Organizational strategic analysis

This is a research paper topic suggestion on Organizational Strategic Analysis on the United States Army. Custom business research papers are Paper Masters specialty. The thesis statement and Organizational Strategic Analysis on the United States Army you see here is just a SAMPLE of a paper we can provide you. Papers are always original and we guarantee each research paper, essay, book report or term paper that is sold by Paper Masters will never be resold and is plagiarism-free.

How to Set Up an Organizational Strategic Analysis

An Organizational Strategic Analysis and Recommendation for Improvement Research Paper on the United States Army identify the following elements:

1. Identify opportunities and threats that exist in the Army's external environment.
2. Identify the Army's
   1. Strengths
   2. Weaknesses
   3. Distinctive competencies
3. Analyze the Army's competitive position within its industry in a research paper (i.e. what are its competitive advantages and why do you think so).
4. List alternative strategies the Army should consider taking.
5. Recommend what you believe should be done and how these strategies will help the Army.

United States Army as an Industry

A critical review of what has been noted about the Army as an organization demonstrates that this organization has a foundation that is deeply rooted in history and tradition. Although tradition and history have served the organization well, the Army has faced notable challenges in recent years. In particular, this author asserts that the Army has had to evolve in order to meet the demands of a changing culture and technological environment. Although Jablonsky insists that the Army has begun the process of evolution he does believe that this process will take a considerable amount of time and effort on the part of both military leaders and policymakers.

In an effort to elucidate the changes that have occurred in the Army in recent months, in order to manage the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq, the Army has witnessed notable changes. "The goal is a more 'modular'-plug-and-play might be a good analogy-Army force structure that can be rapidly assembled into task forces tailored to specific missions". Although these changes have been postulated for more than a decade, it has not been until recently that they have been put in place. The demand for change has been spurred by current combat operations and the need for the organization to effectively manage a global war on terror. Only by creating change in the organization is it possible for the Army to remain viable.

Based on this data it becomes evident that the Army has developed the specific internal mechanisms that it needs to perpetuate positive change in the organization. Because the Army is deeply entrenched in tradition and history these changes have notable implications for the development and evolution of the organization. The Army has come to realize that in order to survive and be effective at its missions, it has to change the way in which it approaches basic operations. This awareness will help improve the organization, making it more efficient and effective.

Despite notable strength of the Army in its ability to change as an organization, the writers at Paper Masters report in previous research papers on the US Army Strategic Analysis that the organization has faced notable recruitment problems in recent years. As reported by these authors by the end of FY2002 the Army had incurred a shortfall of more than 17,500 personnel. The most notable problems with recruiting have been increased competition for enlistees. "Today's youth have abundant opportunities in post-secondary education and the labor market that compete strongly with the military sector". As a result of this situation, the Army needs to make its programs more attractive to youth. Only by capturing the attention of high school graduates will it be possible for the organization to acquire the manpower needed to meet staffing goals.

The current problems with recruitment facing the US Army seem to be indicative of the fact that the organization has not made necessary changes to improve its image and market its programs more effectively. Although the Army has made the realization that change is needed to ensure the success of combat missions, the organization has not extended this awareness to the larger context of operations. As a direct result of this situation, the Army remains at a deficit when it comes to increasing staff levels. If the Army is to survive in this context some consideration of the changes that can be employed in all areas of the organization must be addressed.

In the end, the US Army faces the problem of overcoming many years worth of entropy. Although the organization has remained in tact this reality has not been created as a result of efficiency or purpose. Rather, the Army has remained in tact as a direct result of national security. As the important of the Army in preserving national security increases, more changes in the organization will be needed to create greater efficiency. Clearly, the organization has made strides toward achieving this change. Even though this may be a slow and tedious process, change is clearly needed on all aspects of the organization's operations.