UNIVERSITY OF DERBY

DERBY BUSINESS SCHOOL

Critical Perspectives in Strategic Management & Leadership

(7SG500)

Student I.D. XXXX1234

Date Submitted: 21st January 2021

Coursework 2 Word Count: 3426

1
Executive Summary:

This report proposes 3 strategies to gain competitive advantage for UNESCO. The
first strategy focuses on ceasing all educational activities as included in UNESCO’s
mandate and instead focus on only its science and cultural objectives. The second
strategy proposes a collaboration based strategy where UNESCO becomes a
coordinator/regulator to better lead the efforts of competition into achieving their
common mandate. The third strategy proposes a downsizing and reassessment of
UNESCO’s affairs and its impact while focusing primarily on collaboration. Using
SAF matrix, strategy 3 chosen as the appropriate strategy

2
Table of Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................2
Section 1: Strategic position of UNESCO.....................................................................3
Internal and External Analysis......................................................................................5
SWOT Analysis.............................................................................................................5
VRIO framework...........................................................................................................6
Porter’s five forces model.............................................................................................7
Section 2: Strategy Options for UNESCO....................................................................8
Strategy 1:.....................................................................................................................8
Strategy 2:.....................................................................................................................9
Strategy 3:...................................................................................................................10
Section 3: Chosen strategy and Implementation issues............................................11
Conclusion..................................................................................................................12
References.................................................................................................................13

3
Introduction
The position of a company in its intended market is a major determinant of its
success or failure. The whole purpose of management is to steer the company or
organisation in the right direction to be able to secure a position in the market.
Steering the business in the right direction however requires strategy. This duty is
easier said than done especially since the task requires the careful manipulation of
the organization in terms of very limited resources and competencies. The purpose
of strategy is to achieve the long term goals of the organisation. It provides the
direction and scope of the operations of the organization in a bid to achieve
advantage in its chosen field. (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1994),

Strategic positioning is performing different activities from rivals, or performing similar

activities in different ways (Porter, 2004). It is to identify something that makes the
organization unique in comparison to other organizations that offer similar services or
with similar goals. According to Porter (2004), there are three key principles of
strategic positioning which are first that strategy is the creation of a unique and
valuable position which emerges from few needs, many customers- broad needs,
few customers- or broad needs, many customers. The second that strategy requires
trade-offs in competing and thirdly that strategy involves creating a fit among
activities with fit relating to how the company/organization’s activities interact and
reinforce one another. (Porter, 2004)

This report will address the strategy of UNESCO, its strategic position as well as the
basis and sustainability of its competitive advantage while proffering a strategy
moving forward. It uses SWOT analysis, Porter’s five forces framework and VRIO to
examine the internal and external environment of UNESCO while using SAF as an
assessment tool for the strategies.

Section 1: Strategic position of UNESCO

This section will identify UNESCO’s goals, as well as identify its strategy to meeting
these goals, its focus and placement of programmes towards achieving these goals
and how it continues to remain relevant through differentiation and relevance in light
of other organizations who have similar goals.

In deciding its goals, UNESCO regards its mandate for creation which in turn forms
the foundation without which it cannot act. Its underlining mandate is to ensure peace

4
and equitable sustainable development. These two principles are significantly
important as they are the reason UNESCO was established and as such are
regarded as the long term goals and objectives of the organization.

UNESCO’s mode of operations divide its goals into medium and short term goals.
The idea behind this categorization is to ensure that in every given time, there is a
goal set out for 6 years (medium term goals) and two years (short term goals)
(Strategic Documents, n.d.). The importance of setting such goals stems from its
benefit of giving strategic focus on the activities of the organization (Barber and
Taylor, 1990),

UNESCO focuses its activities based on these strategic goals which in turn
translates to how it acts and plans its strategy to gain strategic positioning (Strategic
Documents, n.d.).

Figure 1 Strategic position of UNESCO (Strategic Documents, n.d.)

5
As seen from figure 1 above, the medium term strategy for UNESCO is based on two
global priorities which are Africa and Gender equality. Its strategic objectives
includes “supporting member states to develop education systems to foster high-
quality and inclusive lifelong learning for all”, “empowering learners to be creative
and responsible global citizens”, “advancing education for all and shaping the future
international education agenda”. “Strengthening science, technology and innovative
systems and policies- nationally, regionally and globally” and so other strategic
goals.

With the mandate of UNESCO being so wide and its ambit expansive, it becomes
necessary to streamline its efforts especially in line of its strategic objectives and
goals. Its foundational principles of securing peace and ensuing development
through education and sciences, makes for a robust mandate which can lead to
anywhere depending on its interpretation. It becomes necessary to identify the focus
of the organization especially as it means that the organization will be able to
manage limited resources and prevent spreading itself thin.

