Arkaro Insights
Arkaro Insights is a podcast series produced by Arkaro, where we help B2B executives deliver better results with the latest ideas in change and innovation for your organisation.
About Arkaro
Arkaro is a B2B consultancy specialising in Strategy, Innovation Process, Product Management, Commercial Excellence & Business Development, and Integrated Business Management. With industry expertise across Agriculture, Food, and Chemicals, Arkaro's team combines practical business experience with formal consultancy training to deliver impactful solutions.
You may have the ability to lead these transformations with your team, but time constraints can often be a challenge. Arkaro takes a collaborative 'do it with you' approach, working closely with clients to leave behind sustainable, value-generating solutions—not just a slide deck.
"We don't just coach - we get on the pitch with you"
Connect With Us
💬 We'd love to hear from you! What topics would you like us to explore in future podcast episodes? Drop us a message or connect with us to learn more about Arkaro's approach.
🔗 Visit us at www.arkaro.com
👥 Follow our updates: Arkaro on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/arkaro/
📧 Email us at: mark@arkaro.com
Arkaro Insights
When Plans and Goals Aren’t Enough: The Strategy Implementation Crisis (AI voices Arkaro content)
Welcome to the Arkaro Insights podcast. This episode is based on original content developed by Arkaro. At Arkaro, we're committed to innovation in everything we do—including how we share our insights. We've utilised advanced AI technology to transform our written expertise into this conversational format, making our content more accessible and convenient for our busy B2B audience. What you'll hear is a two-person discussion generated through AI voice technology, designed to deliver our insights in a more engaging way than traditional reading. As we continue to evolve this approach, we genuinely value your feedback. Thank you for listening to Arkaro Insights, where professional expertise meets innovative delivery.
Read the original article here: Strategy Implementation Crisis: When Plans Fail in VUCA
Have you ever wondered why brilliant corporate strategies so often fail to deliver results? The problem isn't the quality of the strategies themselves - it's the profound disconnect between those high-level plans and the day-to-day decisions happening throughout your organization.
This episode dives deep into what experts call the "strategy implementation crisis" - a systemic problem affecting organizations globally. The statistics are shocking: 95% of employees don't understand their company's strategy, only 28% of executives can list three strategic priorities, and just 14% of organizations report their employees understanding the company's direction.
We explore why traditional mechanistic approaches to strategy (the Plan-Command-Control-Utilize model) that worked in more stable times are fundamentally inadequate for today's Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous (VUCA) business environment. Organizations now function more like complex adaptive systems - dynamic, living organisms rather than predictable machines.
The solution? A powerful shift toward rules-based strategy that provides real-time decision guidance. We break down how strategic rules must allow for free choice, provide immediate guidance, and unify efforts around critical bottlenecks. Through nested strategy frameworks, organizations can translate high-level vision into relevant, actionable rules for each level and function.
You'll discover practical steps to begin implementing this approach, from assessing your current strategy's decision-guiding power to facilitating collaborative strategy development. We also explore how this connects with integrated business planning and the importance of viewing strategy implementation as an adaptive challenge requiring cultural transformation.
For B2B executives navigating today's unpredictable landscape, this episode offers a breakthrough framework for turning strategy from an annual exercise into a living capability that drives daily decisions and creates sustainable competitive advantage. Connect with Arkaro for a free strategy assessment and start bridging your organization's implementation gap today.
Connect with Arkaro:
🔗 Follow us on LinkedIn:
Arkaro Company Page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/arkaro
Mark Blackwell: https://www.linkedin.com/in/markrblackwell/
Newsletter - Arkaro Insights: https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/arkaro-insights-6924308904973631488/
🌐 Visit our website: www.arkaro.com
📺 Subscribe to our YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/@arkaro
📧 For business enquiries: mark@arkaro.com
Welcome you curious listener, to the Deep Dive. Our mission here is well, it's pretty straightforward. We take a stack of really valuable sources, articles, cutting-edge research kind of like the material we've got from Arkaro Insights today and we pull out the most important bits, those nuggets of knowledge and insight. Think of it as your shortcut. You know a way to get truly well-informed, with maybe some surprising facts and hopefully enough interesting discussion to keep you listening. Okay, let's unpack this For this deep dive. We're exploring some incredibly relevant stuff. It's material specifically designed to help B2B executives like you deliver better results. It's all about the latest ideas and change and innovation for your organization and today's topic it really hits right at the heart of a challenge. I think many of us feel it's often frustrating this whole area of strategy implementation in today's well, let's face it dynamic business world. What I found really captivating in the material and I think this will probably resonate deeply with you, our listener is this core idea so many organizations craft these brilliant strategies.
