The last quarter of the year can be very frustrating. In addition to the “normal” workload, there’s all the seasonal stuff to be done – what should our Holiday card say, what will we give people this year etc.? (O.K. so I am a Grinch.)
Second, the results for 2010 begin to take shape. Hopefully you’ll have a great year, possibly even so good that you’re not keeping up with demand. A less attractive, but still acceptable, alternative is that you’ll make your targets (if only just). The outcome that no one wants is that you’ll fall short of some or all of your goals.
Then, of course, strategic or business planning has started/is starting/should have started for next year. And what is happening in 2010 will affect the “mood” and possibly the approach, to that exercise.
By the way does anyone really enjoy strategic planning? And does it achieve anything in this age of constant change and heightened uncertainty? I saw 2 blog postings over the weekend that argued we can no longer do strategic planning as we’ve always done it.
The first, Time to Retire Strategic Planning and Adopt Innovation Strategy by Kamal Hassan, said that that strategic planning has become too formulaic and we’ve come to rely too much on what has worked in the past. But isn’t that argument rooted in the application of the process rather than the process itself?
Kamal went on to say that we currently study the past to plan the future but that history is no longer the best teacher. However, as someone (I think it was Winston Churchill) said, “If we don’t learn from history then we are doomed to repeat it”.
This posting closed with the comment that inventing the future is better than predicting it. To invent the future we have, amongst other things, to replace historical data with subjective data (customer surveys, competitor strategy, trends, gaps, etc.). But haven’t been doing these things for some time now? I know the companies we work with do.
While saying that attempting to define the business over a 3 or 5 year horizon is probably foolhardy at best, the second post Strategic Planning and Innovation by Jeffrey Phillips, did acknowledge that it is very important to define strategic milestones or goals and determine how the firm arrives at those goals.
Jeffrey thinks that these are more “tactical” activities than pure strategic planning. At the risk of splitting hairs, I’d say they’re more about execution of the strategy.
In closing Jeffrey says that he doubts we’ll ever see the end of “strategic planning” but that what we will see over time is the realization that innovation and trend management is the actionable part of the strategic planning process. And I tend to agree with that.
I was talking to a colleague today who articulated the point I want to make really well. The strategic planning process will always be with us but it must develop, as most things do, with time. However we must adapt the process rather than declare it hopelessly broken and throw every part of it away.
Forecasting several different scenarios, building assumptions on thorough, comprehensive research (formal and informal) and thinking through contingency plans are just some of the things we can – and must – do in this age of fast, unrelenting change. Looking at, and adjusting, our goals more frequently is also, I believe, simply good sense.
So, I think strategic planning is as relevant in this age of constant change and heightened uncertainty as it has always been. And I think it can accomplish as much, or as little, as we allow the links between strategy development and execution to achieve.
But as for enjoying it, well……….