Its current mandate runs from year 2014 – 2021 and has resulted in Africa and
gender equality being its focal point in achieving its goals,

Internal and External Analysis

To assess the strategic position of UNESCO, an internal and external analysis will be
conducted. To fully examine the ambit of its activities, a SWOT analysis is
conducted. A VRIO framework is used to examine the internal environment and
competencies and a Porter’s five forces analysis is used to examine its external
environment.

SWOT Analysis
A SWOT analysis is chosen based on the duality of the analysis which allows for
internal and external evaluation of the organization’s environment. The analysis will
help define the source of its competitive advantage as well as the general
environment and the position of its competition (Sammut-Bonnici and Galea, 2015).

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
 Backing of the United Nations  Too broad a mandate
 Consensus of every member  Insufficient resources to handle
states all the situations at once

6
  History and track record of  Slow response to situations due
impactful programmes to bureaucracy
 Wide mandate to engage
emergency situations
 Strong relationship with NGOs
and IGOs
 Access to cultural heritage sites

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
 Strengthen interagency  Redundancies due to duplication
coordination in times of of efforts and programmes
emergency  Limited time frame to achieve
 Coordinate national responses to goals
mandates  Political instability worldwide
 Influence private sector could affect activities
engagement in organization
mandate
Figure 2 SWOT ANALYSIS FOR UNESCO

The SWOT analysis taken identifies that indeed UNESCO has as its strength the
backing of the United Nations which by extension means that it is an expression of
the agreement of the all the member states and as such its actions are considered
legitimate and valid. This means that its actions cannot be undermined because it is
based on a general consensus and as such by default an acceptance of its mandate.
Another of its strength is in its history and track record which gives it a strong
reception in the international community and allow it foster cooperation with non-
governmental and inter-governmental organizations. With its international recognition
and backing of the United Nations, it gives it leverage to undergo projects on world
heritage and cultural sites which would have been restricted.

UNESCO’s weakness is primarily in the ambit of its mandate and its decision making
process. Its mandate is too broad and thus there are not enough resources to carry
out its programmes (although in comparison with non-governmental organizations, it
is in a better position). It has to manage resources and as such cannot attend to
various situations and problems (Evans, 1963). There is also the resultant
bureaucracy that is as a result of its mammoth size. Its decision making process is

7
thus wrought with red-tapism which in turn affects its response time in comparison
with NGOs (Nielsen, 2011).

There are opportunities for UNESCO such as inter-organizational coordination as

well as private sector engagement to push its goals. However, there are threats
based on duplication of programmes (Lieberman, 2020). This has led to
redundancies which affects the efficiency of UNESCO. There is also the threat of
political instability and how it impacts the affairs of the organization. An example is
the row with the United States of America in 2011 which led to it losing about 20% of
its funding (Edwards, 2019).

VRIO framework
The VRIO framework is a tool for identifying the resources and capabilities that are
important for it to gain competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). The framework
identifies competence in terms of value, rarity, imitability and organization (Barney,
1991).

Value: UNESCO holds a unique position due to its status and backing of the UN and
by extension the member states. Its position allows it to offer swift and unified
responses to issues as well as a significant weight behind its programmes that other
agencies and non-profit can offer.

Rarity: UNESCO is rare as it is the sole agency with its mandate under the UN. Its
position is one of a kind and cannot be surmounted by any other agency or
framework

Imitability: UNESCO’s activities are imitable as other frameworks and non-profit can
carry out similar programs with similar impacts

Organization: UNESCO has an organized internal structure as inferable from its

establishment and mode of operations.

Porter’s five forces model

Using the five forces model (Porter, 1979), UNESCO’s external environment is
examined below

1. Competition in the industry- As evident in the SWOT analysis done above,

UNESCO is in a dire situation especially considering that reports have shown that
there are concerns as to its efficiency and relevance especially in carrying out its

8
mandate especially in light of financial constraints (Edwards, 2019). UNESCO’s
mandate is coming under threat with other agencies being established to carry out
UNESCO’s functions. This is seen as an indication of its weakening influence
internationally. Organisations and forums such as the Global Partnership for
Education and SDG Global Education Forum. These organizations pose a significant
threat to UNESCO especially with donor funding which is a major source of revenue
for the organisation. The position of UNESCO is thus threatened considering its
financial problems.

2. Potential of new entrants into the industry: Barrier of entry into the industry is very
low as there are no capital requirements or expenditure necessary.

