NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Strategy and Tactics The concepts of tactics and strategy are very important. In order to understand the difference and relations between tactics and strategy, we need to examine these concepts more thoroughly. Tactics is generally defined as a number of near term actions used to fulfill the task and to accomplish specific goals. Strategy is often related to the art of planning. Strategy is usually defined as a long-term action plan for achieving a goal. The workable strategy should be carefully planned and decisively executed (Baldwin 9).
Sometimes a bad plan brilliantly realized yields better results than a perfect plan spoilt by bad leaders. However, planning for victory is the cornerstone of victory; plans come first before execution (Baldwin 9). In such a way, tactics is the complementary part of strategy and, at the same time, its logical continuation. The word strategy originates from military science (Greek stratego's - the art of military leader). In other words, strategy is the concept of achieving the goal.
Many tasks of military science aimed to find the proper and correct ways to gain a victory have much in common with political activity of parties, organizations and political leaders. The concept of strategy as a resumptive model of actions necessary to achieve the planned goal became the issue of the day for many political leaders. Strategy of political organization is the totality of its main goals and main methods of their accomplishment. Effective strategy plays an important role in politics. The political party has many plans, but all these plans cost nothing without the result. The strategy is the way of realization of all these plans.
So, what are the basics of political strategy? The scholars often discuss the concepts related to strategy in a complicated manner. 'Everything in strategy is very simple, but that does not mean that everything is very easy (Gray 16). Yet, the strategy is not so difficult to understand. It is nothing more than the way to reach the goal. In case the politician chooses right strategy, it becomes the only correct way to achieve a goal. Sometimes elaboration and accomplishment of strategy is combined with manipulation.
Some scholars consider that strategy can be examined as a certain plan that forces a person to accomplish actions contradicting to his will and / or convictions. They consider that sometimes the ultimate political goal is so unfailing that it needs no strategy at all. Such approach underestimates the structure of modern society with different groups and different interests. Each social group has an integral right to protect and to stand up for their interests, convictions, beliefs and standpoints. Sometimes the political leader or certain social group needs to exert pressure on society in order to achieve the ultimate goal. Such event is quite normal for democratic society.
For example, strikes are generally recognized as the form of pressure. At the same time, they are not related to manipulation. In such a way, elaboration and accomplishment of strategy are necessary conditions to achieve the goal. Now we came to conclusion that strategy is very important.
In politics and political debates people often concentrate their attention on discussion of the goals and methods of their achievement (the promises). Such discussion lavish with promises is also important, but it can represent a certain danger both for politicians and for voters. The electorate, in its majority, pays attention to desirable results. In case the political party adheres to the strategy, taking into consideration the results, their effectiveness considerably increases. For example, the success of former Communist party in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (Zinner 105) can be easily explained by this fact. The political parties were able to convince voters because they made promises and tried to keep their words.
In such a way, their strategy was successful. To develop a strategy means to determine general directions of development in order to achieve long-term competitive advantages and other ultimate goals. The political strategy is planned for a long term and is oriented at the future with stage-by-stage process of its realization. Strategy as a function of time is not simply concentrated at a certain period of time. First of all, it should be examined as the function of direction. Effective strategy establishes the direction of development of a political party.
It defines the growth, stabilization, directions of development, etc. Strategy can be examined as detailed complex plan directed at accomplishment of the mission and goals of a political party with maximum effectiveness. The main aim of this plan is to provide with novelties and changes in political party according to the changes in environment. You have to remember that There is no universal "correct" strategy: all is dependent upon time, place, and circumstance (Cimbala 3). The real strategy of political party consists not only of planned actions. It is also related to the reaction of party at unforeseeable consequence.
Therefore, the strategy should be examined as symbiosis of planned actions (proactive strategy) and adaptive reaction to situation (reactive strategy): Effective political strategy = proactive strategy + reactive strategy The strategy is necessary because the future is unpredictable. Modern tempo of changes in politics and the tendency to increase of data stream are so high that defining and planning of effective strategy is the only way to foresee future problems and opportunities. Besides, the effective strategy should be open to changes. For example, American strategists now consider using precision conventional weapons to deny proliferate nuclear capabilities in order to develop new counter proliferation strategies (Wirtz 5 - 24) Political strategy is the basis of the plan of development (Gray 235). It helps to define appropriate actions required to achieve the goal, reduces the risk of wrong decision because of erroneous or inadequate information, etc. The effective strategy provides the political party with opportunity to foresee the events and to respond to them quickly.
In order to develop an effective strategy we need to determine ultimate goals. The goals should correspond to the following requirements: The goal should be specific. For example: the government should approve mechanisms of social protection. What does it mean? Which groups should be protected by the government?
To what extent? Inexact goal always result in problems. The reverse may be true: the more specific and detailed the goal is the more potential supporters it can attract. The goal should be measurable.
For example, the party sets the goal to increase quantity of women in politics. In order to attract more supporters, the party should specify the target date. In case the goal is immeasurable, we cannot define whether it was achieved or not. The goal should be realizable.
Some political leaders lavish with promises that cannot be realized. No doubts that the goals should sound optimistically but when they have no real perspectives to be achieved, people will not believe you (Jones 45). This rule is correct in politics. The goal that cannot be realized during the life of a person looses its attractiveness. The culture of the country also plays an important role.
In the Western society people are impatient and prefer to get the results as soon as possible. The tendency of our time is to get the maximum permissible result in the shortest possible time. Finally, the goal should inspire. In case the electorate shows no enthusiasm, they will not support your political program. On the face of it, it seems that all these requirements correlate with each other like a consequence of stages. However, all criteria should be used together and influence each other.
