Obstacles to Strategy Implementation - Term Paper Example

«Obstacles to Strategy Implementation» 1. Introduction The success of strategic projects is strongly depended on the principles and the criteria used in their planning; at the same time, the methods used for the strategy implementation can be also important – as proved in the case of the Commonwealth Games 2010. 2. Literature Review on Strategy Implementation Strategy implementation is a significant part of organizational plans; in fact, Hobbs (2004) noted that three are the phases of a strategy: ‘thinking, conceptualization and implementation’ (Hobbs, 2004, p.111); these phases are closely related at such point that the concept of strategy cannot exist without one of these phases; in accordance with the above view, strategy implementation is not just a distinctive part of strategy; rather is an indispensable part of strategy; a part without which strategy cannot exist as a concept. On the other hand, Brache et al. (2006) stated that the success of any strategy is depending on two criteria: ‘a) the quality of the strategy that is guiding the organization and the effectiveness and the efficiency of the implementation of that strategy’ (Brache et al., 2006, p.15); it is made clear that the success of organizational strategies is related with different requirements and standards; it can be assumed that organizational leaders and middle managers will have to choose those criteria that need to be set as a priority in the context of a strategy’s implementation; at this point, there is the following problem: leaders are likely to be more objective in regard to the standards of strategy implementation – considering the organization as a unit which has core needs and challenges to face; however, middle managers being influenced by the internal organizational environment and their personal perceptions may suggest ineffective standards in regard to the strategy implementation; of course, same problem could appear in regard to the leaders’ effort to initiate strategy implementation in their organization; this fact has been proved through the research developed by Beer et al. (1996); in the above study, the failure of leadership teams to introduce change in their organization, Alpha Technologies, has been related with the lack of appropriate planning of the implementation process. Similar findings were retrieved through the research of Cocks (2010); this research – which was based on a survey among 1000 executives (Cocks, 2010, 260) – revealed that leadership and execution are key factors for the success of strategy implementation. 3. Literature Review on Obstacles to Strategy Implementation There are many factors that can influence the success of a strategy implementation process; in accordance with Flood (2000) the obstacles in strategy implementation are likely to appear in two different phases of the relevant procedure: they can be related to the decision – making part of the strategy or they can refer to the negative responses of middle managers when they have to interpret the strategy which has to be implemented in their organization (Flood, 2000, p.171). Through a similar approach, Hooijberg (2007) categorizes the obstacles to strategy implementation in two major groups: the external obstacles and the internal ones; the former reflect the negative conditions of the market in which an organization operates; the latter is related to the lack of support to the suggested plan from the employees in various positions across the organization (Hooijberg, 2007, p.268). The above view is in accordance with that of Neilson et al. (2008) who noted that ‘competing and conflicting decisions’ (Neilson et al., 2008, p.87) in regard to the implementation strategy may lead to severe waste of time and they can also increase the costs involved. On the other hand, the obstacles appear in regard to a strategy’s implementation can be resulted from failures in developing the strategy appropriately – referring to critical mistakes in strategy’s content/ structure, for instance the functional strategies that are core part of any implementation strategy (Smit, 2000, p.47). In practice, the obstacles in strategy implementation cannot be easily avoided; because of the increased chances for obstacles to appear during the strategy implementation, Speculand (2009) noted that leaders who are interested in implementing a particular strategy should prefer a well – known (and tested) theoretical model of strategy implementation – the Balanced Scorecard of Kaplan and Norton (1990) is proposed as an effective model of such kind (Speculand, 2009, p.13). 4. Background on Commonwealth Games 2010 The Commonwealth is a sports events developed in the context of the countries that are – or have been – part of the British Empire; in fact, ‘bringing together the members of the British Empire’ has been the key reason for introducing these Games – which took place for first time in Ontario, Canada, in 1930. The Commonwealth Games ‘are held every 4 years’ (Commonwealth Games, official site); currently, 71 countries participate in these games –53 of these countries are members of the Commonwealth of Nations (Commonwealth Games, official site). The development of the Games has revealed certain failures in the criteria and the methods used for the realization of the Games’ various phases and plans. 5. Discussion and Analysis 5.1 Strategy The development of the Commonwealth Games up today has faced various challenges and delays; through these failures it has been made clear that the plan of the specific sports event is not appropriately interpreted and applied. The examination of these Games strategic failures has led to the assumption that the methods used for the implementation of the strategies involved in various phases of the Games are not appropriate. At this point it would be necessary to describe the main aspects of the Games’ strategic framework: a) the plans on which Commonwealth Games are based are differentiated; as noted above, the Games are held every 4 years and in different locations; the Committee established for each of these Games provides its own mission and vision statements; moreover, the organizational structure and the objective are also likely to be different; for this reason, evaluating the success/ failure of the strategies followed by its of these Committees involves in referring to each Committee’s strategic decisions and plans; in current paper, the effectiveness of strategy implementation of a particular Committee, the one established for the 2010 