3. Power of suppliers and Power of customers: With non-profit organizations, it is

pertinent to adjust the porter’s five forces model due to the absence of customers
and suppliers instead we will examine who are the large funders and their impact as
they are considered as both suppliers and customers(Applying Porter’s Five Forces
Model to the NGO Sector, 2011). In the instant case, the large funders are basically
the United States as well as major European countries like the United Kingdom,
Netherlands. Sweden etc. These funders possess significant power on UNESCO as
they

5. Threat of substitute products

For UNESCO’s industry, the threat of substitute will be focus on other areas that
might require funding such as nutrition, climate change, conflict situations etc. This is
inferable as substitute products in this instance are other mandates who are
competing for the funding (Applying Porter’s Five Forces Model to the NGO Sector,
2011).

Section 2: Strategy Options for UNESCO

From the evaluation of the strategic position of UNESCO, it becomes clear that there
is the need to re-evaluate the strategic position of UNESCO in order to ensure that it
keeps competitive advantage. In order to formulate the strategy options for
UNESCO, there are two options. These options are split in between differentiation
and cost leadership (Swamidass, 2000).

9
To take differentiation as a strategy would require UNESCO focusing on switching its
mandate and programmes in a manner where its impact will be sufficiently
differentiated from other agencies with similar mandates. This will require finding a
focus which will place it in prime position and thus give it competitive advantage.

To take cost leadership as an option will be to downsize its costs of operations to be

able to use minimum resources to carry out maximum efficiency, Instead it will focus
on reducing its activities and its costs while focusing more on impacts.

The strategy options proposed in this instance will take in to cognisance these two
principles as templates for strategic suggestions.

Strategy 1:
The first strategy proposed is based on the principle of differentiation. It is proposed
that UNESCO focuses on its cultural and scientific aspect of its mandate while
leaving education for other agencies such as UNICEF, Global Partnership for
Education and SDG Global Education Forum. This strategy will ensure that it can
focus its already reducing resources on its promotion of science and culture.

This strategy is based primarily on the notion that the duplication of efforts especially
with numerous agencies taking up the mandate simultaneously makes it difficult to
track progress and ensure responsibility. With this aspect downsized, it will help
UNESCO secure its position in light of the forever existing threat of competition and
also solve its weaknesses. This decision primarily solves the problems as highlighted
in the SWOT analysis such as the wide ambit of its mandate as well as financial
constraints and redundancies due to multiplication of programs.

A focus on the scientific and cultural mandate will allow for more resources to be
diverted into the protection of culture and heritage sites as well as scientific research.
This strategy leverages the efforts of the other agencies as well as benefits both
UNESCO and its competition as the little resources are faced with less strain while
allowing for concentration of efforts. Using Porter’s strategic matrix, this strategy is
based on the Porter’s differentiation focus (Porter, 2004). It thus differentiates itself
by focusing on alternative segments narrowing its focus and thus establishing
competitive advantage.

To achieve these strategy, a resolution must be proposed to the UN general

assembly to augment the mandate of the organization. This would require a

10
consensus on the floor of the General assembly (Schwebel, 1979). This strategy
being a long term strategy is intended to solve its long term strategic issues and
better secure it from financial problems due to the power of large funders.

Strategy 2:
The second strategy proposed focuses on collaboration with non-governmental
agencies. This strategy proposal focuses on collaboration instead of competition.
This strategy leverages UNESCO’s strength as a forerunner in the education drive. It
prioritizes collaboration with these agencies and forums as a means of retaining its
leadership role while taking off some of its burden and strain on its finances.

With an already strong relationship with NGOs and IGOs as well as its consensus
mandate which gives it international recognition and backing it can become a
coordinator in the sector reducing its spending on funding while leveraging on
coordination of efforts.

This strategy will also allow for more private sector engagement which has been
touted as a possible solution to the educational problems faced internationally
(Increasing Business Engagement in Education: A Win-Win Investment, 2020).

To achieve this, UNESCO will have to remodel its operations towards a strict
collaboration policy where all of its programs are in collaboration with another agency
or private non-profit. This policy will be effected through the secretariat and thus will
influence future dealing with other non-profit. This tactic will in the long run allow
UNESCO be instead coordinating and leveraging on the human resources and
capital of its partners while offering access and political leverage with various state
actors.

