Last night was just pondering over the strategies used by various companies to gain or to hold onto their market shares. Majority of the articles encouraged "attacking or aggressive" strategy as the most prescribed strategy for gaining market share. But I didn't seem to agree.
I am working in a company which has been a market leader earlier, lost its place to competitors when it decided to aggressively attack the market. Though a boom did build up, it eventually left the company cash strapped and we lost four places to wind up at number five. "What went wrong" became the case study at many B-Schools. Recently an IIM-C prof conducted a thorough research of the events and was surprised to see the "unhoped-for" outcomes of our aggressive stances.
What I've studied in my MBA stands disapproved when I consider these events. We've been taught aggressive attacking techniques in our curriculum but all of them stand refuted in context to my present organization.
To add icing on the cake, I am amazed to see our organizations revival. It is being led by a strong defensive strategy, which prohibits selling on an accrual basis, i.e., no credit......WOW..... Strategy Books here is an Exception..... Growth based on defensive plans of action.
Signing off
Me.....
No comments:
Post a Comment