Columns

As a Founder/CEO, maximizing stakeholder engagement is crucial for your company’s success. Some stakeholders enthusiastically support the organization, yet you occasionally notice significant discrepancies among motivated individuals. Why? Their departments may inadvertently work against each other due to differing managerial perspectives regarding the future.

Despite consistently communicating your vision as a leader, it doesn’t seem to stick in their minds. Merely reiterating the vision doesn’t seem sufficient to align them effectively.

Does It Matter?

Beyond observing conflicting efforts, you also witness some employees lacking motivation, eventually choosing to leave. Despite regular pay and a strong company track record, some individuals express disinterest or discontent.

What’s been overlooked is that once basic needs are met, people seek an inspiring future in their work lives. When this future isn’t evident, they begin creating their own paths, separate from the company’s vision.

For instance, your top employees seem more excited about leaving than remaining with your company. It’s not just a “local life in this town” issue; they’re rejecting the future you’ve presented to them.

Moreover, while the board urges bold moves, the executives fear taking risks, indicating that your vision alone isn’t compelling enough. They crave a more tangible, engaging “future-to-live-into”.

What is a “Future-to-Live-Into”?

Your organization might have a vision statement, but if it’s stale or lacks specificity, it won’t resonate. Staff members today seek more engaging content beyond traditional vision statements.

What’s the Purpose?

Vision statements once offered an inspiring future-to-live-into. Coined by Werner Erhard, it’s a compelling, verbalized future that motivates people to act positively.

How to Harness This Power?

Merely hosting meetings won’t displace default futures. However, there are design principles to follow, like creating a comprehensive, dated, and inspiring endpoint that surpasses previous visions.

Design Rule: A Clear, Time-Bound, Inspiring Vision

To move beyond the CEO’s vision or generic statements, stakeholders desire explicit inspiration and meaning. Crafting a fresh, collective future-to-live-into involves summarizing relevant facts, acknowledging past successes and failures, and identifying unavoidable trends.

Setting a target year anchors ideas within a specific timeframe. Next, articulate a compelling vision with BHAGs, ensuring it’s inspiring enough.

But don’t stop there. Stakeholders seek a credible strategic plan backing these aspirations, providing detail to validate the concept and unify the team.

In the end, a cohesive, fresh future-to-live-into emerges, inspiring the team and replacing their default futures. You’ll have cultivated a cause worth championing, not just a job offering a paycheck.

Have you ever left a strategic planning retreat feeling invigorated, only to find that the excitement fizzles out? Despite the initial enthusiasm and belief in the positive change that was about to ensue, weeks later, the essence of those profound discussions becomes a distant memory.

The baffling reality is this: a gathering of bright, dedicated individuals, all ardently striving to make a meaningful difference, encountered an unexpected descent post-retreat. The perplexity of this decline seemed insurmountable, leaving one pondering what went awry.

Thankfully, a recent book “Lead from the Future” by Johnson and Suskewicz sheds new light. These insights delineate a striking dichotomy in mindsets: “Past Forward” versus “Future Back.” Let’s delve into these divergent mental frameworks to illuminate the conundrum at hand.

The Dichotomy of Mindsets

The prevalent “Past Forward” mindset thrives on incremental advancements, rooted in dissecting past triumphs and failures. It’s the default mode for most managers navigating day-to-day challenges, leveraging their proven track records that propelled them up the ranks.

However, the milieu of a strategic planning retreat demands a paradigm shift, beckoning participants to embrace an unfamiliar “Future Back” approach. Here lies the crux: mastering this skill within a group setting remains uncharted territory for the average manager.

Sure, crafting lofty vision statements might seem within their purview. Yet, sculpting a comprehensive future and then backcasting it to the present demands a distinct skill set. It’s akin to acquainting oneself with an intricate dance just moments before the performance begins.

Initial struggles are commonplace with newfound skills. Yet, with perseverance, momentum gradually builds. Ideas cascade, intertwine, and gather pace, an exhilarating whirlwind of innovation and collaboration ensues.

The Fragility of Future Back Thinking

However, amidst this euphoria lurks a paradox unique to strategic planning assemblies.

