Introduction
Since the strategic direction emerged in the sixties of the 20th century, there is a consensus, by the authors who address the topic, that the need for proactivity in the face of aggressiveness and turbulence in the environment was one of the elements that made its appearance necessary and later spread throughout the world to become one of the most widely used management tools on the planet.
The study of 31 models of strategic management applied between the years 1962 to 2002 in the world: Chandler (1962), Ansoff (1962), Menguzzatto (1984), Yañes (1989), Sallenave (1992), Wright (1994), David (1994), Certo (1995), Steiner I (1996), Steiner II (1996), Jones (1996), Borges (1996), Pérez llanes (1996), Goldsmith (1997), Navas (1997), Stoner (1997), Argenti (1997), Bueno (1997), Andrews (1997), Weelen (1997), Bienmas (1997), Strickland (1997), Fermín (1998), Gimbert (1998), Kotler (1998), Kotler II (1998), Lazo Vento (1998), Rodríguez Valencia (1999), Gárciga (1999), Hoshin Kanri (2000), BSC (2002) by means of the Cluster analysis demonstrates that the strategic direction consists of three main phases, planning, implementation and control.
It was also determined that the phase that has received the most attention is planning. The implementation and control, although they are mentioned as phases, have insufficiencies that affect effective execution, with implementation being the most affected.
According to a report from Fortune magazine, nine (9) out of ten (10) strategies approved by the management of a company never get to be implemented operationally, which corroborates the previous approach.
What are the causes that influence the poor implementation of the strategy in organizations?
By performing the Delphi method on 15 international experts, the analysis of frequency distribution using the SPSS (Statistical Program for Social Sciences) software and the Cluster analysis established the essential features and insufficiencies of the existing strategic management models, which It allowed to establish the scientific questions: are there laws that govern the effectiveness of the execution of the strategic direction? What are those possible laws?
Development
The social, political, economic and technological transformation that occurred after the Second World War and accentuated in the 70s of the 20th century by the technical-scientific revolution in communications contributed to the organizations being forced to adapt to the challenges imposed by the constant and unforeseen changes or they will resign themselves to disappear.
Many authors in the concepts and theories provided refer to this interaction. Tabatorni and Jarneu (1975) point out that strategy is "the set of decisions that determine the coherence of the initiatives and reactions of the company vis-à-vis its environment", while Igor Ansoff (1976), proposes strategy is "the dialectic of company with its environment ”, Hoffer and Schendel (1978) point out that strategy is“ the basic characteristics of the match that an organization makes with its environment ”. Belohlavek (1996) «is the set of actions to achieve adaptation to the environment- in the market segment where the company operates - in such a way as to achieve its own objectives and those of the community, integrating maximum actions that arise from the market opportunities,with those of minimum that fundamentally depend on the own organization ».
On the other hand, it is established that in the definition provided by 23 authors in the definition of strategic direction, 65% mention the term environment to refer to the relationship organization environment.
These elements give us a first possible law.
Law of adaptation of the organization with its environment
Assumptions
I. No organization can subsist in isolation, without interaction with its environment.
II. Individuality of the form of manifestation of external factors on the organization (what for one organization constitutes a threat to another may constitute an opportunity) In the dialectical relationship that the organization makes with the environment (see figure 1) by satisfying the demand for goods or services, perceives manifestations expressed through political, legal, economic, technological and social forces that can be positive (opportunities) or negative (threats), but this form of demonstration does not mean that it behaves the same for two organizations even if they are from the same market sector.
All behavior of an external factor in relation to the organization has an impact (I) which can be positive (opportunity) or negative (threat). The adaptation of the organization in this case would be given to possess a capacity (C) to take advantage of efficiently and effectively the form of positive manifestation of the external factor (opportunity) or to adequately protect itself from the negative factor (threat) so that the intensity impact effect (IEI) does not have a detrimental result on the organization.
