Defination

A strategy is a plan of action designed to

achieve a particular goal. The word strategy

has military connotations, because it derives
from the Greek word for general.[1]
Strategy is different from tactics. In military
terms, tactics is concerned with the conduct of
an engagement while strategy is concerned
with how different engagements are linked. In
other words, how a battle is fought is a matter
of tactics: the terms that it is fought on and
whether it should be fought at all is a matter of
strategy.

 Strategies in game theory

In game theory, a strategy refers to one of the options

that a player can choose. That is, every player in a noncooperative game has a set of possible strategies, and
must choose one of them.
A strategy must specify what action will happen in each
contingent state of the game - e.g. if the opponent does
A, then take action B, whereas if the opponent does C,
take action D.
Strategies in game theory may be random (mixed) or
deterministic (pure). That is, in some games, players
choose mixed strategies. Pure strategies can be thought
of as a special case of mixed strategies, in which only
probabilities 0 or 1 are assigned to actions.

 Strategic planning is an organization's process of

defining its strategy, or direction, and making

decisions on allocating its resources to pursue this
strategy, including its capital and people. Various
business analysis techniques can be used in strategic
planning, including SWOT analysis (Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats ) and PEST
analysis (Political, Economic, Social, and Technological
analysis) or STEER analysis (Socio-cultural,
Technological, Economic, Ecological, and Regulatory
factors) and EPISTEL (Environment, Political,
Informatic, Social, Technological, Economic and Legal).

Strategic planning is the formal consideration

of an organization's future course. All strategic

planning deals with at least one of three key
questions:
"What do we do?"
"For whom do we do it?"
"How do we excel?"

 In business strategic planning, the third

question is better phrased "How can we beat

or avoid competition?". (Bradford and Duncan,
page 1).
In many organizations, this is viewed as a
process for determining where an organization
is going over the next year or more -typically
3 to 5 years, although some extend their
vision to 20 years.

Execution of strategies
But good strategies fail too, and when that

happens, it's often harder to pinpoint the

reasons. Yet despite the obvious importance
of good planning and execution, relatively few
management thinkers have focused on what
kinds of processes and leadership are best for
turning a strategy into results.

Contd
But can better execution be taught?
You can develop a model.... If people know

what the key variables are, they know what to

look for and what questions to ask."

While execution can go wrong for a variety of

reasons, one of the most basic may be

allowing the focus of the strategy to shift over
time.

Goal- shifting
The attempt by Hewlett-Packard, after it

acquired Compaq, to compete with Dell in PCs

through scale is a classic example of goalshifting -- competing on price one week,
service the next, while trying to sell through
often conflicting, high-cost channels. The
result: CEO Carly Fiorina lost her job and HP
still must resolve some key strategic issues.

Another classic example of mis-

synchronization: United Air Lines' TED, which

attempted to set up a competitive subsidiary
to compete against upstarts such as
Southwest. This was a good idea as far as it
went, but United tried to compete using its
same old cost structure -- the main reason it
was losing markets to the low-cost airlines in
the first place.

 At other times, plans fail simply because they

don't get communicated to all the people

involved.
Strategies also flop because individuals resist
the change. For example, headquarters might
want more standardization in a product, but a
local marketing executive disagrees with the
idea. "He might say, 'I need more nuts in my
chocolate bar' or 'I need a different pack
size,'"

 Many times, there can be sound reasons for

resistance. Sometimes a strategy might make

sense at the highest level, but its full impact on
the whole organization has not been fully
considered,
For example, imagine that the general strategy
calls for promoting one brand throughout the
company while taking resources away from
another brand. That might make sense in one
market, yet be completely counterproductive
elsewhere

 Cultural factors can also hinder execution.

