A large part of the management literature maintains that for a change to occur, the organization must perceive the proximity of a threat, of a danger. It seems that Bill Gates continuously repeats, almost like a "mantra", that Microsoft is always half an hour from bankruptcy. Recent events confirm this fundamental unpredictability. The question is then why self-complacency, conformity or blindness are installed in some companies, so that they are unable to perceive the continuous changes in the environment, fortunately almost never as clear and concrete as those of September 11.
The available data suggests that the strategic options contemplated are more limited by the cognitive and perceptual capacities of managers than by more objective and tangible factors such as company resources or the competitive climate of the sector. Therefore, it is possible that the definition of strategic processes such as the search for adaptation or complementarity between the internal factors or resources of the organization and the demands or positions of those who make up the company environment: clients, suppliers, is insufficient. competitors, substitutes, etc., what the Anglo-Saxon authors call “stakeholders”. To all this should be added understanding, personal characteristics, limitations, fears, hopes, fantasies, intuitions,who are responsible for the design and execution of the strategies.
Management literature is riddled with resounding examples that prove that these personal factors, sometimes not evident, submerged, unconscious, decisively influence strategy and how it is put into practice. To cite only the best known, the case of Apple is paradigmatic. Steve Jobs and John Sculley created the icons that allowed the personal computer to have an interface with much more user-friendly features and to universalize its use. (I think it was around 1980 when an IBM executive stated that the potential market for PCs was just a few hundred thousand.)
They were so proud of their product - cheered by some users that, even today, they constitute a kind of sect in love with their machines - that they decided that they would not open the system to PC manufacturers or application design companies. The market entry of Microsoft and its Windows operating system with a diametrically opposite policy was the cause of the practical disappearance of the Apple market. What happened? That some magnificent entrepreneurs fell in love with their product to the point of self-absorption and were not able to capture the signals sent by the competitors, Bill Gates among them. These processes are relatively frequent, among other reasons, because, according to Edgar Schein, three cultures coexist in all companies, often not too peacefully. One of them is the one that Schein,called the "engineering culture"; the other two are "operational" and "managerial". Without an integrative vision, the balance tilts on the side of one of them, forgetting the other two. Bill Gates is said to be not an expert in operating systems (engineering culture) but rather belongs to the "managerial" with special abilities to "read" the environments. But by his side he needs excellent experts from the other two cultures.But by his side he needs excellent experts from the other two cultures.But by his side he needs excellent experts from the other two cultures.
Coaching work with executives is closely related to strategy and change in organizations. Not because coaching professionals necessarily have to be experts in strategy (although that knowledge never hinders); but because the design and execution of the strategy are the main tasks of the managers with whom we work. Regarding the change, it is not necessary to explain to the reader its relation with the strategy; both are almost Siamese brothers.
I previously stated my belief that the coach does not need to be an expert in strategy. What you have to be an expert in is accompanying the manager in the self-discovery of factors, conditioning factors, review of experiences, traumatic or not, personal history, etc. that influence cognitive and perceptual capacities, because the objective from a strategic point of view is that the coaching work allows you to broaden and expand those capacities. Thus, the same executive, without the help of anyone, will have more tools to avoid having to depend on external advisers.
All coaching consists of that, in making the manager the designer and architect of his own destiny and that of the company. No external adviser can replace you in strategic planning. You will no longer be dependent. We coaches work so that we are not needed in the future.
