Organizational Case Analysis on Ruby Tuesday

Running head: ORGANIZATION STRATEGIC PLANNING

Organizational Case Analysis on Ruby Tuesday

Tanisha Adams

Florida International University

ADE 6180 – Dr. Alfred

Case Analysis #1 - Ruby Tuesday

Introduction

At some point it becomes necessary for an organization to undergo changes. If embracing change is truly one of the organizations core beliefs than efforts should be taken to make the necessary transition. A strategic planning structure allows the organization to stay focused on plans, yet be flexible and adaptive and, therefore, able to deal with change effectively (Galbraith, et al., 2001, pg. 38).”

Organization Overview

Morrison Restaurants, which started its operations in the 1920s, is one of the oldest food-service companies in the nation. Listed on the New York Stock Exchange since the 1920s the company grosses more than $1.1 billion in yearly revenues. Within the Morrison organization there are three divisions: the Hospitality Group, Family Dining Group, and the Specialty Restaurant Division. In April 1982, Ruby Tuesday became apart of the Specialty Restaurant Division of Morrison Restaurants (http://rubytuesday.com/story.asp). The Specialty Restaurant Group was then named the Ruby Tuesday Group. The merger provided Morrison with a larger customer base and it gave Ruby Tuesday the additional financial support needed to continue with its dramatic growth. At the time of the transition there were 185 Ruby Tuesday restaurants nationwide.

Ruby Tuesday’s was originally created in 1972, when Sandy Beall and four of his fraternity buddies from the University of Tennessee started the first restaurant next to their college campus. It was Sandy's dream to form a restaurant that offered great food at a great price in a fun, friendly atmosphere. Those values became the driving force behind the company and part of the reason they merged with Morrison Restaurants.

The restaurant is known for always reinventing itself; nothing stays the same for too long. In 1992, the mission was as follows:

Our mission is to be a great restaurant company that provides the highest quality and greatest value to every guest, every team member, and every shareholder we serve (Woods, 1994, 45).

Article Overview

Morrison Restaurants is a good example of an organization that believes in strategic management. The article details the steps taken to formulate their strategic plan. Three major goals of the organization are outlined along with both operational and action plans to carry them out. The organizations overall plan addresses how the entire company, which operates many different concepts in various markets will pursue their goals in each division. Some organizations believe that strategic planning is only the responsibility of top management. “Too many managers have experienced this scenario: The chief executive officer announces a bold new corporate initiative aimed at generating performance improvements (Levesque and Roberto, 2005, 53).” This top down approach is not the case with the Ruby Tuesday Group. Their strategic planning team consisted of the CEO of Morrison Restaurants, division presidents and managers, human resource staff from corporate headquarters, key managers within the Ruby Tuesday Group and an outside consultant. “Chain-restaurant companies face an array of strategic decisions about the growth of the company (Lombardi, 1994, 40).” Therefore, it is important to get all levels of staff involved in the strategic process.

This case analysis will look at the framework of the organization particularly within the Ruby Tuesday Group and their 1992 strategic planning process and results.

Strategic Planning

In the Ruby Tuesday Group a market research firm was hired to conduct an in depth analysis. Its planning process was based on utilizing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) being faced by the food chain. Some of the strengths presented were hands-on leadership, good management team, fast reaction from management team, and strong technical skills. Areas that they are weak in are internal communications, stakeholder’s needs, planning