Four myths about implementing business strategies

Reading time: 3 min

Organizations spend a lot of time meticulously developing strategic plans in order to compete successfully in the marketplace. However, most managers estimate the level of successful implementation of these plans at best from 25 to 35%, while less optimistic experts voice an extremely low figure of 10%. Why is it so difficult? We reveal four myths about the implementation of strategies. The material was prepared according to the book “Goals and Key Results”.

Myth 1. Implementation means following the plan.

Mike Tyson famously described his attitude to the strategy of the enemy: “Everyone has a plan until they get kicked in the face.”

Strategic plans do not always withstand a collision with reality.

Goals and key results

Building a portfolio of strategic initiatives to ensure strategy success is part of the typical strategic planning process for most companies. These initiatives entail the allocation of human and financial resources, and once adopted, companies are often reluctant to change anything about them.

However, to implement the strategy, you need flexibility, that is, the ability to catch changes and respond to them, making both small and large changes in your strategy. In addition, companies must also be flexible in reallocating human and financial resources to take advantage of emerging opportunities. Fixed-minded people who treat plans as if they were truths carved in stone and do not want to correct them will pay dearly for the implementation of what does not correspond to the new realities.

Read more: How does the HR system work?

Myth 2: Implementation is consistency

It is an almost undeniable business truth that it is essential to achieve alignment, or, to put it more simply, to make sure “everyone is rowing in the same direction.” Undoubtedly, consistency is a worthy goal, but the problem often lies in the implementation of this goal.

Many companies, despite their good intentions, quickly turn this process into a top-down directive, with top management proposing a set of seemingly important tasks and imposing them on the organization with no regard for how the staff will perform these tasks. In this situation, execution suffers: individual business units and structural divisions create goals that are consistent with the goals of management, but do not take into account the interests of other groups and teams. Forced cascading creates “functional wells” (acting solely in their own interests), and this makes cross-functional interaction difficult.

Myth 3. Communication is understanding

Given the availability of simple and relatively inexpensive ways of digital communication, even small companies can significantly expand the possibilities of communication with their employees. And not just with digital tools! In most organizations, top management is known to spend a lot of time communicating strategy.

Unfortunately, information rarely reaches the minds of listeners.

A survey of managers of 250 companies around the world showed that only half of them could even name the key goal of their company. This is a very low figure, but other studies have shown an even weaker understanding of the company’s priorities. The survey revealed that only one in seven people—that is, 15%—is able to articulate the main goal of their company.

This phenomenon is explained in different ways, but quite often one can observe the tendency of organizations to load employees with incomprehensible terms (jargon). It is not uncommon for a company to have core values, strategic priorities, a mission, a vision, a code of ethics, core competencies, and the like—but these are nothing more than big words. Not surprisingly, employees are confused: they do not know what these words mean and what to look for, and therefore do not pay special attention to any of these words.

Myth 4: A performance culture drives implementation

If executives are asked to describe competition in their industries, they are likely to name adjectives such as “strong”, “intense”, and “tough”. Thus, the relentless pursuit of performance is justified when you are trying to stand out from the competition. In some cases, performance is so important that failure can be your curse, and everyone wants to avoid it at all costs. “Mistakes” and oversights are hidden, the game of “Find the Blame” is played with special zeal, while the organization quickly falls behind.

In the question of the formation of culture, as in any other, it is necessary to maintain a balance. Performance is important, but equally valuable to an organization are flexibility, teamwork, collaboration, and risk taking. To encourage implementation, so-called failures should be discussed openly. In fact, failures are sources of data that need to be studied, learned from them, and used to improve processes in the future.