The sand cone model: illustrating multi‐focused strategies

Abstract

Purpose -Researchers are keenly searching methods of analyzing, developing and implementing multi-focused strategies. This is a challenging task because they are quite difficult to structure and, therefore, to assimilate. This study aims to present a new method that can be used further to assist decision-makers in analyzing, evaluating and structuring strategies. Design/methodology/approach -In this constructive case study, an illustrative sand cone model of the different levels and their relative importance ratings is developed using the AHP method. In total, 21 experts in strategies and tactics were involved in the three-stage model development process. Findings -With the help of this visualization model, implementation of a multi-focused strategy in the case study organization was found to have a better fit for strategic decision making. Originality/value -This is a unique research paper.

Cumulative strategic capability and performance of early movers and followers in the cyber market

“…This model is able to illustrate the structure of four different capabilities contributing to organization strategies as cumulative relationships. The authors proposed that quality was the most deeply oriented capability, and serves as a foundation for the rest of cone (Takala, Leskinen, Sivusuo, Hirvela, & Kekale, 2006).…”

The People, Process and Goal Model versus the Sand Cone Model of Transformational Leadership: Critical Evaluation

“…In other words, transformational leadership describes how a leader seeks to meet the higher-order needs of followers (Banks et al 2016). The extensive reviews of the Sand Cone model of transformational leadership already exists (Takala et al 2005;Takala et al 2006a;2006b;Takala, Kukkola, and Pennanen 2008;HaVikström and Takala 2016a;2016b;2016c). Thus, in this section, we present briefly the description of this model.…”

“…The 'Results' level includes three styles of leadership: passive leadership, controlling leadership (Takala et al 2006a;2006b) and dynamic leadership (Ha-Vikström and Takala 2016a;2016b;2016c) in which, passive and controlling leadership focus more on corrective actions and are least effective (Bass and Riggio 2006). In contrast, dynamic leadership is necessary because the world today becomes more complex and dynamic.…”

Proactive Crisis Management in Global Manufacturing Operations

“…A holistic but very simple model of a human being from resource allocations to behaviour and finally to outcome directions and outcomes has been built basing on psychic, social, functional, organizational and structural factors and put together according to the sand cone model and participation objectives in leadership of an organization (Takala et al 2006). A modified sand cone model by integrating technology level into part of resource is proposed in Liu & Takala (2010b), based on which the new analytical models are developed.…”

“…The weights are statistically measured for further analysis with analytical models (Takala et al 2007b). For studying the transformational leadership, leadership profiles are empirically measured with the theoretical frame of reference by AHP questionnaires (Takala et al 2006). Statistical tests are made to find out the logics in the leadership profiles to increase accuracy in the profiles, and in parallel the analytical models are built by induction and tested statistically to measure leadership skills by leadership indexes from resource utilizations to leadership 41 behaviours and finally to outcome directions and outcomes.…”