Strategy Takeaways, Professionally and Personally

As far as I know, I am the third employee in my office to have taken this course, and so it’s fascinating to read some of these articles and see ways that the office has potentially adapted (or remained stagnant) and wonder whether that could be tied to some of the ideas that will be discussed throughout this mini.  One article that particularly stood out is “The Real value of Strategic Planning”, where the idea is put forth that reviews of strategy and the company should take place in a group of three to ten people (72). My office has three annual “Marketing Action Planning” (MAP) meeting a year: one to discuss how the year went, one to discuss how to improve (and follow up on action items), and the last one to prepare for the next year and throw out any wild ideas (not quite to the level of BHAGs though).  These meetings have the whole office staff – between 17 and 22 people present. The agenda of items is long, and due to the time allotted, usually conversations have to be ended midstream so that other topics can be addressed.

            This constant pattern of conversations being ended without resolution or a clear follow up process leads to frustration. The whole section in the article on “Who should attend the reviews?” made complete sense to me, for after attending 4 of these meetings, I end up dreading the frustration and lack of change in the process.  While I appreciate the idea of wanting to involve everyone in the office, from entry level to senior management, including everyone seems to be more counterproductive than helpful.

            The idea is also brought up to have the meetings at a business-unit site. I think of how the article started, by referencing Henry Mintzberg’s idea “that real strategy is made informally – in hallway conversations, in working groups, and rarely in the paneled conference rooms where formal planning meetings are held” (71), so it’s interesting that while the authors say they support this, they also recommend strategy meanings take place in the sterile environment of a business suite. I think of “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team” by Patrick Lencioni, and how taking time away from a “normal” environment, that’s completely dedicated to evaluating the process is more productive.

            Finally, my personal takeaway is from the article “Building your Company’s Vision” and David Packard addressing the “why” of people joining a company: “so they are able to accomplish something collectively that they could not accomplish separately – they make a contribution to society (5). It’s a noble statement, and an idea that can frequently get lost or pushed aside.  It can be frustrating at times to work with people on a team or in an office, but we’re working together for a common goal ultimately, and to accomplish something that we individually can’t do, it’s only by combining our talents and work that we can achieve our goals.