Business Strategies Fail Because of the Poor Execution Carried out by the Management - Coursework Example

THE DUCK AND THE LEMONADE STAND (Student Name) (Course No.) (Lecturer) (University) (Date) The statement,” better a consistently applied mediocre strategy than a series of ad hoc strategies” is an interesting fallacy. Over the years, many business strategies have been developed for the management of organizations as well as people. The development of a business idea and its successful implementation help in understanding the need of a proper plan for these strategies. A strategy is considered null and void until it is implemented. Various people have produced brilliant ideas which have been dismissed by others since they failed to meet the required demands. An idea is considered mediocre if it overlooks the necessary framework needed for its implementation. Such business ideas are fantastic but there is the lack of proper measures put in place to achieve the desired goal, and they continue to be dreams. In companies and corporate institutions, the situation is the same. The institutions develop good ideas and spend a lot of time, monetary input and labor in developing business strategies that often end up in the shelves without review and proper implementation. In an attempt to keep the same level with the increased competition in the market today, several businesses have established fancy ideas. However, these brilliant ideas have been considered unworthy because they fail to focus on the ways through which they can be successfully implemented. The failure of some of these brilliant ideas in achieving the goals and objectives of business enterprises are attributed to various reasons. Therefore, beats logic is the reason why they are referred to as brilliant if they fail to meet their objectives. One of the reasons for the failure of a series of ideas in any given enterprise gap between a strategy developed by an external firm and the ability of the user enterprise to implement it internally. Several companies, for instance, hire external expertise to develop strategies that can be used within the companies (Freedman, 2013, p.47). In countless cases, the research done by the consultants is amazing, and the case studies are excellent. However, the recommendation given sometimes conflict with the internal policies of the contracting organization and thus execution becomes a problem. The failure of a strategy to realize the boundaries within which an institution is confined can also pose a primary problem in implementation of the strategy. Prior to adopting a new strategy, an institution should be able to assess how flexible they are to the changing environment. The scope and time within which a business can adjust to the changes in the market place, for example, differ from one organization to another. It is, therefore, important that a company weighs its flexibility before developing a new plan (Saeed et al., 2013, p. 143). Aligning a business plan with the policies of an organization helps in ensuring proper execution of the plan (Ordonez, 2014, p. 193). In a situation where an organization contracts an outside firm to formulate a plan for them, the challenge lies in execution of the ideas presented. For instance, if a company rewards the customer representatives for long conversations on the phone with the clients, strategies that limit this may not e properly executed by the firm thus resulting in its failure. Secondly, the failure of business ideas is because of the lack of recognition that the information flow is important in execution (Walker, 2011, p.43). In developing new brands, for example, all the employees need to have information regarding the brand, regardless of their position in the company. It is also indispensable to carry out internal presentations and conferences on the new brand. It encourages participation by each department in developing strategies related to the new brand. Another important fact that should be considered by the organizations is that the attainability of a business plan depends entirely on the employees of the organization. In the formulation of fancy business ideas, the top management, in several cases, chooses a brain to do the work. All the remaining employees act as carriers of the brain’s choices. As a result, the employees are demotivated and the strategy fails. Instead of using such conventional approaches in strategy development and execution, the management can use a participatory approach to strategy (Rouse, 2001, p. 81). The failure of many plans in management today is as a result of poor strategy execution. Execution is a way of getting things done (Bossidy and Charan, 2013, p.34). Most of the strategies that are formulated are not properly implemented resulting in failure to meet the required objectives. The execution of a strategy takes the form of a system or a process. As a system, execution depends on the people, operations and the strategy itself. For a strategy to be properly implemented, it requires the input from the people in all departments of the organization. Apart from the people, the strategy itself and the operations involved in its execution play a significant role. The approach to strategy execution as a process looks at the steps that are followed in proper strategy execution (Collins, 2011, p.5). The approach considers ten important steps that should be followed for a business plan to be properly implemented. The first step in this process involves understanding the strategy. Many brilliant strategic plans fail because of lack of vision. The strategy should be understood by all the employees of an organization and its relationship with all other entities outlined. The use of such tools as strategy maps, success maps, and activity maps can be used. The second step is to assign performance values to the strategy. This helps the employees and the top management in gauging whether the strategy will be completed or not. The performance values of the strategy are found in dashboards or in balanced scorecards. The management then establishes a regular framework of reviewing the strategy with an aim of determining whether the strategy is productive while also checking its performance standards. After reporting the progress, the management can make decisions on whether to proceed with the strategy depending on the reporting (O’connor, 2010, p. 307). The reporting process serves as a basis for