The aforementioned means that if there is a certain key factor in the environment that can provide an opportunity for the organization's activity but that it does not have the positive capacities (strengths) to take advantage of it, then it would cease to be an opportunity to become a restriction. However, if the form of manifestation of the external factor is negative, that is, a threat, but the organization has sufficient capacity to mitigate the negative effect that it may cause, then the intensity of the effect of the impact of said threat would be minimum.
Figure 1. Dialectical relationship of the organization with its environment
III. The classification of an external factor as threat or opportunity depends on the following variables.
- Impact of the external or internal factor on the organization. Response capacity of the organization to take advantage of or defend against said impact. Intensity of the Impact Effect, is the relationship between the two previous variables under the hypothesis that the greater the response capacity, the less intensity of the effect of impact.
The above assumption is expressed by the formula:
Where IEI intensity of impact effect, I impact and C adaptability. Assuming that the impact can receive the values of 1, 2 and 3, being (1) a minor impact, (2) medium and (3) relevant, and that the response capacity is also expressed in those three values where (1) is null or little capacity, (2) medium and (3) full capacity, so when the result of the Impact Effect Intensity determined through the formula expressed above is equal to 3, then the form of manifestation will be a threat if the Analysis is external or a weakness if it is internal, if the result is 1.5, the intensity is medium and if it is 1, then it will be an opportunity or strength depending on the type of analysis performed.In this way, the hypothesis "the greater the response capacity, the lower the intensity of the impact effect" is demonstrated.
IV. Generality of the form of manifestation of internal factors for organizations (it has a similar significance for all organizations, which for one is a weakness, for example lack of availability of financial resources, human resources without training, etc.)
During the execution of the strategic direction Figure 2. Correspondence between thought, attitude and intention for effective execution
Assumptions
I. For the formulation, implementation and control of the strategic direction, mastery of its tools and techniques is essential. (thought)
II. Necessary integration between the strategic, tactical and operational levels.
III. There is effectiveness in executing the strategy if it is met:
Where IE strategy implementation effectiveness, PE strategic thinking, AE strategic attitude and IE strategic intention.
If it is assumed that the presence of each variable: strategic thinking (PE), strategic attitude (AE) and strategic intention (IE) is weighted with 1 and its absence with 0, then:
EIE = 1 * 1 * 0 = 0 (there is no effectiveness in executing the strategy).
EIE = 1 * 0 * 1 = 0 (there is no effectiveness in executing the strategy).
EIE = 0 * 1 * 1 = 0 (there is no effectiveness in executing the strategy).
EIE = 1 * 1 * 1 = 1 (there is effectiveness in executing the strategy).
The simple mathematical exercise above demonstrates in a simple way that when one of the three factors described is missing, the effectiveness of the implementation of the strategies is affected.
IV. The variables for effective implementation are: strategic leadership of change, adaptation of the structure to the designed strategy and adaptation of the culture through instrumental values.
Strategic thinking
Thought manifests in man in an embryonic way from the first months of life. The perfecting and development of this capacity takes place in relation to the vital experience acquired in the course of the life of man. Children between 11 and 12 years old already have the capacity for logical abstract thinking.
Taking into account the aforementioned, it can be clearly understood that a leader of any organization has developed the ability to think since childhood, but does this mean that he has developed strategic thinking? Many are the authors who in recent years have addressed the subject; however, they remain at the theoretical level because they do not provide a reference on how to get there.
Thought, from the psychological point of view, has particularities that tend to hinder the development of strategic thinking: the mediated character: when establishing the links between things, man tends to use the data from past experience in a mandatory way, which it means that the leaders, faced with the need to solve the strategic problems of the organization, tend to continue acting as they routinely did when resorting to their past management experiences.
It is based on the knowledge that man has about the general laws of nature and society. The man always uses knowledge already formed on the previous practice. The leaders, for decision-making, always tend to generalize past experiences, which may mean that the traditional factors that hinder the logical follow-up of the implemented strategies are not taken into account.
Thought, according to SL Rubinstein, is the process of reflection in man's consciousness of the essence of things, of the regular links and relationships between objects or phenomena of reality. Authors who approach strategic thinking tend to enunciate it as a continuum of the steps or procedures of strategic management, which distances it from the psychological formation of thought.