Speaker 2:You know, beautifully articulated, inspiring visions, maybe meticulous five-year plans, but then they get stuck. They struggle, sometimes really profoundly, to see those big, visionary strategies actually translate into daily action, into the way teams operate on the ground. It's a bit like building an incredible engine but forgetting to connect it to the wheels, you know. So we'll be diving deep into why this happens so often it's a pervasive problem and, crucially, what we can actually do about it, because the core issue, as we'll discover, seems to be that the traditional ways of planning they're just well. They're failing us, especially now. But don't worry, we're not just here to talk about the problem. We'll also explore a really powerful, adaptive solution. It's about a fundamental shift towards something called rules-based strategy and, importantly, truly collaborative capability building implementation.
Speaker 3:Indeed, and to really get a handle on how urgent this is, we need to look at the scale of what the source material actually calls a profound strategy implementation crisis, and this is impacting organizations globally. It's not just, you know, a feeling someone has, or frustration in one department. It's a systemic thing, and it's backed by some pretty revealing statistics that really paint a picture of this huge disconnect between the grand strategy and what happens day to day. Just consider this one the Harvard Business Review found that a staggering 95 percent nine five of employees don't understand their company's strategy.
Speaker 2:Ninety five percent, that's right.
Speaker 3:Think about that for a second. Nearly everyone from the front lines right up to middle management is essentially flying blind when it comes to the big picture. They can't clearly say how their daily work connects to the company's long term vision. That's not just inefficient, it's it's got to be profoundly disorienting for people.
Speaker 2:You feel like a cog maybe.
Speaker 3:Exactly, and it doesn't get much better higher up either. The MIT Sloan Management Review reported that only 28% of executives can actually list three of their company's top priorities.
Speaker 2:Only 28% of executives.
Speaker 3:Yes. So if the leadership themselves struggle to articulate the most critical strategic things, how can anyone else be expected to understand it, let alone implement it effectively? And then there's research from William Scheinman back in 2012, but still very relevant showing only 14% of organizations reported their employees actually understood the company's strategy and direction. 14% actually understood the company's strategy and direction 14%.
Speaker 3:These numbers. They paint a clear and, frankly, quite alarming picture of just how widespread the strategic disconnect really is, and these stats really highlight what we call the disconnect or the implementation gap. It's a crucial distinction here. The problem isn't necessarily poor analysis or lack of intelligence. It's not usually a shortage of effort in crafting the strategy document itself.
Speaker 2:Right Companies spend a lot on that part.
Speaker 3:They do. They invest heavily in top tier consultants, countless executive hours developing what they believe are robust strategies. The real issue, it lies in that missing layer, the layer that translates the high level corporate vision, that aspirational what the organization wants to achieve, into actionable daily guidance for teams and individuals. You see, traditional corporate strategy is often excellent at defining the destination, the big goals, the aspirational targets, but it frequently falls profoundly short on providing the crucial how, the how, yes, how should this specific team contribute? How should I make this decision today to align with that grand vision Without that? How? Even the most brilliant strategy just stays as well. A map versus having a GPS with turn-by-turn directions that adjust to real-time traffic. You need the real-time guidance.
Speaker 2:That really frames the challenge well. So if we're saying traditional approaches are failing now, we probably need to step back a bit, understand what those approaches actually were and maybe why they used to work or seem to. In the past, business strategy was often, as the source puts it, deeply rooted in a mechanistic worldview. This was heavily influenced by things like the Industrial Revolution. Thinkers like Frederick Taylor. You know scientific management. The idea was that organizations operated like these finely tuned machines predictable inputs, predictable output, clockwork almost Exactly clockwork Predictable inputs, predictable output.
Speaker 2:Clockwork on us.
Speaker 3:Exactly.
