Blog #4: Taking Strategy from Development to Implementation

In determining the success of a company, the effective implementation of a strategy is as important as the design of the strategy itself. This weeks' reading materials talk about critical issues to be considered in strategy implementation from different perspectives. 

Collin's article highlights the importance for executives to clearly state their strategic goals to the whole company (Collis & Rukstad, 2008). McKinsey's article provides 10 methods to test the effectiveness of a strategy (Bradley et al., 2011). The article Bringing Science to the Art of Strategy, emphasizes the need to balance rigor and innovation in strategic planning and implementation: elegant strategies require both rigorous analysis and novel hypotheses (Lafley et al., 2012). Finally, Horan and Connerty's article reminds entrepreneurs of the four tensions during strategy implementation and suggests several solutions (Horan & Connerty, 2017).

For a company, although the strategic design is necessary, its value remains mainly at the beginning of the company's development. Only in the follow-up implementation, can we continuously adjust the strategy and create real values. The 2nd tension mentioned in Horan and Connerty's article is one of the real problems often encountered by enterprises: should a large strategic reform start from top to bottom (which could bring more efficiency), or from bottom to top (which could motivate current employees)?

From my observation of several cases in technology companies, whether it is a new product launch or old product revision, the key to successful strategic transformation is to get all the people involved to deeply understand and support the strategy from the very beginning. Strategic analysts often think that their design is based on comprehensive research and reasonable assumptions. Nevertheless, it is R&D engineers, salespersons, and operation personnel who actually conduct the strategy. No matter the original strategic design comes from spontaneous employees or the strategic investment team (in most cases, the latter), if the company wants the strategy to be implemented smoothly, all participants must have a deep understanding of the optimate goal and a clear knowledge of their specific contributions to the ambitious goal. 

Google's OKR (Objectives and Key Results) management system can be used as a helpful example in this case. Through disassembling Objectives and Key results from large to small, everyone involving in the strategy implementation will have a precise sense of purpose and participation. In this way, even if there are setbacks or even failures in the early stages of strategic transformation (in fact, it is very common in technology companies), there will be no extreme consequences of human departure and organizational paralysis. Instead, everyone will be motivated to learn from the failure together and start another round of transformation attempt.

References:

David J. Collis, Michael G. Rukstad. (2008, April). Can You Say What
Your Strategy Is?. Retrieved from https://eclass.aueb.gr/modules/document/file.php/DET162/Session%201/Can%20you%20say%20what%20your%20strategy%20is.pdf.

Chris Bradley, Martin Hirt, Sven Smit. (2011, January). Have You Tested Your Strategy Lately? Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/have-you-tested-your-strategy-lately.

Lafley, Martin, Rivin, Siggelkow. (2012, September). Bringing Science to the Art of Strategy. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/09/bringing-science-to-the-art-of-strategy.

Simon Horan, Michael Connerty. (2017, November). Good Strategy Execution Requires Balancing Four Tensions. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2017/11/good-strategy-execution-requires-balancing-4-tensions.