Columns

In the ever-evolving landscape of business, some voices argue that the concept of strategy is becoming obsolete, overshadowed by the rapid pace of change. Yet, beneath this assertion lies a reluctance to engage in deep, thoughtful planning—a sentiment that betrays a certain intellectual inertia. How can we reshape this perspective, sparking a transformation in those who seem trapped within it?

Imagine participating in a 5k race. At the starting gunshot, you witness young runners dashing forth with an incredible burst of speed. A mile or two later, however, you find them struggling, on the brink of exhaustion, while you maintain a steady jog, passing them by. They fell into a common trap: assuming a long-distance race can be conquered by a series of short sprints.

The truth is, successful long-distance running requires a series of well-informed decisions. Every step carries consequences, and a misstep can lead to failure.

This analogy seamlessly mirrors the distinction between tactical maneuvers and strategic planning in an organizational context. To prevent confusion, businesses must delineate these concepts clearly.

Distinguishing Between Short-Term Tactics and Long-Term Strategy

Modern tendencies have led to the casual labeling of everything as “strategic,” a practice that dilutes its significance. Consider the phrase “strategic goals for the week.” Yet, placing a fancy veneer on a shrub won’t yield a salad.

Challenge this tendency, as I did in a Gleaner column on January 23, 2022, titled “Why Short-Term Strategy is a Misnomer.” I explored the incongruity of coupling these two words. The essence: tactics span a few years, while strategies encompass a much longer horizon. In this article, let’s assume the cutoff point to be five years.

With this test at hand, a stark truth emerges: most companies lack written strategic plans.

Yet, both tactics and strategies remain essential in a thriving organization. However, their demarcation extends beyond time frames. They stand as separate disciplines, and interchanging them can lead to an unsustainable sprint, endangering the future. To avert this, let’s scrutinize their individual roles.

Strategies: The Architects of Transformation

The concept of BHAGs—Big Hairy Audacious Goals—commands attention. Defined by visionaries Jim Collins and Jerry Porras, these goals entail transformative results, forming a roadmap for a company’s metamorphosis. The Sustainable Development Goals set by the UN for 2030 in 2015, and Jamaica’s Vision 2030, forged in 2007, stand as prominent examples. Echoing through history is President Kennedy’s 1961 moonshot declaration, propelling humanity to the lunar surface within a decade.

Strategic plans are purposely designed to realize such audacious visions. But modernity demands them to be credible in new ways. Why?

An attainable plan provides a solid foundation, a platform of trust that validates visionary aspirations. In a world numbed by the barrage of daily promises from advertisers, credibility is paramount. Mere proclamations hold no sway; substance is demanded.

Additionally, the translation of grand plans into immediate actions is pivotal. This is where tactics come into play.

Tactics: The Craftsmen of Incremental Change

Execution of any long-term commitment mandates swift short-term actions. These actions exist independently from ingrained habits and routine, daily processes.

Realizing BHAGs necessitates altering these operational elements. These micro-transformations constitute tactics, to be executed by your team.

However, this is easier said than done. Overcoming inertia to scale these long-term commitments is a formidable task.

Case in point: If a company is perpetually reactive, progress is hard to sustain over years.

Similarly, if an organization’s status quo has endured for eons, kindling enthusiasm for BHAGs seems to be an impossible pursuit.

The crux is that achieving long-term aspirations hinges on tactical modifications, demanding adept change management.

While strategies and tactics are distinct, they must remain united without being confused. This unity is the compass guiding an organization toward its envisioned future.

In summary, the narrative of a road race underscores the vital distinction between strategic vision and tactical maneuvers. By untangling these concepts and skillfully blending them, organizations can chart a course toward their ultimate goals. As you reflect on your organization’s journey, remember, it’s not about doing either the sprint or the jog—it’s about the seamless, synchronized dance between the two that propels you forward.

This article is based on a similar column published in the Jamaica Gleaner. It’s available behind the newspaper’s paywall.

You have heard of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive or its acronym, CSRD. You know that it has something to do with the EU which means that you haven’t paid it much attention. It’s far away.

However, this could be a mistake. This new standard for disclosure reaches into some unlikely places for all companies who do business with the continent. In this article, we’ll look at the impact on your corporate strategy.

Recently, the European Commission reaffirmed its commitment to “Net Zero 2050.” Inspired by the Paris Agreement, their goal is to be climate-neutral by 2050 – an economy with net zero greenhouse gas emissions. Lest the world relax, an interim target was set to reduce emissions by at least 55% by 2030.

CSRD makes it plain that big companies must play their part in accomplishing these goals. As such, they are required to report their progress annually via certain templates. But what does this have to do with a large company in Jamaica?

Well, your firm may not have a European subsidiary. And it might never reach the E40m turnover or 250 employee lower limit for inclusion. However, it may have wholesale customers on the continent. If so, it will probably be required by them to report on your conduct as a member of its supply chain.

But this is already happening.

Last week, I browsed Booking.com for a holiday stay in Ocho Rios. Now, there’s a new badge for each property to earn: a “Travel Sustainable Level”. According to the website, the programme was “introduced in 2021 to provide travelers with transparent and credible information to make more mindful choices for their trips.”

In other words, the intent of CSRD is already being realized. It seeks to give stakeholders knowledge about each large company’s progress on goals such as Net Zero 2050.

This new standard is likely to be seen by some as a nuisance. But for others, particularly in the area of strategic planning, there lies an opportunity.

How CSRD Can Help Shape Your Strategy

Essentially, the new standard mandates your company to tell the world how its strategy for topics related to Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) are faring. It expects you to address this explicitly in your short, mid and long-term strategic plans.

However, if you are like most companies, you don’t have anything more than a five-year list of tactics. But you aren’t alone. As a result of upheavals since the 9/11 Terrorist Attack, firms have argued that they don’t have time for long-term thinking.

Instead, their energies have focused on basic survival…short-termism.

CSRD says that if you continue to indulge in this dangerous practice, you will be required to highlight this fact to your stakeholders in your ESG disclosures.

While this sounds like a threat, some are seeing it as an opportunity, or at least an excuse to do the right thing.

The Optimal Response

In essence, your company has two choices to meet the directive.

1) The Compliant Low Road consists of sticking to an approach of only keeping short-term business tactics. This means that you will need a separate strategic plan for all matters ESG-related.

While some firms have hired sustainability professionals to do this very task, some are calling it out as a form of greenwashing. Said differently, it’s probably just a way to be compliant without making fundamental changes.

2) The Transformational High Road means crafting mid and long-term strategic plans for your business, if they don’t currently exist. Ideally, they should reach as far as 2050 to be completely aligned with the Net Zero aspiration.

If your company already has a written long-term strategic plan, then this may just be an exercise in adding a few different dimensions. The CSRD is actually developed for companies like yours. The adjustment should be easy.

However, if it’s never had an interwoven short/long-term strategic plan, this might be the perfect moment to begin. You do have some time before this becomes a requirement.

But your free paper is being burned up. The SEC in the United States and the IFRS are expected to recommend similar reporting standards, in line with existing requirements for financial disclosure.

It’s not too late to start getting your company ready. Schedule time to prepare the right kind of interwoven short/long-term strategic plans.

As you do so, be prepared to answer the questions raised by CSRD. Even if the process you follow is sound, these may not be central concerns. But they will fit in with the thinking the EU Commission wants you to do.

When the time comes to complete the forms required for your CSRD reporting, you’ll be ready.

The original article was published in the Jamaica Gleaner.