2. Strategy Execution & Strategic Change Management Contact:
Robert G. Barnwell CUNY Baruch Colleges Zicklin School of Business
One Bernard Baruch Way, Box B10 New York, NY10010 Tel.(917)
771-4628 [email protected][email_address] 3.
Executive BiographyROBERT G. BARNWELL The strategy execution and
strategic change management study is being managed and supervised
by Robert G. Barnwell. A clinical professor in the MBA program of
CUNY Baruch Colleges Zicklin School of Business, Robert is also a
regularly invited guest speaker at such universities and business
schools as Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and the Wharton School of
Business.In addition to his academic and research experience,
Robert has considerable strategy consulting and corporate finance
experience working with companies undergoing significant strategic,
operational and financial change. Robert is the author of the
forthcoming book,A Lead, Follow or Get the Hell Out of the Way:
Driving Rapid and Lasting Strategic Change (Summer 2011.)Robert
completed his masters degree in business administration at New York
University and received his undergraduate degree from Georgetown
University in Washington D.C. To learn more about best practices in
strategy execution and strategic change management or to
participate in the study, please contact Robert via e-mail
at[email_address]or by telephone at (917) 771-4628. 4. Strategy
Execution & Strategic Change Management MEETING OBJECTIVES
- Identify and share some of the best practices to:
-
-
- (a)Accelerate strategic change;
-
-
- (c)Assure that changes stick.
5.
- Study Questionnaire & Discussion Guide
- Leading Causes of Failure
- Strategic Change Management Framework
-
- Appendix Two: Recommended Reading
Strategy Execution & Strategic Change Management CONTENTS 6.
Strategy Execution & Strategic Change Management ABOUT THE
STUDY Curious about why strategy execution programs and strategic
change initiatives werent more successful, professor Robert
Barnwell began to study the existing research on the subjects of
strategic change management and strategy execution. What he found
was a largely universal and broadly agreed-upon framework that
crossed several disciplines, including project management, change
management, Management by Objectives/Results, and strategy
execution (see Section IV).Assuming that this basic framework isnt
to blame, something else (or some other combination of factors)
must be responsible for the disappointing lack of success To find
out, Robert is supervising an ongoing study focused on identifying
the most successful strategy execution and strategic change
programs currently being employed within large publicly-listed
corporations with a focus on how these initiatives are being
managed and implemented. 7. Fall 2009 Spring 2010 Summer 2010 Fall
2010 Spring 2011 Launch Study Perform comprehensive review of
existing literature and research and meet withparticipating
companiesto scope study. Field Studies Identify 6-12 leading best
practices and beginfield tests with participating companies.
Accelerate Research Expandcorporate interviewsandsurveys ; and
secure roles asobserverandscholar-in-residence .Performassessments
and reviewsas requested. Publish Initial Findings Publish findings
(executive briefings, articles and books) following comprehensive
dissemination of initial findings to corporate participants. 8.
Strategy Execution & Strategic Change Management GETTING
INVOLVED
- There are a number of opportunities for companies to increase
their involvement in the study, including:
- Serving as areferral sourceto other participating companies and
professionals;
- Participating infield studiesto test and refine best
practices;
- Hostingobserversto critical implementation meetings and/or
activities;
- Requesting anassessment/reviewof an existing strategy execution
or strategic change program relative to best practices (for a
nominal stipend);
- Hosting professor Barnwell as aScholar-In-Residence(for a
nominal stipend); and,
- Funding of amodest research grantto provide for ongoing
research.
9.
- & Strategic Change Management:
- Questionnaire and Discussion Guide
Section I 10. Strategy Execution & Strategic Change
Management LEVEL & DURATION OF RESULTS Level of Impact
disagreeagreestrongly agree Significant Notable/As Expected Limited
None Negative Duration ofResults Long-lasting (2-years+) Modest
(12-24 months) Rapidly Dissipated (less than 12 months) No impact
Of the strategic initiatives youve been involved in the past
10-years, how would you characterize the level and duration of the
typical results? 11. Strategy Execution & Strategic Change
Management COMMON OBJECTIVES What have been the most common three
(3) direct objectives of any strategic change initiatives youve led
or been involved with over the past 5-years?
