Category: Gleaner Jamaica

As a proponent of long-term thinking in your company, you’ve likely encountered resistance. You may feel isolated, struggling to articulate the value of strategic foresight to colleagues focused on immediate concerns. This guide aims to provide you with a framework to effectively communicate the importance of long-term strategic planning (LTSP) and engage others in this crucial mindset.

The Challenge of Long-Term Thinking

You’ve probably experienced this scenario: In a meeting, you highlight a future your colleagues can’t see. The potential long-term consequences seem obvious to you. Unfortunately, your team, preoccupied with urgent problems, lacks the energy to consider your strategic viewpoint. They opt for the quick satisfaction of immediate resolutions.

Afterwards, you realize that fundamental issues remain unaddressed. It feels like you’re only discussing surface-level solutions without questioning the underlying approach.

If this resonates with you, you’re not alone. Many forward-thinking professionals struggle to convey the importance of LTSP. But there’s a way to bridge this gap and bring others into long-term thinking: the Three Horizons Framework by Curry, Hodgson and Sharpe.

Horizon 1: Understanding the Decay of Current Offerings

Every organization provides value through its products or services. However, it’s crucial to recognize that these offerings have a limited lifespan. Each day brings you closer to the point where your current solutions become obsolete.

Consider the photography industry. Until the 2000s, companies like Kodak and Fuji thrived selling film. Today, the average consumer has no interest in this product.

This decay in demand is a universal truth in business, illustrated by the following curve:

The key question is: How long will your current strategic fit last?

As an LTSP advocate, you’ve likely considered this. Now, you have a visual representation to share with your colleagues, helping them grasp this concept more easily.

Horizon 3: Recognizing Future Opportunities

While managing current operations is crucial, it’s equally important to look for signs of future trends. These “faint signals” can be found in emerging technologies, evolving customer needs, new regulations, environmental changes, and various other areas.

By paying attention to these signals, your team can craft narratives about potential futures. This foresight defines the third horizon:

Many companies overlook these disruptors by failing to plan far enough ahead. As an LTSP proponent, you can encourage your team to do more than passively observe these changes. Instead, position your organization to influence and shape these future scenarios.

Horizon 2: Bridging Present and Future

To transition from current offerings to future opportunities, your organization needs a bridge – this is Horizon 2:

These are initiatives that may not represent your ultimate vision but serve as stepping stones towards it. Developing these transition strategies is best done in strategic planning retreats, where all departments can contribute their insights.

Integrating the Three Horizons

When effectively implemented, the Three Horizons Framework allows your organization to manage current operations, develop transition strategies, and prepare for future scenarios simultaneously:

This integrated approach demonstrates how long-term imperatives can and should inform immediate actions.

Conclusion: Empowering Long-Term Strategic Planning

By using the Three Horizons Framework, you now have a powerful tool to illustrate the importance of long-term thinking to your colleagues. This approach allows you to:

1. Visually represent the lifecycle of current offerings

2. Highlight the importance of future-focused initiatives

3. Demonstrate how to bridge present operations with future opportunities

4. Show how all these elements work together in a cohesive strategy

Remember, you’re not alone in advocating for LTSP. Many successful organizations embrace this approach, recognizing that preparation for the future is key to long-term success.

Use this framework to spark meaningful discussions about your company’s future. By doing so, you’re not just planning for tomorrow – you’re shaping it.

Thinking Big and Going Long

As a corporate or national leader, you’re deeply concerned about the future of your enterprise or country. But you may notice something is missing—a sense of shared hope and engagement. You ask yourself, “Why?”

The last time many Jamaicans felt truly hopeful about the future was around 1962, just before independence. I wasn’t born then, but elders recall the power of that moment: a future brimming with promise.

Before independence, leaders like Marcus Garvey, Sam Sharpe, and Norman Manley courageously articulated a vision for Jamaica. They took these stands, despite knowing they wouldn’t see the outcomes in their lifetime, or even in the coming decades. We revere them because they made unselfish sacrifices for the greater good, even when the odds were against them.

