Wesfarmers Case Study

889 Words2 Pages

3.3 Impact of not having a strategic plan
After being corporatized and listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in 1984, Wesfarmers was considered to be one of the most elite organisations based on the returns it offered to its shareholders. A major contributor to the organisations success is strategic planning. But would the organisation achieve the same amount of growth without planning? The absence of planning can impact the organisation in the following ways:
• Loss of market share - Competition is increasing rapidly and organisations are always looking to outperform each other. Bunnings, one of Wesfarmers most successful businesses, is a large hardware retailer that has acquired 80% of the market share in Australia. In order to compete …show more content…

As a result, employees will not want to be a part of such an organisation where the future of the organisation and also of the employee is uncertain. The lack of a strategic plan will have a negative impact on the performance of Wesfarmers. Even though the organisation realises the positive impact its employees can have on the performance of the organisation, the lack of interest expressed by people wanting to work for the organisation based on its poor performance will make it difficult for the organisation to find the right people. Simultaneously, the organisations poor performance will lead to an increase in the turnover rate. As a result, the productivity levels of the organisation will drop drastically and achieving its goal becomes even more challenging (Olsen, …show more content…

Global strategy- Organisations that adopt a global strategy are focused on maintaining a low cost. The product developed by such organisations is standardised and hence lowers the operational cost. Marketing and production for these organisations will be handled by locations where the cost of operations is low (wages, rent) and the output (efficiency of employees, volumes produced) is high. The responsibility for the global strategy lies with the headquarters and the subsidiaries possess no power. Such a strategy is recommended where the pressure to reduce cost is high and local responsiveness is low (Iwan,

Open Document