Commonwealth Games in Delhi will be analyzed and evaluated, b) in the context of organizations, the identification of the role and the responses of middle managers is not a difficult task; these persons can be easily identified through each firm’s HR department; on the contrary in the case of the Commonwealth Games the following problem appears: there are countries which participate with different teams – for instance the case of UK which sends 4 different teams: for Britain, for Scotland, for Wales and for Northern Ireland. The persons intervening in the development of the strategic decisions of the Games’ Committee can be a challenging task and c) organizational strategies usually focus on the achievement of specific organizational goals; however, in the Commonwealth Games the strategic decisions of its Committee is related to a high variety of activities, each of which involves in sub-activities; roles are difficult to be easily identified and evaluated; moreover, the number of individuals participating in the relevant procedure – in a way similar to the employees in the organization – is quite high. Under these terms, effort will be made to analyze the Committee’s strategic decisions and explain the failures that can be possibly identified in the strategy implementation. The strategy followed by the Committee in regard to the development of the Commonwealth Games can be identified in the Committee’s objectives – as presented in the Games’ official Website (2010 Commonwealth Games, About Us, Objectives); through the Committee’s relevant statement it is made clear that the strategic priorities of the Committee in regard to the specific Games are the following ones: a) to organize and support all activities that are included in the Games’ schedule or those which are necessary for the successful completion of the particular sports event, b) to promote a series of values, like ‘integrity, fair play, competence, team work, commitment to excellence, respect for gender equality and tolerance’ (2010 Commonwealth Games, About Us, Objectives), c) ensure that all preparation is made in regard to the Games’ various phases and events. In order to achieve the above objectives the Committee has developed a series of departments/ services which will deal with the tasks incorporated in the Committee’s objectives – as explained above; 8 different departments have been established – in the context of Committed – including the Executive boards, the sub-Committees and the expert consultants – in order to support the realization of the Committee’s strategic decisions. The achievement of the Committee’s objectives – parts of its strategy – will be evaluated in the section that follows; it is necessary that reference is made to the events/ facts that prove the success of the Committee’s strategy but also to those events that indicate the existence of failures in regard to the Committee’s strategic plan (in the section 5.3 below). The literature will be also used – as appropriate – to support the assumptions produced. 5.2 Strategy Implementation The implementation of the strategies referring to the development of Commonwealth Games – meaning all the activities included in the specific event – has to be examined and evaluated using the findings of the literature – as presented above. In accordance with the studies presented in the literature section, the most common failures of strategy implementation are related to the following elements: a) the leadership style and competencies, b) the response and the perceptions of middle level managers, c) the content/ structure of the strategy and d) the market conditions. These elements need to be used for criticizing the effectiveness of the strategy implementation in the case of the Commonwealth Games. The problems regarding the strategic plans of the Game’s Committee were first identified about one year before, i.e. in 2009; in a relevant report published by the BBC News (2009) it is doubted whether India would be able to face a series of challenges regarding the 2010 Commonwealth Games; the above report refers to the concerns of ‘the Indian Olympics Association secretary general, Randhir Singh’ (2010) regarding the specific sports event; it is noted that Mr. Singh emphasized on a series of failures related to the security and the housing of guests; the progress of the construction projects included in the Committee’s plans also faced severe delays; in fact, it was noted that the delay in 13 out of the 19 sports venues (BBC News, 2009) was such that the ability of India to hold the 2010 Commonwealth Games was under risk. The failures appeared during the 2010 Commonwealth Games are also analytically presented in the report of Boser published by the Telegraph (2010); in the specific report it is noted that severe failures were identified in regarding to the hosting of guests – referring to the conditions of habitation, especially the lack of necessary facilities; moreover, the cleaning of the sites used during the Games was inappropriate at such point that warnings have been given by a committee appointed by the High Court (Bose, 2010). Other problems related with the 2010 Commonwealth Games in Delhi are also described in a report published by the Reuters; problems like security, radical increase of the Games’ cost, delays in the delivery of the sites required for the development of the sports events and the risk for dengue fever appeared during the 2010 Commonwealth Games even if the Indians were notified in advance for the potential effects on failures on the quality of the specific Sports event. 5.3 Obstacles to Strategy Implementation The strategic failures developed during the 2010 Commonwealth Games have been mainly related to the way that Indian officers tend to work on the particular project; despite the fact that the Commonwealth Games is a complex project and it requires the cooperation with experts, this rule was not followed in the case of the specific event. Indian officers possibly thought that the involvement of foreigners in such a project would be regarded as a direct involvement in the country’s issues; this problem is highlighted in the study of Boser (2010) where another weakness of the Games is revealed: in accordance with Boser (2010) the failures noted in the 2010 Commonwealth Games are the result of the Games’ scope and philosophy; it is explained that since their establishment the Commonwealth Games were not appropriately defined (in terms of their scope, structure and operational elements and borders) in such a way that they are often considered not as official sports event but as ‘friendly games’ (Boser, 2010). 