How JCPenney Failed : JCPenney's Failure

Personal Views in How JCPenney Failed

In this article, the author provides a detailed report for the sustainable

solutions paper J. C. Penney Company, Inc., commonly known as JCPenney. Moreover, JCPenney is a retailer company in the United States that is over 100 years old. As time passed, JCPenney experienced challenges to stakeholder needs. JCPenney has a value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney company lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine value chain process and is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing more value and lower prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed.

Executive Summary

The sustainable strategy for JCPenney includes changes to the value chain processes. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. Expectations and affiliations with social identities do not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The focus for JCPenney should be in value creation, and social dynamic alignment for organizations to maintain or sustain a competitive advantage (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Out of Peter Drucker’s eight long-term survival objectives, JCPenney will benefit in correcting: (a) Market Standing; (b) Innovation; (c) Profitability; (d) Management Capability; (e) Employee Satisfaction & Performance; and (f) Obligations to Home Bound Communities state an argument that organizations must have direction and purpose (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). JCPenney is to scan the environment to find trends (variable over time), events (happening now), or forecasts (extension of the future) intercepting the industry. The survival tactic for JCPenney to implement will include the long-term survival objectives as strategic intent. Performance changing metrics will assist in providing scope to action plans required by the strategic intent (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Strategic intent represents a quick recovery to a drastic change in opportunities and threats.

A consideration to JCPenney culture type includes identifying the various different ethnic groups that represent JCPenney. Moreover, JCPenney organizational structure is of different types of ethnic groups from various parts of the United States and the world. Motivating different types of ethnic groups in an organization setting is challenging due to traditions. An organization practicing old North American traditions in a business setting, when most of the employees are not originally from the United States, is not a productive strategy. The prime idea is to incorporate a motivational plan aligned with the values of traditional ethnic group origins.

Recently JCPenney terminated 2,200 employees affecting approximately 100 stores and the potential of 1,100 stores for future, cut backs in the future (Murray, 2013). Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement," 2013). The last three years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). The organizational strategy is causing organizational market value to decrease. In addition, when the economy improves organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is missing.

JCPenney’s success is mainly responsible for external forces (Chittihaworn, Islam, Keawchana, & Yusuf, 2011). The external forces that are of interest to JCPenney include: (a) products and services; (b) the way of doing business; (c) management expertise; (d) entrepreneur characteristics; (e) characteristics of the organization; (f) resources and finance; and (g) Internet technology (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). The factors concerning the growth and sustainability of JCPenney include the business capacity of leadership and team (Mazzrol, Rebound, & Soutar, 2009). To grow a business, the managers must implement a strategy that relates to measurement of the expansion. Leaders must understand the principles of economics state that as demand grows price rises to reduce demand and supply increases to match demand (Stacey, 2011). The external constraints to any technology-based organization are newer technologies, cost to implement, and material availability to produce the technology (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Factors to reduce the threat of entry include economies of scale, providing materials for the implementation of technology just in time, producing a technology unique to the industry, branding the industry, and induction to cartels (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). In addition, JCPenney has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry placement (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, JCPenney can improve external and internal views of diversity by electing leaders that are diversity friendly (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney can become competent by realizing an organization that incorporates external a friendly physical environment including behaviors and settings labor forces require for a “Workplace Fun” environment (Pryor, Singleton, Taneja, & Humphreys, 2010). The factors that increase workplace fun for JCPenney comprise of higher moral: (a) lower turnover; (b) increase creativity and innovation; (c) better performance; and (d) higher commitment (Pryor et al., 2010).

JCPenney enthusiasm in changing its logo, hiring a new CEO and marketing manager may provide its shareholders initial short run relief from pressing low returns of revenues. The new CEO arrived from the retail technology sector, not the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. In addition, the new marketing manager experience is from recreating a sugar water drink from the 1980s and has no expertise the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. The CEO first introduced a new idea of “Everyday Low Prices” that did not go over well with the public. Moreover, the CEO implemented a new pay scale to employees. The pay scales does not pay commission to sales staff. Furthermore, the pay scale does not offer motivation to sales employees. Nevertheless, JCPenney has to embrace a more sound strategy in evaluating organizational performance by concepts of the value chain measurements.

JCPenney has alignment to customer’s shopping experience and customer service within the organization. JCPenney has a weakness in having enough personnel in the stores; however, the untrained personnel attempt to engage with customers with a welcome message. The online auction experience does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less human interaction with the public. The misalignment challenges are causing JCPenney in moving to a direction for solvency ("Balance sheet," 2013). In addition, JCPenney should connect the mission statement to the daily activities for providing distinction and customer definition (Anitsal, Anitsal, & Girard, 2012).

The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping the external forces of the VCA infrastructure. A capability JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as a consistent parameter to improvements. JCPenney has many capabilities not yet realized for value creation. The capability to implement is utilizing the abundance of information to introduce profit maximization. Moreover, JCPenney creates information from all daily routines. A study of those routines is mandatory to evaluate redundant practices and missed opportunities. Other capabilities include the existing employee base retains knowledge to utilize for value creation.

The opportunity for JCPenney is to derive a model of interest to the daily routines with the employment base, availability of human resources, and the needs of communities (Stacey, 2011). The intricate strategy is reliant on processing information and the interaction of people within the organization. In essence, JCPenney must overcome the differences human labor offers in culture identification to unite the organization in offering a vision of value to communities in a global scale.

The strategy JCPenney undertakes do not address needs to align organizational strategy with values of communities. Moreover, JCPenney is in a culture shock i.e. JCPenney is finding the new environment too complex to attempt to retain organizational footing in a competitive business. Indeed, the direction taken by JCPenney currently encompasses the strategy of exhausting capital assets and devaluing infrastructure.

JCPenney needs to respond competition by using the opponents inertia to balance position (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The advantage achieved by JCPenney is in harmony when the strengths of the competition turn to weaknesses. The art of the strategy is when the competition does not realize JCPenney is defending territory (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

JCPenney has in place a product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s history and company culture …” (Lee, Fairhurst, & Wesley, 2009, p. 146). The corporate social responsibility is not evident in the activities JCPenney makes. Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers information on being a servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our communities, our Associates, our Customers and the environment. What matters to you matters to JCPenney." (Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from the two statements depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed to a lawful alignment with communities; however, the concern for communities is ethics. The ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

JCPenney lacks the appropriate personnel at store level to assist in implementing a strategic plan since the current people hired by JCPenney reflect a misalignment with the needs of stakeholders. The attitude of the workers is without motivation due to the compensation structure and the requirements by the organization. The resources to implement a strategic intent plan exists (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs. The best plans have back-up plans, hold people responsible for those plans, are measurable and have a scheduled date of implementation. The implementation process will show the progress that is obvious to management. The difference in the implementation process, success in implementation, and before implementation should reflect the change in the positive direction. The metrics for management to review include stakeholder reports, accounting reports, and shareholder acceptance. Lastly, the implementation and success of the implementation is tedious, should allow for measurement, show ownership to unit goals, and be time driven.

The time line for implementation involves five key steps. The first objective to implement change is when close knit teams exhaust current leadership (Stacey, 2011). Next, the organization grows by decentralization and becoming autonomous (Stacey, 2011). After growth through direction, the organization structures decentralize, and the organization proceeds to delegation (Stacey, 2011). Afterwards, the directed efforts of delegation bring the necessity for coordination by decreasing redundant operations (Stacey, 2011). Cultural bonding and cohesion assisted in reducing waste and the last time implementation action process include forming habits that are in alignment with the strategy (Stacey, 2011).

JCPenney ought to realize the opportunities in a diverse work force. Diversity is the variety of culture and ethnic groups within an organization (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, diversity allows organizations to adopt the best cultures to offer an environmental cohesive group (Stacey, 2011). Diversity enhances organizational performance and provides improvements through planning (Stacey, 2011). Diversity also calls for culture adaptation and acceptance of differences (Stacey, 2011).

JCPenney failed to recognize the changing dynamics of society’s culture and growing base of younger stakeholders. In addition, the CEO placed more emphasis on vision to the dominant discourse than alignment with stakeholder needs. The strategic plan of offering new products through Martha Stewart represented the misalignment in understanding the needs of a younger generation of stakeholders. Moreover, JCPenney missed the opportunity in relating social constructionism to stakeholders. In essence, JCPenney realized the approach of supplying products and services to an older stakeholder group that represented a small portion of social groups.

JCPenney bombed to attempt to measure stakeholder response to strategic planning. The CEO abandoned academic views to interchange with personal tools. The CEO did not examine core business alignment with customer, attempt to realize entrepreneurship with stakeholders, and recognize the value. Moreover, evidence-based management principles or TQM were not important for JCPenney. The CEO brought a mixture of conceptual beliefs from past industries and attempted to realize gains from those experiences. By not relocating to corporate headquarters, the CEO did not bond with the culture of JCPenney, therefore, could not correctly interpret the culture. The signals of communications were a miss by not examining the communicative system of participants. Lastly, the CEO convoluted strategies were successful at not yielding positive cash flows.

JCPenney is in a negative discourse aiming at devaluing stakeholders. Social interaction dynamics is essential for sustainability, and JCPenney has not shown interest in identifying new emerging stakeholder base. The retail industry has a difficult task of identifying stakeholders. Much of the misalignment is within how the internal stakeholders and external stakeholders communicate. Majority of JCPenney employees do not attempt to develop a personal relationship with customers, therefore, JCPenney will find it difficult to learn customer’s expectations. The center of mass of customers perceptions maintains a distance from the misconceptions of JCPenney. In summary, new, emergent stakeholders emerge in external societies with boundaries not reachable by JCPenney.

The booming JCPenney leader will enact measures of alignment with key measures that result a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that nearly reaches sustainability with noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and effort represent the axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of creativity (Stacey, 2011).

Alignment to environmental responsibility is not just among employees. The responsibility goes further among the value chain to affect everyone within vertical and horizontal support. The amount of alignment is dependent how far off the center of mass is the organization processing activities. Leaders have to break any pre-existing boundaries to dominate the competition. Meeting the needs of stakeholders is only possible by realizing the change in environmental responsibility and accepting diversity. The integration of environmental than is apparent through measurements of metrics. Quality management (QM) assists in the integration processes by observing the alignment of common principles with the complex strategy of the leader. The actual alignments made to QM, and environmental have the basis of the function of individual organizational needs, resources, and environments (Rusinko, 2005).

Crisis management assists organizations by acknowledging unforeseen events that can change barriers of entry to the organization. The focus is in social, political, cultural and moral factors that can change sustainability. Moreover, the events include resource depletion, environmental degradation, economic decline, competitive threats, labor strife, financial crunch, technological risks, and health hazards (Shrivastava, 1993). The competitive advantage by crisis management is in the response, time of response, change of processes, and alignment to based processes.

JCPenney’s analysis of shareholder value includes risk reduction to minimize waste, and emissions from operations (Senge et al., 2010). The industry has a number of internal threats to the safekeeping of products within the department stores. Theft is common in an organization with numerous produces roaming through each department store. Product displays originate from the same products offered to the public; therefore, control of the items is a challenge. In addition, the items incur damages by misuse. The supply chain incurs theft and misalignment from the distances materials travel. The occurrence is a waste of resources.

Furthermore, the reputation of JCPenney is now of an organization that offers products to a demographic not popular among the majority of stakeholders. The accepted model by most stakeholders is of an organization that offers discounts and built its reputation surrounding the market value organizational frame. The misalignment lacks connectivity to communities and does not incorporate a match to the organizations’ mission statement.

Technology exploitation is necessary to sustain a low-cost strategy. At this time, JCPenney hires personnel to task redundant activities that can be reassign to automation processes. The payoff is an innovative organizational model that environmentally proficient and efficiently productive. To maximize shareholder value, JCPenney needs to reinvent its processes and reposition itself as a dominant retail organization.

The challenge for JCPenney in globalization is economies of scale. Currently, the business model focuses on product creation and assembly in regions of the world where labor costs are minimum. Product transfers occur via the supply chain by transportation methods to include oceanic, air travel, and motor highway. The product destination is the United States. The disabling opportunity is that products made overseas have a high price for the local communities in the overseas countries. In addition, the waste from product creation made to communities of the isolated countries represents resource depletion. In essence, the current business model is not environmentally friendly and lacks overall long-term sustainability. The lack of alignment with environmental concerns is the culprit to sustainability.

Summary Focus

The sustainable strategy for JCPenney includes changes to the value chain processes. Out of Peter Drucker’s eight long-term survival objectives, JCPenney will benefit in correcting: (a) Market Standing; (b) Innovation; (c) Profitability; (d) Management Capability; (e) Employee Satisfaction & Performance; and (f) Obligations to Home Bound Communities state an argument that organizations must have direction and purpose (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The survival tactic for JCPenney to implement includes long-term survival objectives as strategic intent. The prime idea is to incorporate a motivational plan aligned with the values to a traditional diversity group of employees. The new strategic intent plan needs to stabilize cash flows and stakeholder expectations. The external forces triggering the need for change include: (a) products and services; (b) the way of doing business; (c) management expertise; (d) entrepreneur characteristics; (e) characteristics of the organization; (f) resources and finance; and (g) Internet technology (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Factors to reduce the threat of entry include economies of scale, providing materials for the implementation of technology just in time, producing a technology unique to the industry, branding the industry, induction to cartels and environmental sustainability (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010; Stacey, 2011). JCPenney has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry placement (Martins & Meyer, 2012). In addition, JCPenney should connect the mission statement to the daily activities for providing distinction and customer definition (Anitsal, et al., 2012). Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs.

For JCPenney to succeed, it has maintain focus on; (a) a core business; (b) closeness to customer; (c) productivity through people; (d) autonomy and entrepreneurship; (e) hands-on; (f) value driven; (g) bias for action; (h) simple form and lean staff; and (i) simultaneous loss-tight properties (Stacey, 2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that nearly reaches sustainability with noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and effort represent the axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of creativity (Stacey, 2011). Long-term sustainability calls for alignment to internal controls, connectivity to communities, technology exploitation, and environmental sustainability.

Key Takeaways

A consideration to JCPenney is not considering the challenges in leading diverse culture and change dynamics from younger generations of employees. Moreover, JCPenney organizational structure is of different types of ethnic groups from various parts of the United States and the world. Motivating different types of ethnic groups in an organization setting is challenging due to traditions. An organization practicing old North American traditions in a business setting, when most of the employees are not originally from the United States, is not a productive strategy. The prime idea is to incorporate a motivational plan aligned with the values of traditional ethnic group origins.

JCPenney has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry placement (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, JCPenney can improve external and internal views of diversity by electing leaders that are diversity friendly (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney can become competent by realizing an organization that incorporates external a friendly physical environment including behaviors and settings labor forces require for a “Workplace Fun” environment (Pryor et al., 2010). The factors that increase workplace fun for JCPenney comprise of higher moral: (a) lower turnover; (b) increase creativity and innovation; (c) better performance; and (d) higher commitment (Pryor et al., 2010).

JCPenney enthusiasm in changing its logo, hiring a new CEO and marketing manager may provide its shareholders initial short run relief from pressing low returns of revenues, but it does not communicate a true change of environmental sensitivity to communities. The new CEO arrived from the retail technology sector, not the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. In addition, the new marketing manager experience is from recreating a sugar water drink from the 1980s and has no expertise the clothing, kitchen, and home retail sector. The CEO first introduced a new idea of “Everyday Low Prices” that did not go over well with the public. Moreover, the CEO implemented a new pay scale to employees. The pay scales does not pay commission to sales staff. Furthermore, the pay scale does not offer motivation to sales employees. Nevertheless, JCPenney has to embrace a more sound strategy in evaluating organizational performance by concepts of the value chain measurements.

JCPenney has a weakness in having enough personnel in the stores; however, the untrained personnel attempt to engage with customers with a welcome message. The online auction experience does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less human interaction with the public. The misalignment challenges are causing JCPenney in moving to a direction for solvency ("Balance sheet," 2013).

JCPenney has in place a product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s history and company culture …” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 146). The corporate social responsibility is not evident in the activities JCPenney makes. Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers information on being a servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our communities, our Associates, our Customers and the environment. What matters to you matters to JCPenney." (Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from the two statements depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed to a lawful alignment with communities; however, the concern for communities is ethics. The ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Integration of Concepts

A Low-Cost strategy is challenging to sustain. The factors to consider including environmental sustainability and economic value. Exploiting other sectors of the world to achieve an efficient supply chain causes environmental misalignments and shareholder grief. A Low-Cost strategy and Differentiation Strategy represent companies attempting to offer products or services at a lower price (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Retailers such as Wal-Mart have made the suppliers lower their cost resulting in more profits to Wal-Mart (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The lower cost strategy involves reducing over all costs lower than the competition (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Concepts such as “Continuous Improvement In Operating Efficiency” involve all stakeholders to work together in improving operating efficiency (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Companies can exploit employees as employees gain experience. The exploitation includes employees perform the same task in a less amount of time than other employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Consequently, employees with experience offer organizations a cost advantage based on the principles of the Experience Curve (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, maintaining low costs to supply chain processes results in a company having a competitive advantage in cost leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Companies can redesign product line to reduce manufacturing costs; therefore, creating a competitive advantage in cost leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The best strategy is to create a low-cost atmosphere among staff (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Offering quantitative value to customers derives a stronger demand for the firm’s products (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

The principle organizations implement related to the concepts of Judo where footing holds with consideration to movement, balance, and leverage (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Nevertheless, the competition is not direct. In essence, gains from competition reflect slow progression to business model that are not noticeable in daily routines (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategy is best if the design does not advert reaction from the competition (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In contrast, when the competition attacks JCPenney should hold footing by using the opponents inertia to balance position (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

The implementation process cannot be part of the creation process (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The two tasks set apart by a profound acknowledgement of business practices (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizational success is relevant in how closely firms separate the two concepts (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizations considering strategy alignment will focus on: (a) people; (b) incentives; (c) supportive activities; (d) organizational structure; (e) culture; (f) and the leadership of the business (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

The strategic implementation process connects with the assistance of all personnel in the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). To succeed in this process, organizations hold everyone accountable for the implementation process (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The realization process by an organization achieves the rewarding process according to responsibility (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The assurance of the implementation is in aligning the interest of employees to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Stakeholder Identification and Value Analysis -Part I

To begin defining the emphasis of stakeholder identification, we must understand the relationship key holders have towards businesses and the like. An attribute to stakeholder identification is the role of economic function in how it relates to organizations (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The interaction stakeholders participate include social economic bonds gluing and adhering to value (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Consequently, organizations have to identify the relationships key holders have with the organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Depending on the organization, understanding relationships between key holders and the organization is challenging (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The key holders comprise into groups called social identities (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Self-defined groups, segmented groups, or peculiar people have the potential in affecting demand and supply of resources or products a firm offers (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Social identities vary among groups including those based on gender, age, race, religion, nationality, sexuality, political affiliation, interests, possessions, and those based on roles in society (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Expectations and affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. The focus is in how social identities mix and relate to social groups and how they have an economic need in the firm (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Moreover, social identity represents a thorough process in mapping the potential in key holders (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). In contrast to social identities, stakeholder identification mainly focuses on groups or individuals affecting the welfare of the organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011; Freeman & McVea, 2001). The classical idea flawed if not combined with the theory of social identity (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011).