Speaker 2:Clockwork. Yeah, this gave rise to what's widely known as the plan, command, control utilize or PCCU model, and under this PCCU framework, the basic assumptions were pretty straightforward. Organizations function like that clockwork Cause and effect, predictable, discoverable through careful analysis, largely stable. So the belief was if you just had detailed long-term plans and specific, measurable goals, that was enough guidance.
Speaker 3:Right, plan it all out in advance.
Speaker 2:Precisely. Expert knowledge established procedures that could solve most problems, and central planning would deliver consistent, efficient results. It was all about maximizing efficiency, ensuring predictability, maintaining that top-down control. You could sort of engineer your way to success, assuming the world stayed relatively still.
Speaker 3:Which it did for a while, relatively speaking it did.
Speaker 2:And there's a really astute observation from Dave Snowden, who works a lot in complexity theory. He famously said something like I was always amazed that Western capitalism adopted the planning cycle and approach of Soviet.
Speaker 3:Russia. That's a great quote. It really makes you think.
Speaker 2:It does, doesn't it? It's almost ironic. These systems, supposedly built for freedom and market responsiveness, ended up using the rigid planning methods of a command economy. It just shows how deeply ingrained that top-down central planning idea became and, to be fair, this mechanistic model. It worked reasonably well on what Snowden calls clear or complicated environments, situations where solutions were known or at least discoverable by experts through analysis.
Speaker 3:Like building a factory, maybe.
Speaker 2:Exactly Building a factory, optimizing a repetitive manufacturing line. You could plant every nut and bolt. But then, well then, things started to change dramatically.
Speaker 3:Building on that point, the business world has fundamentally shifted. The source material really highlights this. It talks about moving away from what complexity folks call LAMO, thinking that's linear, anthropocentric, mechanistic, ordered LAMO okay. Yeah, lamo. We've shifted from that to a new, increasingly pervasive reality VUCA, volatile, uncertain, complex and reality.
Speaker 2:VUCA volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous.
Speaker 3:VUCA. We hear that acronym a lot these days. We do, and for good reason. It's not just another set of buzzwords. It really describes a profound shift in how business operates, how markets behave and, crucially, how leaders need to adapt. Let's unpack VUCA a bit and think about its impact on strategy. So volatility that's about the rapid, unpredictable changes we see everywhere Sudden shifts in customer demand, disruptive tech appearing seemingly overnight, geopolitical events messing up supply chains instantly.
Speaker 2:Yeah, constant surprises.
Speaker 3:Then uncertainty. That means there's just a lack of clear information about the future. You don't have all the data you need to make perfect predictions. The horizon's always a bit fuzzy.
Speaker 2:Right.
Speaker 3:Complexity comes from all the interconnected parts both inside and outside the organization. Cause and effect isn't linear anymore. It's often hard to pin down. A small tweak over here can have massive unforeseen consequences somewhere else. You know the butterfly effect.
Speaker 2:That interconnectedness yeah.
Speaker 3:And finally ambiguity. Else you know the butterfly effect, that interconnectedness, yeah. And finally ambiguity. This means there's a lack of clarity about what things mean or what the consequences of actions might be. Events can be interpreted in multiple ways. There's often no single obvious right answer or clear precedent to follow.
Speaker 2:So multiple interpretations are possible.
Speaker 3:Exactly. And in this VUCA world, those traditional mechanistic models, the PCCU approach with its rigid plans and top-down commands, well, they're just profoundly inadequate.
Speaker 2:Like that hiking map in the white water you mentioned.
Speaker 3:Yeah, precisely, they stifle innovation because they reward sticking to the plan, not creative problem-solving or trying things out quickly. Think about it A product team follows a rigid plan for months. Then market feedback shows a huge flaw or maybe a better opportunity.
Speaker 2:Right Happens all the time.
Speaker 3:But in a traditional model, pivoting means bureaucracy, budget fights, maybe even being seen as failing the plan. Even if pivoting is the smart move, this fear of deviating, this sort of reward for just sticking to it, means great timely ideas often just die.
Speaker 3:Killed by the process and these models also slow down decision making. Any deviation needs layers of approval. Response times get sluggish, which then leads to employee disengagement. Because people feel like cogs, they can't adapt. They can't contribute meaningfully when things inevitably change. They feel disconnected, undervalued. I can't adapt. They can't contribute meaningfully when things inevitably change.
