Posted on

Time to Ditch the ”Pillars” in Your Strategic Planning

You finally have time to look back at outputs from prior strategic planning retreats. A quick glance reveals an approach they used which includes “pillars”. If so, be aware: there are some drawbacks to this technique that could lead to a weak plan.

Check out past columns at https://blog.fwconsulting.com

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit longtermstrategy.substack.com/subscribe

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Posted on

Time to Ditch the “Pillars” in Your Strategic Planning

You finally have time to look back at outputs from prior strategic planning retreats. A quick glance reveals an approach they used which includes “pillars”. If so, be aware: there are some drawbacks to this technique that could lead to a weak plan.

But you must make a decision about what to use going forward. You need to craft an approach, but why should you be wary? To understand why, let’s go back to the process typically followed.

It usually begins with a review of the company’s vision and mission statements. Then, a SWOT and PESTEL analysis of the environment are also done. Next, the team brainstorms projects which are necessary for the organization to achieve the vision. Finally, these projects are grouped into three to five pillars based on common themes.

The final product is often diagrammed as a building with the vision and mission statements in the roof, supported by the pillars. However, its simplicity belies the fact that there are some good reasons to use a different approach.

  1. Pillars are merely semi-random lists

A review of the contents of each pillar shows that the link between its items is tenuous. They are simply a list of activities which are nice to do, grouped together using some common attribute. Why is this a problem?

As Peter Compo says in his groundbreaking new book, “The Emergent Approach to Strategy”, anything that resembles a to-do list is not a strategic plan.

Instead, he reasons that, at the heart of an overall framework, should be a triad: an aspiration, a bottleneck and a strategy. What is the role of each element?

  • The aspiration defines the overall goal or outcome desired.
  • The bottleneck represents the primary obstacle which stands in the way of achieving your accomplishment.
  • The strategy defines the way in which the bottleneck will be “beaten” or loosened so that the aspiration is easy to achieve.

Together, these three elements form a hypothesis. It represents the most important changes the organization needs to make. Plus, it evolves as further information and experiences are gathered.

Unfortunately, the pillars approach masks this important nuance. Instead, it assumes that all you need to do is mobilize staff to execute disconnected projects. If this were so, executing strategic plans would be easy.

Instead, in the real world, planning teams need to adjust their hypotheses on the fly as technology advances, government regulations change, competitors take action, and customer tastes change. Together, these shifts force changes in the original hypothesis, a fact of life the pillars approach ignores.

  1. Pillars hide relationships

Pillars also over-simplify reality. A mere list of activities hides the fact that projects are always interconnected. But more importantly, they only produce outcomes after the correct chain of causal relationships is followed.

For example, if you are a retailer, you may believe that an Easter Sale will bring in added revenue. However, to achieve the final result, a number of other actions need to take place.

You must become effective at reaching your audience with a promotion. Also, the sale should be launched on the right day of the month to hit paydays. Finally, the season has to be ideal for shopping, as some folks restrain their “retail therapy” during Lent.

The point is that the strategy relies on a number of variables which need to work together, but are imperfectly understood. As such, success is far from assured. The pillar approach obscures this reality and over-simplifies the challenge.

The truth is that strategy is an art in which your actions (causes) are separated from the results (the effects) in time and space. Sometimes the gap can be decades long, or thousands of miles apart.

Fortunately, there are better tools to use, like strategy maps, invented by Drs. Kaplan and Norton. These diagrams preserve the connection between key activities. Furthermore, they are easy to understand and explain to other employees.

3. Pillars emphasize short-term thinking

None of the pillar-approach strategic plans I have seen take into account long-term strategies and results. Instead, they tend to be so simple that they only work for plans which are five years or less in duration.

As such, the lists of projects in each pillar don’t tell a long-term narrative or story which builds a timeline.

Without it, complex undertakings lasting several decades aren’t possible. Think of the planning it takes to build a cathedral over a span of more than 200 years, for example.

Consequently, the list of projects found in a pillar only works for short-term tactical assignments in which the sequence doesn’t matter. This is a major drawback. The technique can’t be used to produce an inspiring, monumental accomplishment.

To craft an alternate approach, read my Gleaner article from March 19th 2023, as an example.

Francis Wade is the author of Perfect Time-Based Productivity, a keynote speaker and a management consultant. To search his prior columns on productivity, strategy, engagement and business processes, send email to columns@fwconsulting.com.

