Blog #4: Taking Strategy from Development to Implementation

Analyzing the current environment and developing a brilliant strategy is useful, but what really sets a successful strategy apart from a failed strategy is the implementation phase. In order to discover whether the particular strategy has a chance to be successful, Horan and Connerty suggest looking at 4 different “tensions,” or sources of potential disruption that need to be balanced effectively. Another way to look at a strategy and to test its effectiveness is to put it up against 10 different “tests,” per McKinsey & Co. I personally have no experience with either of these methods but can see how they could be applied in any simple strategical setting.

For example, while I was looking at different practice business cases, a question that often came up was “what is the best strategy for this business going forward...?” While the businesses and objectives can vary, the underlying process for developing a strategy is the same. You must first look at the market and its trends, your competitive advantages and insights and segmentations (both market and customer). These “tests” can help you in the environment analysis step and position you for a better strategic implementation in the future. You must understand the level of uncertainty that may come with any strategy that plans for the future, avoid bias as much as possible and must find a balance between commitment and flexibility (similar to the balance you must find in each of the four “tensions”). Finally, after gathering all this information, you formulate an action plan and provide recommendations for the next steps while also preparing yourself to defend your strategy should someone object.

While the McKinsey “tests” offer a surprising similarity to business case frameworks, the 4 “tensions” might present a more realistic view of problems that can arise and the factors you need to consider balancing in order to prevent a potential strategy from being derailed. You must balance your focus between the end goal and the steps that must be taken to get there, otherwise your strategy is aimless. You must also consider the balance of power (example, dictatorship vs. democracy) and the pros and cons of both. You must develop your own capabilities while also providing tangible results, but you must not fall victim to the pressure to produce results and fail to develop your strengths (This happens a lot with video game companies, who push out a game too early in order to make money, but face backlash on an under-developed product) Finally, you must be able to balance creativity and discipline relatively equally.

I will definitely keep these two methods in mind as a strategy for my upcoming group case interview. As I would want to use the McKinsey “tests” to accurately measure the strength and effectiveness of a potential strategy that we develop as a group. But I would also like to keep the "tensions" in mind since I feel like they have more of a impact in a group/company setting.