-
-
-
- Strengthen competitive position/strategic capabilities
-
-
-
- Increase revenues and/or market share
-
-
-
- Improve liquidity and/or credit profile
-
-
-
- Support share price and market capitalization
-
-
-
- Integrate recent mergers or acquisitions
-
-
-
- Other: ________________________________________
12. Strategy Execution & Strategic Change Management
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
-
- A clear understanding of the companys business, financial,
human and strategic resources and/or constraints (relative to
market and competitors)
-
- A balance of financial, operational and strategic metrics
-
- A balance of short (0-12 months), intermediate (12-36 months),
and longer-term goals (36 months+)
-
- A limited number of strategic alternatives/options
-
- Identification of key risks and provided for proper risk
mitigation
-
- Consideration of how the plan would be incorporated/cascaded
into corporate, divisional and business-line planning and budgeting
processes.
The planning and development of recent strategic change
initiatives have included(select all that apply): 13. Strategy
Execution & Strategic Change Management LEADING CHALLENGES What
have been some of leading hurdles to achieving the level and
duration of resultsof these objectives?
-
- Insufficient financial or organizational
resources/capabilities
-
- Weak or ill-defined financial, strategic or operational
objectives
-
- Lack of commitment or support from critical managers
-
- Cross-divisional or cross-departmental infighting or lack of
coordination
-
- Weak or inappropriate monitoring and/or progress reporting
-
- Lack of individual accountability
-
- Other:_____________________________________________
14. Strategy Execution & Strategic Change Management
CONTRIBUTORS TO SUCCESS Which do you believe to be the 3 most
important components of a successful strategicchange program and
which do you feel are the 3 least important?
-
- Formed a dedicated staff to support the day-to-day execution of
the plan
-
- Incorporated departmental and business-line support in strategy
formulation
-
- Written plan addressing broad strategy, supporting initiatives
and execution
-
- Required resources were properly identified and allocated
-
- Highly-visible executive-level support, commitment and
participation
-
- Management changes to assure proper skills/experience to
support plan
-
- Individual performance appraisals and incentive compensation
tied to strategy
-
- Progress against key milestones was regularly monitored and
communicated
-
-
-
- most importantleast important
15. NOTES 16.
- & Strategic Change Management
- Leading Causes of Failure
Section II 17. Corporate Strategies are intellectually simple,
their execution is not.The question is, can you execute? Thats what
differentiates one company from another.
- Larry Bossidy, former CEO Honeywell and Allied Signal
18. Unfortunately, for the vast majority of companiesand their
executives, the answer to this questionis a resounding No. 19. less
than 10% of the strategies effectively formulated are effectively
executed. Robert Kaplan, Harvard Business School well-formulated
business strategies fail 90 percent of the timedue to poor
implementation Raymond E. Levitt and William Malek, Stanford
University Companies typically realise only about 60% of their
strategys potential value because of failures in planning and
execution. Economist Intelligence Unit survey 20. SIDELINED BYWEAK
STRATEGY EXECUTION
- Strategy execution at most companies are plagued by such
challenges as:
-
-
- Weak or inconsistent senior-level commitment, support, or
motivation
-
-
- Resistance by key managers or other internal constituents
-
-
- Ambiguous roles and responsibilities
-
-
- Fundamental lack of accountability
-
-
- Cross departmental conflicts and inadequate coordination across
organizational boundaries
-
-
- Financial and other critical resource constraints
-
-
- Failure to prepare or agree on an execution plan with properly
definedobjectives, responsibilities, and timelines
21.
- Insufficiently powerful guiding coalition.
- Failure to remove obstacles.
- Failure to create short-term wins.
- Declaring victory too quickly.
- Neglecting to anchor changes within the culture.
- * John Kotter,Leading Change .Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business
School Press, 1997.
