June 6, 2005
Strategery
Posted by Kevin | Print This Article
Earlier I mentioned an article on the death of strategic planning from Jeff and Jamie at Association Renewal. Well, it’s not really about death. They write:
“For decades associations have engaged in what certainly must be tens of thousands of strategic planning sessions, and we doubt they have achieved many genuine breakthroughs. In the 20th century, it might have been sufficient for associations to pursue mission-driven constancy as their main strategic objective. In the 21st century, however, associations, like so many organizations, must confront their own demise and, in so doing, also must address the threefold challenge of sustaining relevance, catalyzing renewal, and increasing resilience. Unfortunately, strategic planning, an approach grounded in the command-and-control management model, fails to produce the requisite creativity and dynamism necessary for associations to succeed strategically in the years ahead.”
I couldn’t agree more. In his book Selling the Invisible, published a lifetime ago in 1994, Harry Beckwith laid out, in very simple terms, many of the problems with “planning” in general — eighteen “fallacies” described in twenty-eight very short pages. And these fallacies are still true — er, false — today. (While ostensibly aimed at “service professionals” like accountants, attorneys, etc., this is a great little book for association executives. I bought copies for all the staff in my division. In fact, it was the book’s title that first caught my eye in an airport bookstore because over the years I’ve frequently made the half-joking comment that associations are in the business of “selling air.”)
Chief among the fallacies of planning as described by Beckwith are the first two: “You Can Know What’s Ahead” and “You Can Know What You Want.” You can’t know either. And here’s what he said about “strategy”:
Business once encouraged the view of strategy’s superiority to tactics by throwing piles of money at it. Fifteen years ago, many with a Wharton MBA and a lust for money and status tried to get into strategic planning. They’re still great jobs if you can get them … But in successful companies, tactics drive strategy as much or more than strategy drives tactics. These companies do something and learn from it. It changes their thinking … Sometimes, the very first tactic you execute changes your plan.
Amen! If you want to get from A to Z, first you must do A. And once you do, guess what — B changes. You realize B isn’t what you thought B was. Or you realize you can skip ahead to D. Or you realize that A didn’t work out and you need to start from scratch. Or you realize you didn’t really want to get to Z in the first place.
Old-school association strategic plans lock organizations into mindsets that are outdated before the laserprinter is done spitting them out. They stifle innovation and create a “pass-the-buck” mentality among staff, who are rewarded for following the rules rather than introducing innovation — and who can easily blame the plan (and by extension, the association’s leaders/members) when ideas that sounded good eight months ago in a boardroom fail miserably in the field.
Jeff and Jamie, as association consultants, did a nice job of creating an “alternative consulting concept” in a world where strategic planning doesn’t work any more (if it ever did) but consultants still need to eat. For those lucky few, like me, who get to work for associations and CEOs who “get it,” there’s an easy path to follow:
1) Decide what you want “Z” to be. The vision. And a “vision” is not something wishy-washy like “We will offer first-class training, aggressive advocacy, and will be the partner of first choice among our industry/profession.” Bleah — I say it’s spinach and I say the hell with it. “Z” should be bold. It should be inspiring. It should be audacious. It should be something so bold, inspiring and audacious that you would never in a million years put it on your letterhead or in a press release.
2) What’s the first thing that should change/be done if “Z” is to ever be a reality. That’s “A.”
3) Do it. See how it flies. Now you know what “B” is.
4) Do it. Repeat.
Fantastic blog article, Kevin. As someone who may be reentering the association world soon, I hope we can help more associations pursue the Big, Bold Z (sounds like what Seth Godin calls “Edgecraft”). I always gave the five year strategic board plan an insolent eyeroll. I’ve infamously been known to have said, “With enough planning, in five years the association might be dead.” Kind of tough to develop a strategy for that.
Kevin, thanks so much for the supportive post. We agree with you that traditional strategic plans do not encourage the kind of on-going systemic strategic thinking that is required to be successful in today’s environment.
The more fundamental challenge facing most associations, however, is that we’ve assumed too much about the capacity of our organizations to think, talk and act strategically. This basic lack of organizational capacity makes it difficult, if not impossible, for many associations to fulfill their potential, particularly when their guiding strategic frameworks remain static for years at a time.
Our “alternative” is, in part, an attempt to introduce the kind of energy and passion into the work of strategy that most association leaders would hope to see in other areas of their organizations’ work. It is also a recognition that the ability to make intelligent strategic choices and implement them is a discipline that is cultivated over time. Our organizations need both innovation and execution yet they continue to struggle with both, and Jamie and I believe that a misplaced commitment to strategic planning is a big reason why.
Thanks again for endorsing our view. We greatly appreciate the support.