Companies sometimes try to apply a tried-and-true

strategy without realizing that they are operating
in markets that require a different approach. Even
such a world-beater at execution as Wal-Mart, for
instance, has sometimes made some missteps
because of culture. One example: When Wal-Mart
first moved in to Brazil, it tried to lay down terms
with suppliers in the same way it does in the U.S.,
where it carries huge weight in the market.
Suppliers simply refused to play, and the company
was forced to reevaluate its strategy.

Yet the biggest factor of all may be executive

inattention. Once a plan is decided upon,

there is often surprisingly little follow-through
to ensure that it is executed,

"Less than 15% of companies routinely track

how they perform over how they thought they

were going to perform,
Instead, only the first year's goals are
measured -- and executives often set firstyear goals deliberately low in order to meet a
threshold for a bonus.

 One school emphasizes people: Just put the

right people in place and the right things will

get done. However, within the people school,
there are also divisions. Some experts insist
that the right people are hired, not made.
the key is to improve executive performance
through training, and improve the average
employee's performance through the creation
of a culture of accountability.

For example,W. James McNerney, Jr., the

chairman and CEO of 3M, argues that by

improvingthe average performance of every
individual by 15%, irrespective of what his or
her role is,a company can achieve and
sustain consistentlysuperior performance.

Five Keys to Getting the

Job
Done

Develop a model for execution.

- Michael Porter's theory of comparative
advantage
Choose the right metrics.
- sales and market share are always going to
be the dominant metrics of business

 Don't forget the plan.

- plans are often simply agreed to and then

forgotten !
Assess performance frequently.
- Performance monitoring is still an annual
affair at most companies. The reason why
Wal-Mart is so good at execution is it knows
daily if what it is doing in each of its stores
gets results or not

 By shortening the performance monitoring

cycle -- from quarter-by-quarter to month-bymonth or week-by-week -- top management

can get more "real-time" feedback on the
quality of execution down the line.
Communicate.
- companies often go wrong by creating a
cultural distinction between the executives
who design a strategy and people lower down
in the corporate hierarchy who carry it out.

WYDIWYG
Strategy is Execution. Another way of saying

this is WYDIWG What You DO Is What You

Get.
Strategy Is . . .
Strategy is many things: plan, pattern,
position, ploy and perspective. As plan,
strategy relates how we intend realizing
our goals.

As position, strategy is the stance we take: to

literally take the high ground, to be the lowcost provider, to compete on the basis of
value, to price to what the market will bear, to
match or beat the price offered by any
competitor,
As ploy, strategy is a ruse, it relies on secrecy
and often on deception

As perspective, strategy is part vantage point

and part the view from that vantage point,

particularly the way this view shapes and
guides decisions and actions.

Strategy is Execution
Strategy is Execution
Strategy is getting it right and doing it right.

On the one hand, we have to envision the

right course of action. On the other hand,
once chosen, we have to carry it out properly

If our strategy and its execution are both

flawed, the effort is "doomed from the

beginning." Our chances of success are zero,
nil
If our strategy is sound but its execution is
flawed, we are guilty of muffing it

Only when our envisioned strategy and its

execution are sound do we stand a pretty

good chance of success. Even then success is
not guaranteed
So, even if we get the strategy right and even
if we carry it out efficiently and effectively, all
we can really say is that the odds are in our
favor, that we have "a pretty good chance.

 In the early 1980s, Tom Peters made a

presentation to a group of senior managers at

AT&T in which he used a slide that read,
"Execution is strategy." We can turn that
around and also say that strategy is
execution. In simpler terms, we adapt to
changing circumstances and so does our
strategy. Thus it is that strategy as envisioned
or contemplated becomes strategy as
executed or realized

Organizations that successfully execute even

mediocre strategies far outperform those that fail

to execute the most brilliant of plans! According
to Fortune Magazine, "less than 10% of strategies
effectively formulated are effectively executed."
Enterprise Strategy Execution (ESE) is a proven
methodology for driving better business results
that encompasses a continuous process of
prioritization, improvement, and control. ESE
focuses and empowers every employee toward
the common strategy.

