Comments

Excellent points. Failure to implement is the number one reason strategies fail...and this is just as true in the non-profit world as in Corporate America. It doesn't do us much good to have grand ideas if we don't know how to translate into action - or don't have the resources with which to implement. Better to actually implement a mediocre strategy (start someplace, folks!) than to spend time producing a work of art that never gets translated into action.

Posted by Mary Schmidt at October 17, 2005 10:00 AM

I've always loved the quote you give from your ex boss at McKinsey about strategy-making being 5% of the job and implementation being 95%. And the Kelleher one: "We have a strategy. It's called getting things done."

I keep 2 books by me most of the time. One is the Bossidy book and the other is your "Essentials" on Leadership. Thought: your next "Essentials" ought to be on execution / getting things done / implementation / project delivery. I'll buy copy #1 straight off the presses.

Posted by Mark JF at October 17, 2005 10:06 AM

I agree that failure to implement is a big problem

I also think it is important to distinguish different types of thinking.

People tend to view thinking as "not doing" and therefore a problem. (I have certainly encountered this big time in my career. This leads to real Dilbertville type behaviour as really stupid ideas go forward that someone with 1/2 a braincell would have stopped.

The important thing is to keep your thinking focussed and disciplined.

The other important thing is to know what needs some reflection and what needs immediate action. One of the key problems I have encountered is that groups tend to approach all situations with the same methodology. If you tell them they have to think more or act more they do that - but they apply their new approach to all situations.

I have encountered very very little Meta-thinking in business (or in life come to think of it!). We have to find a way of showing that thinking is a PART of doing and giving people the framework to bring both together in balance. We have to get away from a Strategy (think) then execute (Action) paradigm and work on how thinking and action constantly feed each other effectively

Paul

Posted by PaulH at October 17, 2005 11:13 AM

While we are on the subject of Business Books. This is hard to belive, over the weekend I heard a speaker say that the average person only reads .70 of a Business Book.... Hold On to your TP Slides... EVERY FIVE YEARS.....

Posted by RTodd at October 17, 2005 11:16 AM

Seems to me that the risk taking and loosing the comfort level mentality are best cultivated for success. Living a bit on the edge - taking action after action since all contributes to success, failure is an ancient obsolete state of mind.

Posted by John at October 17, 2005 11:49 AM

Tom - wonder if power walking [and other get at it exercise] is a metaphor for what these slides address? Also in the new Oprah book Live Your Best Life, she mentions taking Sunday off totally to strengthen ... action in meditative periods of calm ...

Posted by Sean at October 17, 2005 12:10 PM

I agree PaulH, thought AND action. The good companies get it (and DO it!). I'm not sure it's a failure to execute if the plan is unrealistic, at best, or stupid in the extreme examples. I would also add that you are setting yourself up for failure, short and long term, when a bad plan is forced upon an organization. Not only will the team not fight for the goal (and not execute), but the credibility of the leadership will be seriously diminished with regard to future plans.

Posted by Patrick M at October 17, 2005 2:08 PM

Hi, we see this duplicated in the Design/Advertising industries as well, and this is very often the case, the people in planning/research department labelled 'strategists', often have a parochial (historical needs-based) worldview, favouring linear-cause and effect relationships – which is abstraction. If we look at the input-output as a continuum, sometimes with many actors involved. Are the people 'lower-down' oops, further along on the continuum openly encouraged to challenge the business or marketing assumptions? Especially from a largely different value-adding worldview. One of my favourite quotes is from madcap vanguard Dutch advertising agency: Kessels Kramer "Its weird how they research results, before there can be results. They are so busy worrying about what people think, when we are in the business of changing what people think." – Tyler Whisnand

Actually I enjoyed reading the comments to 'Marketing Aesthetics' on Amazon, with the marketers saying we still don't know how DO IT. That's the point, wear your 'Nike' and live the Brand ;) Planning = insight, not strategy IMO from a brand building perspective. In strategy formation should there not be a model for innovation, applied to both the concept itself and to the realization media? Extrinsic models of creativity, how about tacit knowledge, intuition tempered by experience, insight through curiosity, knowledge of executional tools, anti-benchmarking, and of course with the culture and systems that support this.

Simply put; Strategists should have frontline execution experience or at least access to that worldview perspective.

Posted by E Riggs at October 17, 2005 4:21 PM

Mary, how would you react to 'Failure to consider implementation is the number one reason planning fails...'

Posted by E Riggs at October 17, 2005 4:39 PM

I've had the audio CDs of "Execution" in my car since they came out a couple of years ago. Great stuff--I love the hard-nosed realism.

Posted by Dirk Brandts at October 17, 2005 10:02 PM

In my experience the UK National Health Service is full of well meaning managers who are highly skilled at writing strategies .... Sadly the sentence usually ends there.

Posted by Trevor Gay at October 18, 2005 2:01 AM

Lead! Follow! Or get the hell out of the way! However, some of work for people who's motto is: "Don't just do something; sit there!" Thanks for reminding us that until it's executed, a plan is only a plan.

Posted by A Thomas Dillard at October 18, 2005 11:20 AM

Hi everyone:
Getting this done for me means: participating also with an idea. So here it goes....reading all the interesting comments on execution, I thought of Kaizen. A japanese word that means continuous improvement! For two years now I have been working with kaizen and it has so many lessons to give. A simple and powerful tool. But at this point, what kaizen has to do with execution? Everything. One of the most important things of kaizen is doing, putting it to action at Gemba, which is whatever "floor" you need to work on. No matter how good you plan, how good you are, how good the idea is....how good!? If it is not translated into action...you missed it! The other great thing about "kaizening" is that you don´t need to execute it perfectly at first...what you need to do is execute, make it happen, make it solid and then you go on and modify it, enhance it, make it a little better here and there, put a little color or take it..but doing it is the it! And once you put the raw material into "being" more "being" comes, more life and blood comes to it until it "speaks". Practice Kaizen...and get new eyes for things!

Thank you for the opportunity! It´s great to share!

Posted by Susie Dias at October 18, 2005 12:53 PM

E. Riggs - I agree that failure to consider implementation is the main reason planning of any type fails - government programs, military campaigns, you name it. Things that look good on paper can rapidly degenerate into chaos out in the real world. And, it can't be a top down edict - folks need to be involved that actually do the front-line work.

Another spanner in the works of any effective planning is ego. Many examples throughout history of failures due to this. One classic is the German war plans in WWI. Their own data showed there was absolutely no way their big two-pronged strategy would work (men, horses, and trains can only move in so many ways and only so fast.) So, what did they do? They ignored the data. Result being the bogging down of both sides in horrific trench warfare.

Posted by Mary Schmidt at October 18, 2005 1:06 PM

I'm glad you mention ego, it's not something I have really looked into (yet), I'm guessing – overestimating ones own competence, the pull of intrinsic motivation, and the unwillingness to take new perspectives on board? 'not invented here'. Although I'm just learning Soft Systems Methodology and the CATWOE, where one considers the 'actors' involved, are there any articles/books that can be recommended for dealing with their (the actors) ego, and how to generate buy-in (or change) in afflicted cultures? (there are often turf wars in who takes the strategic high-ground in my industry – rather than to consider what would be best for the client). Interesting Japan came up too. I've heard about their use of 'open systems' philosophy/hoshin kanri, I think the closest western approximation would be 'meritocracy by MBO/BSC'.

Thanks for a cool thread, too bad these 'interesting' topics are ephemeral!

Posted by Edwin Riggs at October 19, 2005 3:41 PM