the enterprise executives to make informed decisions regarding the plan. Identification of the strategy projects is the next stage. Many enterprises have several ongoing projects within the organization at any one time. The challenge, however, lies in the proper understanding of these projects. As part of management strategy execution, it is important that the projects related to the strategy are identified for easy operation. The projects are then aligned to the strategy of the enterprise. Having identified the projects, it is important that they are related to the business plans. It ensures that the path toward achievability of the strategy is smooth. The next step is project management. One important factor in achieving efficient strategy execution is its application in overseeing the projects within an organization. The strategy should also be communicated to the people in the organization from the managers to the lowest ranked employee. Since the execution of plans requires the input from people, there is the need of making them have a perfect understanding of the plan for them to be productive in its execution. Determining the roles of individuals and rewarding performance are the last two stages in plan execution. In all organizations, the employees have an inward motivation in contributing to the efficiency of their companies. The management should ensure that each employee plays a role towards achieving the strategy of the organization. Motivation of the employees also increases their morale towards ensuring that the goals of the organization are achieved. Business institutions which fail to recognize the contribution of employees through incentives register some of the worst performance in the market (Stettinius, 2007, p.60). In his article entitled “The Execution Trap”, Roger Martin argues that the execution of strategies fail because the business idea dealt with is not good at all. He argues that the fact that a strategy does not produce good results make it as good as nothing. According to Martin, an idea that does not bear fruit cannot be categorized as brilliant. The author argues that even in politics, a brilliant strategy results in the winning of a candidate thus an idea that does not produce the desired outcome is a failure. He points out that the problem is caused by the false doctrine of Dimon and Bossidy that execution is the key to success as very popular but flawed. The author points out the common misconception that, strategy execution, is the role of the executives in an organization. Most commonly, and in many organizations, execution of strategies is seen as the role of the executive and the managers in an organization. The author considers this as misguides and uses the body and the brain relationship to illustrate. The author considers the brain as the top management which chooses what to do and the body as the organization that performs what the brain directs it to do. When compared to the workplace situation, the executive formulates strategies with the expectation that the junior employees carry out the implementation. This kind of approach is considered unproductive. A better approach according to Martin is a situation whereby choices flow from the top management to the junior employees and one is allowed to make a choice depending on the situation at hand. The book gives an example of a retail bank in which the customer representatives read manuals on how to serve customers. The manuals are provided by the bank owner or managers and the representatives are mandated to follow them even when they don’t produce results. The author also points out at the choiceless doer dilemma as another cause of strategy failure. In the case of the retail banking again, there is a lot of pressure on everyone to deliver. The managers are pressurized by the boards, the shareholders, and the regulators. This suggests that the decisions made from the management through to the junior employees relies on some level of uncertainty and are confined within some boundaries. As a result, the decisions made are not of an individual but in line with the company guidelines. In some instances within the choiceless doer dilemma, employees adapt by understanding the rules and applying them in their day to day activities. They stick to the rules, doing only what they are supposed to do. In other cases, this bureaucracy causes the employees to be demotivated. Since the employees cannot make their own choices, they fail to be part of the strategy thus resulting in failure. The common thought by managers that strategy and execution are different things results in failure since they overlook the effectiveness of the strategy. Since working in an organization which does not allow one to make informed choices is tiresome, the employees get disillusioned. As a result, they fail to share important information with their seniors to influence decision making. The management then sorts help outside the organization by hiring external consultants. Since the recommendations are made by outside firms, they become unconvincing to the staff and conflict arises in the enterprise with blame games from all directions. The result is strategy failure. Since strategy execution involves almost all aspects of an organization the argument by Martin is considered null and void. The poor implementation of a series of very good ideas within an institution often results in failure. For strategies to work in organizations, it is important that all the elements of the organization be put together to realize its intended goals. The duck and the lemonade stand video presents a story of a duck walking up to a lemonade stand and asking the man running the stand whether he has some grapes. The man says, “No, I just sell lemonades”, but encourages the duck to buy, saying that it is cold, fresh and homemade. Since the duck does not need the lemonade, it just waddles away. This happens several times until the man gets irritated with the duck and wants to glue it on the tree. On the last day, the duck walks again to the lemonade stand and asks the man running the stand whether he has glue. He also asks the man for some grapes. This time round, the man offers to take the duck to the store and buy him the grapes he has always wanted. The man offers the duck a grape but the duck declines saying that the store would have made his day if it had lemonades. It is interesting how the duck is determined to