Today, we long for leaders with similar clarity and conviction—those not swayed by greed, political gain, or self-interest. Instead, we’ve grown accustomed to pointing fingers; for many, leadership has become synonymous with corruption. Ironically, however, even flawed leaders can still “think big and go long.” They can look to our National Heroes as models. So, where can they start?

Understanding What Really Motivates People

Humans are creatures of imagination, and our motivation is deeply influenced by our vision of the future. This imagined future shapes our experience both now and in the long run.

Take, for example, the motivation of new employees. Initially, they’re excited. Over time, however, as they encounter challenges and setbacks, their enthusiasm fades. In environments that are merely transactional—where work is treated as nothing more than an exchange for money—this disillusionment runs deep.

Today’s younger employees, especially Gen Z, are making it clear: “That’s not enough.” They demand engagement that’s driven by purpose. To meet these expectations, leaders must do two things: think big and go long.

Thinking Big and Going Long

Most leaders don’t genuinely think big or long. They may talk about game-changing goals, but they only want results within the fiscal year, their CEO term, or before the next IPO or election. In the past, this approach might have worked.

But today, employees, customers, and citizens are quick to recognize shallow promises. In a world flooded with “Buy Now!” messages, people have learned to ignore hollow pitches and easy promises. Leaders who try to “sell” people on short-term impossibilities come across as self-serving, and the result is widespread contempt.

The essential truth? “Thinking big” requires “going long” at the same time. For example, Richard Williams developed a 25-year tennis plan for his daughters, Venus and Serena, long before they were born. GraceKennedy did something similar with its 2020 Vision.

Contrast this with the cautionary tales on the CompanyMan YouTube channel, where the creator explores the decline of companies like K-Mart and Nokia. Each story illustrates the dangers of short-term thinking—loss of market share, plummeting shareholder value, and mass layoffs.

These same mistakes happen on a national scale as well. Right now, around 30-40 national plans worldwide—like Vision 2030 Jamaica and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals—are nearing their deadlines, and many are off track.

However, modern employees want more than just their leaders’ long-term thinking and big goals.

Freeing People from Past Disappointments

You may notice that even when there’s good news, some employees stay stuck in cynicism. Previous disappointments have hardened their outlook, making it difficult for them to feel optimistic.

One way to address this is through radical truth-telling. For example, I visited South Africa during the Truth and Reconciliation Commission hearings in the 1990s. The broadcasted testimonies were harrowing, recounting torture and murder. I could only watch in short bursts.

But the principle was powerful. Truth-telling can be liberating. In our case, the forward of Vision 2030 Jamaica, written 15 years ago, put it bluntly:

> “Partly due to our neglect of long-term issues, our nation has suffered from a number of inadequacies… Previous planning efforts floundered… Jamaicans have expressed a clear wish to break out of this vicious cycle of low performance and build a quality society.”

When organizations or nations engage in these difficult, honest conversations, they show that a troubled past doesn’t have to define the future. It allows employees and citizens alike to hope—and ultimately frees them to think big and go long once again.

Your organization has crafted a vision for the future, winning the approval of a wide array of stakeholders. But how do you keep that momentum alive beyond the initial excitement and actually deliver results?

Jamaica is known for its creativity, especially when it comes to innovation. We excel at producing world-class prototypes and ideas.

However, that reputation also highlights a significant gap: a lack of emphasis on follow-through and upkeep. There’s an old saying: hire a Jamaican for innovation, a Trinidadian to launch it with flair, and a Bajan to handle the day-to-day operations.

Consider Vale Royal as an example. Recently, a viral internet post depicted the state of this historic 1694 property, once the official residence of past Prime Ministers. Despite the Jamaican coat of arms adorning it, the image revealed a dilapidated building.

The reaction was swift and unanimous: shock and disappointment. This was hardly a proud moment for the nation. Clearly, some part of the government process had failed, leaving an eyesore in its wake. The only consolation? The neglected building is set back from the road, slightly out of public view.

