will make in the hereafter. no 1 can state. â€Å"For adult male there is no limit† ( Montessori notes ) . Man is a rational animate being to be most â€Å"like to God† whose image we are made. Man entirely possesses â€Å"that capable and god-like ground which enables us to make what no animate being has of all time achieved –i. e. to lift to a consciousness of our being i. e. ego consciousness. to the cognition that â€Å"I am I† . It is with this gift of ground or mind as foundation that we are able to construct our single characters. How shortly does a kid Begin to ground? Harmonizing to Montessori. it begins every bit early as a babe where the kid starts from nil. Its ground revolves round his internal working like a small bud. developing and presuming concrete signifier from the images it absorbs from the environment. Harmonizing to Montessori at her talk in 1944. it was stated that the first twelvemonth of a child’s life is the period where greatest psychic activity can develop by the human being. This is apparent because we know that the encephalon is one thing that is active during the first twelvemonth. That the ground why the caput of a one twelvemonth old has doubled in size since its Born. At the 3rd twelvemonth. its encephalon is already half that of the adult- at four old ages eight –tenths of its ultimate size. Montessori farther elaborated that it is during the first period that the human being grows chiefly in intelligence: the remainder of its growing during this period. being low-level to this developing psychic life. The three features we can detect about a kid during this period are – The kid creates his ain head –Since intelligence is what distinguishes adult male from all other animate beings. the first feature is the creative activity of intelligence. As said before he foremost constructs himself by absorbing everything from the environment by his unconscious head. With these countless feelings. the kid continues to construct his witting intelligence. Montessori said ; to construct up this witting intelligence. the work of the manus plays an of im port and indispensable portion. The intelligence builds its ain instrument –Second fact is while building his ain intelligence he besides begins to build his ain bodily instruments of look. The child’s power of motion will develop in subordination to this superior purpose i. e. of psychic development. Its activity will non be confined within the narrow bounds of natural behaviour. but will work as an instrument of a free moral agent. His ageless fate is placed within his ain custodies. Fantastic adaptative powers of the kid –The 3rd feature of this period. are the fantastic adaptative power possessed by the kid. Montessori illustrated this point by comparing adult male to animate beings. Example – if a cat is born in France. England or India. it would mew merely the same manner wherever it grows up. However for a kid he will talk Gallic in France. English in England and Hindi or any other idiom in India. This is because of its â€Å"inner construction† . Motion and mental assimilation leads to integrating of personality – The kid constructs himself through motion. The value of motion goes deeper that merely assisting in acquisition of cognition. It involves the development of child’s personality -in 1st twelvemonth babe establishes his physical his physical development through motion. He learns to utilize his limbs and whole organic structure to transport out motions such as creeping. standing and walking and sometimes running. In the following few old ages he refines his gross motor accomplishments through motion. He continues to develop his all right motor accomplishments through activities that involve motions. As the kid interacts with his environment. he absorbs the environment into his psychic life. Through repeated usage of stuffs in the environment he learns to compare. discriminate. differentiate and justice the qualities of the stuffs. As the kid additions experience through exercisings and motions. he co-ordinates his ain motion and records the emotions he experienced in coming into contact with the external universe. He learns self aid accomplishments. taking and sharing. This is the societal and emotional development of the kid. It is besides non sufficient to let kids to larn without giving him the chance to work or research with the stuffs. When kids work with the stuffs. it involves originative motion. When learning kids. it is non sufficient for them to hear the things which we wish him to larn. â€Å"We must give no more to oculus & A ; ear than we give to the hand† ( Montessori notes ) For illustration. in learning kids. the thought of dimension. it is no good to demo them a diagram of objects of assorted sizes. alternatively we need to supply kids with concrete stuffs such as the gnarled cylinder. tap tower. brown stepss. long rods and knobbles cylinders. They must be given the chance to research and experiment with the stuffs. This is so with all Montessori stuffs whether it is the four operations in arithmetic. parts of address or acquisition of lands and H2O. It ever involves motion. The kid as an single nowadayss two facets –the centre and the fringe. The centre is seen as the innermost bastion of the personality from which action returns. At this centre the kid increases his mental powers by seeking out esthesis and motion which takes topographic point at the 2nd portion of his personality i. vitamin E at the fringe. The fringe is that portion of the child’s personality which comes in contact with the external universe. It involves the senses. motions and the outward manifestations of his pick. Through uninterrupted interaction of the centre and the fringe. the head of the kid develops and expands. The directress should be concerned with the fringe as it is that portion of the kid that is accessible to her. The other methods of learning purposes at acquiring to the centre straight. The teacher’s concern is to feed the fringe. The instructor prepares the environment that meets the child’s inner demands and in his geographic expedition of the stuffs. he abstracts thoughts from them. As both centre and fringe interacts. the kid builds his head. The objects in the environment can non be chosen at random. Each stuff possesses an thought or concept to be realized. non to be announced by the instructor. At the kid explore with the stuffs. this concept/idea become presented. In pattern. we frequently find that even if the directress has prepared the environment and presented the stuffs to the kids. at that place do non look to be a chink of the centre and the fringe. The kid does non look to be interested and his act seems to be in a disorderly mode. Harmonizing to Montessori. the reply to this losing nexus is the â€Å"Point of Contact† . To explicate this. Montessori used the illustration of learning the grasp of music. If the instructor tries to play music forenoon