V. Petrovsky states that thought is the socially conditioned psychic process and inextricably related to language, aimed at the search and discovery of something substantially new, that is, it is the process of indirect (mediatized) and generalized reflection of objective reality through analysis and synthesis operations. Thought arises based on the practical activity of sensible knowledge and considerably exceeds its limits.
If you go to a philosophical dictionary you will find that thought is defined as the active process of reflecting the objective world in judgments, concepts, theories, etc. linked to the solution of one or the other problems; superior product of specially organized matter (the brain). And it states that the main characteristics of thought are:
- It arises in the process of men's productive activity. It exists only in relation to work activity and speech, typical only of human society. The ability of thought to reflect reality in a synthesized way is expressed in man's ability to form judgments and concepts.
Individual strategic thinking includes applying judgment, based on experience, to determine future directions. Company strategic thinking is the coordination of creative minds within a common perspective that allows a business to move into the future in a way that is satisfactory to all. The purpose of strategic thinking is to help you exploit the many future challenges, both foreseeable and unpredictable.
Strategic thinking incorporates values, mission, vision and strategy that tend to be intuitive (based on feelings) rather than analytical (based on information). Reaching agreement on these elements among members of your management team is an essential requirement for effective planning.
Strategic thinking is important because:
- Keeps focus on both the future and the present. Reinforces the principles adopted in the mission, vision and strategy. Supports communication and cross-functional planning. Motivates managers to look at planning from a macro perspective. Save time, reduce conflict, and increase the power of human effort. Transform long-term planning into specific measurable results. Accentuates team planning that gives participants ownership of the plan and projected results Provides a means to carry out short-term plans and to ensure understanding and commitment to them
Strategic thinking provides the foundation for strategic planning and is largely intuitive in nature, leading to perspective, while long-range planning leads to position and tactical planning leads to performance.
Strategic thinking addresses the values, the philosophical convictions of the executives charged with guiding your company on a successful journey; mission, the general concept of your company; vision, how your company should be in the future, and strategy, the direction in which your company should move.
It has become increasingly clear in recent years that, to be successful, every business needs the active engagement of all its decision makers. While the formal process of strategic thinking typically begins with the CEO and senior management team, and to be effective, it must immediately spread to the rest of the company.
It has been verified that in the companies where the general manager delegates the process of implementation of the strategic direction to the deputy managers and mid-level leaders, the process is neglected, which brings with it the dissonance when making decisions so that the effectiveness is not achieved of process. To help solve this negative aspect, it is considered prudent to carry out training actions for the entire management team to train them in driving change.
The strategic attitude
A genuine example of a strategic attitude has been the wise leadership of the Commander in Chief of the Cuban revolutionary process; therefore, using all their experiences constitutes a source of development of this essential aspect, to achieve the necessary effectiveness in the implementation processes of the strategic direction in security and protection organizations.
The author Marina Menguzatto (1984) points out the need for a change in management's attitude, to enable the rapid adaptation of the company to a turbulent environment, and emphasizes that the focus of management must move from the internal sphere of the company and efficiency, up to company environment and effectiveness relationships.
In the author's criteria, she states that the center of the strategic direction is effectiveness; however, if an organization neglects the internal aspect, it may be at the mercy of threats if it does not notice an increase in weaknesses or not fully exploit the strengths to take advantage of the opportunities, which is why it is considered that the strategic direction should focus on effectiveness, or what is the same, efficiency and effectiveness if you take into account that both variables are not exclusive, but complementary, the challenge facing organizations today is to be more efficient and effective every day, so the Strategic attitude must be in correspondence with it.