get some grapes from the lemonade stand, where only lemonade is sold. From the story, it is evident that the duck attempts to inculcate in the man running the lemonade stand, a new strategy. Over the years, the man has only been selling lemonade. By insisting to buy grapes from the lemonade stand, the duck tries to motivate the seller to bring in new products. Even when the man finally offers him the grapes he wanted, the duck says that it would have been better if the store had some lemonade and walks away. Through this, the duck tries to open the eyes of the lemonade stand owner to growth. From a business point of view, the strategy employed by the stand owner in attempting to sell his products to the duck fails in several occasions. The one reason for this failure is the culture of the stand owner. He has been selling lemonades for a long time and does not think of any other expansion that he can have in the business. Therefore, when the duck asks for some grapes, his answer is definitely a no. Most brilliant business strategies fail to deliver because they are myopic, like the stand owner, thinking in just one direction. Having sold lemonade for several years, the stand owner is not open to any other changes. It shows that, like in the choiceless doer dilemma, the stand owner cannot make any other decisions from the normal things he has been doing. His strategy employed in luring the customer to buy grapes fails because he does not care to know why the duck wants grapes. Similarly, failure of many strategies is because they fail to consider the demands of the customers beyond the guidelines of the company. Also, instead of trying to find out why the duck requests for grapes at a lemonade stand, the stand owner tries to convince the duck to buy the lemonade by using marketing terms such as cold, fresh and homemade. The approach also fails. There is also a similar connotation to this in the business world. Many of the strategies employed in businesses today fail because they overlook the needs of the different stakeholders involved such as the customers. Implementation of such strategies, therefore, becomes a challenge. Finally, the lemonade stand owner comes up with a brilliant idea that he thinks would impress the duck. He offers to use his own money to buy the duck the grapes. Ironically, the duck declines the offer and walks away. In many businesses, the challenge of spending a lot of time and resources such as money in developing strategies that don’t work is a nightmare. In the past decades, several strategies have been developed, just like the idea by the lemonade stand owner, which have not solved the issues intended for their development. The engagement of a great thinker in developing a plan and its successful implementation are important in the success of any enterprise. In most cases, however, the developers of great ideas are not often the implementers. Hence, communication of a business plan to the various departments of an organization is important for its successful execution. Business plans should also be made in a manner that the flexibility of the institution is well taken care of. It should encompass the time and the extent of adjustment of an enterprise to the new plan. One of the ways through which brilliant ideas can be categorized is by duration. A common characteristic of such ideas is that they serve their purpose and are faced out after a short time an example of such ideas is the management by objective (MBO) which was coined in the 1960s to help businesses in managing their customers. The concept was used by many businesses at the time but it was faced out when the demand for use by many human resource departments reduced. Among the theories and strategies that have been developed to explain the execution of strategies in business environments is the blue ocean strategies. The blue ocean strategy was developed by Kim and Mauborgne. The blue ocean strategy differs from the conventional approach in that the conditions of the company can be shaped. The theory further focuses on the need to increase the quantity of the buyer value to dominate the market. It uses the mass of buyers and can discard of the already existing customer base (Kim and Mauborgne, 2015, p. 10). The theory suggests that instead of joining the already flooded market that is full of competition, an enterprise can eliminate the need for competition. Instead of the conventional approaches where the industries compete for demand in the market, the blue ocean theory provides an enterprise with the option of creating the demand. The concept provides four significant actions that can be applied. The raise option considers the elements that should be increased above the standards of the industry; others should be eliminated after the company has competed with them for sometime; still, others can be decreased to be below the industry standards and the enterprise can also develop new elements which have not been offered before (Zhexembayeva, 2014, p.23). The theory is, however, applicable only in execution of blue ocean strategies. Another theory used in explaining strategy execution is the Organizational Framework theory of Leavitt Ry (Baligh, 2006, p.21). The theory argues that strategy execution follows the organizational framework which is simple and easy to conceptualize. The concept uses the system approach to strategy execution that includes technology, people, structure and processes. The model has been in the recent past redesigned to include other elements such as the culture and history of an organization as well as the different modes of rewarding the employees. The concept, however, does not include the market and products because theoretically, strategy execution is not affected by both the market that an organization operates in and the products manufactured. The office of strategy management is also another theory that is commonly used in explaining the strategy execution procedure. The theory aims to emphasize on the need for strategy execution in any given organization and hence drives the process. The approach uses the balanced scorecard as a base for management systems (Sheldrake, 2003, p. 15). Institutions that use the office of management concept produce good results and can reduce the gap between strategy implementation and execution. The application of this theory is restricted to the institutions that use the balanced scorecard and may not be of