boulder clay dark and kids are allowed to travel approximately to travel about anyhow and anyplace in a disorderly mode. there is a deficiency of contact. To decide this job. the musculuss. which move. should travel in response to the musical beat therefore set uping a psychic span between the psyche of the kid and the external world of music. The minute the kid understands that there exists the connexion ( i. vitamin E between the music and his motion ) . so the point of contact is established. So if the music changes its beat. so the kid becomes cognizant of it and changes his motion consequently. and he is on the route to hone himself. This world may be either material or religious ; but motion must ever attach to the kid at any rate. Let’s expression at an illustration to understand how the point of contact aid development. In their presenting of the sensory stuffs. kids were given new sounds. new forms etc. The chief intent of it is non merely convey new sounds. new forms but to convey order into this new feeling. The trouble or the mistake that the kid is to detect and understand must be isolated in a individual piece of stuff. For illustration the long rods will show to the kid merely a fluctuation in length and non in coloring material and design. Such isolation will assist child concentrate on the job more readily. It is through this method. that it leads the kid to be interested in dimension. and develop him to detect them in the universe about. Montessori calls her material â€Å"keys to the Universe† –it is of import to constantly retrieve that it is through this point of contact limited and precisely but existent work. helps the kid to cite the head to inquire at big in phantasy to something existent which opens up a new tract. With younger kids. nevertheless. it was observed that the exercisings in practical life will play an of import portion. but ever the point of contact will be established through motion. An illustration was to acquire up from a chair and carry it from one topographic point to another without any sound. The kids would be presented this construct of self flawlessness and would seek to make the same as it corresponds to his psyche. Again. we see the truth of Montessori’s axiom that â€Å"education begins through movement† .

On Limits Of Strategy Business Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 23 Words: 6762 Downloads: 4 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Business Essay Type Research paper Did you like this example? The Four Arena analysis and Four Lens analysis are based on a simplification of the dynamics of competitive interactions that breaks reality into it component pieces. In reality, the arenas are not quite so distinct, the progression is not quite so clear, and the nature of dynamic strategic interaction is not so predictable or easily labeled. DAveni, R.A. (1994, p. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "On Limits Of Strategy Business Essay" essay for you Create order 180) Strategic management theories and methods are indispensable in todays economy. Regardless of their origin, dynamics or focus they are designed by scientific logic to understand the complexity of reality, to analyze the focused conditions (i.e. market, power, relative positioning and so on) and to cope with competition to achieve an advantage or to sustain the economic performance of a company. Combined with an insightful execution they strengthen the profitable existence of organizations within a competitive environment. However even the most successful companies which implement the most paradigmatic strategy methods by the rulebook fail. This raises the question of whether contemporary strategy can, in fact, provide such consistent insights for strategists or rather bias the perception of reality. This chapter is dedicated to a critical analysis of the predominant strategic research streams in order to locate their structural weaknesses. A symptomatic case study will introdu ce/illustrate the issue. The Textbook Example The Taiwan-based High Tech Computer Corporation (stylized as HTC) was founded 1997 as a producer of notebooks and became one of the largest smartphone manufacturers in the world in just over a decade. It is best known for its wide consumer smartphone portfolio ranging from mid- to high-priced models. With a market growth of nearly 100 percent in 2011 and a skyrocketing sales growth of 229 percent, HTC held the title of the most profitable stock at the Taiwanese stock exchange from 2007 until 2011 (cf. HTC Investor Relations; Bloomberg 2011). But as of today, the tables have turned on High Tech Computers Corporation. In the second quarter of 2012, the company had shown substantial revenue losses of 3.35 billion Dollars resulting from a slump in sales and profit in the first quarter (cf. Reuters 2012; HTC Investor Relations). Its stock plummeted from an all-time high of 35 euros (1300 Taiwan Dollars in April 2011) to now 7,5 Euros a share (277 TWD as of August 2012; this signifies lo sses in the amount of more than 3 billion US Dollars). In conclusion, HTC cut its expansion program by closing its offices in Brazil and South Korea, and sold half of its stake in its main acquisition of high fidelity headphones (cf. Kan 2012). What began as a yearlong success story for the innovative smartphone manufacturer is turning into a failure, putting HTC in the same declining market share position as Nokia. But what went wrong? The answer might be found in the strategies and the business model adopted by the Taiwanese company to assert their place in such a dynamic industry as the smartphone market. According to the empirical analysis of the High Tech Computers Corporation by Chi-Ho Chiou (2011), its general corporate strategy was based upon a threefold approach. The first strategy, Development and Reconfiguration of Dynamic Capabilities, includes the implementation of both the core assertions of the first-mover advantage theory, as well as the methods of the Configurati onal school of thought. The concept of the first-mover explains the advantage a market pioneer can successfully live off, if he is the first one to establish himself in a niche (Robinson 1988, p. 92ff.). Through expanding the scope of the product, establishing effective response barriers for competitors, creating proprietary and innovative products, exclusive production skills, vertical integration and securing the best areal locations, a company as a first-mover could create powerful entry barriers as well as high switching costs (MacMillan 1983, pp. 22-25). In addition to this proceeding, the Configurational school describes the relations between periods of stability and transformations a corporation might undergo to adapt to new environmental changes. To sustain equilibrium of its organizational characteristics (and therewith its success), there is the important need to acknowledge change and to embrace it through