Category: Strategy

Imagine: You are a newly minted executive in a strategic planning project and notice that a single, strong person is hijacking the process. They are intelligent, but should you be relieved, or dismayed, as they take over?

Backstory: Ever since your promotion to the C-Suite, you have eagerly anticipated your inaugural corporate planning retreat. Why? This should be the place where the most realistic, impactful discussions occur.

However, near the beginning of the workshop, everyone seems to be holding back. Then, all of a sudden, the CEO, Chair or even a hired consultant announces: “I have already figured this out.”

Unfortunately, the rest of the meeting slips into a power struggle as the hijacker attempts to persuade participants that no further deliberations are necessary. Why? He’s already given the right answer. Should you resist?

Consider that even if his reasoning is brilliant, you are now caught in a fake retreat. Here’s why.

1. Key Inputs Are Being Ignored

Contemplate these classic matchups:

• Kodak vs. FujiFilm
• Blackberry or Nokia vs. iPhone
• Cable and Wireless Mobile vs. Digicel

In each competition, opposing companies prepared rival strategic plans. Today, many years later, we know that the plans on the left were failures.

From years of experience I can attest: it takes a supreme team effort to produce a plan on the right. In other words, these pre-emptive, long-term, game-changing efforts are not dreamt up by single actors.

Instead, given our complex world, they require the combined insights of subject matter experts from all parts of your company. In a strategy discussion, they bring data only they can understand.

The “strong” person who thinks today’s problems are simple is wrong. Therefore, for the sake of the organisation’s future, you must be prepared to make this point whenever your retreat slips into a one-man show. But that’s only a single way it can happen.

Another is via stonewalling. A CEO begs her team to engage in fruitful discussion, only to be met with dead silence. Her colleagues are being cautious, lazy or selfish. She’s forced to jump in to fill the gap.

Don’t let this unhappy outcome occur, either. Prepare your entire team, including the leader, for an interactive offsite beforehand.

2. The Most Consequential Discussions are Avoided

After a few months’ study, a new chairman has decided he has already mastered the top issues. During a retreat, he presents his agenda of topics to be discussed, selling his point of view convincingly.

However, the conversation takes a left turn. New data emerges, and the discussion heads in a direction he never anticipated. To respond, he tries to get things “back on track” but the energy has shifted. In his official role as chair, he gavels the discussion to order, using Robert’s Rules.

A revolt breaks out. Participants are convinced there is no greater priority than the current issue being discussed. Some become incensed, ready to walk out. They argue, “If this topic isn’t of strategic importance, then nothing is.”

Unfortunately, the chair is stuck following a bad process. He doesn’t understand that he’s undermining the freedom participants need to explore hard-to-appreciate problems. Without it, he’s turned a strategic planning opportunity into the wrong kind of struggle.

But what’s the right kind? If the team can focus on the hardest challenges, it could achieve the breakthrough their situation requires. However, he’d have to abandon his preset picture of success and go along with the flow.

3. Lack of Ownership

Ultimately, a strategic plan which fails in the above two ways will fall apart in implementation. Why? The plan won’t have the true buy-in of those who attended.

It’s a paradox. When you allow an open, messy discussion, you authorise those involved to own the outcome.

Furthermore, they’ll commit to more than you imagined, simply because you have allowed a group dynamic to build. Now they are ready for disruptive, breakthrough solutions even if it involves a personal sacrifice. They are a team.

The best approach requires your use of neutral facilitators, sourced from either inside or outside. They’ll balance the inevitable tussles a workshop is intended to stir up. It’s easier for them to do so because they don’t have a pre-set agenda.

What kind of result should they be trying to produce? Full, engaged accountability and a plan which has a high likelihood of being game-changing.

But don’t follow this advice for a “placeholder” retreat intended to preserve status quo thinking. While it will ruffle feathers, you can expect the above formula to generate superlative results.

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.

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.