Posted on

Stop Treating R&D as a Luxury

You agree with the general concept of having new products and services to offer your customers. After all, a company that relies on stale stuff is likely to fail. But how do you put together an effective R&D plan when budgets are limited?

It sounds like something only the biggest companies overseas do. Most think that “Research and Development” are two luxury items to be indulged in when times are good. And Jamaica’s economy has not shown sustained GDP growth in years.

But what if R&D is just a fancy name for innovations you cannot afford to delay? Sadly, some only realise this in retrospect. Today, they are out of business because they failed to abandon old, obsolete thinking. How can your firm ensure that it doesn’t destroy value because it’s too slow to learn?

  1. Be Hyper-Curious About the End

Most of us remember when videotape rental companies did a booming business. To most, this appeared to be a great niche, with guaranteed traffic every weekend.

I happened to live in the US when Netflix arrived, offering the chance to rent a DVD by mail. Initially, it was inconvenient to send items through the post. Compared to renting a video from Blockbuster, it took longer and stuff could get lost.

Apparently Netflix agreed and tried to sell itself to Blockbuster…who literally laughed as they left in embarrassment.

A few years later, after they closed 9,000 stores, the smiles were replaced by tears.

In retrospect, it was all very obvious to see what was happening. Today, we shake our heads at their arrogance in disbelief. But are you committing the same mistake in your organisation?

If you accept the fact that it’s just a matter of time before your industry is disrupted, congratulations. You are ahead of the game. Consider that, in your company, a short-term plan, by itself, may not go far enough to show that the clock is ticking.

If you are really curious, you should have a plan for exiting each major line of business. Create a deadline date: the moment when you intend to earn your last dollar from the pertinent product or service.

Alongside this doomsday prediction should be a plan to launch a new category of product or service. Where should these timelines come from? Your long-term R&D plan, of course.

For example, immediately after making a record year of profits in 2000, Fuji Film’s research showed it had a 10-15-year end-game. Kodak also had fantastic sales, but was never curious enough about the future to take the right actions. Consequently, Fuji thrives in a whole different industry. Kodak is just a single tiny business, having destroyed an estimated US$9 billion of value.

  1. Allow Competing Alternatives in Your Planning

How should your company determine these choices?

In your next strategic planning session, ensure that you permit attendees to propose various visions of the future. (If team-members share the same age, gender and background, consider that to be an impediment.)

You want different points of view to emerge for your “Vision 2040”, for example. First, make sure you are all starting with the same facts. Then, invite advocates to describe their preferred future. Even if it makes others uncomfortable. Get them to share details as they paint a vivid picture and draw fellow participants in to expand it.

Do not squelch your colleagues.

When you have a number of candidate futures, stand back collectively and assess them, because it’s time to choose which one(s) to pursue.

In this moment of truth, you should be scared witless. Why? You could easily and unwittingly fall into the path of more videotapes. Or film.

In other words, you could doom your company. Or save it. Agonize if you will, but understand that your decision cannot easily be reversed. It’s just not the kind of choice that can be revisited whenever the breeze changes direction.

  1. Decide and kill off alternatives

Instead, treat this moment of selection as a final verdict which will assign time, money, manpower and other corporate resources. You are making a bet which has an unsure outcome, but understand that the team must be willing to stand by its selection.

However, this means that if major assumptions change, then it’s your duty to revisit the plan. But this should be rare.

Blackberry needed to do this when the iPhone turned out to be a serious threat, for example. Only a dose of humility would have saved it from obsolescence.

Unfortunately, this advice isn’t easy to take. Most shy away from the kind of hard conversations required until it’s too late.

Don’t disappoint your shareholders, employees, suppliers, pensioners, and other stakeholders by being slow or cowardly. Instead, make the difference by investing in your organisation’s future.

Francis Wade is the author of Perfect Time-Based Productivity, a keynote speaker and a management consultant. To search his prior columns on productivity, strategy, engagement and business processes, send email to columns@fwconsulting.com.

Posted on

Stop Treating R&D as a Luxury

You agree with the general concept of having new products and services to offer your customers. After all, a company that relies on stale stuff is likely to fail. But how do you put together an effective R&D plan when budgets are limited?

 

For past columns see https://blog.fwconsulting.com

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit longtermstrategy.substack.com/subscribe

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Posted on

Planning for Profits vs. People vs. Purpose

You need to add a widget, row, or prebuilt layout before you’ll see anything here. 🙂

Like most other business-people, you have almost given up on the task of combining short-term and long-term strategic planning.


It’s not that you don’t believe in it at some level. You acknowledge there is value in thinking expansively and inspiring others with BHAGs (Big Hairy Audacious Goals).