Picture hurtling down a steep incline in a hastily assembled homemade go-kart…at breakneck speeds. The thrill is palpable, but the precariousness looms – at any moment, the framework could splinter apart.

Similarly, the pinnacle of a strategic planning retreat rests atop the fragile pedestal of a Future Back mindset. However, the buoyant euphoria often leads participants to overestimate its durability, a temporary high masking its ephemeral nature.

Regrettably, mere hours post-retreat, this Future Mindset evaporates. The commitments, decisions, and promises made during the meeting dissolve as the rigors of daily operations resurface, ushering back the Present Forward mentality.

Hence, navigating this transition demands astute tactics tailored for strategic planning retreats, steering teams from this transient mindset toward tangible implementation.

Constructing Resilient Frameworks

Envisage your next retreat as an arena for implementing these tactics:

– Visual Strategy Mapping: Transcend mere verbal articulation; employ diagrams to encapsulate the elusive strategic hypothesis underlying your deliberations.

– Actionable Projects: Define projects in tangible terms, delineating actionable steps for seamless execution.

– Project Descriptions: Elaborate on each project in written paragraphs, engraving its significance and rationale into the strategy.

– Sponsorship Assignments: Appoint sponsors for each project, fostering ownership and ensuring continuity beyond the retreat.

– Comprehensive Documentation: Record vital discussions and retain transcripts for future reference and sustenance of momentum.

These strategic pillars aren’t just conveniences; they stand guard against the pervasive “Strategy Amnesia” plaguing planning efforts. Deploy them to infuse accountability and anticipation into the implementation phase, steering clear of post-retreat disillusionment.

The transition from manager to CEO often proves to be an intricate journey, one that presents unique challenges to those stepping into this elevated role. Managers, typically adept at producing short-term results, find their focus honed on meeting quarterly or yearly targets.

However, a distinct realization dawns upon some top-tier executives – a profound responsibility transcending immediate successes. This newfound responsibility calls for the articulation of a vision. But it can’t be a hollow ‘vision statement.’ Instead, it must be a transformative, long-term destination capable of captivating and engaging stakeholders on a deeper level.

Yet, embracing this visionary aspect doesn’t come effortlessly for a new leader. Consequently, many opt for shortcuts, each carrying its set of pitfalls and limitations.

One shortcut involves redefining the concept of ‘long-term,’ squeezing it into the narrow confines of three to five years. The other shortcut involves padding the current plan with additional years, adding superficial layers that fail to address the underlying complexities. However, these superficial approaches inevitably pave the path to failure. Let’s delve deeper into the reasons behind this.

Comprehending Managerial Mindsets

At strategic planning retreats, managers engage in collaborative activities. Yet, beneath the action, a phenomenon unfolds, understood by only a few individuals.

Johnson and Suskewicz, in their book ‘Lead from the Future,’ introduce a compelling concept termed the ‘Past Forward’ mindset. This mindset characterizes managers elevated to the C-Suite based on their track record of delivering immediate results. It’s a mindset steeped in past experiences – leveraging prior triumphs and missteps to pave incremental pathways for future improvements.

Occasionally, amidst routine meetings, a contrary voice emerges, questioning the grander vision for the company’s trajectory. However, these inquiries often get sidelined, perceived as peripheral to the immediate agenda.

Fast forward to mandatory strategic retreats, met with groans by many attendees. These managers view the retreats as distractions diverting their attention from pressing targets.

Embracing a New Perspective

Consequently, most attendees walk into these retreats entrenched in the ‘Present Forward’ mindset, secretly yearning for swift remedies before returning to their ‘actual’ responsibilities.

Thus, engineering a shift – an imperative transition to what the authors term the ‘Future Back’ approach – becomes the order of the day. This approach necessitates envisioning credible, transformative futures – a significant departure from vague, traditional vision statements. It’s about precisely delineating new destinations that will, in turn, inform robust strategic plans.

While no standardized formula can usher in this transition universally, leveraging the dynamics of a cohesive team often bears fruit. A shift in mindset among a few can catalyze a ripple effect, influencing others to follow suit.

To initiate this paradigm shift, I recommend embarking on a deep dive into the current challenges. However, this isn’t about finding quick fixes; it’s about diagnosing issues and devising long-lasting solutions. Often, persistent challenges arise from long-ignored problems.