What lessons can this teach us about managing grand aspirations like Vision 2030 Jamaica, and how can you apply these insights to ensure your organization’s vision doesn’t face the same fate?

Visions Are Hard to Maintain

Unlike physical objects, a vision is built from fragments of imagination. While it’s often captured in written form, what truly matters is the resonance it finds within people.

A compelling vision takes root in the hearts and minds of those who see themselves in it. It inspires them, evoking strong emotions and a shared sense of purpose toward a future they want to make real.

Yet, creating a tangible product is far easier than inspiring others to envision a brighter future. Those who do this effectively—figures like Marcus Garvey, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela—are rightfully revered.

Sustaining a vision over time is even harder than maintaining a physical structure. Today, both Vale Royal and Vision 2030 Jamaica are in need of revitalization. Though their restoration processes would be different, neither is beyond hope.

Now, think of your own organization. Are stakeholders genuinely motivated by your vision? Has its impact faded? Can you rekindle the energy it once generated?

Ordinary Efforts Won’t Achieve Extraordinary Visions

Perhaps a common oversight by those managing both Vale Royal and Vision 2030 Jamaica was the assumption that regular, routine efforts could somehow produce remarkable, transformative outcomes.

This isn’t just a government issue; the same challenge exists in any organization. Some employees are skilled at keeping day-to-day operations steady. As author Robert Pirsig (in *Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance*) puts it, they preserve “static quality.” They are essential—but they are not visionaries.

For breakthrough change, you need people who drive “dynamic quality,” those who push for improvement and innovation.

Pirsig argues that both roles are essential, but they must be balanced. A possible misstep with Vision 2030 Jamaica was the reliance on government staff focused on “static quality” to also execute and govern a forward-looking vision.

As a result, while Jamaica started Vision 2030 with momentum, the progress has slowed. To avoid this pitfall, your organization must institutionalize the management and execution of its vision, creating a structure that ensures enduring commitment.

This approach, though it may seem new, draws on a proven success story.

Introducing a Vision-Oriented Oversight Committee

Jamaica’s significant reduction in its debt-to-GDP ratio has been celebrated worldwide. This accomplishment was thanks to a bipartisan, long-term effort that drew upon disciplined oversight from the private sector, trade unions, and civil society.

What if your organization established a similar framework—a “Vision-Oriented Oversight Committee” (VPOC)? This committee would serve as a vision-focused equivalent to Jamaica’s Economic Programme Oversight Committee (EPOC), actively balancing both static and dynamic qualities to ensure sustained progress. In some cases, a board could serve this function.

This idea could be the key to Vision 2030 Jamaica’s success. Without a VPOC, the likelihood of achieving Jamaica’s aspiration to become “the place of choice” may continue to diminish over the next six years, potentially jeopardizing one of our most ambitious goals since independence.

As a Jamaican employed in an organisation, you are worried about the future of our nation. It appears as if our country is stumbling along, barely keeping its head above water.

At the same time, you are aware of the power of a corporate vision. Why hasn’t someone done one for our 2.8 million people on the island, and the other 2+ million in the Diaspora?

The good news is that something is already in place in the form of Vision 2030. But why isn’t it changing your everyday experience?

The truth is that we need help. The two main things Jamaicans care most about – economy and crime – seem not to have progressed for decades. Instead, we want the hyper-growth of Trinidad-2004 and Guyana-2023. Or maybe even the steady high performance of the Bahamas.

Or perhaps more importantly, we envy the low crime rates of Barbados or Cayman (formerly a Jamaican protectorate.) At some point, we led all these countries in these areas.

Today, we are working hard not to slip into the same zone as Haiti.

If our leading companies can accomplish so much long-term success, why can’t our country, we wonder? While a direct comparison is unfair, maybe there are a few things we can learn from best practices accepted in your organisation.

A Joined Up, Far-Away Future

A “joined-up” future is one that lots of stakeholders contribute to creating. In a company, it means engaging the board, executives, staff, customers, suppliers, regulators, local communities and more.

Shouldn’t our country do the same?