The groups or individuals consisting of stakeholders at times confuse identifying the roles they participate (Freeman & McVea, 2001). The focus should be in value creation, and social dynamic alignment for organizations to maintain or sustain a competitive advantage (Freeman & McVea, 2001). In addition, corporate planning states the importance of stakeholders to understand the firms links to derive bounds of operation (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Furthermore, the study of stakeholder relationships is the key in understanding value creation (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Identification of stakeholders first introduced in 1965 did not consider the stability of a firm (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Organizational leaders benefit in aligning corporate strategy with the values stakeholders offer. Corporate planning states the importance of stakeholders to understand the firms links to derive bounds of operation (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Industry circumstances linked to the bounds of operation when corporate planning was first designed (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Stakeholder relationships missed originally from corporate planning thus lucrative profits preceded the concerns for society challenges (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Moreover, stakeholder relationships followed System Theory that signaled the development of strategies linked to stakeholder (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Thompson 1967 first introduced the term clientele that promoted a need to examine the relationships between external and internal links of an organization (Freeman & McVea, 2001). Profile cases initiated a concern for social responsibility by providing a medium to metrics (Freeman & McVea, 2001). The stakeholder approach reevaluates the firm strengths and weaknesses (Freeman & McVea, 2001).

Identifying stakeholders offering value to shareholders is essential. Contributions to all stakeholders are the basic purpose for business according to the theory of Stakeholder Management (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). In marketing, the business purpose includes the theory of Maximization of Sales Revenues & Market Share (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Moreover, in operations the business purpose is the theory of Maximizing Product Quality and Facility Throughout (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Similarly, in Organizational Behavior the business purpose is the theory of Maximization of Employee Satisfaction (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Lastly, in the field of Strategic Management the focus in business purpose is Economic Performance of the Total Organization (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).

Peter Drucker’s eight long-term survival objectives: (a) Market Standing; (b) Productivity; (c) Innovation; (d) Physical & Financial Resources; (e) Profitability; (f) Management Capability; (g) Employee Satisfaction & Performance; and (h) Obligations to Home Bound Communities state an argument that organizations must have direction and purpose (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Moreover, Peter Drucker’s eight objectives reflect the weaknesses of a business (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). In addition, Peter Drucker’s “Set of Measures” include the eight long-term business objectives of business performance (Schulz & Hofer, 1999, p. 2). The accumulation of inquiries, requirements, and performance metrics prompts the need to evaluate organizational value. Economic Value Added (EVA) is a response to attempt to offer a single measure to measure overall business performance (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The theory of EVA derives customer demand to services and products (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Total Market Value (TMV) is another theory to measure long-term organizational performance (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Moreover, TMV measures the static value performance of an organization (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). TMV and EVA are directly proportional, and the maximization of both theories offers an organization a competitive advantage (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). Lastly, TMV and EVA derive organizational strategy (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).

Enterprise Level Strategy

Organizations are susceptible to change. Competition and barriers to entry challenges new up coming organizations. When an opportunity erupts, organizations attempt to achieve results. As competition results the end of an opportunity, organizations scram to engage the threat. A conventional strategy plan focuses on the evaluation of opportunity and threats to derive a plan of action. Strategic intent is a “win all” or “lose all” scenario.

Conventional strategic plans focus in action plans executed at unit levels (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Action plans are goal-derived steps stipulating the methods in achieving a strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, action plans are a precision measure of the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The deconstruction of action plans is a requirement to assure cohesion at all levels of the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics provide measurement to the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales, and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In contrast to strategic intent, a conventional strategy plan incorporates in one to three years (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A conventional strategic plan is more thorough than strategic intent.

Cultures vary in the process of obtaining new business ventures. Western cultures make acquisitions by expanding resources (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In contrast, strategic intent originates from eastern cultures that depend on intellectual capital (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Competitive Revitalization includes systems of competition for companies to become resilient and adapt quickly by creating an unmatchable value system (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Companies implementing strategic intent model focus on evaluating the changing metrics to competition including human, technical, and financial capital (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). The advantage of evaluating changing metrics instead of vacuum metrics is in the ability to evaluate changes in capital acquisition and growth (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Moreover, a snapshot of current events do not depict the tactical information of resolution, stamina, and ability of competitors (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). The implementation of strategic intent is more feasible in the short run than in the long run (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Motivation by top managers is essential in strategic intent to achieve shareholder value (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Companies with an innovative, and congenial culture realize strategic intent due to the required motivation by all internal stakeholders (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Strategic intent implements quickly hence the need for cohesion at all organizational levels.

In contrast to strategic intent, manager’s idea of a strategic plan is more closely related to current events (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Strategic intent represents a quick recovery to a drastic change in opportunities and threats. Moreover, conventional strategic plans require leadership to: (a) provide people with inspiration to continue and direction; (b) promote an organization that compliments motivation; (c) plan and make decisions carefully with structure and responsive; and (d) create teams that are able to notice patterns (Vargo & Seville, 2011). In contrast, strategic intent is similar to crises where the strategy develops, and actions by lead management are essential (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In addition, conventional strategic plans are typically implementing an opportunity; whereas, strategic intents focus more on threats (Vargo & Seville, 2011). Strategic planning emphasizes in selecting the best strategic to gain an advantage. Moreover, strategic planning deals with the future, vulnerabilities, threats, sets out a plan, works with business structures and resources (Vargo & Seville, 2011). Strategic intent and strategic planning use much of organizational resources (Vargo & Seville, 2011). Crisis management (strategic intent) inhibits strategic management since it has: (a) to be done immediately; (b) crisis management that does not allow control of the strategic plan; (c) the magnitude of the crisis that can inhibit management from quickly deciding on actions taken; and (d) the options of action that limits crises versus strategic.

Both strategies are goal driven and results oriented. The actions are necessary due to unforeseen, crisis, or opportunistic event that will allow the organization to thrive or survive. In addition, both plans require narration, focus, and execution. Conventional strategic plans take months to implement, and provide plenty of time to measure the effectiveness. In contrast, strategic intent implement with force since there is no substitution. Furthermore, strategic intent is the end of the line and its success is essential for survival.

JCPenney requires an appropriate tool of change. Quantifying the psychological nuances in people is essential when those people are stakeholders of an organization. From the facts about JCPenney’s diminishing returns, an enterprise level strategy will benefit the organization. The leap is in Enterprise Transformation (ET). Moreover, ET poses a risk in friction and resistance between stakeholders (Makins, Nagao, & Bennett, 2012). In addition, ET differs from internal change in that the former is between external and internal stakeholders (Makins et al., 2012). The strategy makes a methodology in managing extensive ET by focusing on resistance to social dynamics (Makins et al., 2012). The approach is important because Organizational Mindfulness is a stable form of identifying threats, opportunities to an organization (Makins et al., 2012). The basis to importance is on the study of business structures and practices (Makins et al., 2012).

Culture Type

The consideration of culture type is the last of the strategic planning alignment strategy leadership considers (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Strategic plans and Humanistic Psychology integrate without and with peril. Formulating a strategic plan has to account motivational factors to human presence (Stacey, 2011). Long-term sustainability, in addition, to implementation works together with the value system shareholders envision the organization to represent (Stacey, 2011). Prominent leaders derive a strategy not only in creating an organizational mission, but also in aspiring the organization to become in harmony with its values, and vision (Stacey, 2011). The challenge for leaders to date has been finding triggers to motivate the organization (Stacey, 2011). Moving forward, the challenge in motivating people from different cultures is finding what people hold as the value outside of monetary gains. Emotional content is necessary to drive people to success and become the family to organizations (Stacey, 2011).

Social identities vary among groups including those based on gender, age, race, religion, nationality, sexuality, political affiliation, interests, possessions, and those based on roles in society (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Expectations and affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. The focus is in how social identities mix and relate to social groups and how they have an economic need in the firm (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). Moreover, social identity represents a thorough process in mapping the potential in key holders (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011).

Integrated Concepts

Conventional strategic plans focus in action plans executed at unit levels (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Action plans are goal driven steps stipulating the methods in achieving a strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, action plans are an accuracy measure of the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The deconstruction of action plans is a requirement to assure cohesion at all levels of the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics provide measurement to the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales, and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In contrast to strategic intent, a conventional strategy plan incorporates in one to three years (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A conventional strategic plan is more thorough than strategic intent.

Cultures vary in the process of obtaining new business ventures. Moreover, Western cultures make acquisitions by expanding resources (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). In contrast, strategic intent originates from eastern cultures that depend on intellectual capital (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Competitive Revitalization includes systems of competition for companies to become resilient and adapt quickly by creating an unmatchable value system (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Companies implementing strategic intent model focus on evaluating the changing metrics to competition including human, technical, and financial capital (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). The advantage of evaluating changing metrics instead of vacuum metrics is in the ability to evaluate changes in capital acquisition and growth (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Moreover, a snapshot of current events does not depict the tactical information of tenacity, stamina, and ability of competitors (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). The implementation of strategic intent is more feasible in shorter periods than longer periods (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Motivation by top managers is essential in strategic intent to achieve shareholder value (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Companies with an innovative, and friendly culture realize strategic intent due to the required motivation by all internal stakeholders (Hamel & Prahalad, 2005). Strategic intent implements quickly hence the need for cohesion at all organizational levels.

Evidence and Implications

For the last three years, JCPenney executed a conventional strategic plan to increase return of investment. Moreover, JCPenney’s approach is in reducing the cost. The cost idea includes eliminating stores with diminished returns and eliminating labor from those properties to include corporate support. Recently JCPenney terminated 2,200 employees affecting approximately 100 stores and the potential of 1,100 stores for future cut backs in the future (Murray, 2013). Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement," 2013). The last three years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). The organizational strategy is causing organizational market value to decrease. In addition, when the economy improves organizations meet with difficulty building up capital. Nevertheless, whenever a sluggish economy affects market behavior a return on investment survives; however, when the issue is due to loss in value the strategy flaws because the actual culprit is missing.

General Force Analysis: External – Remote Environment

Organizations have threats (general forces) existing in the outside of an organization. The general forces that influence organization’s performance include external forces such as economics, technology, demographics, social, culture, government, legal, military, and physical environment. Organizations must analyze the external forces to gain footing with performance.

General Force Matrix Analysis

The idea is to scan the environment to find trends (variable over time), events (happening now), or forecasts (extension of the future) intercepting the industry. The size of an organization, status of resources, and strategic choices state the capabilities of withstanding external forces (Chittihaworn et al., 2011). The outputs of an organization such as products, services, operational performance, and financial performance are inherently dependent on external forces (Chittihaworn et al., 2011). An organization’s success is mainly responsible for external forces (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). The external forces that are of interest include: (a) products and services; (b) the way of doing business; (c) management expertise; (d) entrepreneur characteristics; (e) characteristics of the organization; (f) resources and finance; and (g) Internet technology (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Organizations have the option in measuring external against success to derive a statistic model (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). The model provided to costumers weighs the results definite to value (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). The factors addressed allows for continuity and growth of an organization (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Moreover, social networks and government support are additional external forces affecting organizational success (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). Social networks are available for organizations to reduce external threats and risks (Chittithaworn et al., 2011). In contrast, when social networks unconditioned to assist an organization legal aspect result often in cost opportunity (Chittithaworn et al., 2011).

Economics. The life cycle of an organization determines the resources to implement at different levels (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Initially, organizations begin the life cycle process with resources initially to compensate for down cycles (Mazzrol et al., 2009). As organizations travel through the life cycles and understand economic factors that involve transactions, intellectual capital realizes the need for planning (Mazzrol et al., 2009). The planning phase of an organization realizes the correct mix of input and outputs to sustain a competitive advantage (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Organizations reaching maximum output seldom make a decision to grow the organization (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Risk and uncertainty are factors to affect growth and change (Mazzrol et al., 2009). In addition, entrepreneurial competence, business orientation, and risk behavior are other determinants (Mazzrol et al., 2009). The behaviors with connection to resist organizational growth relates to family orientated businesses that incorporate and emphasize entrepreneurial management (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Other factors affecting growth include the business capacity of leadership and team (Mazzrol et al., 2009).

Organizations showing interest in growth will take the steps necessary for expansion (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Individuals with attention in expansion show a capacity to understand the growth by reviewing calculated risks (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Refinement of growth expansion is possible by accumulating interest in complex key barriers to entry information (Mazzrol et al., 2009). To grow a business, the managers must implement a strategy that relates to measurement of the expansion. Leaders must understand the principles of economics state that as demand grows price rises to reduce demand and supply increases to match demand (Stacey, 2011). In essence, organizations interested in growth incorporate leaders that understand efforts required to sustain change and evoke negative feedback to sustain change (Stacey, 2011).

Technology. The external constraints to any technology-based organization are newer technologies, cost to implement, and material availability to produce the technology (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). These factors represent barriers to entry unless circumvented through concessions, litigation, or policy creation (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). In addition, integration factors such as manufacturing cost derivation result to constraints (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Other threats include the cost of materials to create the technology. Industry structure such as the cost to transport technological creations can add cost to the supply chain (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Moreover, local laws reduce the momentum of technological advancements (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010).

Factors to reduce threat include economies of scale, providing materials for the production of technology just in time, producing a technology unique to the industry, branding the technology, and induction to cartels (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). In addition, decentralizing the production of technology to hold key management responsible for production offers ownership of success (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Lastly, organizations benefit from introducing synergies from technology-based production resulting in cost reduction to implementation (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010).

Demographics / social / culture. Organizations have to evaluate human resource decisions affecting a competitive advantage to the organization (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Retaining human capital through the cyclical cycles of the organization is challenging. Moreover, organizations overcome factors to loss of human capital through the evaluation of return on investment (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Organizational knowledge ends at the turnover of employees (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, an aging workforce results in loss of job data and job-related information (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Moreover, the downsizing of the organization and economic recession increase turnover (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Recessions disrupt the availability of education resulting in a reduction to intellectual capital (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Few organizations realize the importance in maintain tacit knowledge, and deviate from maintaining skilled workers (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Other factors affecting the hiring of intellectual capital include managers fearing job loss to talented employees. In addition, professionalism within the work environment is a challenge to maintain in the global market. Work atmospheres without professionalism result in management not able to realize the need of expert knowledge (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Expert knowledge is essential in maintaining and sustaining a prime level of efficiency (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Organizations not maintaining expert knowledge and forgetting about less lucrative periods repeatedly attempt to create newer methods to introduce the same productivity (Martins & Meyer, 2012). The results are in knowledge gaps by introducing costly disruptions to the organization (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Organizations maximizing returns from intellectual capital are wise to implement strategies in reducing attrition (Martins & Meyer, 2012). A study of organizational behavior resulting to turnover is necessary to sustain a competitive advantage (Martins & Meyer, 2012).

Government / legal / military. From the early years of immigration into the United States, communities argued about the quality of work offered by immigrants and the debauchery introduced into the North American culture (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). The basis of difference from immigrant workers to North American styled labor began labor law initiatives (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Moreover, communities found an interest in regulating unethical Europeans behavior (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Labor standards fueled by ethnic and racial differences began the campaign of labor law (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). National reform to labor practices was a premise in the United States until the 1980s (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Moreover, expansive and restrictive immigration reforms began (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Labor advocacy of civil rights and immigration reform from the late 1950s and 1960s initiated changes to the direction of the acceptance of immigration labor law (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Social dynamics respond differently to mass immigration movements into the United States (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Labor law changes determined by modern North American status dictate in government the control imposed on organizations (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Furthermore, labor law acts as an external threat to organizations. Mass immigrations create a demand for cheaper labor; however, communities self-regulate to loss of culture and traditions by commanding regulations to labor. The regulations undermine the competitive advantage offered by cheaper labor.

Physical environment. Competent organizations realize external threats to the physical environment include behaviors and settings labor forces require for a “Workplace Fun” environment (Pryor et al., 2010). The factors that increase workplace fun comprise of higher moral: (a) lower turnover; (b) increase creativity and innovation; (c) better performance; and (d) higher commitment (Pryor et al., 2010). Workplace leaders and ethical standards by the leaders result in negative workplace fun (Pryor et al., 2010). The ethical standards and hiring practices link to organizational mission and values. Top management creates a competitive advantage by continuously reviewing staff’s fit to the organization (Pryor et al., 2010). A dysfunctional environment and negative workplace culture build negative workplace fun (Pryor et al., 2010). A successful organization self-regulates failures and realizes success by implementing causality feedback loops (Stacey, 2011). The norm in an organization is productivity. Factors diminishing productivity are patterns inconsistent to growth and sustainability of an organization. Patterns such as bullying by organizational leaders create an atmosphere of distrust and incompetence (Pryor et al., 2010). Management roles are essential for growth to organizations (Pryor et al., 2010). Essentially, management inadequacies including micromanagement, unethical behavior, and lack of empowerment strongly discourage commitment from talented employees (Pryor et al., 2010). The returns from competent intellectual capital are vital to long-term sustainability (Pryor et al., 2010). Lastly, failings to the sustainability of causality feedback render forecasting impossible to attain (Stacey, 2011).

