The role of operations executives in strategy making
| Author | Jovan Grahovac,Lieven Demeester,Arnoud De Meyer |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.09.006 |
| Published date | 01 November 2014 |
| Date | 01 November 2014 |
Journal
of
Operations
Management
32
(2014)
403–413
Contents
lists
available
at
ScienceDirect
Journal
of
Operations
Management
j
o
ur
na
l
ho
mepage:
www.elsevier.com/locate
/jom
The
role
of
operations
executives
in
strategy
making
Lieven
Demeestera,∗,
Arnoud
De
Meyerb,
Jovan
Grahovacc,1
aLee
Kong
Chian
School
of
Business,
Singapore
Management
University,
50
Stamford
Road,
178899
Singapore,
Singapore
bSingapore
Management
University,
81
Victoria
Street,
188065
Singapore,
Singapore
cCollege
of
Business,
University
of
Illinois
at
Urbana-Champaign,
1206
South
6th
Street
Champaign,
IL
61820,
United
States
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
i
n
f
o
Article
history:
Available
online
16
September
2014
Keywords:
Operations
strategy
Strategy
process
Information
processing
Contingency
theory
a
b
s
t
r
a
c
t
Creating
competitive
advantage
based
on
operations
capabilities
is
likely
to
require
much
analysis
and
communication
within
the
operations
function.
At
the
same
time,
much
communication
and
joint
strate-
gizing
with
the
top
and
other
functional
executives
is
likely
to
be
needed
as
well.
Hence,
given
that
operations
executives
have
limited
time
and
also
have
to
perform
many
other
routine
tasks,
they
need
to
manage
two
tradeoffs.
The
first
one
is
between
the
time
spent
on
strategy
making
and
the
time
spent
on
everything
else.
The
other
is
within
strategy
making,
between
the
time
spent
on
“functional
delib-
eration”
within
the
operations
function
and
“top-level
communication”
with
other
executives.
Using
a
survey
of
134
operations
executives,
we
find
that
an
increase
in
the
time
the
operations
executive
spends
on
strategy
making
is
positively
associated
with
performance
in
complex
and
hostile
environments
and
when
the
relative
strength
of
the
operations
function
within
the
firm
is
low.
Within
the
operations
exec-
utive’s
strategy
making,
an
increased
emphasis
on
top-level
communication
is
positively
associated
with
performance
in
environments
that
are
complex,
stable
(less
uncertain),
or
hostile.
©
2014
Elsevier
B.V.
All
rights
reserved.
1.
Introduction
It
is
well
established
that
operations
executives
(OEs)
contribute
to
competitive
advantage
when
they
play
an
active
role
in
strat-
egy
making
(Brown
et
al.,
2007;
Papke-Shields
and
Malhotra,
2001;
Swamidass
and
Newell,
1987;
Wheelwright
and
Hayes,
1985).
The
types
of
decisions
made
in
this
role
are
also
well
known
from
descriptions
of
the
process
of
operations
strategy
(Skinner,
1969;
Fine
and
Hax,
1985;
Hill,
1989;
Menda
and
Dilts,
1997).
What
is
not
well
understood,
though,
is
how
and
to
what
extent
various
inter-
nal
and
external
contingencies
affect
the
optimal
involvement
of
the
OE
in
strategy
making.
For
example,
Clancy
and
Kieff
(2004)
found
that
increased
communication
with
other
functional
execu-
tives
was
necessary
to
formulate
successful
strategies
in
an
industry
facing
a
threat
of
commoditization.
A
different
need
was
suggested
by
reports
on
the
retail
industry’s
response
to
the
emergence
of
the
Internet.
Here,
a
number
of
OEs
fell
short
in
developing
newly
needed
logistics
capabilities
(e.g.
Wall
Street
Journal,
1999),
imply-
ing
that
these
OEs
may
have
failed
to
devote
sufficient
time
to
the
analysis,
planning,
and
execution
within
their
function.
How
OEs
∗Corresponding
author.
Tel.:
+65
6828
0729.
E-mail
addresses:
ldemeester@smu.edu.sg
(L.
Demeester),
arnouddemeyer@smu.edu.sg
(A.
De
Meyer),
grahovac@illinois.edu
(J.
Grahovac).
1Tel.:
+1
217
265
0266.
can
best
adjust
their
involvement
in
strategy
making
as
the
context
changes
is
the
question
we
address
in
this
paper.
We
define
the
OE
as
the
person
in
charge
of
the
operations
func-
tion
and
responsible
for
the
resources
and
processes
used
in
the
production
and
delivery
of
a
firm’s
goods
and
services.
The
OE’s
job
entails
a
number
of
monitoring,
coordination,
and
other
tasks
(e.g.
Fayol,
1949)
beside
what
we
refer
to
as
strategy
making,
that
is,
the
involvement
in
the
analysis
and
formulation
of
business
level
and
operations
strategies
as
well
as
in
the
analysis
and
planning
of
how
to
best
implement
them.
Importantly,
like
everyone
else,
OEs
have
limited
time,
attention,
and
ability
to
process
and
communicate
information
at
their
disposal
(Simon,
1947),
and
these
limitations,
in
turn,
imply
that
OEs
have
to
prioritize
and
balance
their
numer-
ous
tasks.
Moreover,
these
priorities
and
balances
probably
need
periodic
reevaluation
and
adjustment.
In
this
paper,
we
focus
on
two
broad
tradeoffs,
or
balances,
in
the
OE’s
job.
The
first
is
between
strategy
making
and
all
other
tasks.
The
second
occurs
within
strategy
making,
between
what
we
call
functional
deliberation
and
top-level
communication.
We
define
functional
deliberation
(FD)
as
the
analysis
and
communication
with
subordinates
in
the
operations
function
and
external
parties.
In
contrast
to
the
functional
focus
of
FD,
top-level
communication
(TLC)
is
inherently
cross-functional
and
consists
of
various
engage-
ments
with
the
CEO
and
senior
executives
of
other
functions
such
as
marketing,
research
and
development,
finance,
etc.
In
essence,
the
second
tradeoff
corresponds
to
a
tradeoff
between
strengthening
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.09.006
0272-6963/©
2014
Elsevier
B.V.
All
rights
reserved.
To continue reading
Request your trial