appropriate strategizing (Mintzberg et al. 1998, p. 305ff.). Thus HTCs strategizing originated with the early insight (presumably because of the production volumes of the Iphone) that consumer matched smartphones will induce a state of market change the company has to adapt to. Against this background, HTC, as one of the first manufacturers, switched the focus from business-tier phones to cheaper mid-tier handhelds, bundled its distinctive competencies of technological advancement and into the development of these products, and defended its advantageous position with the buy-in of skilled professionals. To enhance its performance within the state of reconfiguration, HTC incorporated additionally the strategy of Collaborative Networks which is essentially the optimization of the value chain and the domain of the Power school of strategic management. As mentioned before, the benefits of the early-mover might stem from the vertical integration of business units. This approach was elaborated and explained by Michael Porter within the Generic Value Chain. A company can be disaggregated into its primary and support activities which, taken together, generate the profit margin (cf. Porter 1998a, pp. 36-52). By optimizing the management of the value chain and an efficient expansion strategy, a company is able lower its production. These strategies go hand in hand with the principles of the Power school. This school of thought is divided by perspective. On the one hand, there is the perspective on the inter-organizational issues subsumed under the term of Micro Power, and on the other there is the Macro Power concerning the political processes in between several corporations. The latter perspective includes a cluster of different concepts which outline either the importance of strategic alliances and cooperational networks (Hamel et al. 1989, p. 134; in: Mintzberg et al. 1998, pp. 255-260), or the influence of the external control an organization can achieve through planned strategizing (cf. Pfeffer/ Salancik 1978; in: Mintzberg et al. 1998, p. 248f.). By creating strategic collaborations with Microsoft and Google in its early days as a smartphone parts supplier (first contracts being made in 1997), HTC was able to improve its value chain by reducing the total cost of its technological development, firm infrastructure, and human resource support activities in its value creation process. It simply used the provided operating systems as Android or Windows Phone, instead of investing assets and resources into own research. HTCs strategic alliances began to manifest itself in the 2001-2003 time periods as the company collaborated initially with such European telecommunication providers as Vodafone, T-Mobile, Orange and O2. As it built up favorable reputation and its brand image in a low competition market as Europe, High Tech Computers entered the US Market in 2005, signing exclusive hardware deals with providers AT and T, Sprint, Verizon and Cingular. Finally, dominating its niche of mid-tier smartphones, the co rporation collaborated with Japanese providers including NTT DoCoMo and Softbank Mobile to enter the most competitive smartphone hardware market in the world (all data taken from Chiou 2011, p. 301f.). Step by step, HTC incrementally developed a brand image and established itself in the world market through regional maneuvers, strategic alliances, as well as technical partnerships. Finally, HTCs product strategy and its radical transformation are based on the third strategy named Dynamical Product Diversification. It was, as Chiou points out in the African Journal of Business Management (2011, p. 302), derived from Porters Five Forces analysis and the resulting Generic strategies matrix strategy (at this point, this paper will refrain from explaining these basic concepts due to their prominent nature). As Apple changed the mobile communication market in 2007, HTC must have recognized the chances and the potential of this newly established market by shifting its own production tow ards the masses demanding similar products as the Iphone. Yet the Taiwanese analyzed the competitive forces and realized that they should not compete against Apple and mimic its differentiation strategy, but choose the focus approach instead. Hence, each year since 2007, High Tech Computers released approximately ten to fifteen different smartphones with the goal to capture and capitalize on the niche left by Apple (cf. Areamobile.de 2012a; HTC Portfolio 2012). The Iphone was considered an unchallenged luxury good available only to consumers who were capable of either spending almost a thousand Dollars or binding themselves to year-lasting provider contracts. HTC became the alternative with a diverse product portfolio of less expensive phones for the mainstream, adopting Porters focus (or segmentation) strategy. All in all, it should have become evident that HTC incorporated a range of paradigmatic theoretical concepts of strategic management in its endeavor of competition analysis and strategy creation. Despite of being a textbook example of applied strategic management theory, the company struggles the second quarter in a row to operate in the black. The reason for their failure is, from the corporate point of view, the loss of revenue due to lower sales and therefore less net profit and an impaired market growth (cf. HTC Investor Relations 2012; Whittaker 2012). Yet analysts claim unanimously that these lower sales result from an overloaded and simultaneously dull product portfolio which lacks a distinct competitor to Apples Iphone or the even more successful Samsung Galaxy product line (cf. ibid.; Shimpi 2012; Milett 2012; Luk/ Poon 2012; Bertolucci 2012; Lunden 2012). But why does HTC need to have such a competitor, in spite of choosing the segmentation product strategy and having a portfolio of 96 different mid-price smartphones (cf. Areamobile.de 2012b)? This companys failure implies that the company had to complement its strategy with the same cost focus endeavor as Apple. According to Porter, the positioning school, and every SWOT analysis, HTCs managers planned everything in accordance with the textbook and the double strategy its competitors pursue should be essentially wrong because: [a] firm that engages in each generic strategy but fails to achieve any of them is stuck in the middle. It possesses no competitive advantage. This strategic position is usually a recipe for below-average performance. A firm that is stuck in the middle will compete at a disadvantage because the cost leader, differentiators, or focusers will be better positioned to compete in any segment. (Porter 1998a, p. 16) Samsung Electronics did exactly that. It is indeed stuck in the middle having approximately 380 low- to mid-price phones and 11 high-end smartphones (cf. Areamobile.de 2012c). And its consolidated operating profit soaring to 4.8 billion Euros shows a 79 percent increase