Michael E. Raynor

Michael E. Raynor’s Followers (23)

member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo
member photo

Michael E. Raynor



Average rating: 4.01 · 13,378 ratings · 246 reviews · 9 distinct worksSimilar authors
Il dilemma dell'innovatore:...

by
4.02 avg rating — 46,596 ratings — published 1997 — 57 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Innovator's Solution: C...

by
4.02 avg rating — 12,896 ratings — published 2003 — 24 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Relic Master (The Book ...

by
3.70 avg rating — 2,275 ratings — published 1998 — 14 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Strategy Paradox: Why c...

3.91 avg rating — 262 ratings — published 2007 — 8 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Three Rules: How Except...

by
3.89 avg rating — 175 ratings — published 2013 — 9 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Clayton M. Christensen ...

by
4.36 avg rating — 72 ratings — published 2015 — 6 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
Disruptive Innovation: The ...

by
4.50 avg rating — 58 ratings — published 2011
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Innovator's Manifesto: ...

3.52 avg rating — 61 ratings — published 2011 — 3 editions
Rate this book
Clear rating
The Three Rules: How Except...

by
did not like it 1.00 avg rating — 1 rating — published 2013
Rate this book
Clear rating
More books by Michael E. Raynor…
“Operating divisions that manage their own long-term strategic uncertainty will most likely end up mediocre performers, avoiding high-risk bets to increase their odds of survival. In addition, since great performance demands relentless focus on a particular strategy, devoting resources—especially management time and attention—to creating options is typically beyond the capacity of an operating division. Consequently, Strategic Flexibility is not something a successful operating division can typically create for itself. Only by focusing the corporate office on the management of uncertainty can the overall corporation achieve high results (thanks to commitment-focused divisions) at lower risk (thanks to the uncertainty-focused corporate office).”
Michael E. Raynor, The Strategy Paradox: Why committing to success leads to failure

“The strategy paradox arises from the need to make strategic commitments in the face of strategic uncertainty. Strategic uncertainty—which is different from operational or financial uncertainty—increases as one attempts to plan over longer time horizons. The traditional hierarchy provides a foundation for managing strategic uncertainty, because hierarchies function best when the levels within them are defined by the time horizons the managers at each level are responsible for. As a result, each level in a hierarchy copes with different degrees of strategic uncertainty. Lower levels have very little strategic latitude, focusing instead on delivering against past commitments, while higher levels manage strategic uncertainty more actively by mitigating strategic risk and positioning the firm to exploit future strategic opportunities. Midlevel managers in charge of operating divisions must translate the possibilities created by senior management into commitments that functional management must fulfill.”
Michael E. Raynor, The Strategy Paradox: Why committing to success leads to failure

“The strategy paradox arises from the need to commit in the face of unavoidable uncertainty. The solution to the paradox is to separate the management of commitments from the management of uncertainty. Since uncertainty increases with the time horizon under consideration, the basis for the allocation of decision making is the time horizon for which different levels of the hierarchy are responsible: the corporate office, responsible for the longest time horizon, must focus on managing uncertainty, while operating managers must focus on delivering on commitments. This is the principle of Requisite Uncertainty. A critically important tool in applying Requisite Uncertainty is Strategic Flexibility, a framework for identifying uncertainties and developing the options needed to mitigate risk or exploit opportunity.”
Michael E. Raynor, The Strategy Paradox: Why committing to success leads to failure



Is this you? Let us know. If not, help out and invite Michael to Goodreads.