Implications of General Forces

Entrepreneurial competence is necessary to sustain strategies for organizational expansion (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Shareholders interested in expanding an organization invite leadership welcoming expansion (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Moreover, technological challenges represent an external threat to organizations (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Organizations implementing strategies in 360 degree scanning for sustainability, reduction in cost, synergies, and just in time manufacturing to technologies implement a competitive advantage (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Organizational and tacit knowledge are essential to maintain (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Competent organizations implement strategic plans to maintain human resources that maintain the organization brand (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Increasing profitability by reducing the cost of human capital is a discouraging strategy to offer value. Moreover, organizations adapting to change by acknowledging social concerns and ethics of communities in alignment with a hiring strategy experience higher returns in capital. Organizations accepting the mentioned factors result in a better analysis to SWOT, and improved formulation to forecasting.

Threats. Reviewing external threats to organizations in the Economics area leaders find troubles with entrepreneurial competence, business orientation, organizational growth, and business capacity (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Moreover, external threats to technology include improved technologies, implementation costs, and material availability (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). Demographics threats comprises lost of organizational knowledge, aging workforce, downsizing, economic recessions, unconfident leaders, and lost of knowledge to human capital (Martins & Meyer, 2012). The losses of organizational and tacit knowledge are the critical factors to organizations. Furthermore, external threats to legal embrace labor law, conflicts with immigrant cultures, and competitive advantage (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Lastly, physical environment external threats involve bullying leaders, micro managers, unethical behavior, and lack of empowerment (Pryor et al., 2010). The focus in this group is bullying leaders and unethical behavior representing an unfriendly work environment.

Opportunities. External forces to opportunities in economics include understanding risk factors (Mazzrol et al., 2009). Ideally, an organization embraces higher returns by hiring competent people to realize expansion. Moreover, technological external forces contain concessions, litigation, policy creation, economies of scales, just in time inventories, unique and branded products, introduction to cartels, and introducing synergies (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). The focus in technology is to retain a competitive advantage by exploiting technological creations mainly in economies of scale and synergies. The rest of the focus is in controlling barriers to entry by introducing concessions and litigation (Kipping & Cailluet, 2010). The opportunities to demographics are all at equal ranks including return on investment (ROI), introduce professionalism, and study of organizational behavior (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Cheap labor, economies of scale, and litigation are the opportunities in retaining the advantage to immigrant hiring (Fine & Tichenor, 2009). Lastly, several opportunities to providing a positive physical environment including lower turnover, high moral, creativity and innovation, commitment, and higher performance (Pryor et al., 2010). The concept of 360-degree reviews and mission values perceived by the leadership structure assure a competitive advantage to the organization. Changing times and increase of immigrants in United States call for more attention to the physical environment, legal, and economics in hiring practices.

Porter’s Five Forces Industry Analysis: External – Industry Environment

In this section of the sustainable solutions paper, the doctoral student will provide

Porter’s five forces industry analysis: external – industry environment. The general forces that influence JCPenney’s performance include external forces such as economics, demographics, social, culture, government, legal, military, physical environment, and technology. The idea is to scan the environment to find trends (variable over time), events (happening now), or forecasts (extension of the future) intercepting the industry. The measurement of external forces assists Porter’s Five Forces model (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, Porter’s Five Forces depict the external influences businesses encounter regarding threats and opportunities (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The five forces include the threat to entry, customer bargaining power, threat of substitute products or services, bargaining power of suppliers and the industry attempting to balance itself against this counterbalances (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The actual external forces undergoing strains to JCPenney include Technology, Social, and Economics.

Five Forces Matrix Analysis

Within the review of external threats, economic changes is affecting JCPenney in a trend format of mid degree (Hou and Elliot, 2010). JCPenney welcomed the online auction experience as a test model to find a unique demographic group participating (Hou and Elliot, 2010). The idea behind online auctions and offering a family experience at JCPenney stores differs greatly. The online auction experience does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less human interaction with the public. The response from the online auction experience signals a change in the customer’s buying preference thus affecting Economy. Furthermore, JCPenney is to observe the dynamic differences to anticipate a substantial change in the retail market.

The online auction research shows males to dominate the online auction shopping experience (Hou and Elliot, 2010). Within Porter’s Five forces, the change in shopping behavior shows a change in bargaining power of customers (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, higher education equates to more online auction attendance. JCPenney should observe the general state of the population with correlation to education and compare it to the census. The lack of alignment to a new emerging group could invite a new competition as barriers to entry vary (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, other factors affecting the online auction experience include: (a) type of relationship a customer draws to the online shopping experience (affiliation); (b) bargain hunting; (c) enjoyment seeking; (d) information seeking; (e) convenience seeking; and (f) variety seeking (Hou and Elliot, 2010).

The change in technology with lower cost and rapid changes is causing a change in purchasing behavior (Barrientos, Mayer, Pickles, & Posthuma, 2011). The dramatic change is external and represents a high level trend. Global Production Networks (GPN) offer lower barriers to entries to companies needing to offer cheaper value chains set up and cost by outsourcing the inputs needed to value chains (Barrientos et al., 2011). A competitive disadvantage is present to JCPenney attempting to compete with companies that have in place GPN systems (Barrientos et al., 2011).

Technological challenges do not end with changes in buying behavior. Department stores are introducing “Just In Time” inventories changing the scope of the supply chain (Anitsal, & Anitsal, 2011). The faster time to process and deliver products to the supply chain improves organizational performance and improves customer satisfaction scores (Anitsal, & Anitsal, 2011). Customers consider value to businesses that offer products in a timely fashion.

The forecast for the future includes robotization the cashier sections of department stores (Anonymous, 2012). Another technological change includes robotization, changing the demand of labor (Anonymous, 2012). The opportunity to reduce organizational costs is a method to sustain by JCPenney. A careful analysis is important to measure the amount of organizational staff required to run department stores. This measure aligns with customer engagement and participation. Robotization, as introduced in the automotive industry, represents a competitive advantage by reducing costs and delivering timely output. The adaptation to robotization will boost productivity and offer customers quicker service.

The online buying environment JCPenney has in place does no consider gender preferences to customers practices (Porter, Donthu, & Baker, 2012). Offering gender base type assistance within the department stores results in higher motivation and reduces the risk within the shopping experience (Porter et al., 2012). Consequently, gender differences represents a social external threat and a mid level event. In contrast, gender based-shopping is a competitive advantage and departments stores practice it (Porter et al., 2012). Lastly, gender based shopping offers customers more value as customers are more comfortable in a setting of their choosing (Freeman, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988).

The external forces challenging the sustainability to JCPenney are a threat. The challenges to Social, Economic and Technological factors are in profit maximization, value creation, and efficiency. The specific external threats include online auctions, GPN outsourcing, supply chain processes from competition, robotization, and gender preferences. Value creation and maintenance require a competitive advantage. A derived benefit anticipates global social changes to determine a positive footing in the industry. Moreover, the Economic challenges to the online auction represent the supply and demand of what customers are willing to pay. Unfortunately, the online auction process does add stability to the demographic patterns within the stores environment. Consequently, customers may dictate different shopping experiences. Lastly, changes in technology represent both gains and losses in profits if not managed correctly within organizational infrastructures. Robotization of the cashier centers represents a competitive advantage.

Barriers to entry. In general, organizations have barriers to entry including: (a) Supply-side economies of scale; (b) Demand-side benefits of scale; (c) Customer switching cost; (d) Capital requirements; (e) Incumbency advantages independent of size; (f) Unequal access to distribution channels; and (g) restrictive government policy (Porter, 2008). Larger organizations apply fixed costs over units resulting in economies of scale (Porter, 2008). In contrast, smaller organizations cannot absorb the cost over the supply chain. Larger organizations have a larger volume of buyers that add patronize to the buying experience such as online bidding (Porter, 2008). Moreover, organizations acting as customers to other organizations experience additional cost to training whenever changing services or products to a competitor (Porter, 2008). Cash flows necessary for routing expenditures compromise forecast and implementation of projects (Porter, 2008). Incumbents have fixed arrangements with other competitors that could have preferential access to cheap raw materials (Porter, 2008). The access to distribution channels offers difficulty to starting organizations (Porter, 2008). Lastly, government policy to protect existing organizations introduces barrier to entry to competitors (Porter, 2008).

Organizations in the retail sector, such as JCPenney, must focus introduction to market or to globalization in unsaturated sectors of the world (Reinartz, Dellaert, Krafft, Kumar, & Varadarajan, 2011). Factors to consider in globalization strategies include: (a) retail formats; (b) branding; (c) assortment; (d) process innovation; (e) customer experience; (f) information technology; (g) new media; (h) handling of payment; and (i) order fulfillment (Reinartz et al., 2011). Supermarkets are popular in saturated markets; however, supermarkets are excellent store formats for under develop nations (Reinartz et al., 2011). Differentiation, positioning, and assortment relate difficulty in barriers to entry for new organizations (Reinartz et al., 2011). Retailers such as JCPenney overcome challenges in barriers to entry by adapting market research and supply chain management (Reinartz et al., 2011). Store atmosphere, customized expertise by employees, and media technology overcomes barriers to entries by introducing and aligning the shopping experience to stakeholder value (Reinartz et al., 2011). Customized payment options to purchases and personal experience to order delivery offers advantages to retail organizations (Reinartz et al., 2011).

Substitutes. Convergence is a factor that results to shareholder value (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). Acquiring similar organizations with similar type organization structure offers a competitive advantage (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). The acquisition of similar organizations at times when the organizations are close to insolvency is the time when to make the union (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). A value analyzes of the organization showing how the assets to convert result in a competitive advantage is the stages of organizational conception (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). The practice of risk management will assist in making the change occur with minimum friction (Cummins & Weiss, 2009). Retailers observing the market for industrial derivatives offering a competitive advantage in shareholder value make incremental equity to the organization (Cummins & Weiss, 2009).

Bargaining power of suppliers. Suppliers of apparel, components, and services (such as expertise) to the firm are a source of power for organizations (Alrawashdeh, 2013). The supplier control over customer prices is self-regulated in organizations, and supplier control made by grouping of similar organizations (Alrawashdeh, 2013). Organizations will favor looking for substitutes when bargaining exists from suppliers (Alrawashdeh, 2013). A competitive advantage and shareholder value exist to organizations withdrawing from purchasing supplies from one entity that can fluctuate the price of raw materials. Not all products sold to customers in the retail sector have a high elasticity of demand. Creating an industry that has high barriers to entry has high overall power to suppliers. In addition, the need to introduce a personalizing service to customers is important not to allow suppliers sell directly to the demand and become direct competitors (Alrawashdeh, 2013). Lastly, organizations favor knowledge over the supplier base (Alrawashdeh, 2013). In addition, organizations realize substitutes to supplies with minimal cost (Alrawashdeh, 2013).

Bargaining power of buyers. One of the competitive forces to businesses is the bargaining power of buyers (Neagle, 2010). The force of the industry determines the profit organizations will earn, and the severity of the force is determinant on the industry (Neagle, 2010). The forces change with time with the progression of the industry and dynamics of demand of the product and services. Competent organizations take a strategic analysis of complex external forces affecting the bargaining power of buyers (Neagle, 2010). The metrics include macroeconomic factors such as: (a) growth rates; (b) interest rates; (c) real value to currency; (d) cultural changes; (e) technological; (f) environmental; and (g) changes within the law. In addition, capital formation is an external force to measure (Neagle, 2010). JCPenney encounters challenges with cultural changes driving the demand of products and services to competitors.

Competitive rivalry. JCPenney has a value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. The key links to improve from the value chain include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management, technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The comparative advantage JCPenney has is offering better value by better use of IT and further analysis of value creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988). The implementation of broad scope offers a company relationships between related industries, geographic areas, and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985).

The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. The misguided process in support activities is in matching value from new hires to project scope and studying the needs of the segmented customer group (Porter & Millar, 1985; Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The missed opportunity for JCPenney company lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Consequently, JCPenney failed to examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing more value and lower prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed.

Implications of Five Forces

The long-term organizational performance shows decreasing value to stakeholders; therefore, TMV is small (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). In addition, JCPenney’s performance metrics proof the values to TMV. Furthermore, JCPenney last three years performance shows a lack of resilience to the challenges to market. Organizations must scan the market for stated flaws to the welfare of the organization containing differences in opportunities and threats. The five forces include the threat to entry, customer bargaining power, threat of substitute products or services, bargaining power of suppliers and the industry attempting to balance itself against this counterbalances (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The actual external forces undergoing strains to JCPenney include Technology, Social, and Economics.

Within the review of external threats, economic changes are affecting JCPenney in a trend format of mid degree (Hou and Elliot, 2010). JCPenney welcomed the online auction experience as a test model to find a unique demographic group participating (Hou and Elliot, 2010). The idea behind online auctions and offering a family experience at JCPenney stores differs greatly. The online auction experience does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less human interaction with the public. The response from the online auction experience signals a change in the customer’s buying preference thus affecting Economy. Furthermore, JCPenney is to observe the dynamic differences to anticipate a substantial change in the retail market.

The change in technology with lower cost and rapid changes is causing a change in purchasing behavior (Barrientos et al., 2011). The dramatic change is external and represents a high level trend. Global Production Networks (GPN) offer lower barriers to entries to companies needing to offer cheaper value chains set up and cost by outsourcing the inputs needed to value chains (Barrientos et al., 2011). A competitive disadvantage is present to JCPenney attempting to compete with companies that have in place GPN systems (Barrientos et al., 2011).

The online buying environment JCPenney has in place does no consider gender preferences to customers practices (Porter et al., 2012). Offering gender base type assistance within the department stores results in higher motivation and reduces the risk within the shopping experience to JCPenney (Porter et al., 2012). Consequently, gender differences represents a social external threat and a mid level event. In contrast, gender based-shopping is a competitive advantage and departments stores practice it (Porter et al., 2012). Lastly, gender based shopping offers customers more value as customers are more comfortable in a setting of their choosing (Freeman et al., 1988).

Threats. JCPenney’s threats include competition (bargaining power of suppliers), social misalignments (bargaining power of customers), and not using technology to offer a competitive advantage (threats of substitutes, products, or services). Moreover, as JCPenney reduces in organizational size, its competitive advantage in applying fixed costs to a larger organization is diminishing; therefore, losing economies of scale (Porter, 2008). Another threat is process innovation with supply chain processes. Customers that experience delays result in exiting and pursuing the competition. Store atmosphere, customized expertise by employees, and media technology overcomes barriers to entries by introducing and aligning the shopping experience to stakeholder value (Reinartz et al., 2011). The bargaining power of suppliers is in the need to introduce a personalizing service to customers is important not to allow suppliers sell directly to the demand and become direct competitors (Alrawashdeh, 2013). JCPenney encounters challenges with cultural changes driving the demand of products and services to competitors. JCPenney’s strongest competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision.

Opportunities. Uses of Organizational Mindfulness to derive opportunities are beneficial to organizations that will make JCPenney a competent entity (Vogus & Sutcliffe, 2012). Moreover, opportunities achieved the OM represents studying inherent business structures and practices (Vogus & Sutcliffe, 2012). The key links to improve from the value chain include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management, technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The comparative advantage JCPenney has is offering better value by better use of IT and further analysis of value creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988). The implementation of broad scope offers a company relationships between related industries, geographic areas, and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985).

Detailed Value Chain Analysis: Internal Environment

Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement. Further analysis of strategic links and recommendations are essential. The value chain involves the physical creation of vertical support activities and horizontal primary activities to measure the effectiveness of a business (Porter & Millar, 1985). Moreover, support activities includes the firm infrastructure, human resource management, technology department, and procurement (Porter & Millar, 1985). Furthermore, the primary activities consist in inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter & Millar, 1985). The appropriate management of primary activities results in a positive margin (Porter & Millar, 1985). The vertical and horizontal activities connect stakeholder needs, strategy, and threats (external and internal). The processes between vertical and horizontal activities are the links that can offer a competitive advantage.

JCPenney is experiencing lower returns from customers and is continuing to downsize its infrastructure. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. The missed opportunity for JCPenney company lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Modern society engages in tech savvy entertainment. Majority of the youth communicates heavily through electronic texting. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Furthermore, JCPenney does not have a competitive link between social media and social environment within the store atmosphere. Consequently, the links between internal and external horizontal primary activities are hindering a sustainable advantage.

Society has increased concerns for environmental factors than in past decades (Lee et al., 2009). Society added an additional component to demand of product requiring retail vendors such as JCPenney to make a corporate responsibility to environmental concerns (Lee et al., 2009). Marketing and Sales as an opportunity to add value to merchandise by examining the social concerns tied to product development (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The external threats are high in not supporting a strategic link to social concerns in the retail industry. Lastly, aligning systems to consider Growth Path and Trajectory with Reputation and Legitimacy benefits retailer by considering shareholder value to external and internal threats (Senge, Smith, Kruschwitz, Laur, & Schley, 2010).

The value chain process of separating organizational structures allows leadership to evaluate each link independent from other sources. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine value chain process and is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers. Information technology is the basis and fundamental to society. In addition, digital information encompasses at a broader spectrum, and customer base is directly proportional to ethical alignment and media atmosphere. Lastly, implementing a solution based on internal and external threats tied to shareholder value will show JCPenney a weakness in its Marketing and Sales strategy.

Customized Value Chain of Activities in Table Form

The table below introduces the VCA’s characteristics to JCPenney and competitors.