Strategy 3:
The third strategy proposes combination of differentiation and downsizing. This
strategy proposes a restructuring of UNESCO programmes to identify redundancies
and overlaying objectives while at the same time streamlining its efforts in line with
its resources and medium term goals. This proposal will require reduction of the
activities especially in collaboration with other organizations and bodies who have
similar mandates so as to instead consolidate efforts. Using Porter’s strategic matrix,
this strategy is based on the Porter’s cost focus (Porter, 2004). This strategy focuses
on narrowing its mandate while also reducing costs within its narrow focus. This the

11
proposed reduction will in turn reduce costs while at the same time narrowing the
mandate and focus of UNESCO.

This will require an assessment of all existing programmes and their impact. It will
require identification of redundant programmes as well as programmes with
overlaying objectives. It is proposed that this assessment should be taken on not
only the existing UNESCO programmes but also programmes of its collaborations
with NGOs and IGOs.

The second aspect of this strategy will require reinventing its roles, significantly
downsizing its education mandate while collaborating with competition to achieve its
sustainable goals.

This strategy will significantly reduce its costs of operations, solve its problems of
finances, remove its competition and leverage its strength. It will also remove the
threat of political instability affecting its finances significantly preventing a repetition
of the 2011 saga with the United States of America.

Section 3: Chosen strategy and Implementation issues.

From the above strategies, there are three options. To assess the strategic options,
they will be assessed with regards to their suitability, acceptability and feasibility
using the SAF model (Johnson, Scholes and Whittington, 2006).

SAF matrix Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Suitability 4 5 5
Feasibility 2 4 5
Acceptability 1 4 5
Total 7 13` 15

Using the SWOT analysis has a platform, the SAF matrix is completed by answering
the following questions;

Suitability: This seeks to check whether the plan is suitable for reaching the strategic
goals of the organization. This is assessed based on whether the plan takes
advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of the organisation. It is thus that in
setting this criteria, each strategy will be scored on the basis of the criteria met.

On a scale of 5, the first strategy is rated 4 out of a possible 5 as it tackles the

weaknesses of insufficient finances and the broad mandate but it fails to take into
cognisance the backing of the UN since it will be a drastic decision to totally forgo its

12
education mandate. The second strategy and the third strategy solves the same
issues of finances and a broad mandate without the decision to exclude education
totally.

Feasibility: This looks at the possibility of execution. And examining the three
strategy, strategy one is not feasible especially as it will be extremely difficult to
decide to remove education from its mandate as it will require a consensus of its
general conference as well as the general assembly of the United Nations. It thus
gets a 2 out of a possible 5. Strategy 2 gets a 4 as it will be difficult to assume the
suggested coordinator role as it will require logistical control of the activities of these
organizations and might be politically difficult due to majority of these organizations
being established with the intention to work outside UNESCO. Strategy 3 on the
other hand is possible to execute as it will require internal assessment of UNESCO’s
programmes and to encourage collaboration with other organizations.

Acceptability: This criteria assesses the strategy in line with the acceptance of
stakeholders and how they accept the strategies. As regards strategy 1 as stated
earlier it is less likely to be accepted by the member states and thus get a 1 out of a
possible 5. Strategy 2 gets a 4 out a possible 5 because it depends on the
acceptance of these organizations to allow UNESCO take up the prescribed role and
thus may be difficult to ensure acceptance. Strategy 3 is rated 5 as this is in line with
stakeholder suggestions as to the way forward for UNESCO and since it is based
heavily on internal assessment, it is generally acceptable to all stakeholders
(Edwards, 2019).

As seen from the analysis done, there are two options open to UNESCO. Strategy 2
and Strategy 3. Strategy 2 offers a long term solution to UNESCO’s problems by
proposing an evolution towards regulation and coordination as opposed to its current
mode of operation. Strategy 3 on the other hand proposes as short term focus on
downsizing its programs, reassessing them for redundancies and significant cost
cutting. Strategy 3 proposes a finance based strategy which will prioritize partners
funding and focus on expenditure in emergencies.

It is suggested that the option for UNESCO is strategy 3. The achievement of

strategy 2 is hindered by various situations such as reception by other agencies as
well as political pull to effect such as regime. There is also the inference that

13
agencies outside UNESCO’s umbrella were established to be alternatives and might
not want to be policed by UNESCO. This strategy is based on a restructuring of
UNESCO’s affairs, downsizing on its programs and focusing on collaboration while
directing its limited resources to specific and problems with immediate impact. This
will be done in collaboration with member states, non-governmental organizations
and the private sector.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the position of UNESCO has been questioned especially as to its role
in achieving its set out goals and its position in the fulfilment of the sustainable goal
of education for all. After an evaluation of the strategic position of UNESCO, it is
suggested that there should be restructuring and downsizing of its activities with a
focus on collaboration. Three strategic options were available but using a SAF
matrix, this strategy was chosen and thus is believed to be the appropriate strategy
moving forward.

