Not everything is strategic Triad Beyond Failure October 27, 2024

Hello and welcome back to Chronicles from a Caribbean Cubicle podcast. This is Francis Wade. Here's an article that's based on a column recently published in the Jamaica Gleaner. This article is entitled Beyond Recurring Failure: Using the Strategy Triad. Studies consistently show that most strategic plans fall short. The reasons are varied, but a common mistake stands out: teams often assume they understand "strategic" planning, only to end up misguided, compromising their organization's success. Often, what they call a strategic plan lacks real strategic thought. If you've ever reviewed a company's strategic plan, you've likely seen a list of ambitious goals. They may be grouped in catchy ways, but as you read through, doubts surface. Why? You sense the organization may lack the resources or focus to achieve all these objectives simultaneously. The longer the list, the more you suspect it may be abandoned when daily issues arise, with lofty goals slipping out of view. Redefining strategic. One way to prevent this common pitfall is to rethink how we use the term strategic. Today, the label strategic is often used casually to signal importance, so much so that it's lost its impact and audiences tune it out. This is not just a communication issue. When teams invest time in a strategic retreat, they expect the final plan to be truly strategic, yet often that's not the case. Typical brainstorming sessions encourage a mix of ideas and positive intentions without much structure. The result is often an extensive report of hopeful outcomes, which can look similar to other plans within the industry—ultimately, another reason for failure. Enter the Strategy Triad. Peter Kompo's book, The Emergent Strategy, introduces a helpful definition of strategic by proposing a 3-part approach: 1. Aspiration: a meaningful, challenging goal that requires effort and won't happen automatically. 2. Bottleneck: the main obstacle preventing the organization from achieving its aspirations. 3. Guiding Principle: A decision-making rule to help navigate actions that address the bottleneck. Consider a store aiming to increase profits. If the biggest bottleneck is low brand recognition, the guiding principle could be to improve brand awareness through multiple channels—online, in-store, and through partnerships. Applying the Strategy Triad. At a recent strategic planning offsite, a leadership team was challenged to apply the triad. Initially, it was difficult. Identifying bottlenecks from new perspectives required collaboration and creativity, especially without cross-functional data. This led them to rely on firsthand experiences. Yet they successfully defined bottlenecks and guiding principles that empowered employees to align their daily choices with the strategic plan. This alignment is what leaders want but is often rare. Why alignment is rare. Leadership teams often avoid the challenging healthy conflict required to build a robust strategy triad. They may take the easier path, creating lists of goals rather than diving into critical strategic planning. Alternatively, when discussions become too heated, leaders may intervene prematurely, cutting off debate and limiting essential buy-in. To achieve meaningful alignment, it's important to work through differing viewpoints until agreement is reached. Though challenging, this process builds the intellectual and emotional commitment needed for successful execution. By persevering through difficult conversations, leaders can significantly improve their strategic plan's success and longevity. Thanks for listening. Do you have an unsolved problem in your Caribbean company related to strategy, productivity, engagement, or business process improvement? Just visit a searchable listing of all my prior articles and you may be able to help yourself to a fresh line of thinking. Go to blog.fwconsulting.com or see the show notes.