Please write about 330 words for below comments and ask question?
also mention some references ( 2 or 3 referrences)
For this academic exercise, I will analyze the article ¨Can You Say What Your Strategy is?¨ by Collis and Rukstad (2008). The authors provide a comprehensive study of managers from various industries to determine if they can articulate what their company´s strategy is. They claim that very few executives can articulate their strategy in less than thirty-five words, and most of them work for the most successful industries in their field.
Collis and Rukstad (2008) analyze natural language data from interviews with high executives; Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson (2012) define two methods of natural language analysis, which are content and grounded analysis. Content analysis consists of ideas that have been developed in advance and then using the data to construct and support them; on the contrary, grounded analysis lets the data speak for itself and guide them to draw conclusions. In my opinion, Collis and Rukstad (2008) implement a content analysis method to prove that top executives cannot articulate their company strategy in a concise manner. I think that they elaborated a theory based on observation and then used data to prove or disprove it.
Miles and Huberman (1994) state that qualitative data can be analyzed in different ways to accomplish diverse results; it is crucial to adopt the appropriate research methodologies for the type of study that is being developed. For example, this investigation could have had a grounded analysis approach that then led to the conclusion that many executives are not clear about their strategy. The main benefit of this method is that the researchers would investigate about corporate strategies and in the process of obtaining data, they would have noticed the pattern and focus the investigation towards that subject; instead of developing a theory and then investigating for corroboration.
The authors also included secondary data into their study, using a mixed research methodology approach. They summarized the data and presented it clearly, using many resources such as tables and graphics, making it easy to understand for the audience. I believe that the study was not biased by the theories presented by the authors; they used primary and secondary sources of data to analyze the scenarios and gave recommendations based on their findings. Finally, they used a narrative analysis of natural language data; this was done by gathering experiences and stories of members from different organizations and then interpreting them to support their study.
Please let me know what you think about the research methods used in this article.
Thank you,
References