Speaker 2:They feel disconnected undervalued.
Speaker 3:I can see that and, crucially, as the source points out, those detailed plans. They become obsolete almost the moment they hit the market and the goals that were meant to guide daily decisions. They just fail to do that when uncertainty hits.
Speaker 2:Which brings us back to that military saying you mentioned A plan never lasts longer than the first engagement with the enemy.
Speaker 3:Exactly you plan in the war room, but reality intervenes immediately.
Speaker 2:So going back to that LAMO acronym linear, anthropocentric, mechanistic, ordered I'm curious about the anthropocentric and ordered bits. Does anthropocentric mean we sort of over-relied on human control, assumed we could predict and dictate everything?
Speaker 3:Yes, you've nailed it Anthropocentric here means assuming that humans, especially leaders at the top, can fully understand, predict and control everything about the organization and its environment. It's very human-centric, underestimating emergent forces and external factors. It leads to this belief that if we just analyze enough data we can dictate the future, and ordered follows naturally from that. It implies the world works on clear, linear cause and effect. Do A, b. Always happens that thinking was okay when things were more stable. But in a VUCA world those assumptions are dangerous. They blind us to how dynamic systems actually work, which is why the source argues that in VUCA organizations are better understood not as static machines but as complex adaptive systems, cas.
Speaker 2:Complex adaptive systems, CAs.
Speaker 3:Yes, think of them as dynamic, living, almost flock-like organisms, made up of intricate human interactions, not just static parts.
Speaker 2:Flock-like organisms. That's a really interesting image. What does that actually mean for a leader on the ground? How does it feel different leading something that's more like a living system than a machine?
Speaker 3:That's a really crucial question. Leading CIS isn't about pulling levers and expecting a precise, predictable outcome. It's much more like guiding a flock of birds, or maybe a school of fish. You don't tell each individual bird exactly where to fly. Instead, you influence the overall direction and behavior through simple rules, maybe environmental cues. For a leader, this means understanding that intelligence and adaptation are distributed throughout the system, not just at the top.
Speaker 2:So not just top-down intelligence.
Speaker 3:Right. It means embracing emergent behaviors, realizing that the best innovations might pop up from interactions at the edges, not from central command. It feels less about having absolute control and more about creating the conditions for success.
Speaker 2:Conditions like.
Speaker 3:Like setting clear boundaries, fostering communication, encouraging experimentation, learning from failures quickly and amplifying positive patterns when you see them. This understanding demands a completely different approach to leadership and strategy. It requires an adaptive mindset, one that's comfortable with ambiguity, uncertainty, constant learning. Leaders need to replace that old PCCU plan command control utilized with something more agile. The source suggests a vision mission, capacity learning or VMCL framework. Vmcl is much more aligned with this organic, adaptive nature of organizations today. It focuses on continuous evolution and responsiveness, not rigid adherence to outdated plans.
Speaker 2:Okay. So if the traditional plans, the static goals aren't enough for this VUCA world, and if our organizations are more like these evolving flocks, then what is the answer? We clearly need something that gives us that real-time guidance, something to help make good decisions in the moment when uncertainty strikes and last quarter's plan is already looking shaky. And this is where the source introduces a concept that feels really insightful, maybe even revolutionary. It's dr pete campo's emergent approach to strategy. The source calls it a breakthrough definition, something that cuts through decades of confusion about what strategy actually is. It's not just tweaking the old models. It sounds like a fundamental reframing.
Speaker 3:It really is. It shifts the perspective significantly.
Speaker 2:So the definition he gives is a strategy is the central rule of a framework designed to unify all actions and decisions around busting the bottleneck to achieving the foremost aspiration. Let's break that down because it feels packed with meaning, especially for the B2B executives listening. It shifts our focus away from strategy as just a static document that thick binder the forecast, the goal.
Speaker 3:Oh, it's the thing that sits on the shelf.
Speaker 2:Exactly. It shifts it to an active guiding principle. It's not about trying to predict the future perfectly, because we know that's impossible in VUCA. It's about setting up clear, actionable rules that help everyone in the organization navigate the uncertainty of now but consistently move towards a shared top priority, that foremost aspiration.