How to Get There From Where You Are Today?

When an organization commits to ESE, it must

do so in steps or stages. Tackling all of the

various components at once -- no matter how
focused and motivated an organization is -- is
simply not feasible. New skills must be learned,
new behaviors encouraged, cultural changes
fostered -- all of which must occur over time to
be successful.

Many managers are comfortable planning, but

lag when it comes to actually putting the plan

into action.
The Execution Challenge
There are eight areas of obstacles or
challenges to strategy execution. Or, to put it
positively, there are eight areas of opportunity:
Handling them well will guarantee execution
success. The areas relating to the success of
execution are as follows:

Developing a model to guide execution

decisions or actions
Understanding how the creation of strategy
affects the execution of strategy
Managing change effectively, including
culture change
Understanding power or influence and using it
for execution success

Developing organizational structures that

foster information sharing, coordination, and

clear accountability
Developing effective controls and feedback
mechanisms
Knowing how to create an executionsupportive culture
Exercising execution-biased leadership

Without guidance, individuals do the things they

think are important, often resulting in

uncoordinated, divergent, even conflicting
decisions and actions.
Having a model or roadmap positively affects
execution success.
It all begins with strategy. Execution cannot
occur until one has something to execute. Bad
strategy begets poor execution and poor
outcomes, so it's important to focus first on a
sound strategy.

It is vital to get the "right people on the bus,

the wrong people off the bus," so to speak.

But it's also important to know where the bus
is going and why.
It drives the development of capabilities and
which people with what skills sit in what seats
on the bus.

Strategy defines the arena (customers,

markets, technologies, products, logistics) in

which the execution game is played.
Execution is an empty effort without the
guidance of strategy and short-term
objectives related to strategy.
Execution or strategy implementation often
involves change. Not handling change well will
spell disaster for execution efforts.

Power reflects strategy, structure, and critical

dependencies on capabilities and scarce

resources. Knowing what power is and how to
create and use influence can spell the difference
between execution success and failure.
Yet managers are often motivated not to share
information or work with their colleagues to
coordinate activities and achieve strategic and
short-term goals. Why? The answer to this
question is vital to the successful execution of
strategy.

Clear Responsibility and Accountability

This is one of the most important prerequisites for

successful execution, as basic as it sounds.

Managers must know who's doing what, when,

and why, as well as who's accountable for key

steps in the execution process. Without clear
responsibility and accountability, execution
programs will go nowhere. Knowing how to
achieve this clarity is central to execution
success.

The Right Culture

Organizations must develop execution-

supportive cultures. Execution demands a

culture of achievement, discipline, and
ownership
But developing or changing culture is no easy
task. Rock climbing, white-water rafting, paintgun battles, and other activities with the
management team are fun. They rarely,
however, produce lasting cultural change.

Leadership
Leadership must be execution biased. It must drive

the organization to execution success. It must

motivate ownership of and commitment to the
execution process.
Controls, Feedback, and Adaptation
Strategy execution processes support organizational
change and adaptation. Making strategy work
requires feedback about organizational performance
and then using that information to fine-tune strategy,
objectives, and the execution process itself.

Tackling too many execution decisions or

actions at once will surely create problems.

"When everything is important, then nothing
is important," is a clear but simple way of
expressing the issue. Priorities must be set
and a logical order to execution actions
adequately defined if execution is to succeed.
Planning requires anticipating early on what
must be done to make strategy work.

Managers cannot act in a helter-skelter

fashion when executing strategy. They can't

focus one day on organizational structure, the
next on culture, and then on to "good people,"
only to find out that strategy is vague or
severely flawed.
Managers require a "big picture" as well as an
understanding of the "nitty-gritty," the key
elements that comprise the big picture.