Table 1

Value Chain Analysis

Business Process	JCPenney	Macys	Sears
Management	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent
R&D	Not Applicable	Not Applicable	Not Applicable
HR	Below Average	Below Average	Below Average
Procurement	Below Average	Average	Average
Inbound logistics	Below Average	Average	Average
Operations	Average	Average	Excellent
Outbound logistics	Below Average	Average	Average
Sales	Below Average	Average	Below Average
Service	Below Average	Average	Below Average

Company Skills / Capabilities

Management style represents weakness and opportunities in the retail sector (Baldoni, 2010). Selecting among micro management styles to macro management styles affects the culture of the employees and in how the style reflects customers (Baldoni, 2010). The correct management style aligns with mission, values, and vision (Baldoni, 2010). JCPenney has alignment to customer’s shopping experience and customer service within the organization. In contrast, the challenges are in outsourced delivery services that are not the image of JCPenney. Macys and Sears have similar managerial styles; however, do not have an outsourced service to delivery.

Human Resources practices to training internal staff for transparency of products are essential to offer value to stakeholders (Drumwright & Murphy, 2009). Retailers concerned with lowering the cost to supply chain forgotten about the needs of the public to connect merchandise to people (Drumwright & Murphy, 2009). JCPenney has a weakness in having enough personnel in the stores; however, the untrained personnel attempt to engage with customers with a welcome message. Nonetheless, Sears and Macys have the same challenges.

JCPenney welcomed the online auction experience as a test model to find a unique demographic group participating (Hou and Elliot, 2010). The idea behind online auctions and offering a family experience at JCPenney stores differs greatly. The online auction experience does not offer the connection between customer and client representing in less human interaction with the public. The response from the online auction experience signals a change in the customer’s buying preference thus affecting Economy. Furthermore, JCPenney is to observe the dynamic differences to anticipate a substantial change in the retail market. Lastly, JCPenney’s Procurement conceptions are missing the connection to the interest of external stakeholders.

Inbound and Outbound logistics offered by JCPenney are impressive with the wide variety of product mix (Bhatnagar & Chee-Chong, 2009). The size of the organization is changing. JCPenney has a mass transit system for inbound products to satisfy the supply chain. The outbound logistics contracted to outside organizations. Each year JCPenney announces closings and terminations of employees affecting supply chain and economies of scale (Murray, 2013). Nevertheless, smaller organizations are able to streamline process chains to offer value to customers; however, JCPenney is moving to a direction for solvency ("Balance sheet," 2013). Finally, JCPenney Inbound and Outbound Logistics are suffering from project scope and in contrast to Macy’s and Sears, which have a proficient Inbound and Outbound Logistics concept.

JCPenney has a mission statement aligned with the connection to value shareholders, communities, and customers desire (Anitsal et al., 2012). The challenge for JCPenney is to connect the mission statement to the daily activities for providing distinction and customer definition (Anitsal et al., 2012). In general, mission statements connect the operations of an organization and represent the environment the organization promises to customers (Anitsal et al., 2012). The processing of products has incremental cost and adds flaws to the VCA. The difference in the mission statements is in focus in building relationships, providing assistance, and maximizing technology (Anitsal et al., 2012). Providing assistance is not the same as generating bonds between stakeholders and the organization, which is the competitive advantage of business (Anitsal et al., 2012).

Consideration of Sales and Services made easily through the observation of performance metrics (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, a review of Sears, Macy’s, and JCPenney performance metrics analyzed to performance metrics will show which of the organizations has a better competitive advantage in Sales and Services than the other. Moreover, Macy’s net income increased in 2012 and borrowed capital ("Cash flow," 2013). Macy’s short-term debt increased in 2012 and equity grew slightly ("Balance sheet," 2013). Furthermore, operating income increased in 2012 ("Income statement," 2013). In 2013, Sears delved to investments that generate capital ("Cash flows," 2013). Sears has a lower amount of retained earnings compared to previous years ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, Sears is announcing no income for the entire year ("Income statement," 2013). Similarly, JCPenney’s public balance sheet dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement," 2013). The last three years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). Clearly, JCPenney is not utilizing resources in a way to offer value to customers since it is failing to produce profits. Improvement to Information Technology serves as the catalyst for profit maximization.

Implications of Competitive Analysis

Further analysis to JCPenney’s VCA is a necessity. The below sections shows the strengths and weaknesses to the VCA JCPenney currently has in place. With a risk implementation strategy, JCPenney can implement a solution to survive a few years longer.

Strengths. JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak areas. The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping the external forces of the VCA infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as a consistent parameter to improvements.

Weaknesses. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices. Lastly, JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed.

Skills. JCPenney has many skills not yet realized for value creation. The skills to implement are utilizing the abundance of information to introduce profit maximization. Moreover, JCPenney creates information from all daily routines. A study of those routines is mandatory to evaluate redundant practices and missed opportunities. Other skills include the existing employee base retains knowledge to utilize for value creation.

Improvements to organizational management are necessary to maintain a competitive advantage. Continuous improvement to management is essential; however, not all organizations hold continuous improvement as essential for long-term growth. In the past contemporary organizations were popular (Chang & Sun, 2007). Moreover, LO characteristics include organizations learning from mistakes, realigning organizational processes to offer value to customers (Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast, learning from mistakes has a cost that organizations may not want to realize. Organizational knowledge retained by factors of LO represents an advantage (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer, 2012). Organizational knowledge ends at the turnover of employees (Martins & Meyer, 2012). A LO adapts to changes and retains intellectual capital (Chang & Sun, 2007; Martins & Meyer, 2012). Furthermore, an aging workforce results in loss of job data and job-related information (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Moreover, the downsizing of the organization and economic recession increase turnover (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Recessions disrupt the availability of education resulting in a reduction to intellectual capital (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Few organizations realize the importance in maintain tacit knowledge, and deviate from maintaining skilled workers (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Other factors affecting the hiring of intellectual capital include managers fearing job loss to talented employees. In addition, professionalism within the work environment is a challenge to maintain in the global market. Work atmospheres without professionalism result in management not able to realize the need of expert knowledge (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Expert knowledge is essential in maintaining and sustaining a prime level of efficiency (Martins & Meyer, 2012). Lastly, a LO adapts quicker than TQM in amending organizational culture and in offering value to external stakeholders (Chang & Sun, 2007).

Capabilities. The process of keeping eyes open and observing the capabilities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for business. The reality is in observing what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations, leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the organization.

Detailed SWOT Analysis

In this section, JCPenney complexities have broken apart because of a SWOT analysis to identify the potential and direction to follow in the future. The dynamics of threats along with opportunities identify organizations that are not considering social aspects of culture. Without the analysis, JCPenney cannot survive the pressures of competition and understand to the needs of communities.

SWOT Factor Matrix

JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak areas. The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping the external forces of the VCA infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as consistent extent to improvements. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices. JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The process of keeping eyes open and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for business. The reality is in observing what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations, leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the organization.

The change of time causes changes to stakeholder’s value intention and choice. Tools are available to identify changes such as a strategic choice (Stacey, 2011). Strategic choice theory calls for individuals making a strategy not to think of themselves as part of the organization, but part of a vision of change (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, the theory makes assumptions that leaders have intentions to sustain change and assist shareholder maintain a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). Leaders implementing cognitive thinking to organizational changes in shape, performance and future adapt to pressures of time (Stacey, 2011). Other techniques strategic planning includes SWOT Analysis, Industry Structure and Value Chain Analysis, Product Life Cycle, Experience Curves, and Product Portfolio (Stacey, 2011).

Tools for strategic planning required by organizations implement through a learning process in finding tools adequate for diverse goals (Chang & Sun, 2007). One of the tools available is the Learning Organization (LO) process that enables organizations to study organizational beliefs that introduce organizational change (Chang & Sun, 2007). Total Quality Management (TQM) offers organizations a continuous improvement at all levels of the organization (Chang & Sun, 2007). A fledgling correspondence exists between the two outfits (Chang & Sun, 2007).

Strategic logic requests forecasting measures implement by highly skilled leaders (Stacey, 2011). The forecasting includes external strengths, threats, opportunities, and weaknesses (Stacey, 2011). Obviously, SWOT analysis is preemptive tactic to support the strategic plan. Moreover, organizations adapting to change engineer systems to prepare it to change. A tool organizations implement Industry Structure and Value Chain Analysis offering the nature of competitive advantage to market, power and value chain of a company (Stacey, 2011). The Value Chain Analysis draws advantages from the raw materials utilized in the value chain (Stacey, 2011). Similarly, organizations study the Product Life Cycle to terms of strategy (Stacey, 2011). The competitive advantage in product life is in the stages of production and use of raw materials (Stacey, 2011). As organizations develop products, experience is possible through repetition and learning (Stacey, 2011). Organizational efficiency gathers through repetition and rises of production to the best forms of production to raw materials (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, market share to production calculates by methods of Product Portfolio (Stacey, 2011). The infallible method considers the different mix of products calculated against market share that provides a measure of competitive capability (Stacey, 2011). The competitive capability prompts leaders to take the measure of rate of growth in the market (Stacey, 2011). From the difference of market shares and growth rates, the organization learns the strategies that offer a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011).

Fierce competition in the global markets initiated the need for TQM (Chang & Sun, 2007). In contrast to LO, TQM offers a repetitive cycle of organizations reviewing threats and opportunities to sustain environmental growth (Chang & Sun, 2007). TQM focuses on the organizations total involvement, customer focus, and continuous improvement (Chang & Sun, 2007). The prerequisite for TQM is to involve all stakeholders at internal level to review the needs of external stakeholders continuously (Chang & Sun, 2007). The constant reviewing of customer needs offers a competitive advantage by assuring external outputs have value (Chang & Sun, 2007). The TQM environment calls for the leadership to maintain a constant interest in changes to external forces. In contrast, leadership, not in alignment with constant reviewing will not ascertain the total value from TQM implementation.

Organizations adopt to change by implementing a strategic plan to offer a competitive advantage. Organizations attain change the study of prime methods that introduce a competitive advantage. Changes made by an organization are essential. The tools to implement are a system of measures to metrics at each stage of production, planning, and delivery of products and services to external stakeholders. Some of the tools are Strategic Choice Theory, Cognitive Thinking, SWOT analysis, Industry Structure, Value Chain Analysis, Product Life Cycle, Experienced Curves, Product Portfolio, Learning Organization, and Total Quality Management.

The tools to change are not all without flaws. Strategic Choice Theory holds high self worth of a leader and values the leader to represent perfection. In contrast, the theory assumes the leader has good intentions and will not deviate from offering a competitive advantage to shareholders. Moreover, Learning Organization is a tool to draw ideas from experiences; however, not all experiences represent value to an organization. Nevertheless, cost exists through the learning process, but the aim is to minimize the downcast business cycles.

JCPenney has a value chain threat due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. The key links to improve from the value chain include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management, technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The comparative advantage JCPenney has is offering better value by better use of IT and further analysis of value creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988). The implementation of broad scope offers a company relationships between related industries, geographic areas, and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985). Threats to JCPenney overcome by observing the implementation process of scope.

SO strategies. JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak areas. The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the cost drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources. The first improvement is into revamping the external VCA infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as consistent extent to improvements.

ST strategies. JCPenney has a value chain threat due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. Moreover, JCPenney’s strongest competitors include Sears, Roebuck & Company and R. H. Macy & Company and indirect competition with Target Corporation and Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. The key links to improve from the value chain include support activities: the firm infrastructure, human resource management, technology department, and procurement and primary activities: inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and service (Porter & Millar, 1985). Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The comparative advantage JCPenney has is offering better value by better use of IT and further analysis of value creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005; Freemen, Gilbert, & Hartman, 1988). The implementation of broad scope offers a company relationships between related industries, geographic areas, and value chains (Porter & Millar, 1985). Threats to JCPenney overcome by observing the implementation process of scope.

WO strategies. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing more value and lower prices. JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer, 1999).

WT strategies. The process of keeping eyes open and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for business. The reality is in observing what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations, leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the organization.

SCOT Factor Matrix

Social constructionist approaches as collective attributions of rationality and justice to organizations interaction with unskilled labor has challenges (Stacey, 2011). Communities allow organizations to exist upon presentation of economic concepts of delivering products and services (Stacey, 2011). The cost effective methods in delivering products and services set organizations apart from communities attempting to satisfy individual interest in economic needs (Stacey, 2011). Organizations enacting their environment satisfy value creation by extending the social complexities of human behavior and offering products and services to satisfy needs (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, organizations set apart by the alignment with the needs and culture of communities (Stacey, 2011). Strategy is then dependent on the relationships between communities and the complex structure of the variety of ethical standards within the community (Stacey, 2011). The value and interest is to satisfy the needs of many, adapt to the differences in culture, and become the best in realizing opportunities with various groups in communities (Stacey, 2011). Organizations set apart by alienating products and services from consumers (Stacey, 2011). To maximize strategy, organizations have to develop systems to coerce people in accepting the differences in others and derive technology that sets organizations apart from competitors. Aligning the interest of organizations is systematic by adapting principles of economic regression to learn the probabilities in dynamic relationships.

SO strategies. The opportunity for JCPenney is to derive a model of interest to the daily routines with the employment base, availability of human resources, and the needs of communities (Stacey, 2011). The intricate strategy is reliant on processing information and the interaction of people within the organization. In essence, JCPenney must overcome the differences human labor offers in culture identification to unite the organization in offering a vision of value to communities in a global scale.

ST strategies. The ideal strategy is to align social constructivism principles to the needs of communities and to implement systems to maximize technology (Stacey, 2011). In addition, JCPenney should consider weaknesses of the VCA to encounter threats. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Moreover, identification of the social identity that JCPenney represents to communities is essential (Stacey, 2011).

CO strategies. The opportunities are heavily dependent on the information JCPenney produces from daily operations. The information to draw from the data include the factors that represent individual behavior, do away with redundant processes, and eliminate potential threats from the assessment. Statistical analysis assists in deriving complex models to offer a competitive advantage.

CT strategies. The threat JCPenney experiences are not understanding the factors that impede cohesion within the organization (Stacey, 2011). Individual and social identification are instrumental in existence to JCPenney (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, consideration error to noise ratios is essential in determining the optimum statistical model.

Key Success Factor Matrix Analysis

The success factors include a wide range of business principle in alignment with value creation. The opportunity for JCPenney is to derive a model of interest to the daily routines with the employment base, availability of human resources, and the needs of communities (Stacey, 2011). The intricate strategy is reliant on processing information and the interaction of people within the organization. In essence, JCPenney must overcome the differences human labor offers in culture identification to unite the organization in offering a vision of value to communities in a global scale. The ideal strategy is to align social constructivism principles to the needs of communities and to implement systems to maximize technology (Stacey, 2011). In addition, JCPenney should consider weaknesses of the VCA to encounter threats. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Consumer demand has shifted to Marketing and Sales campaigns heavy on television media (Berman & Kesterson-Townes, 2012). Moreover, identification of the social identity that JCPenney represents to communities is essential (Stacey, 2011). The opportunities are heavily dependent on the information JCPenney produces from daily operations. The information to draw from the data include the factors that represent individual behavior, do away with redundant processes, and eliminate potential threats from the assessment. Statistical analysis assists in deriving complex models to offer a competitive advantage. The threat JCPenney experiences are not understanding the factors that impede cohesion within the organization (Stacey, 2011). Individual and social identification are instrumental in existence to JCPenney (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, consideration error to noise ratios is essential in determining the optimum statistical model.

Macy’s implemented a strategic plan that adds value to the organization by considering factors of culture, ethics, and needs of the communities. In addition, Macy’s exploits technology to measure pitfalls and strengths. To satisfy and unite with communities, JCPenney should develop a different culture that communities hold to value and exploit technology at the same level or higher than the competition. In essence, JCPenney should recreate its inner persona to deliver impact to social needs.

Implications of Analysis

The implications of not introducing strategic planning processes in alignment with the analysis of SCOT analysis are in not sustaining value in the challenging arena of retail sales. Moreover, JCPenney will not last indefinitely financing daily activities on borrowed basis. The idea is to break apart all the complexities of the organization to derive a solid strategic plan of progress.

Analyzing the Company Strategy Type -Part II

Every organization strategy attempts to lower cost and maximize profits (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A Low-Cost strategy and Differentiation Strategy represent companies attempting to offer products or services at a lower price (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Retailers such as Wal-Mart have made the suppliers lower their cost resulting in more profits to Wal-Mart (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The lower cost strategy involves reducing over all costs lower than the competition (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Concepts such as “Continuous Improvement In Operating Efficiency” involve all stakeholders to work together in improving operating efficiency (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Companies can exploit employees as employees gain experience. The exploitation include employees perform the same task in a less amount of time (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Consequently, employees with experience offer organizations a cost advantage based on the principles of the Experience Curve (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, maintaining low costs to supply chain processes results in a company having a competitive advantage in cost leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Companies can redesign product line to reduce manufacturing costs; therefore, creating a competitive advantage in cost leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The best strategy is to create a low-cost atmosphere among staff (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Offering quantitative value to customers derives a stronger demand for the firm’s products (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

A firm can focus in offering a commodity to a product such as fast delivery in marketing an item to offer greater demand (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Strategy differentiation is only noticeable among customers and value (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Customer relationship is essential in long-term sustainability for a business (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, personal relationships represent value by customers. Adding a personal touch to client relationships is essential such as embracing habits and lifestyles (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

A focused strategy concentrates target groups with customer relationships to provide the best goal to organizations (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, Customer Relationship Management (CRM) is a system that studies the needs of customers (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Customer reliability and repetition provide a basis to the elasticity of demand. As the cost of services increases, customers will turn to competition for a better price point (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Lastly, by paying attention to the SWOT analysis and organizations mission statement organizations satisfy the alignment to the best possible strategic plan to undertake (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). An alignment to the specific of the community is essential to maximize profits (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Strategy Type

Supporting Argument

JCPenney’s current stature to the North American economy is at shambles. The stock price or perception of stability has diminishes return clearly seen with a negative slop to stock value ("Stock price," 2013). The slope represents a year activity including the years of 2012 until 2013 ("Stock price," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney’s public balance sheet dating 2011 to 2013 depict diminishing returns of equity while maintaining similar levels of the debt ("Balance sheet," 2013). The amount of profits in the last three years shows a diminishing value to sustainability ("Income statement," 2013). The last three years of cash flow are falling, and Net Borrowing has increase ("Cash flow," 2013). Clearly, JCPenney is not utilizing resources in a way to offer value to customers since it is failing to produce profits. Improvement to Information Technology is the catalyst to profit maximization.