use to companies that use other strategy tools. Developed by Hrebiniak, the theory of making strategy work is also an important framework in strategic management. The theory explains the significance of culture, proper coordination and integration, incentives and control as well as the power of influence in execution of strategies. The theory faces criticism because its contributions are only based on professional experiences (Hrebiniak, 2013, p. 25). In any given market environment, competition is inevitable. Competition in the market place is facilitated by such factors as the bargaining power of the consumers. The ability of all the consumers to strongly influence the producers is called the bargaining power of the customers. If the customers can influence the prices of goods and the purchase business plans should be developed that schemes increases competition in the market. Business plans should be developed which ensure that the bargaining powers of the consumers are limited. Another important factor that influences the business strategies as far as competition is concerned is the emergence of substitutes to the products in question. The result is that the new products compete with the existing ones for buyers in the market. The enterprises competing in the market have to strategize on the ways that will help them to remain relevant in the wake of such fierce competition. The competition of a business also depends on the economy of scale. Competition affects strategy as well as its execution. Competition in any business enterprise is influenced by both internal and external factors. Internal factors are the intrinsic elements that influence the success of the organization. Among them are the employees. For businesses to thrive in the market, they should consider hiring the best talented and experienced people (Nandakumar et al., 2014, p. 247). Motivation of the employees is also an important factor that needs to be considered in-house. This enables the enterprise to outstand others in the market. The business relationships in different departments such as teamwork also play a significant role. External factors are the factors that are beyond the control of the institution yet they affect it. One of the important external factors that affect all businesses is competition. Competition is found in all markets regardless of the industry within which the business is operating (Kreitner and Cassidy, 2011, p.56). Companies have a challenge of developing better brands and other marketing strategies to reduce external competition. The goods and services offered should also be of very high quality. Other external factors that influence the operations of businesses include the legal factors, ethical, political and socio-economic factors that require businesses to either adapt to the changes in the environment or be faces out. From the above discussion, it is evident that business strategies fail because of the poor execution carried out by the management. It is important to incorporate technology and human resources in this process. Employees, being vital in the execution of strategies, should be appreciated by the management in order to completely achieve the objectives of an enterprise and remain relevant in the competitive market. REFERENCES Baligh, H. H., 2006, Organization structures theory and design, analysis and prescription. New York, Springer, p.21-32 Bigler, W. R., & Norris, M., 2004, The new science of strategy execution: how established firms become fast, sleek wealth creators. Westport, Conn, Praeger, P. 201-271. Bossidy, L., & Charan, R., 2013, Execution the discipline of getting things done. New York, Crown Business, pp 34-51 Collins, J. C., 2011, Good to great why some companies make the leap--and others don't. [New York], HarperCollins, p5-21 Freedman, L., 2013, Strategy: a history, p.47-64. Holm, M. J., 2007, Strategy execution: passion & profit. Copenhagen, Copenhagen Business School Press, p. 78-103. Hrebiniak, L. G., 2013, Making strategy work: leading effective execution and change, p. 25. Hrebiniak, L. G., & Joyce, W. F., 2004, Implementing Strategy. New York, Macmillan, p. 6 Karami, A., 2007, Strategy formulation in entrepreneurial firms. Aldershot, England, Ashgate, p 93-123. Kim, W.C. and Mauborgne, R., 2015, Blue ocean strategy: how to create uncontested market space and make the competition irrelevant, pp.10-15. Kreitner, R. & Cassidy, C., 2011, Management Mason. OH, South-Western Cengage, p 56 Lussier, R. N., 2012, Management fundamentals: concepts, applications, skill development. Mason, Ohio, South-Western, p. 238/251. MacLennan, A., 2011, Strategy execution: translating strategy into action in complex organizations. London, Routledge, p. 132-142. Monippally, M. M., 2001, Business communication strategies. New Delhi, Tata McGraw-Hill Pub, p.90-103. Nandakumar, M. K., Jharkharia, S., & Nair, A. S., 2014, Organizational flexibility and competitiveness, p 247-263 Niciejewska, K., & Dimitrov, D., 2009, Blue Ocean Strategy INSEAD School. München, GRIN Verlag GmbH, p. 36. O'Connor, T., 2010, Strategic planning for distributors: execution isn't everything - it's the only thing! Washington, D.C., NAW Institute for Distribution Excellence, p. 307-332. Ordonez De Pablos, P., 2014, International business strategy and entrepreneurship: an information technology perspective, p. 193. Pride, W. M., Hughes, R. J., & Kapoor, J. R., 2010, Business. Australia, South-Western/Cengage Learning, p. 61. Rouse, M. J., & Rouse, S., 2001, Business communication: strategy and culture. London, Thomson Learning, p. 81. Saeed, S., Khan, M. A., & Ahmad, R., 2013, Business strategies and approaches for effective engineering management. Hershey, PA, Business Science Reference, p. 143. Sheldrake, J., 2003, Management theory. Australia, Thomson, p. 15. Shelly, G. B., & Rosenblatt, H. J., 2012, Systems analysis and design. Boston, Course Technology Cengage Learning, p. 72- 143. Stack, L., 2014, Execution is the strategy: how leaders achieve maximum results in minimum time, p. 40-49. Stettinius, W., 2007, How to plan and execute strategy: 24 steps to implement any corporate strategy successfully. Maidenhead, McGraw-Hill, p. 60-82. Walker, R., 2011, Strategic management communication: for leaders. Australia, South-Western Cengage Learning, p.43-61. Zhexembayeva, N., 2014, Overfished ocean strategy: powering up innovation for a resource-deprived world, P. 23-52. Read More