I wrote a post a few weeks back called Save a Tree, Stop Strategic Planning. Ryan Olsen then wrote a response to that post, and the debate continued with a number of comments on LeaderLab and Twitter. Some people agreed, others were amused, and others weren’t impressed at all. Since it is an interesting and relevant topic, here are more of my thoughts on the subject.
***
I wrote the title of my last post a bit sarcastically, but perhaps it had more truth to it than I initially thought. We do kill a lot of trees when engage in strategic planning (SP). “Are those trees worth it?” is still my question.
There are lots of diverging opinions on the subject, but many of the opinions depend on your direct role in the SP process. Consider some of the stakeholders:
- CEOs – I’m not 100% convinced they read the Strategic Plans themselves, but they do look really pretty (especially after Communications departments get ahold of them) and somewhat useful to shareholders and boards. CEOs go along with the exercise because they don’t want to be perceived as being strategy-less.
- Boards & Shareholders – Probably love SP because it gives them something tangible to hold and dissect. What they don’t know (and forget to ask) is how many of these plans are being used as coffee coasters in the offices and how many swear words were directed at the people who forced middle managers to fill in all the boxes and checklists. A printed plan is not an implemented plan.
- Middle Managers – Love the thought of SP because it allows them to think for a minute that their opinion actually counts (until the CEO trumps it with a new direction). Hate the actual work involved in doing them unless they are part of the SP department (in which case, this is life-and-death work).
- Consultants – Love SP! It makes them a lot of money after all. (oops, did I just write that? If any future clients of mine read this, strategic planning is worth the $$$ I will bill you).
- Frontline Staff – Couldn’t care less about SP and another corporate initiative brought on by all of the above people (see coaster comment above).
- Customers – Just want the dang product (or service) and wish there were less people strategically planning and more people serving them or making products for them.
In our enthusiasm about the next fad in planning, do we forget to actually measure the value in strategic planning itself? How many dollars are wasted each year by planning exercises begrudgingly done by those involved. Does anyone dare ask whether we “Should” be planning and risk being labelled an organizational anarchist?
I am still not convinced SP is worth it, but some of the commenters on my previous posts indicate that there is some hope out there. My favourite comments were from John Bell. He advocated for a one page (maximum) strategic plan. One page of paper makes a horrible coaster, so perhaps he is onto something. John, if you read this, we’d love to hear more from you on the one page Strategic Plans. You may singlehandedly save thousands of trees by sharing with us.
Tim Vanderpyl is a Certified Human Resource Professional (CHRP) with Canada’s largest catholic healthcare organization. He holds a Master of Arts in Leadership from Trinity Western University and is working toward a Doctorate in Strategic Leadership at Regent University. He can be reached by email here or at his website timvanderpyl.com.
It goes without saying that there have been untold hours and dollars wasted on Strategic Planning initiatives.
How many hours and dollars have been wasted because people are running around with no plan, no thought, and are creating action because they “are too busy to think”?
Action without thought is no more valuable than thought without action.
As with most things, balance is crucial.
Hi Geoff. “Too busy to think” is a great support argument for strategic planning. I just wonder if the long-winded “event” of strategic planning is flawed, not strategy itself.
You are totally right, some sort of balance is needed to ensure we aren’t all running around in multiple directions.
Here’s a great link to Top 10 Tips for Effective Strategic Planning:
http://bit.ly/cxwt4k
Thanks Lisa. His first comment is the most poignant for me: Strategy is a process, not an event.
Strategic planning isn’t something we do or produce; it should be a part of the fabric of our culture and ingrained into our people.
Tim, you are going to get a charge out of my blog on the 1-Pager. Please believe me when I tell you my reference to consultants does not plagarize your sentiments above. But your are pretty much dead-on regarding the above constituents. Regarding the CEO – this depends on his/her role in developing the plan. When I was a CEO, I believed in top-down Strategic Planning . . . so that meant that I had to “walk my talk” and I did. Think about it; by the time a company is down to one page, with a 1-sentence Mission/Vision, 5-7 strategic initiatives/projects, several Key Business Indicators (quantitative measurables) and 2-3 cultural statements, the leaders have captured the future of the business. And of course, if they had more time, the plan would be shorter!
Let us know when you post your blog. I love your comment that “if they had more time, the plan would be shorter”. It seems many SP sessions make the plan longer not shorter.
The company I work for has a one page visual document that summarizes our entire plan and directions. It includes elaboration and explanations in accompanying documents if you need it, but the plan itself is one page. It’s a great reference for us as we make decisions.
Mission and vision statements are a whole other topic, but it seems that many are more than one sentence. Do you think one sentence is enough for a true vision/mission statement.
I’ve crafted many mission/vision statements, never exceeding one sentence. Now, to be honest, the clients who wanted both a mission and a vision statement insisted on a sentence for each – I’m okay with that. I assume you read my Blog, ‘Why Mission Statements Suck’. If not, http://bit.ly/iy2IAB
Tim, I think Strategic Plans can distract organisations from the real issue – that is peoples’ capability for ‘strategic thinking’. I’ve seen so many people, with low strategic thinking capability, go through the process of strategic planning to produce an inadequate plan which is then accepted by the organisation because the correct process has been used.
In my opinion, organisations today need to focus more on building strategic thinking capability and less on producing plans that are often out of date the minute they are printed. I agree that one page communicating the organisation’s overall strategic intent is probably the only type of plan that has long term value in todays complex and dynamic world.
Sounds to me like the process you’re talking about is ‘bottom-up’ and not ‘Top Down’.
John, you might be right. From my experience the strategic planning process is usually a combination of ‘top down’ and ‘bottom up’. The problems arise when very good operational leaders are asked to produce a strategic plan for their part of the business. They are then given a template and process to use and it just becomes an ‘admin’ exercise. Often the people doing these ‘bottom up’ plans have little motivation or cognitive capability for strategic thinking.
Terry, couldn’t agree more on your comments about strategic thinking. In our enthusiasm to embrace the ‘right’ technique, we forget people actually carry out the plan and decide whether it will work or not.
The best book I know of on that subject is Sanders’ ‘Strategic Thinking and the New Science’ (http://www.amazon.com/Strategic-Thinking-New-Science-Complexity/dp/0684842688
It’s a great read for anyone looking to learn more about strategic thinking.
Thanks for recommending the book – it looks great. I’ve just ordered a copy.
In the UK we distribute a psychometric called the Cognitive Process Profile which measures a leader’s capacity for strategic thinking in complex and unfamiliar environments. It looks like this book could really compliment the work we do.