Analyzing the Company Strategy Moves

Observing the weakness of competition is essential to turn the competition’s weakness into organizational advantages (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Weaknesses to competitors are the areas where customers are not receiving value (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Exploiting the weaknesses include the introduction and analysis of new business to strategic regions (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The exploitation to realize converges into areas where the competition is not practicing. The conversions implement as other implementation projects. Specifically, JCPenney measures areas of exploitations to achieve value where the competition fails to acknowledge. The principle organizations implement related to the concepts of Judo where footing holds with consideration to movement, balance, and leverage (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Nevertheless, the competition is not direct. In essence, gains from competition reflect slow progression to business model that are not noticeable in daily routines (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategy is best if the design does not advert reaction from the competition (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In contrast, when the competition attacks JCPenney should hold footing by using the opponents inertia to balance position (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The advantage achieved by JCPenney is in harmony when the strengths of the competition turn to weaknesses. The art of the strategy is when the competition does not realize JCPenney is defending territory (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Another strategy is producing services or items that are specific to the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Product differentiation is essential to control the market and to derive pricing (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Based on elasticity of demand, products retain the best price (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The successful strategy is to patent productions from the organization to retain ownership to the rights of the product (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Other strategies within the same scope strategies are to acquire all the resources to secure the product (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The most ambitious of all strategies is to invent a new industry altogether. Branding in the industry offers control of resources and supplies. Moreover, competition is not existent since the organization owns the rights of the industry (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategy to attain or to control similar industries includes strategic acquisition, merger, or joint venture partnership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizations with enough capital venturing into join ventures are able to control the market outputs (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, absorbing similar organizations that offer a competitive advantage is another method to compete in the industry (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Success is never a guarantee, processing the metrics and evaluating the results is the key to success (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Lastly, all the noted strategies are important; however, practicality calls for a strategic plan that is practical and attainable (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Relevant Strategy Moves

The opportunity JCPenney can undertake is Strategy Differentiation. The reason is that the competition does not have a strategy based the cultural differences North American is experiencing from a large influx of immigrants. Moreover, Strategy Differentiation is only noticeable among customers and value (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Customer relationship is essential in long-term sustainability for a business (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, personal relationships represent value by customers. Adding a personal touch to client relationships is essential such as embracing habits and lifestyles (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Lastly, the strategy is in alignment with the needs of stakeholders.

Supporting Argument

JCPenney has in place a product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s history and company culture …” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 146). The corporate social responsibility is not evident in the activities JCPenney makes. Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers information on being a servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our communities, our Associates, our Customers and the environment. What matters to you matters to JCPenney." (Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from the two statements depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed to a legal alignment with communities; however, the concern for communities is ethics. The ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Alignment and Goals Analysis

Strategic intent focuses on implementing strategies as actions that produce results (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The implementation process thus requires execution, doing, follow-through, Top-to-bottom, Operational, and goal achieving actions to justify the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In contrast, strategy creation calls for analysis and planning, thinking, initiate, at the top, entrepreneurial, and goal setting (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The implementation process cannot be part of the creation process (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The two tasks set apart by a profound acknowledgement of business practices (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizational success is relevant in how closely firms separate the two concepts (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizations considering strategy alignment will focus on: (a) people; (b) incentives; (c) supportive activities; (d) organizational structure; (e) culture; (f) and the leadership of the business (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategic goals that intercept all aspects of strategy alignment are essential for a competitive advantage (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The strategic implementation process connects with the assistance of all personnel in the organization (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). To succeed in this process, organizations hold everyone accountable for the implementation process (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The realization process by an organization achieves the rewarding process according to responsibility (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The assurance of the implementation is in aligning the interest of employees to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

To assure the implementation is effective leaders adapt to a role model process (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The guarantee is in alignment to leadership and role model ethics (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The hiring process, training, logistics, pricing, and other activities realize by meshing the support system of the strategy (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, leaders benefit from understanding the potential of employees and motivating employees based on potential (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, the organization culture must reflect the ethics of the leadership (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). To achieve an ethic alignment with organizational culture, leaders should pair heroes with novice employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Creating a culture base environment is challenging. Valued leaders will encounter difficulty in effort, time, and disruptions to the creation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

A strategic plan then realizes by incorporating action plans (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, the action plans state the cause and steps to the goals of the plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The best approach is to translate the strategic plan into measurable action plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The measurable steps deconstruct to evaluate the efficiency of the implementation process and assign responsibility to those actions (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The measurable steps set apart by corporate strategic goals, unit goals, and team goals (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics are the methods used to achieve the strategic goals (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Similarly, performance metrics address the factors that measure implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics provide measurement to the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales, and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). When performance metrics reach a flaw, leaders should promptly review the interlocks with the use of cross-functional collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The responsibility to the realization for performance metrics embed within the cross-functional collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Alignment Checklist and Unit Goals

Creating a checklist to strategy alignment requires that people have the necessary skills to make the strategy work (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). JCPenney lacks the appropriate personnel at store level to assist in implementing a strategic plan since the current people hired by JCPenney reflect a misalignment with the needs of stakeholders. The attitude of the workers is without motivation due to the compensation structure and the requirements by the organization. The resources to implement a strategic plan exists (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, JCPenney does not offer a feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs. The feedback system in practice relates the employee to the performance of the business as a whole. The structure has optimization to implement a sound strategy. The support strategy of serving customers does not reflect the need of stakeholders. The organizational culture being on modest pay, high fashion and products that are conservative do not serve the purpose of the strategy.

The unit goals require JCPenney to support a strategy to improve the organizational performance of HR, Procurement, Inbound and Outbound logistics, Sales, and Service. The unit goals provided at ground level to all employees and measured by managers as action plans. The leaders measure the action plans. The goal is for JCPenney to set itself apart form the competition and offer services valued by customers.

Supporting Argument

Action Plan Analysis

The action plan to take results in aligning unit goals to performance measures. In this area managers have to oversee the effects of the unit goals in how the goals related to the stakeholders affected by the unit goals. In addition, managers have to evoke motivation principles for the unit goals to engage with stakeholders and staff. Once the motivation is in action, performance metrics analyzed for cohesion. To assist in motivation, managers design a compensation plan that is in alignment with the unit goals. If the unit goals lack progress, the mangers will check their checklist for responsibility of the unit goals. The best plans have back-up plans, hold people responsible for those plans, are measurable and have a scheduled date of implementation. The implementation process will show the progress that is obvious to management. The difference in the implementation process, success in implementation, and before implementation should reflect the change in the positive direction. The metrics for management to review include stakeholder reports, accounting reports, and shareholder acceptance. Lastly, the implementation and success of the implementation is tedious, should allow for measurement, show ownership to unit goals, and be time driven.

Sustainable Action Time Line of Implementation Processes in Table Form

Table 2

Action Time Line

Implementation Sequence	Action
Growth through creativity	Occurs when close knit teams exhaust current leadership
Growth through direction	Organization grows by decentralization and autonomy
Growth through delegation	Centralized power becomes obsolete
Growth through co-ordination	The organization finds and deletes wasteful processes
Growth through collaboration	Interpersonal relationships grow at this last stage

Relevant Action Plan

A strategic plan then realizes by incorporating action plans (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, the action plans state the cause and steps to the goals of the plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The best approach is to translate the strategic plan into measurable action plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The measurable steps deconstruct to evaluate the efficiency of the implementation process and assign responsibility to those actions (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The measurable steps set apart by corporate strategic goals, unit goals, and team goals (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics are the methods used to achieve the strategic goals (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Similarly, performance metrics address the factors that measure implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Performance metrics provide measurement to the action plans that are essential in measuring the scope to the strategic plan (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Examples of metrics include accounting measures such as revenues, sales, and sales by employees (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). A good measure is measurable, specific, and time driven (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). When performance metrics reach a flaw, leaders should immediately review the interlocks with the use of cross-functional collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). The responsibility to the realization for performance metrics embed within the cross-functional collaboration In addition, the management of action plans is through work breakdown structures (WBS) (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Furthermore, WBS take ownership by key members and dictate failures to implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Supporting Argument

Action plans start with ideas and provide steps in how to accomplish the ideas (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Moreover, top management and goals derive quantifiable action plans (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Unit goals created from mission, value, and vision of shareholders and top management (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Measurable, grounded and time driven unit goals work in implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Organizations should avoid vague goal trends. Managers should allow the owners of unit goals to ask as many questions needed to succeed in implementation (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). All unit goals and action plans require ownership for recognition (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). As the staff takes ownership of all plans, managers assure the organization has the resources to implement those plans (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Interlocks unwound and kept under management (Harvard Business School Press, 2005). Lastly, the action plans require cost analyses (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Fitness Landscape Analysis

Organizations engaging in educating stakeholders the landscapes that promote wealth will realize more growth than organizations that do not communicate strategies to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Organizations must evaluate competition for flaws and measure the impact of competition (Stacey, 2011). The ideal position for an organization is to defeat competition to be the only existence in the market and to maintain the highest landscape possible (Stacey, 2011). Classical sciences support calculation where the date shows a high degree of correlation (Stacey, 2011). In contrast, human activity predictions consider an event with a high consideration of bias (Stacey, 2011). Statistical regression analysis used to predict quantitative data (Stacey, 2011). The challenge is developing regression analysis models against many organizations (Stacey, 2011). Another way to perform data search is to provide surveys to organizations, but the information has a high degree of subjectivity (Stacey, 2011). Case studies provide qualitative information that has to change to quantitative (Stacey, 2011). Existing academic journals are limited to a few hypotheses (Stacey, 2011). Notes from executives have bias information (Stacey, 2011). Assumptions of efficient and formative causality are the basic characteristics of data gathering for scientific research (Stacey, 2011).

Connecting strategic planning to improved organizational performance has been difficult (Stacey, 2011). Identification of fewer opportunities and clear links among industry organizations or leaders has been difficult (Stacey, 2011). Subjective judgment occurs with specialist studies to business planning (Stacey, 2011). Statistical analysis proves with considerably amount of probability strategic planning is essential for organizations to sustain a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). The theory of strategic choice cannot be specific which aspect of leadership affected by strategic planning (Stacey, 2011).

Personal humility and professional will describe the personality of a successful organization (Stacey, 2011). Successful organizations maintain focus on; (a) a core business; (b) closeness to customer; (c) productivity through people; (d) autonomy and entrepreneurship; (e) hands-on; (f) value driven; (g) bias for action; (h) simple form and lean staff; and (i) simultaneous loss-tight properties (Stacey, 2011). Evidence-based management (EBM) is the accumulation of business best practices research and adopts by organizations plus improves profitability and less goal setting and performance feedback (Stacey, 2011). Most managers from organizations do not attempt to correct internal problems by asking questions, therefore, damping the interest in goal setting (Stacey, 2011). Healthcare organizations do not automatically implement best practices based on evidence (Stacey, 2011). Healthcare organizations ignore evidence that results in a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). In essence, the healthcare industry does not attempt to be innovative and attempts to argue evidence is insufficient to implement changes (Stacey, 2011).

Total Quality Management (TQM) assists organizations in improving operating performance, income, and long-run stock market performance (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, TQM also assists in developing employment, total assets, and sales (Stacey, 2011). Six-sigma is another tool that aids improve organizational performance (Stacey, 2011). Human resource management and organizational performance is closely related (Stacey, 2011). Mergers and acquisitions are effective when the outcome results in increase revenues and efficiency (Stacey, 2011). Mergers and acquisitions are beneficial to organizations in the long-run, fit represents a competitive advantage to overall company performance and company growth (Stacey, 2011). Dominant discourse provides improved measurements of uncertainty and unpredictability (Stacey, 2011).

The responsibility of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is to focus on rational thoughts about aligning organizational potential of inter capabilities to match with the values and ethics of stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Effective strategies formulate through learning and discovering (Stacey, 2011). Management and leadership discourse led by feelings does not equate to metrics derived from studying value necessities from stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). With certainty, change initiates uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). The primitive format of strategy building is from past actions and experiences (Stacey, 2011). Some leaders build strategy plans through random ideas (Stacey, 2011). Emergences are patterns from action and are not intentional (Stacey, 2011). Emergent strategy and strategic learning are on the same level field (Stacey, 2011). Strategies form from growth value intentions (Stacey, 2011).

Organizations are not formidable systems that cannot sustain formative causality, invisible barriers, and transparency without observation (Stacey, 2011). Systems are necessary for the development of human beings (Stacey, 2011). Systems require users that are controlled and not autonomous (Stacey, 2011). Systems do not incorporate social, human groups that interact (Stacey, 2011). Systems store information and do not process it (Stacey, 2011). The rationale by the term complex agents sinuates that all do not have differences (Stacey, 2011). Adaptive systems workflows allow complexities of human interaction through tools that filter noise (Stacey, 2011).

Agents must believe in the organization of mission, and vision to stay adaptively and motivated (Stacey, 2011). Conflict is the struggle to defeat an opponent’s value makeup (Stacey, 2011). Diversity is the variety of culture and ethnic groups within an organization (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, diversity allows organizations to adopt the best cultures to offer an environmental cohesive group (Stacey, 2011). Diversity enhances organizational performance and provides improvements through planning (Stacey, 2011). Diversity also calls for culture adaptation and acceptance of differences (Stacey, 2011). Human resource management calls for acceptance of diversity (Stacey, 2011). Diverse groups have different ideas, standards, development, and methods to achieve goals (Stacey, 2011). Successful firms create strategies to oversee the implementation of diverse groups in an organization to achieve creativity and discourage discrimination (Stacey, 2011). Organizational initiatives to diversity include equal opportunities, retention of employees, organizational flexibility, improved public image, and better morale (Stacey, 2011). Diversity relationships are about social dynamics not human power relationships (Stacey, 2011). Dominant discourse offers sanitized acceptance view of diversity (Stacey, 2011).

Dominant discourse focuses realistic, beliefs systems, individualist assumptions, and duality of rationalism, and formative causality (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, dominant discourse assumes agents are autonomous and act rationally and irrational (Stacey, 2011). Dominant discourse acts on the organizational alignments with visions, missions, targets, strategic plans, policy rules, performance, efficiency and improvement (Stacey, 2011). Agents do not always act rationally (Stacey, 2011). Not all systems include organizational societies and groups (Stacey, 2011). Every organization encountering modification initiates changes at the end of prior business cycle (Stacey, 2011). Second order system thinking considers the observer and the participant that offers dominant discourse plus more attention to social interactions (Stacey, 2011). Social constructionism disregards the connection to individual autonomy and focuses on social realities (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, social constructionism combines second order system thinking to offer to learn capacities (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, the last discourse focuses on habits and characteristics that are unpredictable (Stacey, 2011).

Systems dynamics next phase is the study of hard systems thinking that assumes interactions have a distinctive purpose (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, systems dynamics accept manager pass retained knowledge to inexperienced workers (Stacey, 2011). Second order systems thinking connects to constructivists’ psychology and has a basis to perception and observers (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, second order systems have observed systems (Stacey, 2011). Level one-second order systems single loop learning where mental models are similar (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, Level two-order second systems double loop learning where mental models are different (Stacey, 2011). Level three-second order systems have religious conversion and change (Stacey, 2011). Under level one-second order systems, agents set goals (Stacey, 2011). Cybernetic systems and mental models have a relationship of low-order goals (Stacey, 2011). Regress and mysticism are the challenges with second order systems (Stacey, 2011). Second order system forecasting does not address the issue of observant participant and is fundamental to all forms of system thinking (Stacey, 2011). Similarly, second order systems maintain a variable of interest outside the norms of data (Stacey, 2011). In contrast, analogies exist stating a relationship between physical entities and organizations thus having distinct boundaries, structures, and functions (Stacey, 2011).

Interactive planning composes ideas that members should realize goals by envisioning the result (Stacey, 2011). An interactive version of strategic choices states that members should foresee a mirror image as participants of the organization (Stacey, 2011). Business leaders that understand value creation should focus in design (Stacey, 2011). The difference to the interactive model is in autonomy (Stacey, 2011). Churchman’s model makes a distinction that the ideal decision maker or designer must deliberate values rather than a participant (Stacey, 2011). Human interaction intercepts rationalist causality and formative causality (Stacey, 2011). Churchman’s method allowed participant and members to share the strategy, therefore, giving the voice of members the same priority (Stacey, 2011). Churchman’s ideas represent introducing democratic participation systems that allow all to have a voice in strategic thinking (Stacey, 2011). In theory, the autonomous model is free for individuals that choose their own system (Stacey, 2011). In practice, the ideal model is not free because all agents must participate realize the model, therefore, innovation is difficult to attain (Stacey, 2011).

The approach to Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is that agents engage impulses to implement strategies of change (Stacey, 2011). The action of change requires multiple links in scenarios that predict the outcome (Stacey, 2011). The predictions should branch out with many choices hypothesis (Stacey, 2011). The hypothesis is subject of formative causality and best hypothesis forms a conceptual system (Stacey, 2011). The autonomous individuals are subjects of causality of freedom, and the system represents formative causality (Stacey, 2011). SSM has two types that are cultural consisting views, interventions, rules, and logical analysis (Stacey, 2011). Another concern to SSM methods is the interactions agents take with each other that represent the complex commutative system of participants (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, SSM owes adaptive aspects to mediate the complex relationships between agents to slow consequences of alternative discourse and provide systematic learning (Stacey, 2011). Goals are not achievable by complex interpersonal relationships until agents communicate effectively and draw conclusions (Stacey, 2011). Rational thinking is not by group consensus (Stacey, 2011).