6. Suggestions It is clear from the issues discussed above that the preparation of the 2010 Commonwealth Games has not been the appropriate one; in the literature presented above, the success of strategy implementation has been related to specific terms – including leadership (Beer et al., 1996, Speculand 2009), cooperation – including the avoidance of conflicting decisions (Neilson et al. 2008)- and external environment. The content of a strategic plan is also of crucial important for its success – referring especially to the functional aspects of the plan as described in detail by the strategic planners (Smit, 2000); in the case of the 2010 Commonwealth Games failures seems to exist in both the decision – making phase and the execution phase of the project (using the views of Flood, 2000, as explained above). Under the above terms, the following suggestions could be made in regard to the potential limitations of failures in the 2010 Commonwealth Games: a) Indian officers involved in the development of the relevant projects should have developed a strategic cooperation with their colleagues in countries that have hosted the Commonwealth Games in the past; in this way, the failures developed in various phases of the project would have been avoided – or at least, these failures would be limited, b) more effective communication and cooperation should exist among the members of the Committee; the fact that severe delays occurred in 13 out of the 19 sports venues involved in the project proves that the specific project was not appropriately planned and – moreover – was not adequately monitored, c) leadership failures could be also diagnosed in regard to this project; the Committee’s executive board did not show the necessary commitment to this project – this was made clear from the severe failures to substantial issues, like the cleaning of sites or the lack of essential facilities in many sites. In other words, the Committee should have established different strategies in regard to all the project’s phases (including planning, execution, monitoring/ cost management and cooperation); the lack of these strategies has resulted by the lack of effective leadership skills – referring to this project’s demands. 7. Concluding Remarks Indians had to develop a demanding project; the Commonwealth Games is not a simple project – not only because of the number of the participants but also because the distribution of tasks among employees/ contractors is difficult to be effectively monitored. On the other hand, Indians were offered the necessary support in order to achieve the objectives related to the specific project; at this point, their refusal to cooperate with foreigners could be considered as one of the key causes for the failures developed during the Games. Other factors that also negatively affected the development of the specific project have been the following ones: failure in understanding the needs and the demands of the project and failure in achieving the cooperation in the internal environment – referring not only to the members of the Committee but also to the employees/ contractors working in various phases of the project. The appropriate preparation of the project – in the context suggested by the literature presented above – could result to the avoidance or even to the limitation of failures in the project’s various phases. The case of the 2010 Commonwealth Games can be characterized as an indicative example of the consequences of failures in strategy implementation. References Alexander, L. (1985) Successfully implementing strategic decisions, Long Range Planning, 18(3), 91-97 Beer, M. and Eisentat, R. A. (2000). The silent killers of strategy implementation and learning Sloan Management Review, Summer, 25-40. Beer, M. and Eisentat, R. A. (1996). Developing an organisational capabilities of strategy implementation and learning. Human Relations, May, 597-619. Beer, M. and Eisentat, R. A. (1996). The silent killers overcoming barriers to organisational fitness. Working Paper, Harvard Business Review, Boston. Brache, A., Bodley-Scott, S. (2006) Implementation: how to transform strategic initiatives into blockbuster results. McGraw-Hill Professional Eisenstat, R. (1993) Implementing strategy: developing a partnership for change, Planning Review, 21(5), 33-36 Flood, P. (2000) Managing strategy implementation: an organizational behaviour perspective. Wiley-Blackwell Goodwin, J. and Elliott, C. (1995) Exporting strategies: developing a strategic framework, SAM Advanced Management Journal, 60(1), 21-8 Graeme Cocks, (2010) "Emerging concepts for implementing strategy", The TQM Journal, 22(3), 260 – 266. Hobbs, I. (2004) A practical guide to strategy: making strategic thinking, development and implementation accessible. AFRICAN SUN MeDIA Hooijberg, R. (2007) Being there even when you are not: leading through strategy, structures and systems. Emerald Group Publishing Neilson, G.L., Martin, K., and Power, E. (2008). The Secrets to successful strategy execution, Harvard Business Review, June, 83-93 Salem M. Al-Ghamdi, (1998) Obstacles to successful implementation of strategic decisions: the British experience, European Business Review, 98(6) 322 - 327 Smit, P. (2000) Strategy Implementation: Readings. Juta and Company Ltd, 2000 Speculand, R. (2009) Beyond Strategy: The Leader's Role in Successful Implementation. John Wiley and Sons Verweire, K., Berghe, L. (2004) Integrated performance management: a guide to strategy implementation. SAGE Online Sources BBC News (2009) India admits 2010 Games problems, available from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8256127.stm Bose, M. (2010) Commonwealth Games 2010: failings of Indian approach there for all to see, available from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/commonwealthgames/8024976/Commonwealth-Games-2010-failings-of-Indian-approach-there-for-all-to-see.html Commonwealth Games 2010, official website, available from http://www.cwgdelhi2010.org/ Commonwealth Games Federation, 2010, official website, available from http://www.thecgf.com/ Guardian, 2010, Commonwealth Games 2010, available from http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/commonwealthgames2010 Reuters, 2010, Commonwealth Games, 2010, available from http://in.reuters.com/subjects/commonwealth-games-2010 Reuters (Sep 22, 2010) Problems faced by 2010 Delhi Commonwealth Games, available from http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-51649820100921 Read More