John Kotters Leading Causes of Transformational Failure 22. Carl
von Clausewitz On War and FrictionCarl Philipp Gottlieb von
Clausewitz (1781-1831), author ofVom Kriege , ( On War ),
introduced military strategists to the concept of friction which he
described as theforce that resists all action.It makes the simple
difficult and the difficult seem impossible. Put simply, friction
refers to the challenges encountered when a strategy that requires
the coordination and collaboration of a large group of different
units meets the harsh realities of the battlefield.Von Clausewitz
identified a number of sources of friction, including:The Fog of
War or the inherent confusion during battle and difficulty of
gathering reliable information; indecision by frontline officers;
lack of proper arms, munitions and equipment (resources); lack of
proper coordination; unclear or overly-complex battle plans; and
inadequate communications.Von Clausewitz found that friction
becomes particularly problematic with regard to the officers two or
three ranks below the field general who originally conceptualized
the strategy. 23. NOTES 24.
- & Strategic Change Management:
- The Traditional Execution Framework
Section III 25. Strategic Change Management & Corporate
Revitalization TRADITIONAL FRAMEWORK
- Throughout our research, weve studied a number of frameworks,
including:
-
-
- GE's Change Acceleration Process (CAP)
-
-
- W. Edwards Demings PDCA Framework;
-
-
- PRINCE2 and the Project Management Institute (PMI)
Processes;
-
-
- Management by Objectives (MBO) / Results (MBR); and,
-
-
- Numerous Proprietary Consulting Change Management Models.
- Weve found that each of these strategy execution frameworks are
surprisingly similar to one another and have summarized the basic
concepts within a simple model weve termed AIM.
26. 27. 28. 29. NOTES 30.
- & Strategic Change Management:
Section IV 31. BEST PRACTICES A Few Highly-Focused Objectives A
proper diagnosis typically leads to a small number of obvious
prescriptive alternatives.However, the patient can only survive a
handful of individual treatments at any one time and still expect
to survive.Similarly, study participants have told us that it is
critically important to triage business challenges and
opportunities so that leadership can focus only on those that
represent the highest payoff and potential for success. The most
successful companies in our study were those that concentrated on
one or two (and in no case more than 3) headline objectives at any
given time .Once these had been accomplished, many began turning
their attention to the next best 2-3 opportunities and then the
next.However, at any particular point in time, the entire
organization is crystal clear on the 2-3 objectives that are
currently most important. 32. BEST PRACTICES Construct a Framework
Whatever the initiative, research participants extolled the virtues
of creating or borrowing a formal framework, including: change
management, Activity Based Costing (ABC), Business Process
Reengineering (BPR), Manufacturing Process Improvement (MPI), Lean
Six Sigma, GE Workout initiatives, JIT & Lean Manufacturing,
and Value Based Management (VBM.) A successful management framework
spells out the various steps and stages of an initiative, the
necessary resources, a schedule of completion, and helps identify
the individuals who should be responsible for completing the
various tasks . By providing a structured recipe, formal frameworks
increase the rate of success, accelerate and enhance results,
eliminate and reduce associated risks, minimize required resources,
improve communications and planning, and reduce complexity. 33.
BEST PRACTICES Put It In Writing A goal without a [written] plan is
just a wish . While weve taken liberties with Antoine de
Saint-Exuperys (1990-1944) original quote, it serves to illustrate
the importance of putting the action plan in writing. The process
of crafting a written plan requires both thoughtfulness and
specificity.It should identify, communicate and clarify the
underlying need for the performance improvement program, the
programs principle objectives, supporting initiatives, individual
responsibilities and accountabilities, resource allocations,
reporting and meeting requirements, a schedule of key
milestones/accomplishments, and associated performance
metrics.Importantly, the written plan will also serves as a
checklist for all that has been done and all that remains to be
done. 34. BEST PRACTICES Get Ugly Despite the best crafted plans
and formal frameworks, strategic change, particularly in a time of
business uncertainty, is a messy affair. As German Field Marshall
Helmut Karl Bernhard Graf von Molke (a disciple of von Clausewitz)
pointed out,No battle plan survives contact with the enemy.
