Two new articles deal with the demands that are necessary for the implementation of strategies to be successful. There is no guarantee of success, there is also no “one size fits all” approach. This makes it all the more important to know and experience from practice that can be used as a guide.

Despite the uniqueness of strategic directions and projects, there seem to be some similarities that are conducive to successful strategy implementation. In this article I focus on the design of the strategy development, on the responsibilities of the board of directors / managing directors on the one hand and executives / project managers on the other, as well as change management.

Demand for strategy development

The challenges related to strategy implementation start with strategy development. This is because the central course is set for implementation. A good strategy development process is characterized by the fact that the creativity in strategy development is not stifled by limitations while still keeping an eye on the implementation and thus the limiting framework conditions. This balance is not easy!

The most underestimated factors in strategy implementation are the uncertainty and the extent of external and internal dependencies. Both should therefore be incorporated into the strategy development as far as possible. Often preliminary studies or proof-of-concept are used to keep uncertainties in strategy implementation within limits. In addition to the “degree of uncertainty”, a second axis, the “degree of approval”, is sometimes placed in order to decide on the basis of a matrix when and at which point it makes sense to start a strategic project.

Both the process and the result of a strategy development can be checked for suitability on the basis of up to eight criteria (“reality check“): logic, completeness, level consistency, profitability, financial feasibility, transformability, resources and market reality. Probably the most important criterion is the logical comprehensibility and internal logic of the strategy; i.e. the strategy logically fills the gap between the current situation and the vision for an imaginary future (“strategic gap”) by means of preliminary studies and strategic projects. One speaks consciously of a causal chain and not of a “gut feeling chain”. A documented cause-effect analysis and a graphic representation of the “strategic causal chain”, i.e. the main branches of a causal diagram, have a very disciplinary effect. Causality is clearly defined and not to be confused with correlation! The more precisely the “strategic causal chain” was formulated and presented within the framework of the strategy development, the more precisely the interpretation (in a project assignment) will succeed.

Strategy communication is already started during strategy development:

  • Why? (sence of urgency, burning platform),
  • where? (vision, goals),
  • how? (strategic causal chain),
  • Value? (Impact on the stakeholders).

Consistent and reliable communication provides orientation.

At the end of the strategy development process, a strategy paper is usually drawn up. This document is characterized by the following features:

  • It is comprehensive,
  • it critically evaluates the current situation,
    it represents the further development,
  • it clearly describes the chosen vision,
  • it deals with the probabilities of success of alternative strategies,
  • it includes the process and the criteria of strategy selection,
  • it addresses dependencies on special risks, and
  • it outlines alternative scenarios for the most important risk areas.

If you are looking for a master’s outline for such a strategy paper, please write to me.

Demand for responsibilities

The top management, as the client of strategic projects, defines the framework conditions in the implementation of the strategy and ensures the provision of funds, while the department and project managers verify the progress of the project execution and create corresponding reports on this for the “client”. Those responsible for a strategic project thus become the contractor.
Clients cannot relinquish responsibility for strategy implementation, they remain “accountable” and can only transfer the execution of tasks.

The responsibility of the client is sometimes lived differently. Contracts with external service providers are meticulously negotiated – often with the involvement of purchasing – while key roles in strategy implementation are often filled internally with “compromise people” or “deserving employees”. I will go into this in more detail in the second part with a view to competencies.

Any conflicting goals should be resolved before an agreement can be reached between the client and the contractor. Examples of objectively justified conflicting goals:

  • conflicts in the definition of strategic goals,
  • project dependencies with incompatible objectives or project planning,
  • business dependencies, in which the project and day-to-day business are opposed to one another, and
  • stakeholders with different interests.

Ignored target conflicts will almost certainly lead to a significantly increased project effort and possibly even to failure. They should therefore be resolved in terms of a company optimum and not as a viable compromise solution for those involved. Conflict detection and handling are among the most important tasks of corporate management, as conflicts arise especially in connection with the implementation of strategic projects. Sustainable conflict resolution goes hand in hand with changing attitudes, behavior and, occasionally, values.

Demand for change management

The remarks on conflict resolution are directly followed by this paragraph on change management. This includes all activities that are intended to ensure that a decided strategy is not only implemented, but also that a positive result is achieved; i.e. the new strategy and its changes must be adopted and supported.

Employee motivation in the sense of an affective commitment is essential for successful strategy implementation. With appropriate participation, motivation can be increased and, in addition, creative potential for the company can be raised. Without answering the “why” an implementation project would not be able to explain to the employees affected by the changes why the changes are absolutely necessary, which in turn is a central tool to motivate the employees affected to support the changes.

Interim conclusion

Central courses for implementation are already set in the strategy development phase. In addition to the balance between creativity and limited framework conditions, it is about the awareness of insecurity and dependencies. The reality check with a focus on a strategic causal chain is also important.

The maximum performance in strategy implementation is achieved when the performance of each individual employee is compatible with the company’s mission and strategy. Conflicts represent “brake blocks” in the rectification of energy and therefore play a special role in change management.

The emotional level of changes must not be ignored and places high demands on the organization and management of strategy implementation.

In the second part, I will address two further requirements for a successful strategy implementation.