Leon Reinharth, Ernest Kallman and Vicki Wulwick
Strategic planning has become an indispensable tool for management, and while its effectiveness is widely assumed, its contribution is rarely quantified. In order to assess the…
Abstract
Strategic planning has become an indispensable tool for management, and while its effectiveness is widely assumed, its contribution is rarely quantified. In order to assess the value of strategic decision making in terms of its contribution to a firm’s sales, net income, and earnings, Leon Reinharth and his associates have prepared a case study of the 10‐step strategic planning process undertaken about seven years ago by a leading multinational insurance brokerage company. The firm is Alexander & Alexander Services, Inc., a highly profitable organization both before and after implementation of its 1976 strategic plan. Readers can draw their own conclusions about the order of magnitude of the plan’s value by comparing the financial results of two five‐year periods in the firm’s history (see Table 3). The benchmark period, 1970 through 1974, was the pre‐plan era, and the years 1976 through 1980 are the ones Dr. Reinharth believes were most affected by the plan. There is some evidence that the firm’s strategic decision making capabilities gave it a definite competitive advantage. A 1979 Fortune survey found that among the five largest publicly held insurance borkerage firms in the United States, A&A had the highest average return on equity from 1975 to 1977 and the highest average annual growth in dividends from 1973 to 1978. Dr. Reinharth’s case study outlines the problems that A&A identified in 1976 and summarizes the management philosophy that guided the strategic responses of the plan. For a detailed version of this case history the reader is directed to The Practice of Planning, by the authors, and published by Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1981. The most recently reported financial results for A&A are presented in the separate section, Alexander and Alexander in 1981.
Leon Reinharth, H. Jack Shapiro and Ernest A. Kallman
This article is based on a chapter from the forth‐coming NASCP book by the authors titled, The Practice of Planning: Strategic, Administrative and Operational.
Leon Reinharth and Daniel W. Russie
Since the scientific study of management began more than a hundred years ago, planning has been acknowledged to be one of the principle functions of managers. It seems hard to…
Abstract
Since the scientific study of management began more than a hundred years ago, planning has been acknowledged to be one of the principle functions of managers. It seems hard to remember now, but it wasn't until after the Second World War that the planning function was given over to specialists. Today, most management takes it for granted that the planning staff controls the planning function.
Ten years ago John Kenneth Galbraith popularized the notion of the dual nature of the U.S. economy. A small portion of one percent of all business units in the United States own…
Abstract
Ten years ago John Kenneth Galbraith popularized the notion of the dual nature of the U.S. economy. A small portion of one percent of all business units in the United States own more than half the assets and receive more than half the earnings on more than half the sales of the entire economy. The balance of asset ownership, profits, and sales is divided up among some twelve million smaller firms. According to Galbraith's theory, this divides U.S. business into the “planning system”—giant corporations that control prices and production, and the “market system”—the great mass of companies whose prices and production are controlled by the give and take described by classical economists since the days of Adam Smith.
Leon Reinharth, H. Jack Shapiro and Ernest A. Kallman
This article is based on a chapter from the forthcoming Van Nostrand Reinhold/NASCP book by the authors titled The Practice of Planning: Strategic, Administrative, Operational.
Ernest A. Kallman, Leon Reinharth and H. Jack Shapiro
Any planner who tries to begin the planning process in a company speedily runs into negative attitudes, excuses, and foot dragging. This problem is so prevalent that one of the…
Abstract
Any planner who tries to begin the planning process in a company speedily runs into negative attitudes, excuses, and foot dragging. This problem is so prevalent that one of the major tasks of a corporate planner is to understand this resistance and to find successful countermeasures. These countermeasures require planning knowledge, courage, a knowledge of psychology, and last but certainly not least, the ability to win top management support.