Speaker 3:And the key is that it's a rule, not just a wish or a target.
Speaker 2:A rule.
Speaker 3:Yes, rules guide behavior now. Aspirations inspire direction for the future. This approach focuses on the behavior.
Speaker 2:That makes sense. But what makes a rule truly strategic? Not just any old rule, but one that's effective in this VUCA environment? How does it go beyond just being a good idea?
Speaker 3:That's a critical question. The source lays out three essential requirements that elevate a simple rule into a powerful strategic guide, and these aren't just like nice to have. They're crucial for enabling real adaptation, keeping everyone aligned and making sure the strategy actually gets implemented okay, what are they? First, the rule must allow for free choice. This means the rule has to be about something leaders and teams can actually freely impose and directly control right now. It can't be about future outcomes or goals that depend on a million uncontrollable things market shifts, competitors, global events.
Speaker 2:OK, so focus on what you can control.
Speaker 3:Exactly. Think about driving. You can choose to follow a traffic rule, like sticking to the speed limit. You can impose that on yourself, but you can't guarantee you'll arrive at your destination at exactly 2 pm, because traffic, accidents, weather those are external factors.
Speaker 2:Right Out of your control.
Speaker 3:So a strategic rule focuses on the choices and actions within the organization's immediate influence. It empowers people by giving them something concrete they can direct, rather than setting them up for frustration with targets they can't actually guarantee. It's about owning your controllable inputs.
Speaker 2:OK, free choice. What's second?
Speaker 3:Second strategy must provide real time guidance. This is absolutely vital for those daily decisions on the ground. People shouldn't have to wait for the quarterly report or the end of your review to know if they were strategically aligned.
Speaker 2:They need to know now.
Speaker 3:Precisely in the moment. They need to know whether the action they're about to take or the decision they're making fits the strategy. It's about asking is this decision aligned with our strategic rule right now? This is totally different from typical KPIs or quarterly goals. Those are useful, sure, but they're backward looking. They measure results after the fact. They don't help you make the choice before the results come in.
Speaker 2:Oh, okay, so the rule guides the doing, not just measures the done.
Speaker 3:Exactly. A true strategic rule gives immediate, actionable direction. It lets teams adapt quickly and confidently without constantly needing top-down approval or worrying if they're going off track. Imagine a sales team with a clear rule about which leads meet the strategic criteria. They know instantly if a prospect fits, without waiting months for conversion data.
Speaker 2:That clarity must be empowering it is.
Speaker 3:And third, the rule must facilitate unification. This means the rule has to unify all decisions and actions across the whole system, every department, every team, every person, towards a common critical objective. It channels everyone's efforts towards what the source calls busting the bottleneck.
Speaker 2:Busting the bottleneck, like in theory of constraints.
Speaker 3:Very much related. Yes, it's about identifying and relentlessly addressing the dominant impediment, the single biggest constraint that's holding the organization back from achieving its most important aspiration. For a marketing team, maybe that bottleneck is lead quality, so their rule focuses on stricter qualification. For engineering, it might be a dependency slowing things down, so their rule is about cross-functional collaboration on that specific issue. The point is it's the single most impactful constraint right now.
Speaker 2:Focusing effort where it matters most, exactly.
Speaker 3:By focusing everyone on that critical bottleneck, the strategic rule ensures all efforts pull in the same direction. It maximizes impact and stops people from working on fragmented, less important initiatives. These three things together free choice, real-time guidance and unification create clear guardrails. They let teams respond quickly and flexibly to change, but maintain strategic coherence and focus. It's about being agile without you know running in circles.
Speaker 2:That's incredibly powerful Strategy as a real-time decision filter, not just a document. Okay, it sounds great in theory, but for money executives listening, the big question is probably how do we actually do this? How do you shift from those old, entrenched ways of thinking and operating to this adaptive, rules-based approach? And that's where Arcacaro's collaborative methodology seems to come in. The source presents it as a practical way to facilitate this, to really embed this kind of strategic thinking not just talk about it, but actually do it.
Speaker 3:Right, making it practical.
Speaker 2:Yeah, arccars methodology seems to have four key steps, kind of a life cycle. First, they help you understand, assess your current situation, your organizational culture. You can't rebuild without knowing the foundation, the pain points, the cultural stuff you're dealing with.