Recognizing this, Moltke prepared his officers to adapt to the
complexity and unknown variables that would unfold on the
battlefield variables which werent anticipated when the initial
battle plans and scenarios were envisioned. Similarly, no matter
how elegant a change strategy may first appear,corporate leadership
must be prepared to deviate from or abandon aspects of the plan as
information and the environment dictate .Inevitably,every
performance improvement program requires continual course
corrections the process is rarely straightforward and never pretty
. 35. BEST PRACTICES Search and Destroy Thesuccess of any
performance-improvement program is as much a function of what the
leadership team chooses not to doas it is a function of what the
team does. Most strategic change and performance-improvement
programs are characterized by profound resources constraints
particularly in terms of time and capital.To address these
constraints and to enhance operating efficiencies, several
companies (as well as Jim Collins, author ofGood to Great ) have
suggested maintaining a stop doing list.From a macro-view, the stop
doing list may include non-core businesses, assets, projects,
product lines, or markets that should be divested or abandoned.From
a micro-view, the list often includes the elimination of
unnecessary organizational layers and low or no-value operational
or job processes. More important than an actual list, however, is
the willingness to embrace the mindset required to aggressively
seek out and eliminate low-value and value-destroying activities .
36. BEST PRACTICES The Strategic CFO Among the highest performing
companies within our study, the outmoded view of the Chief
Financial Officer as the green eye-shade wearing head bean-counter
is long dead.ACFO capable of assuming a significant strategic role
offers a huge advantage over competitors with less-strategic CFOs
.In addition to providing traditional financial and managerial
accounting information, the CFO supports strategic planning through
insights afforded by market intelligence, competitor benchmarking,
and a thorough understanding of the companys leading revenue and
cost components.Further,a strategic CFO actively participates in
leading the day-to-day execution of performance improvement
initiativeswhile refining performance metrics, improving resource
allocation, and cascading expected results into financial
projections and the budgeting process. 37. BEST PRACTICES Action
Talks. Bullshit Walks. Your actions speak so loudly, I cant hear
what youre saying . The organization is looking to senior
leadership to see if their actions match their words. People are
skeptical.They wont believe in any new initiative unless they see
immediate, notable, and tangible results and then regular results
at short intervals throughout the continuation of the program.
Employees are accustomed to a regular stream of changes that never
seem to have any impact on their day-to-day jobs or, apparently, on
the companys performance.Unless you demonstrate otherwise, and
demonstrate it repeatedly, people will ignore the program until it
and you simply go away. 38. Permission to Fail Required In addition
to requiring regular progress reports and meetings, Geoff Merszei,
former CFO of Dow Chemical, explains that the heads of Dows
individual businesses are also required to obtain his
advancedpermission to failto meet their agreed upon goals and
targets. When individual business heads seek his permission to
fail, Dows CFO and CEO have the opportunity to provide (i) any
necessary resources or (ii) intervene with any cross-business
conflicts to help the business get back on track .If nothing can be
done to meet the originally scheduled objective, advanced warning
allows the team tocoordinate with other businesses whos own
initiatives are at riskdue to possible inter-dependence with the
trailing business.BEST PRACTICES 39. BEST PRACTICES A Culture of
Accountability The written action plan has each managers name next
to a given task.A name not a title.The action plan and progress
reports are circulated broadly.Everyone knows whosperformingand
whos not.Peer pressure can be brutal. The program and individual
projects cant be managed by committee which, all too often, permit
people to avoid, or be shielded from, having their name associated
with decisions or responsibilities. The program needs to be more
important than any single individual.If someone isnt performing,
there needs to be some consequence.This may take the form of an
informal discussion, formal performance-review, removal from a
critical project, reduction in bonus, a job reassignment, or even
termination . 40. BEST PRACTICES External Perspectives While
Chesley Sully Sullenberger, Captainof US Airways Flight 1549,began
the decent to safely glide and land the disabled Airbus A320 onto
the Hudson River on January 15, 2009, his head continued to rise
and fall as he and his flight crew double-checked the information
provided by the flight-deck gauges against the view outside the
cockpit window. By accurately achieving proper airspeed, glide
path, pitch and wing level, Captain Sully and his crew were able to
land the aircraft on the river without the loss of a single
life.Several CEOs in our research report the importance of doing
much the same (albeit on a much less dramatic scale.)Unfortunately,
the internal perspectives of a Company and its competitive
environment are not always in sync with reality.Recognizing this,
many successful leaders regularly solicit external perspectives
from external board members, CEOs of non-competing companies,
trusted consultants and advisors, interim managers, external hires,
and debt and equity analysts. 41. NOTES 42.