At the same time, things are changing too fast nowadays. You can barely find time to focus on solving short-term problems, let alone anything pie-in-the-sky.


But what if the popular conventional wisdom, that long-term strategic planning is dead, is wrong?


What if there were huge gains to be made in the following areas from an interwoven short/long-term approach?


Area 1 – gaining competitive advantage by planning for horizons just a bit longer than others. (Amazon)
Area 2 – inspiring staff with commitments that create an irresistible future. (Unilever)
Area 3 – becoming a sustainable organization that takes care of its own, organic ESG concerns first. (CVS)


These areas could be the keys to unblocking multiple goals at once, while bypassing the worst tendency of companies to fall into short-termism.


In this webinar, you’ll be exposed to a practical method of doing interwoven short/long-term strategic planning. You’ll find out how to invest two or three days (rather than weeks) in a way that returns game-changing results. But maybe most importantly, you’ll be well-informed.


Register today.
Time: Thursday March 30, 2023, 12:30pm Eastern
Join Francis Wade, two-decade veteran of 50+ interwoven short/long-term strategic planning retreats in this one-hour introduction.
NB – Space is limited

Register Here
Posted on

Creating the Future

Have some people in your company become reaction-machines? In other words, do they run around all day responding to the latest crisis? Deep down, you know they are inefficient, but what can you do to shift to a culture in which the future is created rather than feared?

For past columns, see blog.fwconsulting.com

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit longtermstrategy.substack.com/subscribe

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Posted on

Creating the Future

Have some people in your company become reaction-machines? In other words, do they run around all day responding to the latest crisis? Deep down, you know they are inefficient, but what can you do to shift to a culture in which the future is created rather than feared?

There is a debate raging within C-suites about the way companies should be led. Some believe that the world has become more VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous.) As such, it’s not possible to plan for the future.

Instead, all you can do is react to the latest disruption. And if you have any energy left over, look ahead…but only for no more than five years. COVID has made this opinion popular.

But I think it’s an excuse.

The opposing point of view is that individuals and companies need a vision of the future.

If you believe in the latter, and prefer to create the future, here are ways to persuade others who feel the activity is a waste of time.

1) You can’t stop creating the future

Fact: in any company, the leadership team is always shaping the future. It may be disjointed, muddled, and hidden from view, but there is a destination being realised with every decision. This can’t be helped.

The only question is, is it being done well or badly?

In essence, a future being realised badly is one that lacks definition, so no-one can put words to it. In fact, two managers might say opposite things when asked. “Survival” may be the only commitment they have in common.

So it’s a free-for-all, with some people playing football while the rest are playing cricket.

As such, there’s a lot of drama, with balls flying everywhere. At the end of the day, when everyone is exhausted, the action stops. Some balls will be near the boundary, others lie in the back of nets, but no-one can tell the score.

Consequently, when good employees sense that the vision is poorly defined, they leave.

2) Things will always change

Another excuse given to avoid planning for the future is that conditions alter too often. Why create another disappointment? Instead, desist from planning because it would only add to a string of prior letdowns.

I think our experience in Jamaica with Vision 2030 is instructive: a country which is “the place of choice to live, work, raise families and do business.” Even though governments have changed, and mishaps have occurred, it remains a single point of focus for our citizens.

Even though we have much to accomplish with limited time left, the reality is that it is still our shared goal…whatever comes to pass.

This puts things in perspective, and allows us to lift ourselves from the most recent shooting, drought or political conflict. As a leader, you can also give your workers a sense of purpose.

They need not surrender to the latest drama unfolding in their email inbox.

3) You don’t know how

But perhaps the most salient reason companies get stuck in the short-term is that long-term planning is too hard. It takes too long.

Furthermore, they see the end-product as overly detailed and rigid.

In my firm, we recently began a study of 50 past long-term strategic planning retreats. Based on two decades of experience, I am able to declare that the old point of view is outdated. Fortunately, both short and long-term strategies may be completed together in a few days.

This means that with the right skills, there should be no obstacles.

But don’t take my word for it. Chances are, you belong to an organisation which does not have a 15 to 30-year strategic plan. It could be your place of work, church you attend, or even an alumni group.

Make this practical – gather people together in a meeting to create a big vision, and a multi-year strategy to underpin it. As you engage in the process, follow the steps outlined in my Gleaner columns from February 5, 2023, and November 3, 2019 as guides.

Remember that the point is to inspire your team with the possibility of a breakthrough result.

