The typical strategic planning process at most of today's large and midsize organizations is an extremely time-intensive, manual endeavor that relies heavily on formal meetings, multiple rounds of presentations, and tedious amounts of data gathering and report compiling. Because of these factors, the time and attention of senior management -- the most valuable resource of any organization -- are spent more on presentation formalities than on meaningful strategic decision making and strategy execution. An inefficient corporate strategy exercise often produces a plethora of static, paper-based documents that -- while attempting to collectively describe a detailed plan for the future -- do little to actually activate and lead the organization forward from the plan into action, navigating the fast-paced and dynamic nature of today's global economy.


In fact, it is this dynamic nature of business that renders the vast majority of paper-based strategic plans obsolete by the time they have finally been disseminated down the corporate ranks, leaving behind a plan that is no longer actionable and, therefore, offers very little value to the organization. To make matters worse, this process is often repeated ritually year after year at every major level and unit of the firm, resulting in huge expenditures of valuable resources with little or no regard for analyzing and evaluating past results and assumptions from the previous cycle.

Few executives will argue against the need for an effective strategic planning process. There is little doubt that sound strategic thinking and information-supported decision making are the foundation of successful strategy formulation. What is often overlooked, however, is that an ever-changing business environment demands more from a strategic plan than a series of PowerPoint presentations and Excel spreadsheets can effectively offer. Most paper-based strategic plans will end up in a binder sitting on a shelf, rarely referenced as a guide for real on-going execution.

Without an organization's ability to access its current strategic plan in real-time, systematic tracking, daily follow-through, and accurate reporting of past results is hardly possible as the connection between strategy execution and accountability for its implementation is ultimately lost.

Chronic Misalignment


The reality is that most large multi-unit organizations are chronically misaligned. A quick examination of what goes on within their walls would reveal an ever-expanding list of misaligned, often duplicative projects and activities and an over-abundance of non-strategic and in-congruent goals and measures, along with a relentless supply of daily tactical "fire drills."

Widespread misalignment puts a drain on the organization, often causing initiative overload, mission fatigue, and a sense of complacency. This is then followed by a counter-response of procedural bureaucracy and competition for resources that ultimately results in a "siloed" corporate structure. Consequently, attempting to formulate and deploy a compelling corporate business strategy that is properly synced with strategies at the unit and I.T. levels is daunting and complex -- exponentially so for multi-national organizations with multiple divisions and business units.

The fact is that these issues are more or less inherent at most large multi-unit organizations. It is their ability to efficiently rectify widespread misalignment of corporate-wide strategy that will help avoid large-scale failure of strategy execution.

Traditional enterprise software limitations and cost-to-support strategy

For most organizations, integrating multiple individual software tools from several different enterprise software vendors into one effective strategy implementation system can increase the total "cost of ownership" by an alarming factor. Generally, software deployment for stand-alone packages for tools like project management and performance management can take anywhere from several months to several years to implement -- especially when you factor in the necessary training and adoption time across the organization due to the increased level of complexity that is inherent in such an undertaking.

Additionally, the real cost of implementation is often times hidden within expensive maintenance fees, high setup costs, and endless customization and integration costs. Even after a huge potential investment - not to mention the tremendous time commitment necessary to get separate software packages from the biggest vendors in working in unison - effective and seamless vision-to-execution strategy management is difficult at best. After all, they weren't designed for the purpose of managing strategy anyway.


References and Related Articles

(1) "Why CEOs Fail" - Fortune, 6/21/99

(2) "Strategies For Corporate Growth" - European Business Journal, 6/1/00

Stratana White Paper: Automating Strategy