1)
What was the biggest surprise for you in the
reading? In other words, what did you read that stood out the most as different
from your expectations?
What really struck me was the section on fatal visions in strategic
planning. There were so many different scenarios, a fatal five actually. What
really caught my eye about them was that for one there can be misunderstandings
in how productive an industry may seem. Following that, there can also be the
mistake of pursuing an unattainable goal. That may sound pessimistic, hence it
made me take a double take, but it rings truth as to not wasting time on
something not feasible in the business world.
2)
Identify at least one part of the reading that
was confusing to you.
The area that was confusing to me was about
the entrepreneurial strategy matrix model. An interesting description of how
innovation requires risk, yet too much risk accounts for possible financial
loss. So then the author goes off saying that it is all up to the entrepreneur to
decide what is best for the venture being contemplated. The diagrams used were
a little difficult to understand and to interpret what they were explaining
about the appropriate strategies which exist in the strategy matrix.
3)
If you were able to ask two questions to the
author, what would you ask? Why?
Question one: What is an example of a new-venture development activity?
Question two: How can we gain control
over opportunities?
4)
Any disagreements:
The
whole bureaucratization versus decentralization argument was debatable. Once
again a majority of these things are opinion based and vary from case to case.
So to say as to which is right and which is wrong is illogical to deem as such.
No comments:
Post a Comment