Based on my experience and queries of colleagues outside government…we don’t know that we already have a joined-up faraway future…at least on paper. In fact, the process used to create Vision 2030 Jamaica from 2003-9 is a world-class model. As such, I have shared it at in-person and online strategy conferences as a case study.

Perhaps you recognise the summary statement: “the place of choice to live, work, raise families and do business.” In times gone, it was the tagline of speeches given by the Governor General, Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition and many others.

But I looked over the recent Budget Debate notes. I struggled to find much of a mention. A Google search didn’t help. Here are a few ways business people at all levels could intervene now to prevent what former leaders of our country seem to be telling us…this is too important to allow it to be eaten up in regular chakka-chakka.

Why the urgency?

With six or so years remaining until we cross the finish line in 2030, we can’t afford to waste a single moment in mid-race. Remember when Miller-Uibo glanced up at the screen and lost her lead in the 400m final of the 2017 World Championships? We are likely to stumble into defeat also as a nation, unless we pay attention to the following.

A Divisive Election – You and I watch the bitter combat underway in the USA. It appears that cooperation towards common goals is impossible. Within a year, our own political parties will try to win the next election by emphasising their differences. This is natural. But it’s the opposite of the intent of Vision 2030 Jamaica. Just imagine if the board of your company were divided into opposing camps. Let’s intervene so that their attention remains on what is most important.

Continuous Inspiration – Your ability to recite our National Pledge and Anthem were picked up as a child. We could elevate Vision 2030 Jamaica to that level of importance, starting with the Forward by Dr. Wesley Hughes, which states in part:

“Today, our children, from the tiny boy in Aboukir, St. Ann, to the teenage girl in Cave, Westmoreland, have access to technologies that were once considered science fiction. They seek opportunities to realise their full potential. This Plan (vision) is to ensure that, as a society, we do not fail them. “

Updated Business-like Measures – How can we know the progress we have made from 2009-2023? Are the measurable results listed in the document beyond reach? Do we deserve an A-? or a D+?

How about fresh, intuitive measures of success which tell us whether or not Jamaica is becoming “the place of choice”? Let’s measure the length of lines outside the US and Canadian Embassies for those seeking permanent residency and how they are growing or shrinking.

Wheeling and Coming Again – Companies have no problem resetting fresh objectives when the old ones no longer do the job. In business, a strategy that is not working is replaced as soon as it’s found to be lacking.

We can do the same for Vision 2030 Jamaica to keep it relevant. This is the beauty of long-term strategic planning.

An honest read of the original document reveals that certain assumptions about the government’s capacity to lead the effort were unquestioned. Today, after over a decade of effort, we have learned much. For example, it’s hard to argue that the planning done in 2009 was enough.

In summary, while we once led the world in long-term national planning, we aren’t doing the same in the more difficult world of national strategizing and execution. But there’s time.

As the clock ticks down to 2030, things are likely to become more awkward for all of us. As you may imagine, the human tendency is to avoid the issue entirely, hoping it goes away.

That may yet happen. But if we don’t confront the gaps in our initial attempt to create a joined-up, faraway vision, we’ll block our citizens from ever believing in a national vision again.

In fact, it would be better if it were declared null and void, than ignored. At least that would have some integrity and enable us to move on to a better national vision, lessons earned.

Better National Strategic Planning

And that is perhaps the biggest lesson for all concerned. We Jamaicans say that we are great starters, but poor finishers. In other words, we know how to kick things off. But when the going gets tough, we aren’t strong at bringing them to fruition.

Said differently, we don’t know how to keep promises just because we made them.

The point here is that Vision 2030, with some five to six years remaining, puts us in an awkward spot. But that’s a lie. We have put ourselves in an awkward spot.

At some point, we were strong in envisioning great things. Like a company who creates BHAGs, our executive team gave its sacred honour to accomplish a great thing, like the framers of the Declaration of Independence.

However, we haven’t put in place mechanisms sufficient to rescue our current situation. At this rate, we won’t be closer to being a “place of choice” than we were in 2009.

