
Simple. Not easy.
As human beings, we like things simple. Platforms like LinkedIn are full of articles about shortcuts, life hacks, efficiencies, the 4 rules of this, the 10 principles of that, and other tidbits that promise to make our work lives simpler, and thus easier to handle.
But life isn’t simple. Take this HBR article: 4 Common Reasons Strategies Fail
The numbers vary, but most agree that 60-90% of all strategic change initiatives fail. I’m not arguing with the validity of the 4 reasons laid out in the article. But I do question whether identifying 4 discrete reasons masks the interplay between those four things.
For example, factor 2: not understanding the organization’s capabilities, focuses on the capability of the leadership team to build the strategy, stating “leaders mired in day-to-day tactics throughout the year are often unsuited for creating strategy when planning time comes,” which is a great observation. I’ve witnessed the difficulty some leaders have distinguishing between strategy and tactics.
Factor 3: not understanding the immovable pressures, specifically discusses the difficulty employees have translating strategy into action. And fair enough. A growth strategy with a bunch of metrics to reach was something I’ve seen my team had difficulty understanding because they didn’t know what activities would achieve those metrics. So, they did what they could, which was “default to working on the easy and familiar, rather than a brand-new initiative requiring more time and mental energy.” Who was I to blame them, then?
Competency: personal abilities and attributes, skills and knowledge.
Government of Canada, ESDC
The common problem is factors boil down to not have the competencies needed to identify and then deliver on a strategy. These competencies cross job categories, from executives, through management, to individual contributors. But since all jobs work together to deliver the strategy, they cannot be considered in isolation.
That often-quoted failure rate of 60-90% of strategic initiatives? Perhaps some of the failure comes from viewing the problems of execution in isolation from each other.
Leave a comment