year-on-year since it implemented this double strategy (cf. Sam sung Investor Relations 2012). It appears that the most paradigmatic strategy analyses reach their limits in the face of contemporary figurations of competition. Hence, HTCs strategic failure is symptomatic of a large part of the normative and descriptive strategic management research. Normative/ Prescriptive Research Streams Over the course of the last century, the term competition passed through different stadiums. In the war torn European economies of the 1950s, competition did barely exist due to an unmet demand for reconstruction and food supplies. Only two decades later, the competitive dynamics in the US transformed the rapidly expanding seller markets into the saturated buyer markets of the late sixties and seventies (all data cf. Chandler 1990). In the nineties, competition once again hardened in the face of globalization and the more complex nexuses of interconnected global market forces. And as of the digital markets of today, Hypercompetition represents the paradigmatic concept for the scientific community characterized through: [an] accelerated change in technology or regulation, low entry and exit barriers for competitors, uncertain and volatile consumer needs and demand situations, [ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¦] leapfrogging of existing standards, blurring of boundaries between com petition, substitution and market entry and continual attempts to outmaneuver each other and to usurp entry barriers (Ortmann 2010, p. 24, also cf. DAveni 1994; Brown/ Eisenhardt 1997; Gottinger 2006) In regard to the continuous historic transformations and the volatile nature, competition is therefore understood by the scientific community as a dynamic, evolving concept. In contrast, concepts of the modern schools of thought of strategic management remained surprisingly static. The Design, Planning and Positioning school of thought represent, according to Eden Ackermann (1998, p. 25ff.), the prescriptive and rather normative side of strategizing. They consist of deliberate analyzing, planning, and strategic creation methods, and describe how things ought to work under ideal conditions. Until today they remain the predominant strategy concepts taught in nearly every book on this topic (insert Fig. 1 here) and their use continues to permeate the academic peer-reviewed literature (for a detailed description cf. Helms 2010). Though HTC claims to be an innovative company, they chose prescriptive analytic models which represent somewhat of an outdated perspective on strategizing. They are characterized through an inflexibility of their frameworks, because they base on the economic situation in the eighties and were developed for managers of large and mature corporations. Furthermore, this period was characterized by strong competition, cyclical developments and relatively stable market structures (Niehans 1990, p. 315f.). For instance, the generic strategies matrix cannot be modified within its framework. Instead of observing the changes of market conditions in correlation to ones own company as a complex adaptive system, and to adapt to the prevailing degree of competitive complexity (as for instance within the framework of the complexity theory determined by McKelvey 1999 or Kappelhoff 2002), the Five Forces analysis and the strategy matrix are based upon the assumptions of perfect competition, that structure determines strategy (structure-conduct-performance-paradigm), and that market growth is continuous. If there were any problems or divergence from one of the questionable assumptions, then Porters whole theoretical construct would be rendered implausible because of its inflexibility as pointed out in HTCs case (for a more detailed critique and analysis of the rather basic paradigmatic concepts concerning HTCs performance cf. App. 1). But beyond the concepts of Five Forces, Portfolio Analyses or Planning procedures, the normative or prescriptive stream of research underwent several paradigmatic changes ever since which spawned more sophisticated iterations of strategic concepts (as depicted in Fig. 2.). These were subsequently modified to improve their performance, as well as their consistency until they became highly complex. But even more elaborated concepts as Game Theory (cf. Shapiro 1989; Nisan et al. 2007), Blue Ocean Strat egies (cf. Kim/ Mauborgne 2005) or the shift to the Resource-Based View (cf. Wernerfelt 1984; Prahalad/ Hamel 1990) continue to analyze competition with only a few set variables and static frameworks which represent rather theoretic enclosures than reality depicting mental models. For issues of scope and continuity, this subchapter will focus exemplary on Porters dynamic progression in the field of normative positioning. After severe criticism on the account of neglecting external forces (as e.g. the government, cf. Brandenburger/ Nalebuff 1996), missing viable middle ground strategies (known as Outpacing-Strategies, cf. Gilbert/ Strebel 1987; Miller 1992), and concentrating too much on the positioning instead of addressing the competencies of the firm (Prahalad/ Hamel 1990), Porter complemented his strategic research by integrating the generic methods into two frameworks driven by causality. The first one, termed as The Determinants of Success in Distinct Businesses (or Chain of Ca usality Framework) focuses mostly on the industrial level from a cross-sectional perspective. It integrates the industry structure analysis (Five Forces) and the value chain into a framework itemized into abstract basic units which represent predetermined variables linked by a chain of causality (cf. Fig. 3 in Porter 1998b, pp. 87-92). Therefore, a proper choice of strategy and a sustainable competitive advantage rest on a set of interconnected company inherent activities (discrete processes of the value chain) whose performance in turn depends upon structural determinants of differences among competitors named drivers (e.g. scale economies, learning curves, location, timing etc.). Ultimately, Porter argues that the cross-sectional part of the causality chain of a company starting with the drivers and ending with a successful positioning strategy attains its quality over time through managerial choices and an advantageous initial condition a company may inherit (ibid. p. 92ff.). Wit h this link to a longitudinal business level perspective, Porter addresses the criticism invoked by the advocates of the resource-based view. Still, this framework becomes dynamic in the first place with the addition of the Diamond of Environmental Influences which focuses on environmental factors on a broader national level. This framework represents a departure from Porters early static template-like models and stresses the reinforcing relations of four interrelated attributes. These attributes represent local, environmental conditions which influence the competitiveness of