Midgley makes an assumption that agents, as a group, have a common problem (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, Midgley argues that system problems are not confined to zones and that agent’s inherent relationships overlap where no true boundaries exist (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, Midgley states agents have a systematic intervention (to make a decision) in how ethics and values are a concern since the problem is bound to a precise zone (Stacey, 2011). In contrast, organizational challenges relates to everyone in the organization (Stacey, 2011). Formulating critical correction to bounded systems requires multiple hypotheses that consider all areas affected by the hypothesis (Stacey, 2011). Boundary setting not explained by Midgley (Stacey, 2011). Setting boundaries limit agents’ creative process because limitations are set (Stacey, 2011). The process limits agents’ interest to think further (Stacey, 2011). Jackson states that system thinking places agents different beliefs in the center of the issues where no boundary is needed (Stacey, 2011). Knowledge gathers through human thinking and cognitive systems (Stacey, 2011). Hegemony systems are the foundation to system thinking (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, system thinking provides a methodology and theoretical steps to world paradigm (Stacey, 2011). System of system methodology (SOSM) offers repairs to system thinking (Stacey, 2011). Jackson makes a distinction between method, methodology, and meta-methodology tying concepts to system tools, principles, and relationships (Stacey, 2011). The SOSM can pair all issues with system methodologies that system thinking fails (Stacey, 2011). The Total Systems Intervention (TSI) analyzes issues and combines different ideas to stimulate thought (Stacey, 2011). The components to critical systems include pluralism, commitment, and improvement (Stacey, 2011). The dual causality of system thinking combines autonomy with formative causality since the leader’s choice affects their role (Stacey, 2011). Pluralism is the common ground to critical systems and system thinking (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, pluralism recommends agents consider different dialogues to a problem and avoids independent thinking (Stacey, 2011). Change in dialogues is necessary because agents are part of a collective and practicing one indefinite principle does not satisfy the needs of the collective (Stacey, 2011).

Stakeholders value the creation of goods and services organizations offer by allowing stakeholders to focus in other personal interest (Stacey, 2011). The offer to stakeholders represents economic efficiency (Stacey, 2011). Strategic leadership intercepts organizational focus by aligning the offers to stakeholders that represent economic value (Stacey, 2011). The relationship of organizations and stakeholders relate to the representation of culture, ethics, and value (Stacey, 2011). Successful organizations realize a competitive advantage by offering the correct mixture culture, ethics, and value as a service or product to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). The realization is then measured as a dominant discourse organizations match to stakeholders’ demands (Stacey, 2011).

Social constructionism represents: (a) fit of communication towards stakeholders; (b) the understood meaning of communication by stakeholders from organizations; (c) the relationships organizations and stakeholders assemble; (d) the value social life of the relationship between firms and stakeholders; and (e) the cultural traditions from the relationship among firms and stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). In contrast, constructionism is the interpretation of society’s culture by the communities (Stacey, 2011). In essence, social constructionism is the interchange by organizations to supply stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, organizations accept diverse communities by supplying cultural products and services to stakeholders and not alienating social groups that are ethical to communities (Stacey, 2011).

Social identity theory is different from mainstream emphasis of social group memberships on identity formation (Stacey, 2011). Social behavior is proportional to social processes (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, social groups are permeable where stakeholders can switch between social groups (Stacey, 2011). Social identity theory places interest for organizations to understand the placement of stakeholders among social groups and the boundaries to the social groups (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, organizations must understand the internal inherent links between social dynamics (Stacey, 2011).

Description of Fitness Landscape and Analysis

Implications of Analysis

Boid Analysis

The characteristics of Boids include keeping a minimum distance from each other, match organizational velocities within each other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey, 2011). Boids are master agents masked to fit into society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding intention, direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011). Boids are resourceful and excellent camouflage of chaos (Stacey, 2011). In addition, boids will adapt to environmental constraints; however, do not follow a stable evolution (Stacey, 2011).

The laws of nature present actions that predict and change when forces alter. Organizational strategies of the modern world are simple in comparison to the complex and non-linear relationships of agents. A growing concern exists that leadership qualifications are not in motion for the current challenges. The former principles of leadership investigated cause and effect mysteries to misalignments to dynamic leadership; whereas, the emerging principles of complexity leadership theory, complex adaptive systems, and chaos theory examines the roles agents participate in non-linear relationships with external and internal forces.

Cause and effect principles allow people to adjust nature (Stacey, 2011). Similarly, managers finesse business structures to change results (Stacey, 2011). The pieces of flaws in organizational culture derive the interaction between them (Stacey, 2011). System flaws analyze by observing linearity between missing links (Stacey, 2011). Some links with prior introduction of negative and positive feedback still do not show linearity, but some other complex phenomenon (Stacey, 2011). Theories of complex sciences focus on the macro level flaws, which are non-linear and deterministic (Stacey, 2011). The theories claim no two actions correlate; therefore, predictions cannot forecast (Stacey, 2011). Complex adaptive systems refer to a strategy of interactions to depend of local inputs instead of a master blue print (Stacey, 2011).

Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are unpredictable and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable; therefore, managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to self-adjust (Stacey, 2011). Organizational challenges serve as linear and non-linear relationship (Stacey, 2011). The adjustment of such systems represents a strange attractor (Stacey, 2011). Organizational problems that complicate prediction should be broken apart in shorter periods or smaller slices to forecast (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior and path are not proportional (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, organizational behavior has a pattern and qualitative shape (Stacey, 2011). Pattern behavior thus has shape and dynamic principles that forecast (Stacey, 2011). Chaotic behavior represents healthy form of existence (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior patterns require an external force to move in a direction cyclical and maintain control of the dynamic system to hold a minimum radius (Stacey, 2011). Once thought as random behavior is non-linear and linear relationship between stability and instability (Stacey, 2011). In essence, small movements away from equilibrium invite new patterns of complex structures to organizations.

Interactive dynamics allows measuring to episodes of interaction between agents (Lichtenstein, Uhl-Bien, Marion, Seers, Orton, & Schreiber, 2006). The interactions are events that occur over time (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Moreover, the interactions include space such as bracket events, systematic data, interaction cues, longitudinal models, and relational qualities (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Bracketing and identifying events include utilizing radiological procedures (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Analyzing organizational processes often reveal event interactions that are in misalignment (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Interdependency cues often have spaces between events that require explanation by agents (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Agents’ perceptions and qualities change over time thus amending forecasting over time is necessary (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). The types of forecasting necessary for predictions include dynamic modeling, discrete event simulation, agent-based modeling, network modeling, and dynamical network analysis (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). In contrast, normative or plausible data methods to forecast incorporate computational modeling (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). New analytical techniques are necessary to forecast non-linear fractal dynamic agent relationships (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Dynamic network analysis forecast non-linear fractal dynamic relationships by considering complex relationships qualities, and complex relationships interaction among agents (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). The developments of adaptive models of Poisson regression are the focus of grounded theory, pattern matching, visual mapping, narrative techniques, temporal bracketing, and quantification (Lichtenstein et al., 2006). Lastly, the generalization of fluctuation dynamics, positive feedback, feedback dynamics, stabilization dynamics, and recombination dynamics acted as drivers to agent events (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).

The complex interactions among agents introduce disruptions in the forecasting of business cycles. Organizations adapt to change in the environment by empirically deriving methods to break apart the complexities among agents. Leaders applying negative feedback to adaptive systems result in changes that do not participate a competitive advantage. The resulting complex systems initiate a response to study theories of complex sciences to focus on macro and micro level strategies that yield a competitive advantage.

The focus in deriving purpose and explanations to agents devises complex complicated tactics result in the formulation of the system and understanding of fractal tendencies. Complex agents formulating changes to organizational structure devise entrepreneurial strategies away from form organizational plans. The once though of as random behavior has patterns of linear and non-linear tendencies. Where the opportunity exists in understanding the complex patterns, lies in the common denominator that all agents must cooperate to co-exist within the organization.

Forecasting strategies are thus in development to assist in leadership. The complex and dynamic relationships introduce a modern form of business structures. Dynamic leadership is no longer a modern style of leading organizations. Lastly, organizations result to maneuvering key agents to lead complex structures.

Organizations that consider the dynamics of agent interaction will succeed in forecasting complex structures within the dynamics of the organization. Dynamic agent interaction that are similar and dissimilar have a common denominator of weighted averages. Moreover, organization can attempt to correct disruptions by applying negative feedback; however, unfavorable results are then a measure of complex interactions within dynamic agents. The spacing between negative feedback and equilibrium also represent time differences. The ideal forecast strategy relies in how close the misalignment processes against time and weighted differences.

“Boid Analysis” Systems Description and Analysis

Dominant discourse acts on the organizational alignments with visions, missions, targets, strategic plans, policy rules, performance, efficiency and improvement (Stacey, 2011). Agents do not always act rationally (Stacey, 2011). Not all systems include organizational societies and groups (Stacey, 2011). Every organization encountering modification initiates changes at the end of prior business cycle (Stacey, 2011). Second order system thinking considers the observer and the participant that offers dominant discourse plus more attention to social interactions (Stacey, 2011). Social constructionism disregards the connection to individual autonomy and focuses on social realities (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, social constructionism combines second order system thinking to offer to learn capacities (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, the last discourse focuses on habits and characteristics that are unpredictable (Stacey, 2011).

Implications of Analysis

The challenge is in maintain social relationships with an emergent customer base that has a different social dynamic. JCPenney is in a negative discourse aiming at devaluing stakeholders. Social interaction dynamics is essential for sustainability, and JCPenney has not shown interest in identifying new emerging stakeholder base. The retail industry has a difficult task of identifying stakeholders. Much of the misalignment is within how the internal stakeholders and external stakeholders communicate. Majority of JCPenney employees do not attempt to develop a personal relationship with customers, therefore, JCPenney will find it difficult to learn customer’s expectations. The center of mass of customers perceptions maintains a distance from the misconceptions of JCPenney. In summary, new, emergent stakeholders emerge in external societies with boundaries not reachable by JCPenney.

Industry Evolution Modeling

The laws of nature present actions that predict and change when forces alter (Stacey, 2011). Cause and effect principles allow people to adjust nature (Stacey, 2011). Similarly, managers finesse business structures to change results (Stacey, 2011). The pieces of flaws in organizational culture and process derive the interaction between them (Stacey, 2011). System flaws analyze by observing linearity between missing links (Stacey, 2011). Some links with prior introduction of negative and positive feedback still do not show linearity, but some other complex phenomenon (Stacey, 2011). Theories of complex sciences focus on the macro levels flaws, which are non-linear and deterministic (Stacey, 2011). The theories claim no two actions correlate; therefore, predictions cannot forecast (Stacey, 2011). Complex adaptive systems refer to a strategy of interactions to depend of local inputs instead of a master blue print (Stacey, 2011).

Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are unpredictable and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable; therefore, managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to self-adjust (Stacey, 2011). Organizational challenges serve as linear and non-linear relationship (Stacey, 2011). The adjustment of such systems represents a strange attractor (Stacey, 2011). Organizational problems that are too complicated to predict should be broken apart in shorter periods or smaller slices to forecast (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior and path are not proportional (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, organizational behavior has a pattern and qualitative shape (Stacey, 2011). Pattern behavior thus has shape and dynamic principles that forecast (Stacey, 2011). Chaotic behavior represents healthy form of existence (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior patterns require an external force to move in a direction cyclical and maintain control of the dynamic system to hold a minimum radius (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, random behavior is non-linear and linear relationship between stability and instability (Stacey, 2011).

Non-linear systems far from equilibrium set small movements eventually to form its own structures (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior can exist at equilibrium and can reside at rest (Stacey, 2011). When external and internal forces away from equilibrium push behavior out the differences in equilibrium require negative feedback to correct (Stacey, 2011). Observation of chaotic patterns is necessary to control organizations (Stacey, 2011). Destructive pattern in organizational behavior when at a tipping point to form bonds to create new identities (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization occurs when chaotic patterns excite behavior to form new unplanned patterns (Stacey, 2011). Strategic change occurs when organizational behavior experiences forces to dissipate equilibrium and introduces self-organization with neutral fluctuations (Stacey, 2011). Destabilization occurs to organizational cultures when broken apart; however, introduction of leadership adheres by motivating and manifesting structures (Stacey, 2011). When value systems are broken, encouragement from external forces causes organizations dis-equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). Broken values cause other departments to follow fractal tendencies to the point of unsustainability (Stacey, 2011). The nature of human behavior is to change the directive path of equilibrium, and outside influences bifurcate norms of existence (Stacey, 2011). Some organizational system exists in the norms of stable instability where the patterns are predictably unstable (Stacey, 2011). Instability on itself represents unknown factors not understood but influenced (Stacey, 2011). Unstable systems far from equilibrium cannot forecast because the needed change is distant from equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). Accounting for misalignments is possible by creating systems-non linear equations that arrive from a process of spontaneous self-organization (Stacey, 2011).

Complex adaptive systems have a common denominator that targets population of agents to have a single common principle (Stacey, 2011). Complex system reacts to a new introduction of a common denominator by changing the behavior of a respected stakeholder (Stacey, 2011). The changed behavior transpires as a new common denominator and complex pattern for all agents (Stacey, 2011). Societies have proven the interaction and manipulation of agents through complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Genetic algorithms take the complexity of introducing new agents (Stacey, 2011). Organizations introduce the same principles by introducing original change stakeholders (Stacey, 2011). Fractal types of complex social systems have a common denominator with the need to interact (Stacey, 2011). Complex systems have the inherent nature of creating unplanned or anticipated evolutionary evolving outcomes (Stacey, 2011). Complex systems do not progress out of planning and do not develop out of random events (Stacey, 2011). Organizations engaging in educating stakeholders the landscapes that promote wealth will realize more growth than organizations that do not communicate strategies to stakeholders (Stacey, 2011).

Organizations must evaluate the competition for flaws and measure the impact of competition (Stacey, 2011). The ideal position for an organization is to defeat competition to be the only existence in the market and maintain the highest landscape possible (Stacey, 2011). The best strategy for organizations includes one that is difficult to measure, to anticipate, and view as intuitive by the competition (Stacey, 2011). The fractal strategy does not guarantee to defeat the strength of competitive forces and provide a high landscape (Stacey, 2011). Small adjustments to organizational strategy may result to a positive direction, but only the strategic intent with a large adjustment sustains a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). A healthy organization has chaos in daily operations and is a prerequisite for sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Competition, internal conflicts, dynamic operation, and constraints are the normal list of options for the internal dynamic healthy organizations (Stacey, 2011). Chaos and conflicting constraints are the attributes of a valued agent (Stacey, 2011). The characteristics of Boids include keeping a minimum distance from each other, match organizational velocities within each other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey, 2011). Boids are master agents masked to fit into society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding intention, direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011). Boids are resourceful and excellent camouflage of chaos (Stacey, 2011). In addition, boids will adapt to environmental constraints; however, do not follow a stable evolution (Stacey, 2011). Competition sets the stage for a healthy organizational environment (Stacey, 2011). Without healthy organizational environments, organizations would welter (Stacey, 2011). Organizational strategy does not have to follow a set of structured rules; in fact, flawed agents not following strict rules carry a successful strategy (Stacey, 2011).

A survival tactic mimics the competition’s role mission, values, and vision through benchmarking i.e. mimicking the fundamentals to the point where the two organizations depict clone traits and the benchmark continue until a new fundamental strategy implements (Stacey, 2011). Assimilating the organization has its drawbacks (Stacey, 2011). Both organizations must exist to survive; therefore, leaders cannot utterly terminate the competition host existence (Stacey, 2011). Organization must accept the placement among the hierarchy of order or destroy the competitive forces to retain dominance in the market (Stacey, 2011). The nature of competition requires a dominant entity to supersede alternate competition at all costs (Stacey, 2011). In the long-run organizational clones do no co-exist (Stacey, 2011). The introduction of chaos to organizational strategy results in both emergence and destruction of agents (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization introduces new agents that morph the competitive forces to survive that would yield positive or negative implementation results (Stacey, 2011). Self-organization strategies create exponential growth in spontaneous and emergent diverse agents (Stacey, 2011). In addition, the competition of agents in the complex self-organizing model generates exploitation among agents (Stacey, 2011). Evolution factors occur from generated competition factors (Stacey, 2011). The genetic genes of agents have predetermined physical attributes and do not contribute to the survival morphogenetic fields of formative causality (Stacey, 2011). Causality transforms agents to digest spontaneous evolution of forms (Stacey, 2011). The difference in causality adaptation to agents is in the organizational change that occurs at micro levels, and agents are not homogeneous (Stacey, 2011). Combining causality with chaos theory to the adaptive systems of agents results in developing new forms of adaptive systems (Stacey, 2011). Evolutionary emergence occurs at predestined genetic and social markers intrinsic to the complex nature of agents (Stacey, 2011). A twisting relation between organizational value and emergent agents exists, however, organizations cannot rely on emergent agents in the long run (Stacey, 2011). Emergent agents create new complex systems that are not self-regulating (Stacey, 2011). Langton concludes the agent interactions at micro levels (Stacey, 2011). Cybernetic systems perform well under closed loop cognitive environments (Stacey, 2011). Cybernetic systems have a linear correlation and maintain a recursive rule system governing self-organization predictability (Stacey, 2011).

Non-linear equations depict the actions of industrial supply chain production (Stacey, 2011). Short-term forecasting is possible with chaos theory; however, the requirement is for longer periods (Stacey, 2011). Utilizing the concerns of a learning organization and systems dynamic based theory, organizations implement computer programming to relate the business model challenges (Stacey, 2011). As complex organization system modeling occurs within the computer environment, the human characteristics of fractal agent conductivity are difficult to mimic (Stacey, 2011).