References
Barber, W. and Taylor, J., 1990. The Importance of Goals, Objectives, and Values in
the Fisheries Management Process and Organization: A Review. North
American Journal of Fisheries Management , 10(4), pp.365-373.
Barney, J., 1991. Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of
Management, 17(1), pp.99-120.
Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S., 1994. Beyond Strategy To Purpose. [online] Available
at: <https://hbr.org/1994/11/beyond-strategy-to-purpose> [Accessed 20 January
2021].
Cafferky, M., 2005. The Porter Five-forces Industry Analysis Framework For
Religious Nonprofits: A conceptual analysis. In: 25th Annual CBFA Conference.
Point Loma, CA,: Southern Adventist University KnowledgeExchange.
Edwards, S., 2019. Has UNESCO Lost Its Way?. [online] Devex. Available at:
<https://www.devex.com/news/has-unesco-lost-its-way-95469> [Accessed 21
January 2021].
Evans, L., 1963. Some Management Problems of UNESCO. International
Organization, 17(1), pp.76-90.
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R., 2006. Exploring Corporate Strategy.
Harlow, England: FT/Prentice Hall.
Lee, M. and Friedrich, T., 2008. The History of UNESCO’s Lifelong Learning Policy
Discourses: A Enduring Social Democratic Liberalist Project of Global
Educational Development. In: Adult Education Research Conference. [online]
Kansas: Adult Education Research Conference. Available at:
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316716845_The_History_of_UNESC

14
 O's_Lifelong_Learning_Policy_Discourses_A_Enduring_Social_Democratic_Lib
eralist_Project_of_Global_Educational_Development> [Accessed 20 January
2021].
Lieberman, A., 2020. Devexplains: What's Going On With UN Reform?. [online]
Devex. Available at: <https://www.devex.com/news/devexplains-what-s-going-
on-with-un-reform-96333> [Accessed 21 January 2021].
Mext.go.jp. 2021. MEXT : History Of UNESCO. [online] Available at:
<https://www.mext.go.jp/en/unesco/title03/detail03/1373237.htm#:~:text=The
%20forerunner%20of%20UNESCO%20is,League%20of%20Nations%20in
%201922.&text=Inazo%20Nitobe%2C%20Japanese%20scholar%20and,a
%20founding%20director%20of%20ICIC.> [Accessed 20 January 2021].
Nielsen, B., 2011. UNESCO and the ‘right’ kind of culture: Bureaucratic production
and articulation. Critique of Anthropology, 31(4), pp.273-292.
PBS NewsHour. 2019. U.S. And Israel Officially Withdraw From UNESCO. [online]
Available at: <https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-and-israel-officially-
withdraw-from-unesco> [Accessed 24 January 2021].
Porter, M., 1979. How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy. Harvard Business
Review, 57(2), pp.137-145.
Porter, M., 2004. Competitive Advantage. New York: Free, pp.11-15.
Sammut-Bonnici, T. and Galea, D., 2015. SWOT Analysis. [online] Available at:
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272353031_SWOT_Analysis#:~:text=
A%20SWOT%20analysis%20evaluates%20the,threats%20in%20an
%20organization's%20environment.&text=The%20internal%20analysis%20is
%20critical,in%20order%20to%20remain%20competitive.> [Accessed 21
January 2021].
Schwebel, S., 1979. The Effect of Resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly on
Customary International Law. Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting, 73,
pp.301-309.
Swamidass, P. ed., 2000. Cost leadership strategy. In: Encyclopedia of Production
and Manufacturing Management. [online] Boston, MA: Springer US, pp.132-133.
Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-0612-8_183> [Accessed 21
January 2021].
Thorin's Think Space. 2021. Applying Porter’S Five Forces Model To The NGO
Sector. [online] Available at:
<https://thorinsthinkspace.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/applying-porters-five-
forces-model-to-the-ngo-sector/> [Accessed 24 January 2021].
UNESCO. 2020. Increasing Business Engagement In Education: A Win-Win
Investment. [online] Available at: <https://en.unesco.org/news/increasing-
business-engagement-education-win-win-investment> [Accessed 21 January
2021].
UNESCO. n.d. Strategic Documents. [online] Available at:
<https://en.unesco.org/strategic-planning/strategic-documents> [Accessed 21
January 2021].

15
Wagner, D., 2013. Literacy and UNESCO: Conceptual and Historical
Perspectives. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education ,.

16