There are several potential causes for this. For example, design of objectives and timelines that are too ambitious. Also, little or no clarity on the vision or objectives. Even a lack of buy-in from key stakeholders. Not to mention that one of the most important causes is related to available resources.
However, this is not really the problem. All these scenarios can influence the success or failure of a strategy, but they are not the cause of the gap between strategy and execution.
The gap occurs because there is no bridge between strategy and execution. Without such a bridge, a high-level corporate strategy can have an infinite number of ways to translate into execution. This results in rethinking existing initiatives so that they appear as if they are aligned with the strategy. Or, simply a series of random tactics that may be loosely linked to the strategy.
So the key to the problem is that without a translation, any and all things can become part of the strategy. This ends up making the strategy itself less strategic.
Example of the gap between strategy and execution
Let’s think of a company developing its corporate strategy. Within it, there is an objective based on achieving growth in a new market. This objective was identified by the strategy team, which considers it a great opportunity.
It is, because it is a new growth market and the organization has the capabilities and resources to serve it. Once determined, this strategic objective is shared with key departments (e.g., sales, marketing and product development). Each of these departments then carries out their individual plans to achieve the objective. And, as you might guess, here’s the rub.
Sales may focus on adding more field professionals in the new market. Marketing, on the other hand, may focus on developing materials and promotions to project itself in the market. As for product development, its focus holds on creating a couple of new products for the market.
This all seems to make sense. Let’s assume the teams are excellent at execution and act accordingly. But in reality, only a marginal amount of revenue is generated. Herein lies the gap, as the problem is not the department’s strategy and plans, communication, resources, or overly ambitious goals.
It is the absence of a supporting strategy
Unlike an operational or implementation plan, a supporting strategy is a unique and distinct way to achieve the objectives envisioned in the corporate strategy. If in the example above each department, instead of jumping into creating implementation plans, started with the creation of supporting strategies everything would change.
Sales could focus on approaching the market introduction in a new and different way to better connect with the target. Marketing could focus on designing a unique and differentiated program that stands out in a homogeneous market. Product development could focus on designing an experience rather than new products.
Ultimately, the key is to design a strategic approach to achieve bold and ambitious corporate objectives.
Photo credit: PX