Previous executives, ensnared in the ‘Present Forward’ mindset, defer addressing these. They follow the Southwest Airlines’ IT fiasco of late 2022, which stemmed from repeated delays in system updates.

This diagnostic phase of the retreat is an unprecedented opportunity to confront long-overdue matters, liberated from the usual shackles of time constraints.

Anticipate witnessing a surge in collective energy as the C-Suite delves into long-term thinking, unloading pent-up frustrations. Additionally, this event inadvertently fosters a unique team-building experience.

However, sustaining the ‘Future Back’ mindset individually is a formidable challenge. Most CEOs need the collective support of a group setting to prolong this mindset beyond fleeting moments.

Top leaders thrive in such retreats, experiencing an intellectual shift beyond the confines of immediate urgencies. Here, the C-Suite collectively embodies the ‘Future Back’ mindset, embracing the vision of chief executives thinking on a collective scale.

This alleviates the pressure on CEOs to function as the solitary visionaries. For the duration of the retreat, they coalesce into a cohesive ‘Future Back Team,’ diverging from the solitary focus on ‘hitting numbers.’

Unfortunately, this transformational journey is transient in nature. Therefore, to solidify this unique mindset and embed it into the organizational fabric, I will delve into strategies for concretizing commitments. This must happen quickly: before this transcendent essence dissipates.

In my next article, I will address how to take strong next steps.

Ensuring your plan possesses a genuine strategy is crucial, yet sometimes, strategic plans lack strategic essence. Here’s why this happens and how to prevent it.

Imagine joining a new management team and attempting to grasp the existing strategic plan. You ask for documentation due to the confusing explanations from your new colleagues. However, reviewing the outputs from the last planning project doesn’t provide the clarity you seek. Instead, it overwhelms with numerous words and diagrams, leaving you feeling lost. The strategy fails to emerge from the pages.

But don’t worry—it’s not you. The issue lies in the strategy’s formulation. Often, strategic planning results in nothing more than a wish-list or a laundry-list.

The wish-list resembles a child’s letter to Santa—dreams of a pony, a helicopter, and a 65-inch television. Similarly, the strategic plan includes all good things imaginable without any hard choices being made.

Conversely, the laundry-list mirrors disorganized ad-hoc tasks lacking clear reasoning. Even when categorized for readability, their origin and purpose remain obscure. They reveal a lack of real thought.

But let’s not be too critical. While every strategic plan includes goals and action items, these lists miss conveying the essence of the chosen strategy. Consequently, they fail to distinguish it from plans in similar organizations.

At the core of a poor strategic plan a crucial element is missing—the strategic hypothesis. It might not be officially named as such, but its essence is critical.

To craft this essential hypothetical element, understand that strategic hypotheses, though sounding abstract, are simple in concept. Recognize that testing a strategy’s validity only happens through implementation—until then, it’s an educated guess, a hypothesis.

Why this approach? Because true strategic planning begins with incomplete information, lacking valuable historical data to predict success. Additionally, the human element and flawed communication within leadership contribute to unpredictability. Moreover, the ever-changing external environment adds another layer of variability.

This unpredictability poses challenges, making long-term strategic planning daunting for some executives. They find leaving things to chance easier than forging a hypothesis that demands multiple steps, significant investments, and years of effort.

However, positive examples exist of companies incorporating game-changing strategic hypotheses. Take Steve Jobs and Apple in 2000, during the Dot-Com Bust. Despite adversity, they formulated a 10-year strategic hypothesis—shifting from selling high-end desktops to interconnected devices like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. This innovation led Apple from near-bankruptcy to become the world’s most valued company.

Jamaica’s GraceKennedy, in the 1990s, facing currency challenges, devised a 25-year vision (GK2020) to enter financial services and overseas markets. This move saved it from disaster and yielded monumental results.

In all strategic hypotheses, intricate links exist between proposed actions and desired outcomes. Apple and GK couldn’t guarantee success with limited information, yet their bold moves changed their trajectories.

So, can your executive team craft a game-changing strategic hypothesis? Though not easy, doing so could make all the difference.