Strategy Development and Execution

(Strategy)
Assess your strategy on three levels (enterprise,
operational, tactical) to be sure they are working
together in an integrated way
Diagnose whether you should create a new plan,
or if something else is getting in the way
Link current initiatives to your strategy, suggest
alternatives, or recommend deletions
Ensure key leaders understand the strategy and
their roles in a

Organizational Effectiveness (People)

Assess whether you have the capabilities and capacity

required to achieve defined objectives

Determine if your current capabilities are being used in the
most productive ways or if they might be redeployed or
refocused to better advantage
Analyze the organizational structure to determine if it supports
effective business practices and management behaviors
Coach leaders to help their teams maintain focus on the most
critical issues
Help employees to work effectively across organizational
boundaries (geographies, functional areas, business units, etc.)

Process Management (Process)

Focus on core business processes, from end to end (e.g.

those that are critical to your business, yet are not the core
purpose of your business)
Assess where it hurts to improve performance and better
manage critical touch points, inputs, and outputs along the
process
Evaluate current metrics and key indicators to ensure they
are providing the right information to monitor the
effectiveness of the process
Ensure everyone knows who is responsible (and
accountable) for what and why

If you know both yourself and your enemy, you can

come out of hundreds of battles without danger, to

a higher ground of defeating an enemy without even
fighting, better strategy by exploring blue oceans
untapped and untargeted markets which hold
tremendous growth potential rather than going
head-to-head against rivals for a share of the
existing market. The latter scenario is akin to a red
ocean where competition is based on outperforming
the existing competitive benchmark. In other words,
the best approach to earn a competitive edge is to
gain the first mover advantage over competitors.

While competitors are the ones who set the

agenda and rule of the game in red oceans,

competition becomes insignificant in blue
oceans.

Twelve strategies for instilling

a culture of execution in your
Build accountability into meetings
organization:
Be realistic. Many strategies fail because

leaders don't make a realistic assessment of

whether the organization can execute the
plan.
Focus on a few priorities. I've seen
organizations with strategic plans that detail
twenty large strategies for one year.

 Ensure employees understand priorities.

This may sound simple, but my experience is

that most employees are not brought into the
loop about what is important to the
organization.
Set milestones. Break down every
organizational project into specific milestones
with action items and dates. Communicate
these milestones to employees and review the
status at each project meeting.

Use your business plan. Is your business

plan collecting dust? Many organizations go

through the motions of spending two days
every year developing strategic and business
plans, only to stick them in the bottom of the
drawer untouched

Hold people at the top accountable. If line

managers are not executing, it's usually

because their leader does not have an
accountability structure in place. Leaders
need to take ownership of their initiatives and
follow-up with managers to ensure completion

Promote candid dialog. This is one of the

biggest reasons why things don't get done in

organizations. Many managers don't want to
rock the boat, so they are very polite and
don't challenge each other or their leaders.
This often leads to failed projects and
initiatives because managers weren't honest
with each other.

What processes could have been better? Did

we meet our time commitments? If not, why?

Use this information to improve processes and
hold people accountable.
Confront performance issues. Some
managers put off confronting performance
issues because it's unpleasant and takes time.

 Reward the doers. Structure your bonus and

salary increases to reward those employees

who get things done. There must be enough
differentiation in bonuses and salary increases
to send the message that execution is
rewarded.
Align systems. Too many organizations have
business units that work in silos. Everyone is
working on their part, and there is no
alignment of the core projects or strategies

Holding employees accountable doesn't have

to be about micro-managing or dictating.

Setting clear expectations and due dates up
front makes the process easier for everyone
and promotes the best use of the
organization's time and money.

 It is also true that strategic planning may be a

tool for effectively plotting the direction of a

company; however, strategic planning itself
cannot foretell exactly how the market will
evolve and what issues will surface in the
coming days in order to plan your
organizational strategy. Therefore, strategic
innovation and tinkering with the 'strategic
plan' have to be a cornerstone strategy for an
organization to survive the turbulent business
climate.