The necessity of exploitation of technologies develops low-cost strategies (Stacey, 2011). Improvements to technologies are possible by organizations to maximize low-cost strategies (Stacey, 2011). New technologies have a weakness of branding reducing the barriers of entry and offering a competitive advantage to differentiation and low-cost strategy (Stacey, 2011). The instability and stability of change industries creates enthusiasm and stressors to the vulnerability and ease of sustainability to emergent organizations (Stacey, 2011). Industry models at the edge of chaos represent sensitive dependence by the inability to observe threats and opportunities due to complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Not all organizations are sustainable in the edge of chaos industry model (Stacey, 2011). Organizations that have an edge of chaos business model are not aware of future sustainability, however, can choose social dynamics (Stacey, 2011). A characteristic of edge of chaos is change dynamics brought by the exploitation of products (Stacey, 2011). Organizations with an edge of chaos industry maintain an impersonal social culture dynamics driven by the constant certainty and uncertainty of sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Patterns of human action emerge from organizations as edge of chaos invites selfish behavior from agents (Stacey, 2011). Irrational behavior provides emergence of prominent business ideas to organizational leaders (Stacey, 2011). Deviant behavior becomes necessary for shareholder value due to uncertainty of organizational diligence (Stacey, 2011).

Human interaction within complex organizations assists the evolution of sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, human interaction is challenging through diversity, therefore, making the evolution of interaction necessary (Stacey, 2011). Self-interest and diversity signal a need to measure the growth rate of human interaction through differential equations (Stacey, 2011). Ignorance marked as error by the differential equations depicted by growth rates show the threat to sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Leaders are most effective when exploiting curve to sustainability and are most vulnerable when exploring sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Exploration to low-cost opportunities is unpredictable, nevertheless, can lead to dimensions in strategy formation (Stacey, 2011). Exploitation of strategies results in the evolution of dominating errors and gaining successful performance, whereas, exploration results to uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, statistical modeling provides metrics to control uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). The statistical models provide probability of success transposed as certainty (Stacey, 2011). Uncertainty, even though erratic, realizes facts when statistical predictions have correlation (Stacey, 2011). Exploration does not mean leaders will generalize about outcomes without certainty of actions (Stacey, 2011). The successful leader will enact measures of alignment with key measures that result a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that almost reaches sustainability with noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and effort represent the axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of creativity (Stacey, 2011).

Organizations that adopt principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) learn the costs involved due to Globalization. For example, an organization that improves transportation systems by adapting to vehicle transportation of goods has an added cost of pollution into the environment. The interdependence of transportation systems has a side effect. The added cost of waste not accounted by organizations from toxic air, polluted air, and contaminated water passes to society (Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions grow proportionally to globalization. The increase of consumption led by the rise of population and productivity initiates an accumulation of waste (Senge et al., 2010). Some industries progress the problem with consumer electronics and automobiles by adding landfills around the world (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, toxic waste develops health problems including cancer and intoxication (Senge et al., 2010). The amount of waste grows to unsustainable levels (Senge et al., 2010). Taking short cuts to production require an overview of long-run added costs (Senge et al., 2010). The regenerative aspects of globalization necessitate monitoring for comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a return of investment (Senge et al., 2010). Lean organizations must provide resources that have minimum travel time and distance to be effective value creators (Senge et al., 2010). Healthy lean system strategies are realistic about the capacity of an organization due to the limitation that exists from long-term sustainability (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, people learn what is truly beneficial and organizations must align with those values (Senge et al., 2010). Principal agents must work together to foster, protect, and build the fundamental infrastructure of a valued organization (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations that build up three fundamental systems to support organizations for economic value i.e. seeing, collaborative, and creation attain long-term competitive advantage (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, organizations must focus to the big picture i.e. sustaining environmental and society measures that improve the quality of life (Senge et al., 2010).

Industry Evolution Modeling Description and Analysis

Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are unpredictable and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable; therefore, managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to self-adjust (Stacey, 2011). Organizational challenges serve as linear and non-linear relationship (Stacey, 2011). The adjustment of such systems represents a strange attractor (Stacey, 2011). Organizational problems that are too complicated to predict should be broken apart in shorter periods or smaller slices to forecast (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior and path are not proportional (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, organizational behavior has a pattern and qualitative shape (Stacey, 2011). Pattern behavior thus has shape and dynamic principles that forecast (Stacey, 2011). Chaotic behavior represents healthy form of existence (Stacey, 2011). Organizational behavior patterns require an external force to move in a direction cyclical and maintain control of the dynamic system to hold a minimum radius (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, random behavior is non-linear and linear relationship between stability and instability (Stacey, 2011).

Implications of Analysis

The pieces of flaws in organizational culture and process derive the interaction between them (Stacey, 2011). System flaws analyze by observing linearity between missing links (Stacey, 2011). Some links with prior introduction of negative and positive feedback still do not show linearity, but some other complex phenomenon (Stacey, 2011). Connecting business and chaos theory results in attempting to keep organizational environment at equilibrium such that negative feedback injects to produce equilibrium (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney should provoke motivation to sustainability by promoting the missing links. In regards to chaos theory, organizational patterns that are unpredictable and predictable represent dimensional chaos (Stacey, 2011). Organizational chaos is not predictable; therefore, JCPenney’s managers need to introduce negative feedback for the organization to self-adjust (Stacey, 2011). Non-linear systems far from equilibrium set small movements eventually to form its unique structures (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney’s organizational behavior can exist at equilibrium and can reside at rest (Stacey, 2011). When external and internal forces away from equilibrium push behavior out the differences in equilibrium require negative feedback to correct (Stacey, 2011). Observation of chaotic patterns is necessary to control JCPenney’s value chain (Stacey, 2011). Destructive pattern in JCPenney’s organizational behavior unfolds when at a tipping point to form bonds to create new identities (Stacey, 2011). Complex systems have the inherent nature of creating unplanned or anticipated evolutionary evolving outcomes (Stacey, 2011). Complex systems do not progress out of planning and do not develop out of random events (Stacey, 2011). Moreover, JCPenney should provide education to stakeholders promoting healthy landscapes that promote wealth (Stacey, 2011). The ideal position for JCPenney is to defeat competition, be the only existence in the market, and maintain the highest landscape possible (Stacey, 2011). The best strategy for JCPenney includes one that is difficult to measure, to anticipate, and view as intuitive by the competition (Stacey, 2011). Competition, internal conflicts, dynamic operation, and constraints are the normal list of options for the internal dynamic healthy organizations (Stacey, 2011). Chaos and conflicting constraints are the attributes of a valued agent (Stacey, 2011). The characteristics of Boids include keeping a minimum distance from each other, match organizational velocities within each other, and all follow the same center of mass (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney’s boids include changing product scope to provide a service that is specific to the industry. Boids are master agents masked to fit into society clusters destined to drive a successful strategy by hiding intention, direction, and timing (Stacey, 2011).

The necessity of exploitation of technologies develops low-cost strategies (Stacey, 2011). New technologies have a weakness of branding reducing the barriers of entry and offering a competitive advantage to differentiation and low-cost strategy (Stacey, 2011). The instability and stability of change industries creates enthusiasm and stressors to the vulnerability and ease of sustainability to emergent organizations (Stacey, 2011). Industry models at the edge of chaos represent sensitive dependence by the inability to observe threats and opportunities due to complex systems (Stacey, 2011). Organizations that have an edge of chaos business model are not aware of future sustainability, however, can choose social dynamics (Stacey, 2011). A characteristic of edge of chaos is change dynamics brought by the exploitation of products (Stacey, 2011). JCPenney has an edge of chaos industry model that maintains an impersonal social culture dynamics driven by the constant certainty and uncertainty of sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Patterns of human action emerge from organizations as edge of chaos invites selfish behavior from agents (Stacey, 2011). Irrational behavior provides emergence of prominent business ideas to organizational leaders (Stacey, 2011). Deviant behavior becomes necessary for shareholder value due to uncertainty of organizational diligence (Stacey, 2011).

Leaders are most effective when exploiting curve to sustainability and are most vulnerable when exploring sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Exploration to low-cost opportunities is unpredictable, nevertheless, can lead to dimensions in strategy formation (Stacey, 2011). Exploitation of strategies results in the evolution of dominating errors and gaining successful performance, whereas, exploration results to uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). Furthermore, statistical modeling provides metrics to control uncertainty (Stacey, 2011). The successful JCPenney leader will enact measures of alignment with key measures that result a competitive advantage (Stacey, 2011). The maximum sustainable dynamics model on an x-axis and y-axis has a growth rate that nearly reaches sustainability with noise equating to uncertainty almost reaching maximum sustainability (Stacey, 2011). Time and effort represent the axis and sustainability dynamics include the independent variable (Stacey, 2011). Lastly, exploration is profitable as long as maximum sustainability does not equate more than signal noise values of creativity (Stacey, 2011).

Life Cycle Assessment

Strategic opportunities are available when organizations expand views about waste and resources (Senge et al., 2010). Waste introduces to serve as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al., 2010). Natural nutrients from the environment are biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et al., 2010). Some waste from natural resources reform to other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge et al., 2010). The life cycle assessment (LCA) process depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy (Senge et al., 2010). Reducing waste by optimizing resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of inputs to equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010). Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by regeneration encounter a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable environment (Senge et al., 2010).

JCPenney extracts furniture from overseas by providing natural resourced products such as furniture to North American families and families eventually depositing used furniture into landfills, however, JCPenney is not intercepting the deposits from families (Senge et al., 2010). The LCA only works properly if inputs and outputs affect the entire organization (Senge et al., 2010). The goals are for an organization to have zero waste, which entails JCPenney to be a regenerative circular organization (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, becoming environmentally friendly by requesting old goods from families and trade for newer goods expands an organization’s mission scope (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs for the trade represent a competitive advantage when the gains are greater than costs (Senge et al., 2010). Furthermore, JCPenney encounters heavy transportation costs to supply chain, and pollution is the side effect to the environment from transportation (Senge et al., 2010). Utilizing local resources and renovating local waste assists communities by helping the environment and injecting the economy with more demand for labor (Senge et al., 2010). Recycling materials adds advantage to organizations with assurance either from other organizations or by itself (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the LCA process implements best as a team than a single person to ascertain aspects of inputs and outputs (Senge et al., 2010).

The economic model John Adams once envisioned is no longer sustainable in the modern era. Society increased its potential by creating tools to generate growth and a higher standard of living. Those same systems initiated failures in the infrastructure to societies welfare and work life balance. An effort by society to align family and home values is essential for long-term sustainability. The adaptive business model depicts an eco friendly environment and the welfare of generations.

The industrial revolution changed society’s views of home, family, and employment (Senge et al., 2010). England suffered from the industrial revolution (Senge et al., 2010). The suffering was from toxic air, polluted air, and contaminated water (Senge et al., 2010). Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions grew proportional to the industrial revolution. The increase of consumption led by the increase of population and productivity initiated an accumulation of waste (Senge et al., 2010). A progressing problem occurred with consumer electronics and automobiles as both amassed landfills around the world (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, toxic waste develops health problems including cancer and intoxication (Senge et al., 2010). The amount of waste grew to unsustainable levels (Senge et al., 2010). Taking short cuts to production require an overview of long-run added costs (Senge et al., 2010). The regenerative aspects of some types of industrial systems in organizations necessitate monitoring for comparison of accumulated waste and measuring for a return of investment (Senge et al., 2010).

The inherent problem with mismanaged waste is in the availability of adequate resources (Senge et al., 2010). The increasing amount of waste made communities exhaust topsoil, fisheries, and forests (Senge et al., 2010). The ecosystems cannot regenerate from the consistent abuse of waste and neglect (Senge et al., 2010). The imbalance of ecosystems is resulting from society effects such as increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Moving away from social problems is constantly more difficult due to space and time having an inter connection (Senge et al., 2010). Regenerative industrial systems require supervision not to neglect its capability (Senge et al., 2010).

Sustainability is more than environmental health. Sustainability is the overall addition of interlocking environmental values including environmental, economic, and social (King, 2008). The responsibility of sustainability masked by the creation of governmental agencies shifts the impact of social problems (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations with a high amount of social conflict within the organization such as high turn over will unlikely consider devotion to environmental problems (King, 2008). Standard of living and economic sustainability is not sustainable (King, 2008; Senge et al., 2010). Equilibrium resulting to environmental health is the give and take relationship between standard of living and economic sustainability (King, 2008). Lastly, sustainability is the mixture of healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living (Senge et al., 2010).

Organizations are suffering from the increase of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations, which do not recognize the link to environmental misalignment, respond by placing blame to agents (Senge et al., 2010). The breakdown of social communities ability to find adequate resources triggered a relocation process into unsustainable urban communities (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations that overwhelm society with unsustainable gains in standard of living should evaluate for neglect in environmental flaws (Senge et al., 2010). Society, in general, does not consider environmental impacts when strategizing for productivity (Senge et al., 2010). Government does not recognize the need for a work-balance that is sustainable. System thinking is about evaluating system patterns and deriving effective plans that yield a competitive advantage (Senge et al., 2010). Industrial systems near large community systems are troublesome in the generation of waste and in managing waste (Senge et al., 2010).

An analogy to the industrial revolution describes the misalignment and potential misses to key milestones organizations can take in developing strategic plans. Unsustainable growth and productivity requires monitoring to align with environmental and society concerns. Organizations that grow exponentially may regard the concerns for environmental impacts. The best business model is an organization that is regenerative and eco friendly. The long-run sustainability for organizations involves interlocking environment, economics and social values. As productivity in general organization increases to achieve a higher standard of living, society fails with increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger. Lastly, the perfect balance is between healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living.

LCA Modeling Description and Analysis

A new CEO for JCPenney will sustain environmental friendliness by aligning value chains to add value. At this time, JCPenney’s supply chain is not profitable due to the complexities of travel and transportation. By providing communities with goods and services that are locally available assist the environment by maximizing environment value and, in addition, opening up possibilities to recycle waste from the communities to resemble a regenerative model. Lastly, Figure 1 below represents the current LCA model JCPenney holds.

Figure 1. The diagram depicts the full cycle of a natural resource (wood) transformed into a commodity and regenerated into again into a natural resource.

Implications of Analysis

JCPenney extracts furniture from overseas by providing natural resourced products such as furniture to North American families and families eventually depositing used furniture into landfills, however, JCPenney is not intercepting the deposits from families. The LCA only works properly if inputs and outputs affect the entire JCPenney’s supply chain. The goals are for an organization to have zero waste, which entails JCPenney to be a regenerative circular organization. Moreover, becoming environmentally friendly by requesting old goods from families and trade for newer goods expands an organization’s mission scope. The added costs for the trade represent a competitive advantage when the gains are greater than costs. Furthermore, JCPenney encounters heavy transportation costs to supply chain, and pollution is the side effect to the environment from transportation. Utilizing local resources and renovating local waste assists communities by helping the environment and injecting the economy with more demand for labor. Recycling materials adds advantage to organizations with assurance either from other organizations or by itself. Lastly, the LCA process implements best as a team than a single person to ascertain aspects of inputs and outputs.

The inherent problem with mismanaged waste is in the availability of adequate resources (Senge et al., 2010). The increasing amount of waste made communities exhaust topsoil, fisheries, and forests (Senge et al., 2010). The ecosystems cannot regenerate from the consistent abuse of waste and neglect (Senge et al., 2010). The imbalance of ecosystems is resulting from community effects such as increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Moving away from social problems is constantly more difficult due to space and time having an inter connection (Senge et al., 2010). Regenerative industrial systems require supervision not to neglect its capability (Senge et al., 2010).

JCPenney needs to eliminate the increase of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, JCPenney does not recognize the link to environmental misalignment, respond by placing blame to agents (Senge et al., 2010). The breakdown of social communities ability to find adequate resources triggered a relocation process into unsustainable urban communities (Senge et al., 2010). JCPenney is overwhelming society with unsustainable gains in standard of living that neglect environmental concerns (Senge et al., 2010). Society, in general, does not consider environmental impacts when strategizing for productivity (Senge et al., 2010). Government does not recognize the need for a work-balance that is sustainable. System thinking is about evaluating system patterns and deriving effective plans that yield a competitive advantage (Senge et al., 2010). Industrial systems near large community systems are troublesome in the generation of waste and in managing waste (Senge et al., 2010).

An analogy to the industrial revolution describes the misalignment and potential misses to key milestones organizations can take in developing strategic plans. Unsustainable growth and productivity requires monitoring to align with environmental and society concerns. JCPenney’s failure involves not aligning organizational strategy with environmental concerns. The best business model is an organization that is regenerative and eco friendly. The long-run sustainability for organizations involves interlocking environment, economics and social values. As productivity in general organization increases to achieve a higher standard of living, society fails with increases of anxiety, overwork, stress, mistrust, fear and anger. Lastly, the perfect balance is between healthy eco systems and a higher standard of living.

Terminated CEO Ronald B. Johnson took over the JCPenney Corporation in the year of our lord 2011 with pre-existing negative sales returns (Clifford, 2013). Mr. Johnson refused to relocate to Plano, Texas for the new position and refused to communicate with executives within the value chain (Clifford, 2013). In addition, Mr. Johnson initiated new strategic sales plans without considering the feedback from the value chain and the values of the customer base (Clifford, 2013). Attempting to run the organization based on mimicking the competition, past feelings, and without consideration to environmental concerns, Mr. Johnson terminated out of the organization by the recruiter that brought him into the organization (Clifford, 2013).

Mr. Johnson credentials include an M.B.A. degree from Harvard University (Clifford, 2013). In essence, Mr. Johnson is aware the importance in offering value to internal and external stakeholders. Furthermore, the M.B.A. from Harvard showed Mr. Johnson the essentials for concerns in sustaining environmental value. In addition, Mr. Johnson is mindful to the need for ethical standards in the value chain operations. The sale ideas incorporated by Mr. Johnson failed at regional levels. Moreover, Mr. Johnson is not ready to lead the organization. Consequently, Mr. Johnson does show interest to bringing JCPenney to environmentally sustainability.

A new CEO for JCPenney will sustain environmental friendliness by aligning value chains to add value. At this time, JCPenney’s supply chain is not profitable due to the complexities of travel and transportation. By delivering communities goods and services that are locally available assist the environment by maximizing value and, thus, opening up possibilities to recycle waste from the communities to resemble a regenerative model.

