Your new post is loading...
From
hbr
Consider the recent article, “Why Strategy Execution Unravels — and What to Do About It“ by Donald Sull, Rebecca Homkes, and Charles Sull, in the March 2015 issue of HBR. Articles like this are well meaning and all set out to overcome the shortfalls of “execution.” But they all fail, including this one, and for the same reason: you can’t prescribe a fix for something that you can’t describe. And no one can describe “strategy execution” in a way that does not conflict with “strategy.”
Blaming poor execution for the failure of your “brilliant” strategy is a part of what I’ve termed “The Execution Trap” — how “brilliant” can your strategy really be if it wasn’t implementable?
Via The Learning Factor
It’s impossible to have a good strategy poorly executed. That’s because execution actually is strategy – trying to separate the two only leads to confusion.
I have a totally opposite view What I've learned from my clients doing is that thinking about strategy and execution at the same thing is a recipe for disaster. Sure they're are inextricably linked, They are two sides of the coin and yet vastly different. In simple terms strategy is about how you're going to move from here to there and execution is about who will do what, and when. You need to be well aware of capability when thinking about strategy. Developing your execution plan and enabling each of your employees to create and own their unique piece is a different exercise to creating the strategy which if its to be the right strategy needs employee and other stakeholders input too
get often get trapped thinking that strategy and execution are distinct processes. Good article to remind us that strategy is really a part of execution. Be sure to read the comments. They are as good, if not better than the article itself.