Speaker 3:A crucial first step.
Speaker 2:Absolutely. Then second, they move into co-create. This is where they actively work with your teams, using collaborative tools like something called the strategy triad, to develop these emergent strategy frameworks together. So it's not an external team just handing you a plan.
Speaker 3:It's built from within.
Speaker 2:Yeah, Ownership Exactly Building it together, getting that ownership from day one. Third, they enable your teams this involves hands-on coaching, providing that real-time guidance. We were just talking about empowering your people to actually use these new strategic rules in their daily work, making them part of how decisions get made.
Speaker 2:Making it stick, Making it stick. And finally, the fourth step is sustain. This is about putting in place ongoing review mechanisms, learning loops, adaptation processes, making sure these new capabilities aren't just a one-off project but become a lasting, evolving part of how your organization operates your organizational DNA, so to speak.
Speaker 3:So it lives and breathes.
Speaker 2:Right, and this really highlights Arkaro distinctive do-it-with-you philosophy, which sounds quite different from, say, traditional consulting. They don't just deliver recommendations, a slick deck and leave.
Speaker 3:The drop-and-run model.
Speaker 2:Yeah, exactly, Arkaro commits to working alongside your teams, shoulder to shoulder. Their goal is explicitly to build lasting capabilities inside your organization, fostering internal expertise, not creating dependency. The source puts it nicely we don't just coach, we get on the pitch with you.
Speaker 3:I like that analogy.
Speaker 2:Me too. It suggests a real hands-on partnership to drive genuine, embedded, sustainable change, tuning your teams into strategic players, not just spectators.
Speaker 3:And what's particularly insightful, connecting back to that implementation gap, is how this collaborative approach, combined with the rules-based strategy, specifically addresses that critical translation gap we talked about earlier. It does this through something called nested strategy frameworks.
Speaker 2:Nested frameworks. Okay, tell me more about that.
Speaker 3:The concept is actually quite elegant and very effective for complex organizations. Basically, different levels or parts of an organization naturally face different bottlenecks and constraints. They have different strategic problems to solve. You know, a CEO's biggest bottleneck might be entering a new global market. A product manager's bottleneck might be a specific features adoption rate. A regional sales leader might be battling customer churn in their territory.
Speaker 2:Right, different scales, different problems.
Speaker 3:Exactly so. The overall corporate strategy needs to be translated into relevant, actionable rules for each distinct level or function. This ensures that the strategy at every level is meaningful, relevant and actually executable by the people doing the work there.
Speaker 2:So it's not one size fits all.
Speaker 3:Definitely not. Let me give you some concrete examples from the source to show this nesting in action. For instance, you might have product management teams. They could create portfolio strategies with clear rules around segment prioritization, maybe rules about resource allocation. These rules guide their specific decisions which products to focus on, which customers, how to spend their limited development budget to bust their particular bottlenecks.
Speaker 2:Okay, specific to product management's world.
Speaker 3:Right Then think about regional sales teams. They develop market-specific strategies. These would align with the big corporate goals, of course, but critically, they'd adapt to local conditions, local customer needs, local competitors. Their rules might guide lead qualification differently or dictate specific tactics for different customer tiers in their region or how to counter a local competitor's move.
Speaker 2:Tailored to the region Makes sense.
Speaker 3:Then maybe R&D organizations. They'd establish innovation strategies, maybe with specific focus areas defined by rules or decision criteria for selecting which projects get funding. These rules guide where they invest their research efforts to overcome their unique technical bottlenecks or pursue specific opportunities.
Speaker 2:Guiding innovation investment.
Speaker 3:And supply chain functions. They could develop operational strategies with rules designed to balance tricky tradeoffs like cost efficiency versus market responsiveness, ensuring their daily operations serve the overall strategy while navigating all the complexities of the supply chain. Each of these frameworks, at its own level, connects upwards to the corporate objectives, but, importantly, it also addresses its own specific context and its own local bottlenecks.
Speaker 2:You get alignment and local adaptation.