- Strategic Change Management:
Section V 43. Strategy Execution & Strategic Change
Management THE STRATEGY AUDIT Based upon our initial research
findings,academic and professional experience, and the contribution
of leading consultants, academics and current and former CEOs, weve
developed a strategy audit comprised of ~225 questions to help
Companies assess both their strategies and execution management.The
audit addresses such topics as competitive environment, strategy
development, strategic leadership and management, strategy
execution and implementation, communications and risk management
practices.The following section presents 55 representative
questions from the audit (which we will continue to refine and
expand as our research progresses.)A copy of the entire audit may
be found in the appendices of Roberts forthcoming bookLead, Follow
or Get the Hell Out of the Way: Driving Rapid and Lasting Strategic
Performance(Spring/Summer 2011) or upon request
([email protected]).Alternatively,interested
companies are also invited to contact Robert and the research team
about conducting a strategy review or audit for a modest stipend .
44. COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT
- Has the Company clearly defined its business and industry?Has
management established the boundaries for the business and industry
in terms of products, services, customers, customer segments,
technology, geography, etc?Has the same been done for each of the
Companys key business segments?
- Identify and describe the market environment including, among
other considerations, the size and description of the broader
industry (by total sales, volume, etc.), the size and description
of relevant industry segments, and discuss capacity and
supply/demand considerations.
- Does the Company and/or its industry suffer significant
customer or supplier concentration?If so, who are the leading
customers and/or suppliers and what effect, if any, do they have on
the relative financial performance of the company and its
competitors?
- What are the customers key buying criteria?How do these
criteria differ, if at all, from one customer segment to
another?From one product segment to another?
- Identify pricing and profitability bands between/among leading
products, quality profiles, distribution systems, production
methods, and/or any other relevant criteria.What is the route-cause
of the differences within and between these bands?
45.
- What is the economic and market health of the industry, its key
customer segments, and critical suppliers?How has the economic
health evolved during the past 5-10 years?How are the present
economics expected to evolve over the next 3-7 years?
- What significant events, if any, have occurred or are expected
to occur that have impacted the industry?New product
introductions?New technology?Bankruptcy or acquisition of leading
customer or competitor?New market entrant?
- Prepare competitor profiles to include summary descriptions of
the competitors, their principle subsidiaries/segments, annual
revenues, total assets, product and service portfolio, nature of
production/manufacturing, marketing and sales (pricing, sales
initiatives, etc.), distribution channels, etc.
- What are the key drivers of any variances in margins (and any
other key performance measures) between the Company and its leading
competitors?
- How has the Company and its leading competitors performed
through past business and economic cycles?Customers?Suppliers?
46. STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
- Reflecting the strategic opportunities and threats, what is the
ultimate objective of the Companys strategy or change
program?Market share?Competitive products?Profitability?Cash
Flow?Market Capitalization?Other?
- What are the performance expectations of shareholders and other
investors (such as lenders)?Is the Company delivering against these
expectations?If not, what is the performance gap that needs to be
bridged?
- Does the company understand the relative profitability of
various customers or customer segments (markets) served?Has the
company made a decision with regard to which customers or customer
segments to concentrate and which to minimize or abandon?
- What businesses, products, assets and processes are core to the
Companys strategic direction?Which businesses, products, assets and
processes are no longer core?How will non-core businesses,
products, assets and processes be monetized and/or capital
reallocated?