a company. Factor conditions as skilled labor, infrastructure or raw materials are provided by the nation. Demand conditions result from the pressure and needs of home market consumers which determine the degree of innovation and advancement of products. Related and supporting industries characterize the presence of rivaling or supporting industries and their linkage to ones company in terms of innovation press ure, cost-effectiveness, short lines of communication, etc. Firm strategy, structure and rivalry determines the market structure set by competitors. The way competitive advantage is achieved by management practices, organizational modes, and the utilization of (local) resources of rivaling enterprises, affects the degree of the external pressure a company has to deal with. Additional parameters of influence are historical chance and the government (ibid. pp. 99-106). Since all these exogenous factors affect the corporate strategizing and resources a company starts with, the diamond can be linked below the managerial choices and the initial conditions (van den Bosch 1997, p. 98). Both frameworks address a certain degree of flexibility and changing environmental factors. However, despite the efforts made to understand the basic conditions of financial success of corporations through strategic analysis of their presumed influential factors, the Diamond and the Chain of Causality rem ain extended frames of the initial generic positioning. Each link of the chain can be challenged in terms of its determinism. Thus, from a academic point of view, the main critique of Porter is that his principles are solely based on macroeconomic conditions which he analyzed within longitudinal studies of successful corporations, local governments and whole trade nations. Albeit these cases provide sophisticated sources of reliable information, they only represent conditions of their particular era, which cannot be extrapolated into changing future markets. Moreover, macroeconomics functions within its own frame of scientific reference and is seldom open to modification that is not based upon empiric evidence. It takes time to gather such evidence and it is per se impossible to modify these concepts in order to make them fit a problem-related context, which requires a different set of variables. Additionally, strategic researchers criticized the general application of the Diamond f ramework on business models. As Porters previous methods, the determinants of the Causality Chain and the environmental attributes of the Diamond are seldom applicable to small businesses or digital enterprises. The scope of the highly complex and national attributes does not really affect the infrastructure of small companies dependent on exports, as well as having menial cash flows (cf. Cartwright 1993; Grant 1991). Neither local infrastructure, nor demand conditions of local customers affects digital businesses, because the internet provides a network structure which is independent from geographic or national boundaries (though, in some rare cases national regulation restrictions indeed apply to digital shops). On a broader scale, critics pointed to the inflexible state of the Diamond framework, because it is only valid for the operational scope on a national level and nothing below or beyond that. For international relations of companies it was proposed to enhance the flexibili ty, by adding another modified diamond (cf. Rugman/ DCruz 1993; Moon et al. 1995). Such businesses do not depend much on local resources and can allocate them in a decentralized manner. Thus, competitive advantage may also result from outbound foreign investments, as well as from foreign-owned companies which add value to distinctive competencies required for the home market, effectively strengthening the competitive position. On the business level of strategy which is addressed by the managerial choices, initial conditions, drivers and activities, it is Porters empiric-based determinism that constraints the adaptive nature of the causality framework. Even though he is asserting that [e]ach model abstracts the complexity of competition to isolate only a few key variables whose interactions are examined in depth and that [t]he normative significance of each model depends on the fit between assumptions and reality (Porter 1998b, p. 84), he does not try to excel in these statements. With the creation of his basic meta-units of activities and drivers, he establishes a solid foundation just to ruin it with the integration of his outdated models of Five Forces, the Value Chain and Generic Strategies. It is impossible to include components such as the predominant cultures of countries, the type of market (digital, industrial, service based etc.) or the customer based preferences, which are vital drivers of complexity in international markets into the Chain of Causality framework. Speaking in economic terms, his framework assumes a classic and perfect market. Therefore, the more a market is influenced by customer uncertainty or the domestic culture, the less meaningful insights the framework can deliver. That is why these frameworks are suited best for analyzing mature, industrial, western markets or national economies with stable market structures. Evolutionary/ Descriptive Research Streams As a result of strategies based upon a prescriptive approach, an organization might develop too sharp an edge. A strong focus on a successful method by optimizing the value chain and activities for a certain business offering, results inevitably in narrowing down other competencies and strengths in a normative approach. Thus, initial success with a product can be disrupted quickly by exogenous changes in customer preferences as it happened within a short time span with HTC. If that is the case, then the organization is missing a requisite variety of alternative options it can exploit (cf. Beer 1981). Therefore, it is expedient to shift the perspective to the other predominant stream of research which endeavors to grasp the processes of change and to include them into a flexible strategy creation process. Hence, the evolutionary or descriptive theories operate from a retrospective point of view, by trying to capture the emergent processes, to reflect them and finally learn to modif y the status quo of strategizing. In comparison to the previous research stream, the descriptive branch is a rather heterogeneous collection of concepts which encompasses more than seven different schools of thought (cf. Eden/ Ackermann 1998, pp. 24-28, Mintzberg 1998). Moreover, chronologically, they have not gone through the same evolution as the normative schools, as they simultaneously began to gain academic traction in the late eighties (cf. Mintzberg 1998, p. 352ff.). The common denominator of all theories is the reflection upon incremental change within the company, as well as the exogenous competition and its impact on the organizational