Speaker 3:Precisely. The outcome is really powerful for B2B companies. You get coherence across the whole organization, but without imposing those rigid, uniform mandates that often kill local initiative and adaptation. Instead, it fosters what the source calls adaptation and freedom. Teams get clear guardrails, those strategic rules which empower them to respond quickly, autonomously to changing conditions in their area, but while staying aligned with the overall direction. It allows for distributed intelligence, rapid iteration.
Speaker 2:You see results from this.
Speaker 3:Absolutely. The source indicates organizations implementing this consistently report measurable improvements. Things like better cross-functional alignment, faster decision making because teams have clarity, greater organizational adaptability overall, and this ultimately leads to better strategy execution and, importantly, higher employee engagement, because people feel empowered and see how they contribute.
Speaker 2:This really clarifies how strategy can become a living part of daily work, not just an annual ritual. Okay, so for you, the business leader, listening, recognizing this implementation gap is probably the first step, but it's often that what next? That feels a bit daunting. The good news is, the source offers three really concrete, actionable steps you can take right now to begin implementing a rules-based strategy in your own organization. You don't have to boil the ocean overnight. You can start small, build some momentum, start somewhere manageable.
Speaker 2:Exactly. First, assess your strategy's decision guiding power. This is like a diagnostic, a stress test for your current strategy. Get a diverse cross-functional team together, maybe five, seven people from different areas. Ask each person individually to write down maybe three specific significant decisions they've made recently in their job. Then, and this is the key part, ask them to describe how the current organizational strategy actually informed those choices. Ah, the how? Again, yes, did it give clear direction? Was it too vague? Did they even think about it? You might be really surprised by the answers If people struggle to connect their daily decisions directly to the strategy doc, or if the answers are all over the place. Bam, you've just pinpointed your implementation gap.
Speaker 3:Makes the gap visible.
Speaker 2:It does. It moves strategy from being abstract to being a tangible tool, or maybe reveals its lack of real-world use Okay, second, identify a high-impact pilot area. Don't try to change everything at once. That often leads to resistance burnout.
Speaker 3:All right, pick your battle.
Speaker 2:Find a specific functional team, one that faces important, complex choices regularly but maybe lacks that clear, real-time guidance right now. The ideal team for a pilot. They should be reasonably receptive to new ideas, open to experimenting, willing to collaborate and critically. Their success should matter to the overall organization.
Speaker 3:So it has visibility and impact.
Speaker 2:Exactly. Maybe it's a team launching a new product, or a sales division entering a new market, or a customer success team struggling with churn. Start small, learn fast, iterate. You demonstrate the value before you try to scale it everywhere. Plus, you build internal champions along the way.
Speaker 3:Smart way to start.
Speaker 2:And third, create collaborative strategy development Once you've got your pilot team set up. Facilitated workshops and these are workshops, not lectures Hands-on sessions. Bring that co-create step from Arkaro methodology to life. The initial focus Get really clear on identifying the most pressing bottlenecks hindering that team's ability to achieve its goals. What's the single biggest constraint they face right now?
Speaker 3:Find the leverage point.
Speaker 2:Precisely, Then collaboratively brainstorm and articulate strategic rules designed specifically to attack and bust those bottlenecks. This is where the magic can happen. The team itself defines its own guiding principles. That ensures immediate relevance, immediate buy-in. They build their own guardrails. That creates way more ownership than a top-down mandate ever could.
Speaker 3:They own the rules.
Speaker 2:They own the rules ownership than a top-down mandate ever could. They own the rules. They own the rules. These three steps are practical, tangible starting points to shift from just having aspirational plans to having actionable adaptive strategy.
Speaker 3:And building on those practical steps. It's also really helpful to understand how rules-based strategy connects with, and is enhanced by, other important concepts for making implementation robust and sustainable. The source material points to several areas worth exploring further, giving a more holistic view okay, like what well, one key area is integrated business planning, or IBP.
Speaker 3:This isn't just, you know, another planning acronym. It's a powerful process that explicitly transforms high-level strategy into those actionable decision rules we've been talking about and, crucially, it creates what the source calls one set of numbers across all the business functions.
Speaker 2:One set of numbers Meaning.
Speaker 3:Meaning your sales forecast, your production plan, your R&D pipeline investments, your marketing spend, your financial projections. They are all derived from and aligned with a single, agreed upon strategic view of demand, supply, capacity and financial implications.