In a company, it’s easier to find individuals or a team of leaders who may hold themselves accountable for a game-changing result. Often, the metrics are clear.

Unfortunately, no such clarity exists around Vision 2030. And given our impending election fever, it may not come from politicians. Instead, it’s time for business to step up and bring sound strategic planning to the accomplishment of the most important outcomes of our national lifetimes.

Let’s inspire each other to intervene so we can have what we already know we want. It won’t happen any other way.

As a member of the C-Suite, you may readily support Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs)—those ambitious, industry-shaping aspirations that separate leading companies from the rest. These high-stakes goals have the power to disrupt entire industries, often turning bold vision into remarkable results.

Yet, you’ve likely also encountered the sobering insights from *How Big Things Get Done* by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner. Their research highlights a harsh reality: major projects across the globe frequently fall short. In fact, fewer than one percent of large projects succeed in meeting their goals on time, within budget, and with all intended features. High-profile failures, like the Sydney Opera House, the Montreal Olympics, and the Panama Canal, showcase how challenging it is to turn big dreams into successful outcomes.

So, when a company or organization makes a commitment to a game-changing goal, the odds are, unfortunately, stacked against it. Take the film *Heaven’s Gate* as an example—it ran years over schedule, went massively over budget, and ultimately led to the collapse of United Artists film studio.

But do these statistics mean your company should avoid aiming for breakthrough results? Should the high failure rates discourage organizations from striving for greatness? Here are some reasons why it’s still worthwhile to pursue game-changing goals, rather than settle for incremental improvements.

**#1. There’s No Backstage**

Some executives believe their company can hold on to the status quo indefinitely. While they might talk a good game about innovation, they are content to stick with familiar practices, almost as if disruptions don’t apply to them. But this is like a writer who clings to their typewriter, ignoring new tools like ChatGPT while assuming the market for their work will remain unchanged.

By choosing inaction, these executives inadvertently embrace a “strategy of inertia.” But this strategy often catches up with them—eventually, almost every industry faces a disruption.

Granted, there are a few rare cases of companies that temporarily escape changing technology, shifting customer needs, new competitors, and unstable supply chains. Even in the public sector, where longevity is assumed, departments that can’t keep up are being defunded under a policy of “contestability.” This shows that no organization, public or private, is immune to change.

—

**#2. Problem-Solving Alone Isn’t Enough**

Without a place to hide from change, executives often struggle to shift their thinking after joining the C-Suite. Why? Up until their promotion, they were celebrated for quick wins and problem-solving skills.

Once they reach the top, however, they need to pivot from short-term results to a long-term vision. It’s no longer about fixing issues on the spot; it’s about building a compelling future. This shift requires leaders to let go of their comfort zone and address their blind spots.

For new C-Suite leaders, this shift can feel like a frustrating waste of time. Imagine a strategic planning retreat to set a BHAG: it involves activities like clarifying goals, weighing risks, and challenging assumptions. To leaders accustomed to fast results, these slower, more thoughtful steps may seem pointless.

Some may even prefer the “move fast and break things” mindset that once fueled early Facebook’s explosive growth. But Facebook eventually abandoned this slogan, learning through costly failures that some damage can’t be easily undone.

**#3. Stop Delaying the Inevitable**

It’s a common issue—many companies defer tackling long-term challenges that could take a decade or more to solve. Instead, executive teams focus on easier problems that provide quicker results.

Look around your organization. Are there longstanding issues that have been consistently set aside? Often, it’s because previous leaders failed to establish the BHAGs and long-term plans necessary to address them.

This might sound like bad news, but it doesn’t have to be.

According to innovators like Chunka Mui and Alan Kay, these neglected issues represent opportunities for game-changing innovation. The difference between success and stagnation often lies in a company’s ability to introduce transformative solutions and lead new market categories.

Mui and Kay outline a process that any company can use to shape the future by proactively inventing it. This might sound ambitious, but consider what it could look like if every organization in Jamaica—businesses, government agencies, NGOs, schools, churches, and clubs—invested in the most effective forward-planning practices available.

