Strategic Planning Issues - Assignment Example

a) Mintzberg’s article is mainly concerned with highlighting the difference between strategic planning and strategic thinking. Planning is concerned with analysis which involves breaking down the goals into steps which can be implemented simultaneously while strategic thinking in contrast involves the use of insight and creativity. Strategic planning is mostly concerned with promoting strategies that have been borrowed from the past or copied somewhere the reason why some organisations fail. It does not fully take into account the need to be insightful and think critically about what the future holds for the organisation. One weakness with strategic planning is that it is comprised of a calculated approach which is fixed towards attaining a goal in contrast to strategic thinking which is committed to encompass other people’s views in attainment of that particular goal. Strategies are only effective if committed people infuse them with their energy directed at achieving the stipulated goals. On the other hand, it can be noted that planning could not learn or think but only limited to the widely held belief of doing things within an organisation. He posits that strategic planning should have been termed strategic programming rather where it would be promoted as a process to formalise the strategies that have already been developed. On its own, planning cannot generate strategies. However, planning is important in that it promotes coordination and also ensures that everyone in the organisation pulls in the same direction. It can be used to gain moral support from outsiders who are more influential to the organisation. In this scenario, it can be noted that as human beings, we are inclined to formalise our behaviour in most instances but careful consideration has to be taken when it comes to strategy making process. Strategy making is often a complex activity which requires creativity in the process. The extent to which we are guided by formalisation sometimes make us stop thinking beyond what is regarded as the norm. When it comes to strategic making process, intuitive thinking ought to play a pivotal role in informing and shaping of the organisational vision. This can be possible through the use of effective thinking which is not only subjected to the principles stipulated to be followed. A close analysis of the given article shows that it is concerned with highlighting some of the shortfalls of strategic planning that can impede the process of strategic decision making process which ought to be guided by creative thinking based on the changes that would be taking place both within and outside the organisation. There ought to be committed effort from all the sides involved in the process of making decisions that affect the operations of the organisation. b.(i) Strategic planning can be defined as the process of attempting to strike a balance between the organisation’s objectives and resources and its changing opportunities. It tries to set the direction for the use of all resources and this direction will remain valid for a period of time. What it means is that this direction and laid down activities cannot be challenged within a short period of time or cannot be easily changed but regarded as the formalised way of doing things within an organisation. Strategic planning differs from strategic thinking in that strategic thinking involves the integration of what has been learned by the manager, other people’s views as well as hard data in formulation of a strategy. It involves creative and insightful thinking in making up strategies. Strategic planning is primarily concerned with analysis of the strategies that have already been formulated and strategic thinking is concerned with synthesis of ideas that can be used to coin informed strategies that can be adopted by the organisation. In strategic planning, there is less thinking other than following the laid down strategies while strategic thinking is concerned with learned experiences in strategy formulation. (ii). According to Mintzberg, strategic planning failed in the first place as a result of the fact that planning systems that were put in place were only articulating visions that already existed and were not innovative where they would bring in new knowledge pertaining to the changes characterising the operations of the organisations. The planning systems were expected to produce step by step instructions for carrying out the outlined strategies. One main weakness of this state of affairs is that it did not take into account action required to meet the external challenges that can be witnessed in the market. Indeed, they were not flexible about the necessary steps that could be taken into account in view of certain changes taking place. Strategic planning is mainly formal in nature and dependent on preserving the established categories but real strategic change requires the invention of new strategies to be taken into account. Therefore, strategic planning has failed as a result of failure to transcend the categories into meaningful categories. It is mostly comprised of calculative management style which is fixed about what must be done to obtain the goals of the organisation without taking into consideration the concern for the other member’s preferences. (iii). The fallacy of strategic planning is the failure to outdo human brains. Well these artificial systems are put in place with the soul purpose of replacing the ideas likely to be raised by the human brains but the effort falls far short of replacing the creative mind of the human being. These artificial systems have never worked as was expected though they can indeed process more hard information. However, failure to synthesise the information aptly sums up the notion that strategic planning can neither learn nor think the very reason why it fails at strategic levels. Another fallacy of strategic planning is the aspect of formalisation which implies that there has to be a formal sequence to be followed in implementing the strategies. However, this does not take into account the idea that strategy formulation is part of the learning process which is informed by the changes that take place in the environment within which a business is operating. Strategy formulation also ought to be committed whereby it takes into account the views and ideas of other people within the organisation so as to make informed decisions. Usually people tend to experiment with other things as a way of gaining useful knowledge that can be used to tackle problems which is the essence of strategic making as a learning process. However, with strategic planning, formal procedures are incapable of forecasting areas which need attention as well as creating novel strategies. Basically, strategical planning does not take into account changes that can affect the decision making process. It is emphatic on the observation of the laid sequence of the status quo which ought to be followed as way of attempting to attain the goals of the organisation. It is not creative to say the least which makes it less effective. (iv). Strategic planners should supply data, help managers think strategically and play a leading role in programming the vision of the organisation. Planners should make their contributions around the strategy making process rather inside it. They should act as catalysists who encourage managers to think strategically through conducting surveys as well as determining concrete steps that can be taken to realise the vision of the organisation. Planners should not provide answers to technical aspects affecting the organisation but should supply the formal analysis of data that is required to broaden the consideration of issues by managers rather than providing the answers themselves. Compared to managers, the planners have ample time to analyse every bit of information they get hence the need to open up complex issues to thoughtful consideration rather than undermining them with decisions that fall short of being analytic. Planners often act as strategy finders where they can scout around the other organisations and try to find other relevant information where there can be differences in their way of operations which would be useful. Planners can also act as analysts where they can critically analyse all the information at their disposal to help the managers make informed decisions about the strategies they may need to undertake. They often find themselves as tasked with the role of influencing other people within the organisation to act in certain ways so as to influence the strategic making process within an organisation. Planners are often responsible for digging for information that can be analysed if it can be helpful to the process of making strategies within an organisation. References Meyer et al, (2006), Management, Fresh perspectives, Pearson Prentice Hall Mintzberg H. (2000), The rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Pearson Education Limited. Porter M., “The State of Strategic Thinking” Economist, May 23 1987 P.21 Robinson W. (1997), Strategic Management and information system: An Integrated Approach, 2nd Edition, Pearson Education Limited. Staude et al (2001), Management, Oxford University Press. Strategic Planning, Retrieved on 31 March From: http://www.civicus.org/new/media/Strategic%20Planning.pdf Read More