Slashdot Mirror
Your Strategic Plans Probably Aren't Strategic, or Even Plans (hbr.org)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Unfortunately, while C-suite executives talk "strategy," they're often confused about what it means. Why this confusion? The problem starts with the word itself -- a scarily misunderstood concept in management and board circles. The most basic mix-up is between "objective," "strategy," and "action." (I see this frequently in published strategic plans as well.) Grasp this, I tell my audience, and your day will be well spent.
An "objective" is something you're trying to achieve -- a marker of the success of the organization. At the other end of the spectrum is "action." This occurs at the individual level -- a level that managers are presented with day after day. So naturally when they think "strategy" they focus on what they do. But this isn't strategy either. "Strategy" takes place between these two at the organization level and managers can't "feel" that in the same way. It's abstract. CEOs have an advantage here because only they have a total view of the organization.
The key to strategy is that it's the positioning of one business against others -- such GM against Ford and Toyota, for example. What exactly is positioning? It's placement on the strategic factors relevant to each key stakeholder group.
An "objective" is something you're trying to achieve -- a marker of the success of the organization. At the other end of the spectrum is "action." This occurs at the individual level -- a level that managers are presented with day after day. So naturally when they think "strategy" they focus on what they do. But this isn't strategy either. "Strategy" takes place between these two at the organization level and managers can't "feel" that in the same way. It's abstract. CEOs have an advantage here because only they have a total view of the organization.
The key to strategy is that it's the positioning of one business against others -- such GM against Ford and Toyota, for example. What exactly is positioning? It's placement on the strategic factors relevant to each key stakeholder group.
>> CEOs have an advantage...because only they have a total view of the organization.
A CEO fluffer piece from an MBA diploma factory on a slow news Friday. My popcorn's ready...
TLDR: Mid-level managers use the word "strategy" to mean BS things that are not strategies. If you groan when you hear the word "leverage" and "synergize" then you aren't one of those people, and there is nothing new in the article.
I found the article confusing because it is clearly aimed at people who can't tell buzzwords from reality. I didn't understand how anyone could use the word "strategy" to mean anything else. It wasn't until I saw the examples and realized "ohhh... THOOOSE kinds of people."
So why is it that Military terms are used for business?
You want to make money and not destroy an enemy nation.
Suggest "Thief's Cant" is actually more useful.
Instead of "Revenue" say "Loot". Instead of "Customer" say "Mark."
At this point the question is: Why the fuck are we still on slashdot? Even the trolls aren't funny anymore.
Someone should hack slashcode, fix the logo. Now should read: "News for MBAs, SJWs and other useless airthieves.'
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I thought it'd be neat to write a virus that lived on network printers and would replace every instance of the word "Strategic" with the word "Satanic" when printing. Sadly, there didn't seem to be any way to open a network socket from the PostScript(tm) layer of the printer, so it would have been unable to spread properly. The "Satanic Plans for Q2" transparencies would definitely have spiced up the board meetings.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The key to success is the following.
1. A product or service good enough not to get legal action against you.
2. A sales and marketing team who can exaggerate how great this product is without crossing the line and making legal actions against you, and who knows the people who have the pockets to buy the product.
If you are going to error, you should error on the side of getting legal action, because if you sell more then the cost of the legal you are still making out.
3. Don't barrow more money then you are able to bring in in the long term (Like Toys R' Us and iHeart Media).
Me, I have too much respect for my work to get past #1. And I suck at sales.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
12% of a plan?
with very few exceptions. They're the ruling class. That's why corporations have all sorts of legal protections you and I don't have (you don't spill the blood of kings) and why they're never punished for their mistakes (if you're gonna hit the king you better kill the king).
America and all the rest of the world has a strong class divide as well as various caste systems used to divide the working class into manageable chunks that can be rules. Once you realize this everything else makes sense.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This is 90% moonshine, with 10% of substance. The language of business.
At a higher level, strategy should influence whether you fight the war in the first place. For instance, if you have two enemies, your strategy could be to provoke them into attacking each other while you sell arms to both sides.
I think a timewarp from April the first just hit.
CEO's are just ugly alpha males who think they have special insight, they don't, they are just better at stamping on faces better than most people can stomach.
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
"Objective - goal - win the war
Strategy - how you will get there in broad terms - drive the enemy back to its borders
Tactics - what you will do in specific terms - bomb the *^&$ out of them"
I'd say your your 'strategy' is just a sub-objective.
Strategy is more the overarching *reasoning* that informs your tactics. Why are you driving the enemy back to its borders? How will that win the war? For example, if the enemy border happens to align with a natural terrain feature - a river that is difficult to cross for example, where defending at that point is easier for you. Or maybe your enemy has excellent antimissile capabilities and air/ground so you can't penetrate their airspace.. but if you can drive them back to their border then your artillery will be able to hit key production facilities, airfields, and impact on fuel / ammunitions / supply lines etc; and will further your edge in conflicts; lead to their airforce being unable to engage. That *reasoning* is the strategy.
Ever work for a big company? - did you have to write down your G&O's ? I always thought WTF is the difference and wrote crap down because I knew that the next year nobody read it anyhow.
Maybe I'm getting old - but do people really ask what the difference is between a Strategy and Action plan? Seriously is that somebody people wonder...and more important didn't know? You got'ur play book - make it happen.
Make it so.
I had him once, briefly for a few months. This guy had been promoted 2 or 3 levels above his ability.
We're in a meeting with the head of dev and we all agree that v2.x, which a few customers wanted continued, was a "tactical release".
We then get onto the new stuff, v3.x which the company was betting it's long term future on. The room called it a "strategic release".
However it then got messy and v3.x started getting pushed aside in favour of v2.x and even saw v3.x getting things changed to suit v2.x needs.
I said "why are we allowing our tactics to dictate our strategy?".
Boss looks at me like a moose chewing cud silently mouthing the words I'd just said while screwing up his face.
The head of dev breaks the silence with "good point!". They moved on and continued with their plans.
If your strategy isn't primary and you let your tactics dictate your long terms plans and actions you are fucked.
I think this story raises a good point, most people don't know what strategy, or tactics, are or can differentiate them.
Why the fuck are we still on slashdot?
Because there is no other place. I left for a while, wandered on the Interwebs, but in the end, there was no place like the old Slashdot. I mean yes, the new Slashdot is not the old Slashdot, but when you can't get the best, you settle for the second best.
See, I was with you up to the example. Words do have meanings. Strategy is a word, and it has a meaning. It means "a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major overall aim."
It doesn't mean deciding who you are (navel gazing?), or whatever the hell the article thinks it means (as far as I can tell the author doesn't actually settle on a definition).