The Glue

Who Owns Strategy Execution?

Who owns a strategy execution management system?  Is it the project manager driving a scorecard software implementation?  Is it the executive champion who is trying to transform his organization?  Is it the internal or outside consultant working to develop the scorecards and install a new business review process? 

The only owner who really matters in the grand scheme is the top executive.  He or she must realize that the strategy execution system is not an 'IT project.'  It is not something owned by the finance folks or the performance improvement team or the VP of Quality.  Strategy execution is the method, process, and system through which the top executive will ensure delivery on his or her primary responsibility.  As a dear colleague often says to people who state the obvious, "Duh."

Though this should seem as plain as day, this ownership isn't always clear or distinct when strategy execution projects begin.  Often, I see them progress in the following stages.

 

Why There's No Hurrying a Strategy Map

I recently ran a Strategy Map development session with a group of senior executives in the public sector.  What I love about these sessions is that no two are ever alike.  The mix of group dynamics, expectations of executives, constraints, and history (i.e. baggage) make for a true adventure every time.

No matter what the session, however, there are always two underlying constants:

1. the session must be run at a certain pace
2. the team must progress thoroughly through a specific mental process

Regarding the pace, I've learned as a facilitator of many such sessions that you simply can't hurry cathartic discussions around strategic issues.  People need to talk, debate, argue, and 'air it out.'  This can sometimes be problematic, as the alloted schedule for the mapping session might not provide sufficient time to move through all of the steps.  But if the group feels hurried, they will rebel against the facilitator.  They will also not buy-in to the final product if they feel they were pushed to produce something that doesn't fully and honestly reflect the strategic situation. 

What usually happens is that the group realizes they need to take the time the process requires, regardless of how long that will be, to work through their issues.  It could be three hours or it could be two days.

If You Really Want to Execute Strategy, Improve Your Business Reviews

I wrote a couple of blog posts last year about what a good structured Business Review should be (and what it should not be). Now I want to delve a bit deeper into why good Business Reviews are so critical to achieving your desired strategic business outcomes.

To move an organization from an under-performing one to an overachieving one, the culture of the organization must change. The behaviors that occur today in the organization (possibly including chaotic fire-fighting, working on low-priority issues, poor cross-functional communication, etc.) must evolve into more performance-based, strategically-aligned behaviors. Otherwise results will remain the same...mediocre.

So how do you change a culture? There is a four-step model for doing that, as follows:

Step 1: Identify the new behaviors that the new culture must have to drive improved results

Step 2: Establish processes, systems, and structures that, if followed, will drive those new behaviors

Step 3: Train, coach, and mentor employees on the proper use of those new processes, systems, and structures

Step 4: Reward and reinforce the new behaviors on an ongoing basis

Leadership Buy-In & Strategy Execution

When studying what makes or breaks an Enterprise Strategy Execution effort, it initially appears to come down to two factors:

1. the need for a sound and compelling strategy that differentiates an organization
2. the right mix of execution methodologies, performance reviews, and accountability 

However, upon further scrutiny, it becomes clear that leadership buy-in is really the essential piece. Without it, nothing within a culture will truly change. And "Business As Usual" is the antithesis of Enterprise Strategy Execution.

Since I've seen plenty of leaders who don't step up to drive Strategy Execution, let’s discuss why this happens. Why don't they "buy-in" to this proven performance-driving methodology, when they are the ones charged with ensuring that the organization improves results?

I know there may be many reasons, but let’s talk about the top three, as I see it:

1. They DON’T personally feel the pain from the company's “burning platform” (i.e. a lingering high-level organizational problem that significantly hinders current or future performance)
2. They DO feel the pain of a burning platform, but don’t understand that Strategy Execution is the solution 
3. They DO feel the pain of the burning platform and realize they need to execute strategy better, but just don’t know how to do that