Get Started for FREE
Sign up with Facebook Sign up with X
I don't have a Facebook or a X account
 Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
Many business leaders subscribe to the classic definition of strategy as a set of actions designed to achieve an overall aim. In other words, they believe strategy starts with a goal. But for companies that have implemented winning strategies, that’s not how it typically happens. Via The Learning Factor
rodrick rajive lal's insight:
I guess many of us had all wrong when we put the goal first. Be it business houses, or educational institutions, or even learners, hitting at the goal first, according to the writer of the article, might not have been a sure path to success! Even Bill Gates arrived at the goal after he had made a few attempts to provide an operating system for micro-computers. It was only after a few false starts, one of which was when his software began to be pirated that he decided to have one operating system across different machines with differing configurations. That, I guess was his goal! To have a operating software was his big idea, his goal was to have a single operating system, while his strategy was built through his experience of pushing his product into the market (the piracy of his first attempt probably taught him a lesson in strategy!). The writer of the article makes it clear that the correct path to success starts with 1.Having a Big Idea, 2.Having a Strategy, 3.Having a Goal. Bill Gates is now closest to his goal of ensuring that almost everyother home in the developed world has a computer! 
|
Scoop.it!
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
rodrick rajive lal's insight:
Both are distinct and yet complement each other. It goes without saying that strategy precedes executions!
The Learning Factor's curator insight,
March 17, 2015 7:27 PM
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. 
Ian Berry's curator insight,
March 19, 2015 12:16 AM
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 
Haidee Calore's curator insight,
March 27, 2015 11:36 AM
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. |
Winning strategies start with a big idea.
Thats phenomenal
Starting with your big idea! #strategy #business