Back in 2009, the launch of Vision 2030 was a step in the right direction. But now, Jamaicans need to take another step forward: embedding a culture of vision-setting and breakthrough goal creation in every company’s annual planning.

In summary, while aiming for game-changing goals may feel risky, the alternative—sticking to the familiar and hoping for stability—is equally uncertain. For organizations that wish to lead, rather than react, these ambitions remain essential.

How long is the ideal strategic planning retreat?

“Francis”, clients sometimes ask, “Why do you recommend a two-day strategy retreat?” Usually, they want to get the most from their workshop, but also don’t wish to waste a moment. After all, top executive time is quite expensive.

Assuming that your company has agreed to such a workshop, what’s the difference between one, two, or more days?

Decision-Making vs. Decision-Announcing

Sometimes, companies just want to announce decisions which have already been made…”Town Hall” style. In these settings, you intend to inform an audience at scale about something important. But you’re happy to answer a few questions and gain some initial support. Expectations are low. Participants don’t expect an open-ended dialogue on all aspects of the business.

We recommend that these short announcement-style meetings be held separately from “decision retreats”.

By contrast, the latter are designed to foster the most powerful, breakthrough conversations possible. The stakes are deliberately boosted so that extensive, game-changing resolutions can be made.

Jim Collins and Jerry Porras, authors of Built to Last, call them BHAGs – Big, Hairy Audacious Goals.

To facilitate these discussions, attendance needs to be limited to 18 people. In this way, your team can have all the necessary talks to come to consensus. Before leaving, you should ask for a clear show of support.

This is especially true for a strategic plan, hence the need for participants representing a wide range of disciplines. But there’s more.

Discomfort Thinking About the Future

In daily corporate life, only the CEO has the benefit of spending much of her time contemplating the future. After all, it’s her job. By contrast, other senior managers are more concerned about fixing everyday problems and meeting short-term targets.

Consequently, when she sits with her team at the retreat, she has a considerable head-start. Her thinking is far advanced. As such, in my role as a facilitator, I sometimes ask her to hold back, especially if she’s an extrovert. She has the knowledge and smarts to dominate the conversation from the first few minutes, but shouldn’t. Why?

Due to the nature of this unique gathering, it takes more time for her direct reports to shift gears from short-term to long. Also, they are more likely to be introverted, which means they need a chance to think quietly. Sometimes, they may be silent for the entire first day.

Unfortunately, in a single-day retreat, the event is over before they have even left the blocks. They literally drive home thinking about all the statements they wish they had made and questions they intended to ask.

The solution is to have a second day which can maximise the team’s overall commitment. Their emotional and social involvement in the process is the key to effective implementation.

Additionally, their most valuable insights are often not revealed until the second day. This impacts the quality of the strategic plan, which begs the inclusion of their ideas.

Only a multi-day retreat gives them at least one night to think. Here’s the best way to bring different thoughts together.

Start from a Blank Canvas – Together

Successful retreats with maximum buy-in all start the same way: they pull each attendees up to speed by crafting a common base of knowledge. This ensures that no-one has an “insider advantage.” Instead, subsequent ideas are based on a shared but informed “blank canvas”.

This is a far cry from meetings where the leader announces the end-result from the start. By so doing, he unwittingly reduces participants to foot-soldiers. Following his cue, they withhold their participation, wasting time and effort.

This doesn’t work, as they all need to play a part in crafting each decision, giving their all and their full attention. It’s the only way to tap into their functional knowledge and experience required by a sound strategic plan.

When these fundamentals are in place, there is no need for more than two days. Instead, you can plan for intense discussions from start to finish, which maintain momentum once it’s established.

Before the 2008 recession, clients used to expect three-day retreats as the norm, with relaxing and fun activities sprinkled throughout. That changed when budgets tightened.

But it was actually a benefit. Now, retreats are focused affairs intended to move the needle in the right direction in the shortest time possible. They require more than ever from all concerned, but the results are equally robust.