performance. Two of the most prolific examples will illustrate both perspectives: Theorists of the Environmental school argue that businesses are part of a natural selection mechanism. Hence, the environment, presenting itself to the organization as a set of general forces, is the central actor in the strategy making process. The company mus t respond to and include these forces continuously in its strategic analyses, in order to adjust its relative competitive position (cf. ibid. p. 288ff.). Executives, thus, choose from a variety of options provided by the environmental context, adopting those that not only suit their environments but also reflect their personal motives, predilections, and capabilities (Miller et al. 1988, pp. 544-548). Other important aspects are share- and stakeholder relationships, which are emphasized by the Power school (already covered in Chapter 2.1, p. 5). This research branch focuses solely upon the non-material assets of power and highlights its impact on strategy making. Whether inside the company or as an essential part of the environmental influence, stakeholders represent an influential factor on business performance as e.g. a (de-)motivated workforce, beneficial government parties, visionary managers, and, of course, customers. To address these parties, theorists developed a wide array of approaches ranging from early empathy based models (cf. Freeman 1984) to almost guerilla tactics-based ideology studies on lessons how social movements mobilize workforce (cf. Ruhland 2006) to computerized benchmarking tools for measuring stakeholder value (cf. Figge/ Schaltegger 2000). Nevertheless, the main flaw with these theories lies within their fragmented nature and the resulting inconsistency. Undoubtedly, the Entrepreneurial school has the best research on successful executives, and their visionary ways of dealing with innovations; the Cognitive school delivers the best insights in their minds and how strategic processes are being constituted. But all aforementioned schools deal with complexity by fragmenting it into thematic clusters and unraveling the separated fields of knowledge. This might be a scientifically valid method of dealing with hypotheses, but concurrently it becomes gradually more difficult for companies to deal with a fast-paced analysis of emerging pro blems. As mentioned earlier, each fragmented school of thought in the evolutionary research stream is composed out of hundreds of different methods and models. Thus, it takes not only time to analyze the situation within the frameworks, but it also costs theoretical effort to interconnect the fundamentally different tools and methods. Though Mintzberg addressed this problem within his books by creating a unifying approach to adapt to environmental change, known as the Configurational School (cf. Mintzberg et al. 1998; Miller/ Mintzberg 1983), it would take a considerable amount of time to apply all frameworks and empirically validate the inter-correlations of each theory. Due to this fact, Osterwalders interdisciplinary method is better suited for the demonstration of the remaining problems (cf. Osterwalder 2004; Osterwalder/ Pigneur 2010). His Business Model Canvas and its methods can be loosely sorted into the Learning/ Environmental/ Power schools (cf. ibid. p. 110f., p. 130ff ., pp.181-189, pp. 200-212.). Though, the model also draws heavily upon Porters (Five Forces) and Penroses (Resource-Based View) normative concepts, as well as the paradigms of the Planning school (Scenario Techniques). Yet it offers a more sophisticated approach to analyzing strategies behind the business model than proposed by Mintzberg , covering the most important factors of the prevalent schools of thought. The basic canvas is composed out of nine sections for analyzing the key components of the business offering (cf. Fig. 4) and can be divided into four main intersecting groups. On the right side of the canvas there are industry based components, including factors of competitive analysis, production activities, the actual microeconomic cost structure and internal resources basing on the aforementioned normative methods. The upper side of the canvas entails the components of product analysis, including the description of the actual product features, distribution channels, quali ty management and customer preferences based upon T.Q.M. frameworks, Six Sigma analyses etc. The right side depicts all activities involving customer analyses and market demand. Lastly, the lower side represents microeconomic and financial considerations regarding the product/ service, based upon the most generic economic units, e.g. cash flow, EBITDA metrics, asset pricing and revenue streams. Additionally, Osterwalder and Pigneur include such basic analytic tools as SWOT, Blue Ocean Strategies, Long Tail and some sort of self-composed competitive environment map to round off their model and make it compatible to other frameworks. Despite the apparently light approach towards creating business models, reflectively understand the core processes of an organization and including emergent change into corporate strategy (judging from the visual context and the non-existent academic aspirations of the book), the canvas was conceived as a doctoral thesis and is based upon scientific resea rch. Overall, the Business Model Canvas represents an emphatic concept for identifying the main processes and business units, upon which a corporate strategy can be based or modified. Despite the inclusion of many perspectives and improvements towards the normative concepts, this seemingly reflexive and holistic approach has to deal with strong criticism. Rosenberg et al. (2011) argued that the canvas dealt with substantial problems emphasizing the processual focus and thus lacking structural and goal-oriented performance representations (p. 310ff.). Moreover, due to its simplistic design, the model lacks consistent causality between each of the nine proposed blocks. Because of that, it is difficult (if not impossible) to determine a valid strategy and to manage the continuous adjustments of the business model (cf. ibid. 312ff.). In general, it becomes apparent that Osterwalder et al. do not provide the deep insight into the macroeconomic context as e.g. does Porter. The processe s and the effects between each canvas-block are only explained within case studies. In its methodology, the Business Model Canvas misses the questions why? and the answer because. The best example is found with the explanation of the Freemium business model (Osterwalder/ Pigneur 2010, pp. 96-106). Instead of introducing the basics or referring to explanatory books, there are roughly eight examples of canvases with a lot of colorful arrows, which point to the main connections between each block. But the model itself does not explain anywhere how to determine, understand and use these connections for strategic analysis or strategy creation. On