- Does management have an objective and accurate understanding of
the Companys resources and capabilities?Financial resources?Human
resources?Proprietary knowledge or technology (patents,
etc.)?Distribution channels and customer relationships?Production
capacity or methodologies?Other strategic resources and
capabilities? What plans has management developed to address
anyweaknesses in capabilities or resource constraints?
47.
- Has management identified strategic options/alternatives that
would achieve the Companys ultimate strategic objectives (as
described in question #11)?
- Which alternatives have the most favorable impact on the
Companys critical success criteria?Which of the alternatives offer
the most favorable balance of strategic and performance impact
versus likelihood of successful execution?
- Which of the Companys strategic alternatives, if adopted, would
most provoke competitors?What would be each competitors most likely
response(s)?How would these competitor responses impact the
viability and profitability of the Companys strategy?
- Does the chosen strategy and supporting initiatives support a
balance between short, intermediate and long-term objectives?
- Does the Company generate sufficient free cash flow and
maintain adequate liquidity to internally fund the financial
requirements of the strategic program?What additional sources of
liquidity does the Company maintain (revolving credit, shelf
registrations, pending asset/business divestitures, etc.)?
48. STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT
- Has a senior management team been formed to develop and oversee
the strategy and supporting initiatives?Does this team include the
CEO, COO and/or CFO?If not, why not?
- What is the defined strategic role of the board of
directors?What are the board meeting and reporting requirements
with regard to strategy and progress against key objectives?
- Do the members of the senior leadership team understand the
current competitive environment, the need for change, and agree
that the chosen strategy is the best of available
alternatives?
- Has senior leadership put in place a process for planning,
organizing, monitoring, controlling and revising the execution of
the strategy, supporting initiatives, and results?
- Has the Company established a strategic intelligence system in
which competitive and market intelligence is regularly gathered,
updated, and disseminated?Have the sources of this intelligence and
update frequency been documented and individual responsibility
assigned?
49.
- Does management regularly seek and value external perspectives
from non-executive board members, consultants, interim managers,
business analysts, external hires, etc?Have these external
perspectives been used to develop and test strategic thinking?Are
external perspectives sought to gauge the results or impact
associated with the achievement of key project milestones?
- How has management performed in the recent past with regard to
its ability to execute strategic change initiatives and achieve
financial forecasts?Review past strategic plans, large-scale
strategic initiatives and multi-year financial forecasts relative
to actual post-plan performance.
- Is the senior leadership willing to replace colleagues and
coworkers who are unwilling or unable to support the program?Can
the senior leadership offer an example of replacing such an
individual?
- Has the Company provided a process for requesting, approving,
documenting, and communicating revisions and change orders to the
strategic plan and supporting initiatives?
- Does management use dedicated project meetings, meeting agendas
& meetings minutes to frequently assess progress, reinforce
expectations and update/revise supporting initiatives?Are meeting
minutes prepared to record the meeting discussions and any
commitments made or outstanding action items?
50. STRATEGY EXECUTION & IMPLEMENTATION
- Has management produced a written action or strategic plan?Does
the written plan detail: (i) the business environment and
underlying drivers for change? (ii) the opportunities and
challenges? (iii) the broad strategy? (iv) the key supporting
initiatives? (v) the budget and resource allocations supporting the
various initiatives? (vi) a calendar of key milestones? (vii)
targeted schedule of completion? (viii) performance measures and
metrics? (ix) communications plan and calendar?(x) Other important
business or industry-specific considerations?
- Is managements strategic change program focused on no more than
2-3 headline initiatives?
- Have individual strategic initiatives, work breakdown, and
sequencing been cascaded through the organization as reflected in
divisional, departmental, team and employee performance
objectives?
- Have these supporting initiatives each been assigned to a
single manager who is clearly responsible and accountable for
successful completion?Has the manager signed-off on the initiative
work plan and publicly acknowledged his/her accountability?
- Do the managers assigned to oversee the supporting strategic
initiatives have sufficient time to both lead the
initiativesandfulfill their regular responsibilities?If not, what
arrangements have been or will be made to provide managers with the
necessary support?
51.
