1. D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
Lesson Four:
The Strategic Management Process
Michael Porter &
His Strategies
sl/BMBE/2017

2. MICHAEL PORTER: Guru of Strategic Management
D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
MICHAEL PORTER: Guru of Strategic Management
His theories include:
Diamond Model
5 - Forces Model
Value Chain Analysis
Generic Business strategies
sl/BMBE/2017

3. Porter’s diamond diagram
D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s diamond diagram
Strategy,
structure &
rivalry
Govt
Factor
conditions
Demand
conditions
Related &
supporting
industries
chance
sl/BMBE/2017

4. D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
According to Porter….
Factor conditions – highly specialised resources developed in different countries where there is a large pool of skilled manpower or labour
Related and supporting industries which help to expedite the process for production of goods and services
Demand conditions where consumers force companies to innovate and shape their market orientation in such a way that caters to their needs and wants
Strategy, structure and rivalry which will be highlighted in the study of 5-forces theory
sl/BMBE/2017

5. D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF INDUSTRIES or competitive analysis of the industry
5 FORCES AFFECTING ANY ORGANISATION ARE :
THREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS
THREAT OF SUBSTITUTES
SUPPLIERS’ BARGAINING POWER
BUYERS’ BARGAINING POWER
INDUSTRY COMPETITIVE RIVALRY
sl/BMBE/2017

6. MICHAEL PORTER’S 5 FORCES MODEL /THEORY
D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
MICHAEL PORTER’S 5 FORCES MODEL /THEORY
sl/BMBE/2017

7. Implications of michael porter’s 5 forces’ model :
D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment
Implications of michael porter’s 5 forces’ model :
The economic model of the market structure demonstrates that the degree of competition in an industry is the result of structural factors over which individual companies have little control. A firm in a highly competitive market has no option but to be a price taker while the other side the monopoly has limited competition through restraining strategies adopted.
His model also shows that every firm has to make decisions with regard to competitive forces and its own resources to maintain its market share and sustain growth, otherwise, the firm may be thrown out of the market due to competition and inability to read the trends in the industry  
sl/BMBE/2017

8. Business Management in the Built Environment
DISCUSSION AND ASSIGNMENT
Examination Questions pertaining to Michael Porter’s models…
1. Michael Porter’s contributions have been highly influential within the field of strategy. Provide a detailed explanation of any of his strategic analysis models and explain which dominant school of thought in strategy the models belonged to.
2. The five forces model is frequently used to help develop strategy. In the context of a built environment organisation, fully explore and explain what is meant by the “five forces model” and specifically how built environment organisations can draw upon and use the model.. additionally provide an explanation of which “school of thought” the model belongs.
sl/BMBE/2017

9. Business Management in the Built Environment
VALUE CHAIN ANALYSIS
Conducting a value chain analysis to link resources to strategic performance
Value chain analysis consists of identifying key value activities and resources required for each activity.
Pg of unit 5
sl/BMBE/2017

10. Checklist of resources and activities
Business Management in the Built Environment
Checklist of resources and activities
Support activities
Corporate structure
Human resources
margin
Technological development
purchasing
services
Outbound
logistics
Inbound
logistics
Mktg
& sales
mfg
margin
Primary activities
sl/BMBE/2017

11. Business Management in the Built Environment
Value system
Much of the value creation is dependent on 3 further steps: A identify external linkages B analyse the extent to which sub-optimisation occurs and then rectify the problem C passing a problem to another organisation does not help value creation See figure 11 of pg 14
sl/BMBE/2017

12. Business Management in the Built Environment the relevant competitors
Porter’s Generic Strategies
Competitive Position
demand in the market
market leadership
Strategic Choice
the relevant competitors
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
DIFFERENTIATION
COST
FOCUS
sl/BMBE/2017 12

13. Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s Generic Strategies:
Competitive Forces:
Drive down costs while maintaining average quality
Cost Leadership / Cost Focus
Differentiate product or service in ways that are valued by the customer
Broad Differentiation / Differentiation Focus
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
sl/BMBE/2017 13

14. Competitive Advantage Competitive scope
Business Management in the Built Environment
Selection of options : Porter’s Generic Strategies
Unit 6 Pg 1-3
Competitive Advantage
Lower cost
Differentiation
Competitive scope
Broad target
Cost Leadership
Broad Differentiation
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
Narrow target
Cost Focus
Differentiation Focus
sl/BMBE/2017 14

15. Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s Generic Strategies
Average
Price
PROFIT
PROFIT
PROFIT
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
COST
COST
COST
Average
Player
Cost
Leader
Differentiator
Player
sl/BMBE/2017 15

16. Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s Generic Strategies
(alternatively)
THE ‘SQUEEZE’
Average
Price
PROFIT
PROFIT
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
PROFIT
COST
COST
COST
Average
Player
Cost
Leader
Cost
Cutter
sl/BMBE/2017 16

17. Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s Generic Strategies (alternatively)
SHORT-TERM STRATEGY
Average
Price
PROFIT
PROFIT
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
COST
COST
COST
Average
Player
Cost
Leader
Cost
Price
sl/BMBE/2017 17

18. Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s Generic Strategies
Drive down costs
the experience curve
Unit cost
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
Organisational Learning
Cumulative volume
sl/BMBE/2017 18

19. Business Management in the Built Environment
Porter’s Generic Strategies
Drive down costs
Economies of scale
(X)
Unit cost
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
Manufacturing Process
(Y)
Scale of production
sl/BMBE/2017 19

20. Business Management in the Built Environment
Selection of options : Porter’s Generic Strategies Pg 2-unit 6
3. Hybrid
4.Differentiation
5. Focused Differentiation
Strategic Choice/options
2. Low Price
6. Increased Price / Standard Value
What is of value to the user of the product / service?
RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT).
TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE.
TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL.
1. Low Price / Added Value
7. Increased Price / Low Value
8. Low Value / Standard Price
sl/BMBE/2017 20