top of that, some cases analyzed are assessed inherently wrong as in the case of Nintendos Wii (ibid. p. 230f.). It is stated that with the Wii as a result of a Blue Ocean approach, Nintendo could find and occupy a new niche of casual gamers, which allow savings on the hardware components and outselling competitors due to the greater volume of the casual gamer market. Again, there are not any insights into connections between consumer segments, revenue streams and value proposition. A Blue Ocean strategy states namely that, a company has to find a completely new market, instead of competing in saturated (red) markets. What Nintendo did, though, is remaining in the same market of virtual gaming and offering smaller innovations for a new segment of gamers. By doing so, they indeed gained more market share. But they did remain in the same old market, where churn rates are more important than short time gains. Usually, classic customers (referred to as hardcore gamers) buy games over the whole lifespan of a console generation. Causal gamers, in contrast, just buy the console and several games at the launch of a console. In the end, Nintendos console sales broke down after being three years the leading benchmark and the competitors began to dominate this market until today (cf. Takahashi 2012, Murphy 2010). Within Osterwalders case, Nintendos business model seemed perfectly fine, but the simple canvas concealed the complex economic and societal market interrelations, and enhanced the impression of success by misapplying the Blue Ocean framework. Admittedly, the nine blocks represent the most important processes of a business offering and enable a more emphatic mode of contextual comprehension, but the model does not consider analysis of conceptual and strategic weaknesses, nor as measuring metrics (as in the Balanced Scorecard; cf. Kaplan/ Norton 1992). That is why the canvas has been modified several times for specific businesses, as it lacks the holistic ability to represent a meta-theory (a framework), as the concepts in the previous chapter. Albeit including processes of innovation and iterating the business model, as well as covering many perspectives on strategic management, it can be outlined that Osterwalders work lacks a higher degree of complexity to match the corporate reality. However, oversi mplification and the need to draw fragmented perspectives into a coherent whole, represent the most common problems within the theories of the descriptive research stream (Day et al. 1997, p. 3f., p. 23; Mintzberg 1998, p. 345ff.). It can be used for a general business plan review and for a retrospective analysis of business models and threatening innovations, but it is not suited for a deeper understanding of complex, emerging problems which lead to a companys failure (as in the case of Nintendos Wii). Dialectics and the Competitor-oriented Turn In the light of the static nature of prescriptive models, the paradigm of strategizing became increasingly dynamic. Researchers stepped into the void of emergent issues and shifted the contextual focus of strategy on the organizational environment, flexible, as well as adaptive strategies, and competitors (Johnson/ Huff 1998, p.15). One of the main drivers behind this competitor-oriented turn is attributed to a structural change within the competitive environment in the eighties. In this time period, the markets became more saturated, privatized, deregulated and globalized (cf. Shapiro 2003, p. 5ff.). Consequently, the demand curves began to sink and companies began to shift their fundamental strategic concern from Why are firms successful? (Bosch 1997, p. 92) to Where do [we] have an edge over rivals? (Day 1997, p. 20). From sustaining an advantageous market position and thriving for a monopolistic division of the market sector, the focus moved to disrupting and undermining the ad vantage of competitors (ibid. p. 2f; cf. DAveni 1994). Such fundamental change caused the disruption of the politically perceived status of perfect competition, which was actively regulated by antitrust laws and government spending (on the basis of Hicks IS-ML Model cf. Hicks 1937; also DAveni 1994, pp. 343-348). In contrast, from a purely economic point of view, this disruption meant rather the constitution of a perfect competition. Without plunging into the depth of macroeconomics, the central axiom of classic, marginalist economics assumes that market processes are better regulated by competition than by governmental intervention. In a highly competitive environment it becomes gradually more difficult to erect high entrance barriers for substitutes of a business offering hence resulting in a notion of general market equilibrium (as assumed by Walras, Pareto or the late Samuelson, cf. Niehans 1990). This development, in turn, not only increased the pace in numerous industries, but decreased the product/ innovation cycles and led to the current state of hypercompetition (Day et al. 1997, p. 2f.; DAveni 1994, pp. 99-105). Uncertainty and constantly changing constellations of competitors gave rise to such practices as benchmarking, rigid patent laws and subsequent strategic adaptation. Strategic management experienced an axiomatic change and developed dialectical mechanics ever since. In dynamic environments, in which the focus is not on sustaining but on disrupting the status quo, consistency and commitment undermine the companys ability to move from temporary advantage to temporary advantage. A constant course decreases flexibility, gives away the firms position to competitors, and leaves it open to be outmaneuvered. (1994 p. 273) DAveni sums up precisely the dialectic paradox inherent in contemporary strategy: On one hand, organizations try to sustain their performance and their market share by creating elaborate and unique strategies, which cannot be imitated. On the other hand, there are the drivers of innovation and disruption which cause the companies to constantly change their strategy, because of the fear of being outmaneuvered and to share the same fate as HTC or Nintendo. At this point, the following question arises: How is it possible that such dynamics emerge, if strategic analysis offers distinct analyses, the determination of distinct competencies, and a solid positioning within the competition? The dialectics appear to arise from the scientific point of view. Researchers create frameworks and models which have to be intersubjectively comprehensive and offer a certain degree of empiric validation. On the other hand, they have to be mutually exclusive so that organizations may gain a temporary advantage. In a strategic arms race in which every organization tries to outmaneuver the other by using the same blueprints for strategy, it is little room left for distinction. Liebl sums it up with the metaphor: ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â ‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚ ¾If