Due to the social embbededness, in impersonal economic estimation the economic activity is not possible to place in the different sphere. The financial characteristics are rooted into a network that contains families, careers, relations and the state. The ends and means of the activity are influenced by these networks, and the reasonable and appropriate nature is defined for their people.
Therefore, the economic activity is shaped using the personal histories where the factors like gender, religion, family back ground, educational back ground and ethnicity are included. So the suggestions given to guide a strategy are cultural but not cognitive as viewed by the social constructivist. Social systems that are in a series, the effects by the organizations, economies and the industries will define the culture. The four forms of culture are “contingency, classical, socio-cognitive and socio-political”.
In this approach the organization behaves like a bird. Generally a bird cannot live in the air forever and it needs to land somewhere in order to take a rest and so it will search for a tree and then select a comfortable branch and then land there. In the same way the organization also search for suitable situation where it can have better outputs. This type of taking decisions is random because it’s the never ending process for searching the best from what is available. As it is random and changing always there are more chances for risks .
Using this approach the organization will ignore the factors that are said to be important for their survival as they have certain potentials and talents. These strategic approaches ares not used frequently and if they are practiced rarely in an organization, then also these approaches are giving unsuccessful results.
The study and relative research is done by observations and scenarios and from those it is indicated that most of the literature studies have focused on the strategy development but not on the strategy implementation. All the above discussed approaches are definitely useful but there are some drawbacks. One such drawback is that strategy effectiveness is not measured by these approaches. This problem is solved by David Norton and Robert Kaplan in 1996. They have generated a method called “Balanced Scorecard Performance Measurement Method”. This method is designed for both the qualitative measures and monetary measures for the sake of employee satisfaction.
They have also designed a balanced score card with a motive of better explanation and implementation of these strategy for the sake of employees using easy, understandable terminology. Various functions are integrated and related to the strategy and these functions include sales, finance, human resources, manufacturing and marketing. The employees are associated with the strategy in their daily work and so they need a better understanding of the strategy. The balance scorecard method explains the strategy for the employees clearly. Even good leadership qualities are developed in the employees with better explanation and implementation of the strategy.