please rewrite in your own words and add scholarly references in apa format

MT1: One concept I learned this week was the knowing-doing gap. Carpenter and Sanders (2008) define the knowing-doing gap as, “The difference between what firms know and what they do.” (p. 238). In order for a firm to achieve maximum efficiency there needs to be an alignment with what employees are doing, why their doing it, and maintaining activities which align with the company strategy. There are three causes provided by Carpenter and Sanders (2008) for when the knowing-doing gap can occur, (1) external and internal obstacles, (2) culture, (3) mismatches. A firm can strive to reduce the knowing-doing gap by providing more open communication channels internally, creating a more inclusive culture, and better aligning decisions and resources with stakeholder expectations. When employees have a mindset and the skillset aligned, a firm becomes more productive and dynamic in a competitive market. All resources are working together to achieve the objective, and confusion is reduced in the process.

MT2: The second concept I learned this week was the balanced scorecard and strategy map, and how both tools can be used to help a firm assess current strategy effectivity. According to Carpenter and Sanders (2008), the balanced scorecard is a tool a firm can use to gauge success and maintain strategic alignment. “It’s a strategic management support system devised to help managers measure vision and strategy against business- and operating unit-level performance along several critical dimensions.” (Carpenter & Sanders, 2008, p. 247). The balance scorecard can also be used to identify whether a firm is meeting its performance goals, and objectives (Carpenter & Sanders, 2008). The balanced scorecard includes four key objectives that a firm can analyze to determine performance. According to Kaplan and Norton, “A critical component of the BSF is a strategy map, with its development recommended as the first stage of any BSF implementation in practice.” (As cited in Humphreys, Gary & Trotman, 2016, p. 1441). When all four perspectives are utilized a firm can use strategy mapping to better understand the big picture within the firm, any areas that need improvement, as well as opportunities to grow, improve processes, and generate stronger returns. The strategy map helps a firm gain insight into the big picture of how all elements of the business are operating. Gaining the big picture allows a firm to make adjustments in strategy in order to be more successful.

MT3: The third concept I learned this week was how to utilize resource allocation to make decisions that are strategic, and in the best interest of the business. It’s important for a firm to incorporate resource allocation strategies in order to make wiser prioritized decisions for the business (Jakovljevic, 2013). Properly carrying out a strategy can be challenging, and requires a balanced mix of resources to be used in order to be successful and effective in the market. “Both the misallocation of resources and the failure to make hard investment choices often result from a firm basing its resource allocation on that of its competitors.” (Carpenter & Sanders, 2008, p. 256). A firm must focus on the current strategy, objective, and goals, and assess how the current resources and capabilities match up. Prioritizing elements in a firm’s strategy helps define what resources are needed to make decisions and be competitive in the market.

Carpenter, M.A. & Sanders, Wm., G. (2008). Strategic management: A dynamic perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Humphreys, K. A., Gary, M. S., & Trotman, K. T. (2016). Dynamic decision making using the balanced scorecard framework. The Accounting Review, 91(5), 1441-1465. DOI: 10.2308/accr-51364

Jakovljevic, M. B. (2013). Resource allocation strategies in southeastern European health policy. The European Journal of Health Economics, 14(2), 153-159. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23357786