a hammer is the only tool you have, you tend to see each problem as a nail (Liebl 2012, p. 7f.). Each strategy can be copied and modified to disrupt the strategic advantage of the competitor. In the same way, the competitor optimizes his business offering by the same business canvas and tries to outplay his opponents. That is why the axiomatic focus shift towards competitors is considered unfavorable. In a competitive environment driven by optimization and benchmarking the strategy of distinction is not defined by inherent properties or customer preference, but more by patent lawsuits as in the case of Apple and Samsung (what can be seen as the end result of the hypercompetition in the smartphone market, cf. Spiegel 2012 Vol. , p. 62ff.). Therefore, some of the state-of-the-art approaches as the Resource-Based View focus on developing methods which incorporate the basic characteristics of the company which are considered inimitable (cf. Wernerfelt 1984; Prahal ad/ Hamel 1990). Following this premise, the Cultural school of thought emphasizes the importance of cultural forces within a company, which render imitation by competitors ineffective, since, for example, these cannot access the same human resources (Mintzberg 1998, pp.276-280). Though, these approaches try to distinguish companies by resources and culture, they have also misconceptions. The whole focus is laid upon culture, because strategy formation is understood as an acculturated process of social integration, based on beliefs and understandings shared by the members of an organization. Furthermore, it is an established condition set by even more entrenched forces as tradition, nation or milieus. Mintzberg (ibid, p. 267f.; 281ff.) criticizes the tendency of corporate stagnation and denial of important change induced by a feeling of reliance on the inimitability of the established key resources (as the predominant configurations of suppliers, culture and human resources). Manage rs may become too confident with the companys configuration of resources and may completely neglect the market-based view on innovations and structural changes. Albeit changing the focus back to the organization and offering new differentiation criteria, the Cultural school of thought does not provide a permanent solution to the dialectics of strategy. It rather represents another important element of distinction within strategic analysis of hypercompetition and adjusts the reflection on the limits of strategy. Finally, the most noteworthy part of the Cultural school of thought is the consideration of an empathic approach to strategic analysis and corporate sustainability in volatile markets. It should have become evident by now that the boundaries of strategy discussed in the previous chapters are set by the question about the perspective of the location of the most basic units of strategic analysis, which allows organizations to assert their position in the face of strong compe tition. Prescriptive theories try to assess competition by analyzing competitive environment and deliberately set the strategy. Descriptive strategies try to include emergent processes and include various parts of the reality as politics and learning into their analyses. Other approaches try to relocate the perspective on the organization and enhance strategy with distinctive attributes instead of generic strategy formulation. What they have in common is that they altogether limit their applicability by excluding another important perspective namely the consumer-based view. Each and every successful company claims that the customer and his satisfaction is their main concern (Rafeà ©/ Fritz 1992, pp. 308-310). But still, the consumer-based attitude is being outsourced from corporate strategy to the domain of marketing and subsequently advertising where it represents the main axiom labeled as Customer Centricity (cf. Levitt 1960). In the predominant strategic management research the customer oriented view is reduced either to a part of the organizational environment (as e.g. the Bargaining Power of Customers cf. Porter 1998a, p. 8ff., pp.130-146), or to a part of the business plan creation method (as e.g. the three parts of the Business Model Canvas cf. Osterwalder/ Pigneur 2010). This lack of focus on consumer strategy reveals the relative importance given by management corridors and scientific literature. But beyond scientific misjudgment, the customer-based view provides high potential and means for the understanding of competition and should therefore be already included in corporate strategy analysis. The team of researchers around Jack Trout postulated already in 1969 that a strategy should not entirely base upon internal resources or external factors, but by the way customers perceive the organizations business offerings relative to the prevalent competition (cf. Trout/ Ries 1969). In the search of the ultimate component of differentiation, the consu mer perspective represents an important axiom for strategic analysis. In every industry and market it is the customers aesthetic judgment, which allocates the degree of sustainability and uniqueness to a service or product. Marketing tools as market surveys, psychological profiling and conjoint analyses put aside, the consumer and his reactions unveil important conclusions about the potential of upcoming products or the positioning strategy of a company. It is even possible to explore entirely new markets and to understand new and innovative value chains by complementing the competitive assessment with a focus on consumers (this will be elaborated further in chapter 6). The background of why this vital context was disregarded in most research streams, why the strategic focus shifted to such extreme forms of competitive disruption that some companies declare war on competitors, and of how the evolution of paradigmatic discourses may influence aesthetic approaches to competition, w ill be examined in the following chapter. The Paradoxes After reviewing the predominant research streams of strategic management, it becomes apparent that each field deals (as always) with its own perks and weaknesses. However, issues of internal consistency put aside, every stream of research deals at least with one of the following (meta-) paradoxes: A strategist needs a theory which is equipped with the flexibility to adapt to forthcoming changes of competition (especially in the face of hypercompetition). Yet the predominant schools of thought offer barely flexible frameworks limited to artificial preset conditions. Another important need in strategizing is a theoretic approach which adapts to varying levels of complexity and thus helps to create appropriate mental models of reality in order to sustain performance. This is necessary due to the reality being too complex and volatile for the human mind. Still, even the state-of-the-art models find their boundaries by oversimplifying reality.