The annual strategic planning retreat

More synonymous with food and drink than thinking and planning, the annual strategic planning retreat is etched onto many organisations calendars.  It is meant to be the place where the company's future direction is discussed, debated and the outcome is a well crafted plan positioning the organisation in the attractive industries of the future....

The problem is that business, opportunities, threats, moments of crisis etc don't wait until you have had your strategic planning retreat.  They come up at random moments and require reaction if the organisation is not going to miss the turn off to the future.

Imagine strategy in a military sense, lets wait for an annual planning session to determine how we are going to fight this war!!!!  It just doesn't work does it.  Strategy is more a constant process than an episodic one with information constantly being checked and input into the thinking process.  The key question that should always be in every strategists mind when information comes is - so what does this mean? So what does this mean??

I have a hunch that strategists in business may be rarer than you think and though there are many people out there who have the word 'strategy' in their title, this may be a little illusory.  I was once employed by a NZ Govt. department with the very posh title - Regional Strategic Planner.  I lasted three months before resigning as only the word 'Regional' was accurate, certainly there was no requirement for strategy or planning, concepts that didn't seem to be understood at all.

My research is going to look into this very area, what and where are the 'real strategists' and what skills and competencies do you need to be a 'real strategist' and not a well dressed impostor..........

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mintzberg and Waters' strategy model

Image
It is interesting how some strategic management models come and go whilst other ones seem to survive the test of time.  In 1985 Henry Mintzberg (one of the leading strategic management thinkers) and James Waters developed a model to demonstrate how the strategy that is ultimately delivered is made of two parts; deliberate strategy (what the organisation set out to do) and emergent strategy (what happened on the way). In their original paper the model looks just a little clunky, word processing not as it is today, but very recognisable for all scholars and practitioners. And although the concept of the model hasn't changed at all, it does look a little funkier with a 'lick of paint'. The model still communicates with a simplicity that belies the revolutionary nature of what it was at the time.  It looks obvious with hindsight that of course we haven't got a crystal ball and the world changes so where we end up is a combination of where we were heade
Read more

Double Hermeneutic

I came across this term (pronounced 'her men you tic') in my strategic management PhD travels and was quite intrigued by it as it's both simple (despite its name) and very enlightening.  Hopefully I'll do the simple part justice here!!!! It was coined by  Anthony Giddens , a famous British sociologist, and it reveals a major difference in the way we should (stress on the should) theorise about the natural world versus our social world and of particular interest to me, theories about how we should manage people. In essence, a theory about our natural world has no impact on the natural world which remains the same no matter what we think.  For example it was previously thought that the world was flat (and yes there are some of you still out there) but that didn't change the shape of the earth which remained a sphere (oh yes it is).  This is a single hermeneutic. However in the social sciences this isn't the case and, if for example, a management theory gains su
Read more

If planning is everything, Maybe its nothing.

A blog back on my subject area, strategic planning or strategic management to use the correct term for the academic field. I have been reading an interesting article entitled 'If planning is everything, Maybe its nothing' written back in 1973 by Aaron Wildavsky.  It is almost a fore runner to one of the largest debates in strategic management, whether strategy should be planned and deliberate or it emerges naturally as part of general management activities. The article makes some very interesting points but it does read a little gloomily as though Mr Wildavsky hasn't got a lot of time for planners in general.  His particular interest is planning in the 3rd world (although it wasn't called the 3rd world then) and he observes that in amongst all the money poured into formal plans and planning, the results have been pretty disappointing. It raises another interesting argument/point and that is the difference between the plan and the outcomes.  He appears to be arguing t
Read more