The Need for Organisational Resilience - Chapter 2

8. The eventual bases of operations and the strategic reserves

9. The marching of armies, considered as manoeuvres

10. The relation between the position of depts. And the marches of the army, as an obstacle

to its progress: the sieges to be made and to be covered

11. Fortresses regarded as strategic means, as a refuge for an army, as an obstacle to its

progress: the sieges to be made and to be covered

12. Points for entrenched camps

13. The diversions to be made, and the large detachments necessary. (Adapted from De

Jomini 2008, 46)

[TEXT BOX ENDS]

Translation and Explanation: Linear versus Adaptive Strategy

Over the years, a plethora of models on strategy have emerged. Most have in common an

inseparability between the organisation and its environment. An organisation makes long-

term decisions to gain a competitive edge in a changing environment.

In principal, two basic models of strategy may be distinguished: Linear and Adaptive

Strategy (Chaffee 1985). A linear strategy resembles the Methodical Battle, applied by the

French; it is a methodical approach to achieving long terms organisational goals. Managers

identify these goals, plan in detail and formulate and implement strategy.

Adaptive Strategy can be viewed as a managerial expression of the manoeuvre warfare

favoured by Germany; it is less focussed on long-term goals but instead seeks the means to

achieve a fit between an organisation’s capabilities and the environment it operates in. This

suggests greater attention to risks and opportunities; the outcome is a product of the fit

between the organisation and its environment, and ultimately depends on the efficacy of that

strategic fit.

The major differences between these views on strategy are shown in Table 2.1.

15 | P a g e