Compliance to Innovation Analysis

Organizations must follow the provided mission, values, and vision (Senge et al., 2010). When organizations do not commit to the mission statement that represents beliefs, environmental views, and long-term vision stakeholders will not value the organizations products and services (Senge et al., 2010). In addition, when some of the organizational strategies do not fully implement organizations remain in the planning phases of strategic plans (Senge et al., 2010). The failure is due to leaders failing to measure strategic plan costs, time for implementation, and plan scope (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations first attempt to identify value in a strategic plan until the reactive phase for non-compliance results in unforeseen added costs (Senge et al., 2010). At what time organizations attempt to infuse proactive measurements to compliance measurements, the organization realizes stable growth and commitment from stakeholders (Senge et al., 2010). The integrated strategy when sustainability is obvious from measuring metrics and applying at all levels of organizational leadership (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs and gains clearly engage this level (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, leaders can sustain the purpose mission stage by staying positive and proactive about feedback (Senge et al., 2010). Additional companies can join the final stage by showing the organization is profitable, meets compliances, and embarks into environmental friendliness (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, a thriving organization can reach the last stage by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).

Environmental responsibility is essential for organizations to sustain value in diverse and eco conscious modern world (Rusinko, 2005). The purposes for environmental responsibility include conservation stewardship, supervisory requirements, enhanced municipal images, and the potential to expand the patron base (Rusinko, 2005). Stakeholder alignment to environmental responsibility is the key to success (Rusinko, 2005). The amount of environmental concerns for stakeholders is the indicator in organizational alignment (Rusinko, 2005). Environmental management systems (EMS), life cycle analysis (LCA), and (ISO) standards assist in implementing environmentally sustainable practices (Rusinko, 2005). In contrast, the three analyses do not provide alignment with environmental responsibility (Rusinko, 2005). Organizational leadership manages the sustainability of environmental responsibility through quality management (Rusinko, 2005).

Organizational Sustainability guides change through the observation of organizational process. Misalignments found by agents specify organizational leaders to find the missing links through organizational tools such as QM and crisis management to sustain change. Quality management bridges the gap between environmental and economics sustainability. Moreover, crisis management conducts pre-emptive narrations of systems that could enter into a mess. The amount of change furnished by key metrics delegate the amount of distance from the center of mass organizational leaders must dissect. The organizational tools award agents by addressing change before chaos.

Compliance to Innovation Description and Analysis

Organizations must follow the postulated mission, values, and vision (Senge et al., 2010). When organizations do not commit to the mission statement that represents beliefs, environmental views, and long-term vision stakeholders will not value the organizations products and services (Senge et al., 2010). In addition, when some of the organizational strategies do not fully implement organizations remain in the planning phases of strategic plans (Senge et al., 2010). The failure is due to leaders failing to measure strategic plan costs, time for implementation, and plan scope (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations first attempt to identify value in a strategic plan until the touchy phase for non-compliance results in unforeseen added costs (Senge et al., 2010). When organizations attempt to infuse proactive measurements to compliance measurements, the organization realizes stable growth and commitment from stakeholders (Senge et al., 2010). The integrated strategy when sustainability is obvious from measuring metrics and applying at all levels of organizational leadership (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs and gains clearly engage this level (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, leaders can sustain the purpose mission stage by staying positive and proactive about feedback (Senge et al., 2010). Additional companies can join the ultimate stage by showing the organization is profitable, meets compliances, and embarks into environmental friendliness (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, a thriving organization can reach the last stage by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).

Strategic opportunities are available when organizations expand views about waste and resources (Senge et al., 2010). Waste introduces to serve as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al., 2010). Natural nutrients from the environment are biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et al., 2010). Some left-over from natural resources reform to other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge et al., 2010). The life cycle assessment (LCA) process depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy (Senge et al., 2010). Reducing waste by optimizing resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of inputs to equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010). Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by renaissance confront a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable environment (Senge et al., 2010).

JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak areas. The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the environmental drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources enabling JCPenney to focus on reactive and proactive strategic agents Senge et al., 2010). The first improvement is into revamping the external forces of the motivation infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as consistent extent to improvements. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers, value creation, diversity workforce, and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices. JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The process of keeping eyes open and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for business. The reality is in observing what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations, leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the organization. Lastly, JCPenney can reach the last stage of strategic implementation by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).

Implications of Analysis

JCPenney must follow the postulated mission, values, and vision (Senge et al., 2010). By JCPenney committing to the mission statement that represents beliefs, environmental views, and long-term vision stakeholders will not value the organizations products and services (Senge et al., 2010). In addition, when JCPenney strategies do not fully implement the planning phases of the strategic plan will remain (Senge et al., 2010). The failure is due to leaders failing to measure strategic plan costs, time for implementation, and plan scope (Senge et al., 2010). Organizations first attempt to identify value in a strategic plan until the touchy phase for non-compliance results in unforeseen added costs (Senge et al., 2010). When organizations attempt to infuse proactive measurements to compliance measurements, the organization realizes stable growth and commitment from stakeholders (Senge et al., 2010). The integrated strategy when sustainability is obvious from measuring metrics and applying at all levels of organizational leadership (Senge et al., 2010). The added costs and gains clearly engage this level (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, the new CEO can sustain the purpose mission stage by staying positive and proactive about feedback (Senge et al., 2010). Additional companies can join the ultimate stage by showing the organization is profitable, meets compliances, and embarks into environmental friendliness (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, JCPenney can thrive by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).

Strategic opportunities are available when organizations expand views about waste and resources (Senge et al., 2010). Waste introduces to serve as a resource if reprocessed (Senge et al., 2010). Natural nutrients from the environment are biodegradable and used as a catalyst for resources (Senge et al., 2010). Some left-over from natural resources reform to other types of resources called technical nutrients (Senge et al., 2010). The life cycle assessment (LCA) process depicts the sustainability of life through a sustainable economy (Senge et al., 2010). Reducing waste by optimizing resources, a continuous cycle of life is a sustainable system of inputs to equal outputs (Senge et al., 2010). Leaders that develop organizations by expending waste by renaissance confront a result that profits organizations, which creates a sustainable environment (Senge et al., 2010).

JCPenney has reserved capital to strengthen weak areas. The approximate four million in surplus capital serves the campaign to progress ("Balance sheet," 2013). Moreover, JCPenney can identify the environmental drivers to eliminate waste by exploiting available resources enabling JCPenney to focus on reactive and proactive strategic agents Senge et al., 2010). The first improvement is into revamping the external forces of the motivation infrastructure. A strength JCPenney has in place is the brand that serves as consistent extent to improvements. JCPenney has value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers, value creation, diversity workforce, and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the outbound logistics distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems. Consideration to value chain ideas specifically vertical support and horizontal primary activities need improvement, and a required different strategy revision. Revamping Marketing and Sales will improve JCPenney’s goals. The missed opportunity for JCPenney enterprise lies heavily within the horizontal primary activities. Moreover, JCPenney Marketing and Sales strategy are no longer valid. Consequently, JCPenney fails to examine the value chain process, and JCPenney is introducing improper value chain diagnosis. Buying practices have changed for most consumers in pursuing value and reduced prices. JCPenney introduces all the challenges required to perform a sustainable solutions study from the weaknesses revealed. Expectations and affiliations with social identities may not match the values of an organization (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The variations in economic and non-economic behavior to social identities represent a possible weakness (Crane & Ruebottom, 2011). The weakness is in not being able to quantify or qualify both scenarios. JCPenney must offer interest in evaluating Economic Value Added to derive details to weakness (Schulz & Hofer, 1999). The process of keeping eyes open and observing the threats and opportunities to organizations is important. Organizations cannot operate simply from the trust external stakeholders may have in knowing that organizations are open for business. The reality is in observing what issues can affect the life of an organization. Realizing the threats to organizations, leaders must engage into problem solving to better the sustainability of the organization. Lastly, JCPenney can reach the last stage of strategic implementation by staying preemptively to environmental opportunities, behaviors, improving brand image, influencing stakeholders, and observing changing events (Senge et al., 2010).

Sustainable Value Framework Analysis

Leaders wanting to survive technological and sociological advances are drifting from social acceptance (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, leaders experience a growing gap between social concerns and profit maximization (Senge et al., 2010). The elements of shareholder value describe a method for accounting and deriving lost value in an organization (Senge et al., 2010). Broken apart by the x-axis and y-axis, the elements of shareholder value represent innovation for the first quadrant, growth for the second quadrant, risk reduction for the third quadrant, and reputation for the fourth quadrant (Senge et al., 2010). The vertical axis represents time, and the x-axis represents the comparison between external and internal threats (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, shareholder represents the balance between all quadrants (Senge et al., 2010).

Moreover, organizational value creation builds around two dimensions i.e. time and space (Senge et al., 2010). An organizations strategic decision logically balances all four quadrants of the elements of shareholder value (Senge et al., 2010). The innovation quadrant includes drivers of disruption, clean tech, and footprint (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, the growth quadrant represents climate change, resource depletion, and poverty (Senge et al., 2010). Furthermore, the reputation quadrant consists of civil society, transportation, and connectivity (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the risk reduction quadrant entails factors of pollution, material consumption, and waste (Senge et al., 2010). All the quadrant explanations involve drivers and payoffs (Senge et al., 2010). The payoffs for quadrant one are innovation and repositioning (Senge et al., 2010). Similarly, quadrant two has payoffs of sustainable growth and trajectory (Senge et al., 2010). Quadrant three represents payoffs of reputation and legitimacy (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, the fourth quadrant involves cost and risk reduction (Senge et al., 2010).

Industrialization has strong points and introduces problems in waste creation (Senge et al., 2010). In addition, civil society stakeholders experience a downfall of ethical concerns (Senge et al., 2010). Technology introduces redundant actions led by groups of labor rendered as obsolete (Senge et al., 2010). The game change is causing stressors to organizations (Senge et al., 2010). Social problems include offering a sustainable driver including food, shelter, sanitation, and medical assistance (Senge et al., 2010). DuPont is a good example of a company with concerns in maximizing the value of profit and social stability (Senge et al., 2010). The formula environmental stability is social concern driver to equal cost plus risk plus economic foot print reduction (Senge et al., 2010). Risk reduction includes finding ways in reducing risks and costs (Senge et al., 2010). Consequently, DuPont reduced risks and costs by improving reduction in waste and emissions (Senge et al., 2010). Partnerships with non-government entities can yield improvements in reputation and legitimacy (Senge et al., 2010). Planning can expand innovation and repositioning (Senge et al., 2010). A company’s research and development strategy can advance innovation and repositioning (Senge et al., 2010). Moreover, innovation and repositioning strategies can only work if all stakeholders anticipate value creation (Senge et al., 2010). Growth and path trajectory are the quadrant where companies need to consider who can improve the quality of people’s lives (Senge et al., 2010). Value creation and sustainability are essential to embrace sustainable growth (Senge et al., 2010). Similarly, sustainable growth strategy needs an introduction at a company’s mission statement for mission values to align with value creation (Senge et al., 2010). Lastly, sustainable growth equals shareholder value plus society’s value (Senge et al., 2010).

Detailed Analysis of All Four Quadrants

The current risk reduction strategy to minimize waste and reduction is not providing effect returns of shareholder value. The strategy is sustaining current leaderships misuse of resources by incorporating false value of capital assets. The payoff is in the short run, however, is not sustainable in the long-run. The correct process is to implement internal controls that represent relevancy to capital assets.

JCPenney’s out view of potential customers does not match the return on investment. The current strategy does not result to benefit in the short-run or the long-run. The ideal corrective strategic intent is to perform an analysis on the threat of competition and realize the available demographical market. The payoff is economic sustainability. The strategy requires a continuous scanning of the environment for economic and cultural changes.

The current technology utilized by JCPenney is old. Current employees learned the technical weaknesses to exploit the results. Consequently, management does not have accurate information of date transformation from sale activities and supply chain processes. The payoff is not to shareholders, but to employees undermining the organization. The change needed is in adapting to higher levels of technological advancements that will sustain JCPenney to new economic levels. The change will forego redundant processes, enable internal controls, and provide accurate feedback from organizational processes.

In the oceans, when human activity is close to the seas to migrate in a specific geographic area, humans tend to pollute the sea life’s natural resources. The ocean is healthier when human interaction is at a minimum and sea life finds nourishment that arrive from the ocean currents. The undisturbed currents carry all the vitamins and minerals to sustain sea life at different depths. Only when humans plunder current oceans suffer.

Natural resources are best when undisturbed by the accumulation of human traffic. Moreover, natural resources when unmolested offer more nutrition to sustain life. The answer is in providing and finding interest in education for every person in the planet to know how to tap into the natural resources that will assist in sustaining long-term life. Efficiency serves best when natural resources transport at minimum distances or no transportation at all. Consequently, natural resources are more economical within local communities.

The optimum strategy for growth is in providing material world wide and observing environmental challenges. The current model exploits overseas workers, does not offer employment to local communities in the United States, and does not offer value to customers overseas. The model is not sustainable due to waste in transportation, exploitation of resources, and lack of vision of the environment. The table below depicts cost and opportunities from the sustainable Value Framework.

Sustainable Value Framework of Activities in Table Form

Table 3

Sustainable Value Framework

	Changes for Tomorrow	Practiced Today
External	Strategy: Improved pricing model and product differentiation Payoff: economic sustainability	Strategy: Return On Investment Payoff: None so far
Internal	Strategy: Improved internal controls and technology Payoff: shareholder value, capital retention	Strategy: Return On Investment Payoff: None so far

Note. The table represents an analysis of the sustainable value framework to JCPenney.

Argument in Support of Conclusions

JCPenney has a value chain weaknesses due to a failed organizational strategy. The change is in foot traffic from customers and dissatisfaction with existing synergies. In addition, the distribution of products now heavily relied on an outside vendor provides less customer service. The existing CEO introduces change by restructuring department processes and focuses in hiring people not qualified in correcting the problems.

JCPenney has in place a product strategy that introduces Martha Stewart’s brand (Murray, 2013). Moreover, Martha Stewart is a well-known criminal and communities do not embrace criminals in the United States. According to JCPenney, it is in alignment with the legal principles of communities “A deep commitment to legal compliance and ethical business practices is firmly embedded in JCPenney’s history and company culture …” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 146). The corporate social responsibility is not evident in the activities JCPenney makes. Moreover, JCPenney’s mission statement offers information on being a servant “JCPenney is committed to serving our communities, our Associates, our Customers and the environment. What matters to you matters to JCPenney." (Anitsal et al., 2012, p. 136). A conclusion drawn from the two statements depict an organization wanting to be a servant and committed to a lawful alignment with communities; however, the concern for communities is ethics. The ethical foundation of JCPenney is missing a link to the desires to stakeholders (Harvard Business School Press, 2005).

Implications of Analysis

Conclusion

JCPenney has to respond with strategic intent strategy to survive sustained years of failed decisions, low return on investment, and depreciation of assets. The new strategic intent plan needs to stabilize cash flows and stakeholder expectations. Moreover, JCPenney has to slow the progression of employee turnover, maintain tacit knowledge, and fear of executive job loss by strengthening industry placement. In addition, JCPenney should connect the mission statement to the daily activities for providing distinction and customer definition. Moreover, JCPenney needs to provide a feedback system that is in alignment with stakeholder needs. Long-term sustainability calls for alignment to internal controls, connectivity to communities, technology exploitation, and environmental sustainability. JCPenney’s out view of potential customers requires continuous scanning of the environment for economic and cultural changes. Furthermore, JCPenney’s technology requires renewing of the infrastructure. The change will forego redundant processes, enable internal controls, and provide accurate feedback from organizational processes. The optimum strategy for JCPenney will sustain community alignment, diversity, low-cost products and services, and long-term environmental sustainability.

References

Alrawashdeh, R. (2013). The competitiveness of Jordan phosphate mines company (JPMC) using porter five forces analysis. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 5(1), 191-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v5n1p191

Anitsal, I., & Anitsal, M. M. (2011). Emergence of entrepreneurial retail forms. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 17, 1-17. Retrieved from http://www.alliedacademies.org/Public/Journals/JournalDetails.aspx?jid=6

Anitsal, M. M., Anitsal, I., & Girard, T. (2012). The core of retail mission statements: Top 100 u.s. retailers. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 131-143. Retrieved from http://www.alliedacademies.org/Public/Journals/JournalDetails.aspx?jid=13

Anonymous (2012). On being human in a transhuman future [Peer commentary on the journal article “On being human in a transhuman future” by Anonymous]. The Futurist, 46(6), 64-65. Retrieved from http://www.wfs.org/

Baldoni, J. (2010). What does the organization need me to do. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 33(1), 10-14. Retrieved from http://asq.org/pub/jqp/

Barrientos, S., Mayer, F., Pickles, J., & Posthuma, A. (2011). Decent work in global production networks: Framing the policy debate. International Labour Review, 150(3), 299-317. Retrieved from http://www.ilo.org/public/english/revue/index.htm

Berman, S. J., & Kesterson-Townes, L. (2012). Connecting with the digital customer of the future. Strategy & Leadership, 40(6), 29-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10878571211278868

Bhatnagar, R., & Chee-Chong, T. (2009). Role of logistics in enhancing competitive advantage: A value chain framework for global supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39(3), 202-226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600030910951700

Chang, D. S., & Sun, K. L. (2007). Exploring the correspondence between total quality management and Peter Senge’s disciplines of a learning organization: A Taiwan perspective. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(7), 807-822. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783360701349914

Chittihaworn, C., Islam, A., Keawchana, T., & Yusuf, D. H. (2011). Factors affecting business success of small & medium enterprises (SMEs) in Thailand. Asian Social Science, 7(5), 180-190. Retrieved from www.ccsenet.org/ass

Crane, A., & Ruebottom, T. (2011). Stakeholder theory and social identity: Rethinking stakeholder identification . Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 77-87. doi:10.1007/s10551-011-1191-4