Finally, our study underway of 50 retreats producing 15-30-year strategic plans shows that two days are ideal. Given all the conflicting needs, it weaves the path and gives the company the greatest opportunity to have an effect in a single, concentrated effort.

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.

You don’t normally think for long about the lasting impact your actions have on unknown business colleagues. This is particularly true if they haven’t even been born. But is there a reason to consider far-future generations of leadership in your company?

Antonio Guterres, who heads up the U.N., recently wrote a letter to his unborn great-great-granddaughter…for delivery in 2100. He titled it a “Climate-Change Apology” and began with the following question: “Will you open this letter in a spirit of happiness and gratitude—or with disappointment and anger at my generation?”

He further admits that humanity is “losing the fight of our lives: the battle against climate upheaval that threatens our planet.” But why is he unsure about her reaction? Simple: today, he sees two paths ahead and doesn’t know which one we will take.

The first leads to a trail of destruction. The other trends to planetary salvation. Given the information, tools and technology at our disposal in 2023, both are possible.

At the end, he imagines her wondering quietly: “What did you do to save our planet when you had the chance?”

His commitment is familiar to all creators of interwoven short/long-term strategic plans. As facilitators, we help clients convert game-changing commitments into immediate actions. Here are three steps I employ.

1. Use Today’s Gripes

In a typical retreat, I ask, “What are some of the complaints you have about your organisation that should have been resolved some time ago?”

This question opens a floodgate of woes. Sometimes, they stretch all the way back to the inception of the company. In fact, older heads admit that the matters being raised were mentioned in previous meetings just like this one, but never addressed.

Then we ask: “What decisions did prior executives fail to make 10 years ago that would have prevented or resolved these issues? 20 years ago? More?”

This also unleashes a torrent of suggestions. In fact, it pays to pause before proceeding.

2. Visit the Future

We then have the team envision a strategic planning retreat like this one, but 15-years down the line. “What are some of the complaints future leaders may have regarding tough decisions you failed to make today?”

Unfortunately, this query is frequently met with horrified silence.

After a few moments of reflection, the answers come out, slowly but surely. But this is a new question for most. Managers spend their days tackling immediate issues, and don’t often take a break to consider the distant future in a structured manner.

On occasion, they may speculate over lunch or drinks, and bemoan their organisation’s collective lack of foresight. But the next day, they are back in busy-mode. “We don’t have time to do interwoven short/long-term planning!”

3. Point Out a Young Person

Finally, if there is a colleague in their twenties in attendance, I point them out by name. “Bob is likely to be in that future retreat.”

I add, “His colleagues will ask: ‘What happened at that planning meeting in 2023? Couldn’t they see what was happening?’”

Just like Guterres, Bob could have two contrasting stories to tell.

One could be a tale of courage. “Amazing experience! The executive team put itself at risk, set aside its fears, and made some difficult decisions. Today, we benefit from their wisdom.” Everyone applauds.

The alternate story could be one of cowardice and selfishness. “They realised there was a problem looming, but they decided to focus only on the short-term issues that affected them.”

Why such a contrast?

Some strategic planning teams fail to address the most salient challenges openly. Instead, they point fingers at the “Big Man”, board, government, customers, etc.

Other teams just don’t care. Attendees are coasting into the second-halves of their careers, and just want to make it into retirement with a pension. They place self before service. So their “strategic” plans don’t look past three to five years of tactics: the outer limit of their comfort zones.

You may think these are bad people, but nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, they are simply caught in a trap whose mechanics they cannot clearly see. Consequently, they do their best, but it’s not good enough.

In the end, regardless of their motivation, the result is the same. Disaster.

Jamaican companies, like many worldwide, are currently rife with short-termism. Blame COVID. Or inflation. Or the war, etc. As such, our leaders are becoming cynical.

Don’t yield. Challenge them to leave future managers of your organisation with more than a basket to carry water. Instead, ask them to create a legacy of kindness, not in the form of cash, but in the strategic decisions only they can make.

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.