- Has the Company identified and removed any critical constraints
or obstacles to the launch of execution and implementation?
[Additional constraints and obstacles will be identified and
managed post-launch]
- Have sufficient resources (financial, people, equipment, time,
etc.) been properly allocated?Is there a process for managers to
secure or request additional resources that may be needed?
- Has the Company scheduled a regular series of short-term wins
to advance the strategy, on which to base communications, and to
establish momentum?
- Does the senior leadership provide consistent pressure to
deliver daily, weekly, and monthly progress in support of strategic
objectives?How is this pressure for progress manifested?
- Has the Company provided a process for requesting, approving,
documenting, and communicating revisions and change orders to the
strategic plan and supporting initiatives?
52. ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT
- Does the Company have a solid understanding of the
organizational requirements to achieve its strategic
plan?Similarly, is the company aware of its organizational
limitations and how to overcome or mitigate such limitations?[i.e.
has the company considered the appropriateness of the current
organizational structure relative to the new strategic direction
and corresponding demands on the organization?]
- Does the existing management information system (MIS) provide
sufficient information for decision support?
- Have the financial contributions and demands of the strategy
and supporting initiatives been incorporated into the annual
budgeting process and financial forecasts?
- Have individual job descriptions, incentive compensation and
performance appraisal systems been revised to assess individuals
against metrics and activities that support the strategy?Has each
individual been provided sufficient authority, control and the
necessary resources to deliver the results for which they are
responsible?
- Has Human Resources and the individual business units revised
their recruiting, hiring, promotional and training systems to align
with the new demands of the strategy?Is the workforce aware of
these changes?
53. STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS
- Does the Company have a written communications plan (including
a communications schedule) and is management actually delivering
communications against this plan?
- In conducting communications, does management regularly explain
(i) the underlying need for the strategic change, (ii) the various
alternatives considered, (iii) the rational for selecting the
ultimate strategy; (iv) the key supporting initiatives and
objectives; and (v) the anticipated results of the program?
- Have the core messages been integrated throughout the Companys
regular internal and external communications, including town hall
meetings, small group or team meetings, company publications,
intranet, one-to-one discussion, public releases, financial
releases shareholder and/or lender conferences, broadcast and print
media, etc.?
- Does senior leadership accept that management is the message?If
so, does management walk the talk?Are the senior leaderships
actions and decisions consistent with the strategic change
program?Are these actions and decisions visible?
- Is the majority of communicationsfactandaction-based ?i.e.
based upon the communication of actions, activities, and
accomplishments achieved?Has management placed a moratorium on
communicating fuzzy values and mission statements?
54. RISK MANAGEMENT
- Does the strategic plan provide for a risk management
framework?Does the plan identify and outline key risks and
mitigants?
- Has the Company sought to eliminate and/or reduce the
complexity associated with the execution of the strategy?
- Has management established adequate buffers and reserves (time
and financial) to address the inevitable delays, set-backs and
challenges encountered?
- Have what if scenarios been tested to identify and mitigate
additional project and company-specific risks?
- Has management properly allocated critical resources?Is there
an established process to rapidly reallocate resources if/when
necessary?
55. NOTES 56.
- & Strategic Change Management:
Appendices 57. Appendix Two: RECOMMENDED READING Hrebiniak,
Lawrence G.Making Strategy Work:Leading Effective Execution and
Change .Philadelphia, PA: Wharton School Publishing, 2005. Kaplan,
Robert S. and David P. Norton.The Execution Premium: Linking
Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage .Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Business School Press, 2008.Kotter, John.Leading Change
.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1996. Morgan, Mark;
Raymond E. Levitt and William Malek.Executing Your Strategy: How to
Break It Down and Get It Done .Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business
School Press, 2007. Neilson, Gary L. and Bruce A.
Pasternack.Results: Keep Whats Good, Fix Whats Wrong, and Unlock
Great Performance .New York, NY: Crown Publishing, 2005. Tabrizi,
Behnam N.Rapid Transformation: A 90-Day Plan for Fast and Effective
Change .Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2007. 58.
NOTES