Vision
Vision, mission and values
Vision: Defines the desired or intended future

state of an organization or enterprise in terms

of its fundamental objective and/or strategic
direction. Vision is a long term view,
sometimes describing a view of how the
organization would like the world in which it
operates to be. For example a charity working
with the poor might have a vision statement
which read "A world without poverty"

Mission
Mission: Defines the fundamental purpose of

an organization or an enterprise, basically

describing why it exists and what it does to
achieve its Vision. A corporate Mission can last
for many years, or for the life of the
organization. It is not an objective with a
timeline, but rather the overall goal that is
accomplished over the years as objectives are
achieved that are aligned with the corporate
mission.

Values
Values: Beliefs that are shared among the

stakeholders of an organization. Values drive

an organization's culture and priorities.

Methodologies
in
Strategic
Planning
Methodologies
There are many approaches to strategic planning

but typically a three-step process may be used:

Situation - evaluate the current situation and
how it came about.
Target - define goals and/or objectives
(sometimes called ideal state)
Path - map a possible route to the
goals/objectives

Draw-See-Think
One alternative approach is called Draw-See-Think
Draw - what is the ideal image or the desired end

state?
See - what is today's situation? What is the gap
from ideal and why?
Think - what specific actions must be taken to
close the gap between today's situation and the
ideal state?
Plan - what resources are required to execute the
activities?

See-Think-Draw
An alternative to the Draw-See-Think

approach is called See-Think-Draw

See - what is today's situation?
Think - define goals/objectives
Draw - map a route to achieving the
goals/objectives

 strategic planning can be as follows:

Vision - Define the vision and set a mission statement

with hierarchy of goals and objectives

SWOT - Analysis conducted according to the desired
goals
Formulate - Formulate actions and processes to be
taken to attain these goals
Implement - Implementation of the agreed upon
processes
Control - Monitor and get feedback from implemented
processes to fully control the operation

Mission statements and vision

statements

Mission statements and vision statements

Organizations sometimes summarize goals and objectives into a mission
statement and/or a vision statement Others begin with a vision and
mission and use them to formulate goals and objectives.
While the existence of a shared mission is extremely useful, many strategy
specialists question the requirement for a written mission statement.
However, there are many models of strategic planning that start with
mission statements, so it is useful to examine them here.
A Mission statement tells you the fundamental purpose of the
organization. It defines the customer and the critical processes. It informs
you of the desired level of performance.
A Vision statement outlines what the organization wants to be, or how it
wants the world in which it operates to be. It concentrates on the future. It
is a source of inspiration. It provides clear decision-making criteria.

Contd
An advantage of having a statement is that it

creates value for those who get exposed to

the statement, and those prospects are
managers, employees and sometimes even
customers. Statements create a sense of
direction and opportunity. They both are an
essential part of the strategy-making process.

 Many people mistake vision statement for mission

statement, and sometimes one is simply used as a

longer term version of the other. The Vision should
describe why it is important to achieve the
Mission. A Vision statement defines the purpose or
broader goal for being in existence or in the
business and can remain the same for decades if
crafted well. A Mission statement is more specific
to what the enterprise can achieve itself. Vision
should describe what will be achieved in the wider
sphere if the organization and others are
successful.

Effective vision
statement
Features of an effective vision statement include:
Clarity and lack of ambiguity
Vivid and clear picture
Description of a bright future
Memorable and engaging wording
Realistic aspirations
Alignment with organizational values and culture

 To become really effective, an organizational

vision statement must (the theory states) become

assimilated into the organization's culture.
Leaders have the responsibility of communicating
the vision regularly, creating narratives that
illustrate the vision, acting as role-models by
embodying the vision, creating short-term
objectives compatible with the vision, and
encouraging others to craft their own personal
vision compatible with the organization's overall
vision.

References
1. Liddell-Hart, B. H. (1967). Strategy (2nd

Edition). New York, NY: Frederick Praeger.

2. Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of

strategic planning. New York, NY: Free Press.