Strategic Adaptation

Having a vision is critical. Not straying from the "big picture" - the ultimate desired outcome - is essential to long-term success. But sticking too closely to the letter and detail of a plan can actually take you farther away from achieving your desired outcome.

An oft-cited quote from success expert Brian Tracy states: "When an airplane leaves Chicago for Los Angeles, it is off course 99% of the time. This is normal and to be expected. A pilot makes continual course courrections, a little to the north, a little to the south. The pilot continually adjusts the altitude and throttle. And sure enough, several hours later, the plane touches down at exactly the time predicted."

That is the idea behind strategic adaptation. For leaders, like pilots, most of the flight time the plane is off course. Like a pilot, we must make adjustments to the speed and direction of the plane in order to keep it on course. Yet the beginning and end points are precise, even though the flight path is not.

For an analogy here on the ground, if we are driving and hear of a traffic jam ahead on the road, we will seek a different route that will take us around the jam, but will ultimately take us to our final destination.

So it is with leadership. Strategic adaptation in business means when new information comes along like the a change in weather patterns or news of a traffic jam, we may have to change course. But our final destination (vision) remains unchanged.

Kodak is a good example of a company that applied strategic adaptation. If Kodak had decided to remain committed selling only film cameras as digital cameras came on the scene, rather than strategically adapting with its own digital products and support services, the company might not be around now. The company's vision -- ultimate outcome -- remains the same, but its path changed based on new information.

In my view, strategic focus is far more important than strategic planning. In fact, many strategy thought leaders believe strategic planning is (and has been) dead. Does that mean you shouldn't have a plan? Of course not. But as leaders, we need to keep our eye on the long view. As Steven Covey says, we need to "begin with the end in mind."

With this in mind, we set our flight path for the final destination but consistently correct course as weather patterns and ground conditions change.

Haiku Strategy

"Principle I: By setting limitations, we must choose the essential. So in everything you do, learn to set limitations."
-- Leo Babauta from "The Power of Less"

In "Strategy, Plain and Simple," I summarized the difference between a strategic plan that was shelved versus one that became integrated into the operations of an organization in one word: simplicity.

In his book "The Power of Less" quoted above Leo Babauta uses the example of the Japanese Haiku poem. Haiku poems are nature-related, just 17 syllables, written in 3 lines, always 5, 7, 5 unrhymed. One of my favorites:

A firefly flitted by:
"Look"! I almost said
but I was alone
- Taigi

The Haiku poet must carefully choose only the ESSENTIAL words. From the very structure of the poem, one is forced get to the heart of things with absolute clarity.

If you want strategy to be successful, I suggest "Haiku Strategy." Simplicity doesn't just mean limit yourself to 3 to 4 areas of strategic focus solely because people are unable to effectively focus on more than that, although that is a fact. Haiku Strategy means because people can only effectively focus on 3 to 4 areas at most, you are forced, as with the Haiku poem, to carefully choose only the ESSENTIAL areas.

Now, I would also contend, if you could keep all strategic statements, such as visions, missions, goals and strategies to 17 syllables, that would be ideal too.

Google's informal mission statement is: "Don't be evil." Four syllables. It's actual mission statement is: "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." Not quite 17 syllables (25 actually) but a heck of a lot closer than most organizations get. Pretty simple for one of biggest, most complex companies on the planet.

The Apple advertising slogan is "Think Different." Can you think of a company to which this simple statement more aptly applies? Can you see how employees of Apple achieve exactly that? While it may just be a slogan, if you worked for Apple, and this statement became the lens through which you made decisions, it's no surprise innovations like the iPod and iPhone become a deliverable.

In "The Laws of Simplicity" John Maeda lists 10 laws, the first of which is "Reduce" where he introduces the concept of "Thoughtful Reduction." He says, "The simplest way to achieve simplicity is through thoughtful reduction. When in doubt, just remove. But be careful of what you remove."

The last statement is the critical one, of course. Keep it simple but not too simple. Don't eliminate the essential, too, in your zeal for simplicity.

The work of determining what is essential, or at the very least, most meaningful and applying "Thoughtful Reduction" is, in fact, the most difficult work. While the outcome is simple, the process of getting there is not. Think again of the Haiku poem. Try writing one. It's hard. But think about how elegant, simple and clear it is when done well.

By Jeff Arnold, MAM, CAE

Strategy Plain and Simple

Strategic planning is simultaneously considered mission critical to our organizations and the bane of our existence. We hole up our organizational leadership in a room for a day or more and cover the walls with flip chart pages.

At the end of the retreat, we feel energized, forward-thinking, ambitious. Brainstorming and banter coalesces into a brilliant 10-point plan for world domination. Then, life happens. We get back into operations and don't look at the strategic plan again until the next time we all head out for a planning retreat.

I've had this experience, but I've also seen a strategy session turn into a living, breathing systemic organizational focus that drove intention and created results. What made the difference? Simplicity.

Often strategic planning sessions look at EVERYTHING the organization does and goals are set in every area (after all, there's room for improvement in all areas, right?). The plan is a multiple page spreadsheet with goal 1, objective 1.1 and so on through goal 6, objective 6.25. The plan looks like a massive task list and none of the goals are given strategic priority. Such a deliverable is why plans get shelved.

The critical missing piece is focused priority given to those areas that are most MEANINGFUL. While there may well be six important things an organization does, all six are not equally important and equally effectively executed. (Imagine disaster struck and you could only choose 1 or 2 or 3 things the organization could keep doing. Which ones would you pick?)

The reality is people and organizations are only able to effectively focus on 3-4 or (preferably) fewer strategic priorities. If you apply the 80/20 Rule or Pareto Principle to your organization, you'll inevitably find a very short list of clients, markets and/or activities drive a disproportionate share of your organization's profitability. That's where you need to focus your time.

I don't believe in detailed tactical plans (goal 1, objective 1.1, etc.) in conjunction with strategic plans; I only believe in strategic focus documents, strategic thinking sessions and strategy reviews.

Strategic focus documents are simple, short statements listing the 1-3 strategic focus areas you identified as being the most meaningful in advancing your competitive advantage.

Strategic thinking sessions are continuous discussions about actions to take within the strategic focus areas, adjustments to the navigation or whole new courses to set based on new information or changes in the environment.

Strategic reviews are periodic checkups on what has been accomplished so far in advancing the strategic focus areas.

Instead of attempting to have staff implement a "task list" tactical plan developed by the leadership, embed strategy in organization-wide thinking and decision making.

People inherently know what to do (i.e., develop their own task lists) if they know what the parameters are for decision making based on the organization's strategic focus. Make the strategic focus areas the key agenda items of regular, not special, meetings. This makes strategy systemic, integrated in operations, not independent of them.

At its simplest, strategic planning is an exercise in answering some basic strategic questions that determine your differentiators:

1) Which?
2) Who?
3) How?

Which market, which product, which service? Who are we targeting? How will we set ourselves apart? How do we compete?

Simply use the answers to those questions to create the parameters, the "lenses" through which everyone in the organization sees it. If they make daily decisions that lead to specific actions based on these strategic parameters, then the "task list" takes care of itself.

By Jeff Arnold, MAM, CAE