Strategic Alliances and Partnership, Case Study Example

This case involves the Shell Corporation and their successful attempt to sue Greenpeace over their activist challenge of Shell’s decision to sink an obsolete oil platform.  The goal of Shell, in this case, was to prevent the organization from pursuing further activist methods against their decisions.  They did this despite full media coverage, ultimately resulting in public damages to the company’s reputation.  The goal of Greenpeace was to effectively bring attention to the incident.  The complexity of this problem resolves around the issue of the company’s image in light of how it is viewed by the public.  The major stakeholders in this incident are both the Shell Company, who have monetary stakes, and the public, which would have environmental concerns.  Furthermore, the organization Greenpeace has stakes in this incident as they most likely put resources into countering the operations that Shell was taking part in.

The situation essentially occurred due to a lack of foresight in regards to Shell’s management of the problem.  These types of protests were actually somewhat common and the issue could have most likely been resolved without damaging the reputation of the company.  In regards to Greenpeace, they made effective judgements in how they would implement their plan.  In bringing the media with them they ensured that there would be a public response to the situation and that it would not be ignored.  Furthermore, in timing the incident in regards to the talks that were taking place the organization was able to promote the most positive effects for the actions that they took.  In doing so, they effectively promoted an underlying strength that their organization had.

The idea of strategic alliances and partnerships was used to great effect in this case.  By utilizing the media, who had a mutual stake in coverage of the incident, the protesters were able to effectively establish a more productive response to the incident.  In developing strategic partnerships, the group was able to overcome the discrepancy in resources between them and Shell in order to draw attention to the problem.  This presents insight into the case in that their capabilities were maximized effectively through the implementation of this strategy.  In understanding the realities of competition the need for these types of partnerships becomes evident.  Through the establishment of strategic partnership they were, therefore, able to overcome this larger organizational challenge.

One of the most important aspects of this decision making process was the ability of the group to establish an effective means of prioritizing their own needs and the needs of those that could potentially help them to fulfill their goals.  In developing a management structure that has allowed them to implement effective measures when the opportunity arises, they were able to more effectively establish their priorities in order to achieve their goals.  In this way, their most effective policy was the implementation of this partnership as well as promoting the demonstration during a specific point in time.  In implementing this strategy they expressed an understanding of the underlying vulnerabilities of Shell.  That is, the public perception of them and how this effects their ability to continue operations.  By attacking this vital point, Greenpeace was able to effectively maximize the partnership that they had established with the media in order to build upon the impact that their demonstration would have on Shell’s image.

References

Stout, D. (2005).Strategic Alliances and Partnership: A way to gain access to new markets and opportunities. EntrepreNews.

Watkins, M. (2003). Predictable Surprises: The Disasters You Should Have Seen Coming. Organizational Culture. Harvard Business Review.