This exercise will take you one step closer and help reverse the myth that life today is more uncertain than ever. It’s not true. In fact, the end of World War II was more hectic, but it led to the creation of a number of long-term institutions such as the United Nations and World Bank.

Our challenges in 2023 pale in comparison. Take practical steps to give your organisations an inspiring future today. Don’t hold back because you are scared or misinformed.

Francis Wade is the author of Perfect Time-Based Productivity, a keynote speaker and a management consultant. To search his prior columns on productivity, strategy, engagement and business processes, send email to columns@fwconsulting.com.

Posted on

How to Connect Two Different Generations at Work

As someone born before 1988, you have noticed that newer staff in your company are acting and thinking differently. You suspect it may just be an expected generation gap, but now something seems to have shifted.

You conclude, new technology is powering the younger generation to change norms at an unprecedented rate. But how?

Among the many explanations of this transformation, the one by The Category Pirates stands out. In their books and newsletters on marketing, they offer a refreshing take.

According to them, the world is now divided between Native Analogs and Native Digitals. Here is a definition of the two groups, followed by ways to bridge the gap.

1. Native Analogs

These are over 35 years of age, Baby Boomers and Gen Xers who were born and grew up in a world of relatively limited technology. They remember the first computer they ever saw, and their first email address on the “world wide web”.

Also, when their land-based phones rang, they ran to answer them. Television, radio and cinema screens played primary roles in their entertainment.

In the workplace, many have adapted to a digital reality. However, their primary experience is live and in-person. Consequently, executives from this era don’t question the need for employees to return to the office post-COVID. After all, it’s obvious: this is how real work takes place.

Unfortunately, a return to a single physical location isn’t for everyone. To some Native Analogs, staff who resist the mandate are probably being lazy. Or wilfully ignorant of the historical fact that the company’s success was built on face-to-face contact which Zoom can never replicate.

Their reluctance to confront this reality is thought to be born of slackness. They need more discipline if they hope to be successful.

But what if that explanation so accepted by Native Analogs only makes sense in their world? The Category Pirates offer a revolutionary answer: there is another world which has arisen that Native Analogs cannot comprehend without effort.

  1. Native Digitals

According to the Pirates, Native Digitals represent a new category of human being. Because it’s being birthed in the open, the older generation is missing its significance.

The Pirates posit that this new generation is not “physical first, digital later” but the opposite…”digital first, physical later”. In other words, their primary reality is not physical, but digital.

About a decade ago, I once met a diaper-clad toddler playing with a tablet. After a few minutes, he set it aside to do something on the PC. The fact that the child could barely talk was a shock. How could this be happening?

Obviously, such an immersion in the digital world would have an impact on the individual. But the Pirates explain that this is a generational shift. Today’s Native Digitals tour the foreign physical world, so they can bring their experiences back to share in their online world.

As such, in the US 58% of workers say they would “absolutely” look for a new job if they had to return to the office. And Jamaican companies complain that they can’t find employees.

As a young Kingstonian explained to me, “I quit my local face-to-face job to work remotely for a company in California.”

Apparently, a traditional analog position is what you take when nothing else is available on Linkedin. Instead of rising the corporate ladder, the new generation wants an independent income from a place like YouTube. You can expect them to leave your organization as soon as they believe it’s within their grasp.

But this is more than a change in work preferences. Native Digitals increasingly buy products, services, experiences and transformations in their digital lives instead of their analog lives. Their choices are transforming all kinds of industries at scale. For example, remember when Jamaica had a cinema in every town, rather than one on each mobile screen?

  1. Adapting to the Change

If there truly is a new category of human emerging, we need to pay attention. This happens only once per few hundred years. But more importantly, the future of your business may be at stake.

At the moment, some 62% of managers are millennials and that number is steadily increasing. At some stage, it will hit a tipping point.

Unfortunately, we Jamaicans like to mentor downwards to younger people still paying their dues. As a result, we suppress young talent to hide old ignorance and incompetence. Obviously, that approach won’t succeed.

A better path is to find some Native Digitals to work with, if you are a Native Analog. And the opposite is also true. Neither side has a complete picture, but working together could predict your company’s success, or even its survival.

Posted on

How to Connect Two Different Generations at Work

We all know what it’s like to be inspired by a vision of the future. It feels good, as if we are responding to a higher purpose. But why do corporate visions fall often flat?

For other articles see https://blog.fwconsulting.com

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit longtermstrategy.substack.com/subscribe

Podcast: Play in new window | Download