The essential elements of the strategic attitude are:
- Adaptability to the circumstance derived from the interaction of forces in the environment. Voluntary attitude to achieve the conviction of all members of the organization that the effectiveness of the future performance of the organization depends on the proper use of strategic direction, reject passivity and neutrality, make changes endogenous. The proactive nature, which implies getting ahead of the phenomena that can impact the organization, as José Martí put it, "Seeing later is not worth it, what is worth is seeing first and being prepared." This implies not being surprised by changes or circumstances, this is an essential element for security and protection organizations. The critical attitude, this means avoiding inertia and looking for new solutions, avoiding routine,which implies not applying the strategic direction as a formula. The flexibility to introduce changes that strengthen the implementation of the strategies and adapt them as the enemy moves, to defeat him. Integration of soft and hard variables, also taking into account all endogenous and exogenous variables that can influence, both positively and negatively, the process.
The strategic intention
Intention can be defined as the deliberate desire to do something, synonymous with will and instinct, so strategic intention refers to the will and drive of the top management of an organization to engage at all levels to lead each step in order to develop a management system with new characteristics contributes to maintaining and strengthening strategic thinking, strategic attitude. Without these three elements, although their essence may seem extremely subjective, no strategic management system will be effective enough.
The three aspects detailed above need an alignment to achieve effectiveness of the strategy execution process.
Conclusions
- The strategic direction consists of three phases: planning, implementation and control. Most of the strategic management models focus on the planning phase. The implementation phase of the strategy has been little studied and attended by researchers on the subject. That the laws to achieve effectiveness in the implementation of strategic management in an organization are:
- The adaptation of the organization with its environment. The existence of strategic thought, attitude and intention during the execution.
- That the variables that favor coherence in the implementation of the strategy are: leadership, adjusting the structure to the defined strategy and adapting the culture (shared, existing, ideal and instrumental values) to the new form of management.
Bibliography
1 Adler, Nancy J; Brahm, Richard et-al Strategy Implementation: A Comparison of Face-to-Face Negotiations in the People's Republic of China and the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 13 (6) pp 449-466.
2 Ansoff, Igor. Strategic planning. New trend of the Administration. / H Ansoff, RP Declerk and Hayes RI / Editorial Trillas, México, sp.
3 Argyris, Chris (1989] Strategy Implementation: An Experience in Learning. Organizational Dynamics, 18 (2) pp 5-15.
4 Beckham, Daniel J. Hot Concepts in strategy. / Helthcare- forum- Journal. Jan / Feb 1997; v 40n1, pp 43-47.
5 Bowman, Cliff. The essence of Strategic Administration. / Ed. Prentice Hall Hispanoamericana, Mexico, 150 pp.
6 Certo, Samuel. C. et al. Strategic Direction. / Ed. Irwin, Madrid Spain. 382 pp…
7 Chakravarthy, Balaji S. On Tailoring a Strategic Planning System to Its Context: Some Empirical Evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 8 (6) pp 17-24.
8 Drucker, Peter, F.. Administration and future. / South American Ed. Buenos Aires, 250 pp.
9 Egelhoff, William G. Great strategy or great strategy implementation - Two ways of competing in global markets. Sloan Management Review, 34 (2) pp 37-50.
10 Floyd, Steven W; Wooldridge, Bill Managing Strategic Consensus: The Foundation of Effective Implementation. Academy of Management Executive. 6 (4) pp 27-39.
11 Gupta, Anil K. SBU Strategies, Corporate-SBU Relations, and SBU Effectiveness in Strategy Implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 30 (3) pp 477-500.
12 Guth, William D; MacMillan, Ian C. Strategy Implementation Versus Middle Management Self-Interest. Strategic Management Journal, 7 (4) pp 313-327.
13 Mintzberg, Henrry. The art of shaping strategy./ Brochures Management, No. 5 1988, CCED, MES, Havana Cuba, 24 pp..
14 Morrisey, George. Strategic thinking. Build the foundations of your planning / Ed. Prentice Hall Hispanoamericana, Madrid, Spain. 119 pp..
15 Petrovsky, AV. General psychology. / Ed. Books for education. Havana Cuba. pp 407 - 446.
16 Rubinstein, SL. The development of Psychology. Principles and methods. / Ed. Town and education. Havana Cuba. PP 71-164.