In case the goal is well-formulated, specific, measurable, and realizable it will help you to develop an effective strategy and effective tactics. Many political leaders make mistakes because they mix up the strategy with tactics. Strategic thinking means to achieve the best result using all possible resources. Some political leaders use only one tactics and have no idea concerning available resources. When we become more experienced in strategic thinking, we come to an unexpected conclusion. The more we understand in tactics, the more flexible we are in strategic thinking. (Gordon 48).
No doubts that tactical thinking strives to replace the strategic thinking, but tactical development enriches the strategic thought. Although tactics is crucial to success in politics, it cannot be considered the subject of the first priority (Ben-Moshe 126). First of all, the political party has to define the goals, reflecting the values and beliefs of its founders, leaders, or members combined with mission, purposes and expectancies. The goals should be defined clearly in order to give the opportunity to concentrate on planning. Besides, the political party has to determine intermediate goals that are close to the ultimate goal. Strategy is not as complicated as one can imagine.
At the same time, it is very difficult to think strategically. Strategy is not a separate decision. It is a totality of solutions: the choice of main tasks and target groups, the necessity of resources and supporters. Effective strategy involves the timely decision when and where certain tactics should be used. More than 2 thousand years ago Sun Tsu claimed that strategy appears when you start to think over the actions of the opponent (his goals, strategies, weaknesses and strengths), your own actions (our supporters, strengths and weaknesses), and place (where the so-called battle will take place). Tactics of the opponent is the key to understanding of his strategy and tactics that will help us to gain the victory.
Consequently, our tactics can influence our strategy. Tactical thinking is an important element of strategic thinking. In its turn, tactics is a special action undertaken by a political leader. Tactics helps us to use the resources in order to arouse changes in the environment. In one situation tactics can be the activity, system or even institution. In other situation technology can be considered the tactics.
Tactics can be accomplished in different ways in accordance with potential and resources of the political party. Tactics changes the situation, whereas strategy comprises of a range of solutions including the decision what tactics should be used by a political party to achieve the goal. Our knowledge of the tactics influences the development of appropriate strategy. Tactics help us to work out an effective strategy. Secondly, different tactics are effective for different goals. For example, the campaigns that involve letters addressed to body of electors work differently in democratic and authoritative systems.
Economic boycott demands a target that depends on economical conditions. In such a way, it is very important to choose tactics based on the goals. It is very important to choose the most effective tactics. Tactics that have no effect should be replaced by innovative and more effective tactics. Thirdly, different tactics attract different people. What does it mean?
Political leaders should use various tactics taking in response to the wishes of electorate. Political parties need to adhere to individualized approach concerning the choice of tactics in order to appeal to a wide range of public. Some people consider vigils and strikes ineffective and dangerous way to achieve the goal; some of them consider that letters of support do not work. We can argue about the correctness or simply can take into account that different people prefer different tactics.
It depends on the character of action, the receptivity to risk, etc. Those political leaders, who react to the problem by one or two tactics, influence only on a small part of population that supports a chosen tactics. You should remember that strategic themes typically reflect an emphasis on particular issues, but a policymaker's vantage point needs to be broader than that (Bunn 33). In such a way, political leaders should propose various ways of participation in political life with various levels of involvement and desirable social changes. Fourthly, flexibility in the choice of an appropriate tactics is the resource for unexpectedness.
You need to ensure that your tactics is flexible and adaptable to circumstances (Hart 349). In case the political leader repeats the same actions, his opponents quickly become accustomed to them and learn to withstand them. Unexpectedness disconcerts your opponents. In its turn, instability can lead to mistakes that will ruin position of your opponent. At the same time, the opponent can re-examine his tactics and strengthen his positions. Lack in flexibility in the choice of tactics can lead to endless iterations, whereas flexibility will inevitably result in future education.
In such a way, strategy and tactics are interrelated concepts: tactics is a practical implication of strategy (Kennedy 345). Effective strategy implies effective tactics, whereas effective tactics is logical continuation of effective strategy. Both of them are crucial to success, and excellence in one hardly can substitute for weakness in the other. References: Baldwin, Hanson W. (1942). Strategy for Victory. New York: W.
W. Norton & Company Inc. Ben-Moshe, Trivia. (1992). Churchill, Strategy and History. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Bunn, Elaine. (2002). A Framework for Strategy Development.
Rand, Santa Monica, CA. Cimbala, Stephen J. (1998). Coercive Military Strategy. College Station, TX, Texas A&M University Press.
Gray, Colin S. (1996). Explorations in Strategy. Westport, CT: Praeger Gray, Colin S. (1999). Modern Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gordon, Andrew S. (2004).
Strategy Representation: An Analysis of Planning Knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Guertner, Gary L. (1993). The Search for Strategy: Politics and Strategic Vision. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Hart, B.
Henry Liddell. (1954). Strategy. New York: Praeger Jones, Richard Wyn. (1999). Security, Strategy and Critical Theory. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Kennedy, Paul. (1988). "Military Effectiveness in the First World War", in Allan R. Millet and Williamson Murray, eds. , Military Effectiveness, Vol.
I, The First World War. Boston: Allen and Unwin Wirtz, James J. (March 2000). Counter proliferation, Conventional Counterforce and Nuclear War. The Journal of Strategic Studies.
Issue 23. 1 Zinner, Paul E. (1963). Communist Strategy and Tactics in Czechoslovakia, 1918 - 48. New York: Praeger
Free research essays on topics related to: plays an important role, order to achieve, strategic thinking, political leaders, first world war
Research essay sample on Plays An Important Role First World War