Speaker 2:Ah, true integration.
Speaker 3:Exactly. The power of IBP is how it hardwires strategy into daily and weekly operations. It becomes a core, consensus-driven managing process. It really succeeds in driving strategy execution where traditional S&OP sales and operations planning often fall short. It closes that loop by ensuring strategic choices directly impact operational plans and resource allocation.
Speaker 2:So it connects strategy to operations tightly.
Speaker 3:Very tightly, and the source also wisely mentions the importance of distinguishing planning versus execution, specifically S&OP, ibp, which are planning horizons, versus S&OE, sales and operations. Execution, which is about the very near-term, day-to-day management against the plan. Keeping those distinct prevents process blur and ensures each serves its purpose. S&oe handles the immediate firefighting within the plan's boundaries.
Speaker 2:Okay, IBP and S&OE Got it. What else?
Speaker 3:Another really critical insight tying back to that adaptive mindset is framing strategy as an adaptive challenge. Harvard's research, which the source mentions, powerfully explains why treating strategy implementation as just a technical problem often fails.
Speaker 2:A technical problem means.
Speaker 3:Meaning something you can solve just with expert knowledge or a new piece of software, or maybe a consultant's report with recommendations. If it were that easy, that 95% statistic wouldn't exist. Good point, true strategy. Implementation is fundamentally an adaptive challenge. It requires cultural transformation. It requires shifting mindsets, building new capabilities within the organization. It's not just applying a prepackaged solution. It's about changing behaviors, beliefs, how people work together. It's harder, yes, but that's where the real lasting advantage comes from.
Speaker 2:So it's about people and culture, not just process.
Speaker 3:Deeply about people and culture. The source also points to some useful practical tools like the five disqualifiers of strategy. These sound really handy. They're basically tests to see if something you're calling a strategy actually provides clear decision making guidance or if it's just a list of wishes, vague plans or generic statements.
Speaker 2:A reality check for your strategy statement.
Speaker 3:Exactly. Think of it as a quick litmus test. For example, one disqualifier is if your strategy could apply to basically any company in your industry. If it's that generic, it's not truly strategic for your unique situation, your specific bottleneck.
Speaker 2:Right, it needs to be specific to you.
Speaker 3:Another disqualifier is if it's just a restatement of a goal like increase market share. That's a goal, not a strategy. A real strategy defines how you'll make choices, what rules you'll follow to achieve that goal. These adaptive tests help you cut through the fluff, the planning theater, and see if you have something actionable.
Speaker 2:Useful test, and you mentioned one more.
Speaker 3:Yes, Finally, for understanding why emergent solutions are so essential, especially in complex situations. The SINIFIN framework is briefly mentioned.
Speaker 2:SINIFIN right. That helps categorize problems.
Speaker 3:Exactly Clear complicated, complex, chaotic. It really reinforces why that Soviet Russia approach, the rigid top-down planning, is just completely wrong for a truly complex VUCA world. In complex domains you can't predict the outcome. You have to probe, sense, respond. You allow solutions to emerge. The framework gives you a lens to understand why adaptive rules-based strategies aren't just a nice idea but an absolute necessity for navigating complexity. All these concepts IBP, adaptive challenge thinking, the disqualifier, cynefin they all work together to enhance an organization's ability to not just formulate strategy but to actually implement it effectively and make it a real competitive weapon.
Speaker 2:This deep dive has really made it crystal clear, hasn't it, that shift from the old lemmo, linear, anthropocentric, mechanistic, ordered thinking to our current VUCA reality. It demands a fundamental rethink. It's not just about tweaking things. It's a whole paradigm shift in how organizations need to approach strategy, from creation to articulation, to actual implementation.
Speaker 3:A whole new game, really.
Speaker 2:It feels like it and we've learned. The solution isn't just more decaled planning or setting even more ambitious goals that, let's be honest, often become obsolete the minute they hit the real world. Instead, it's about developing these rules-based strategy frameworks, Frameworks that provide that crucial real-time guidance and, importantly, enable adaptation throughout the entire organization. It's about creating a living, breathing set of principles that empower your teams to make effective, aligned decisions even when things are constantly changing, rather than being frozen by uncertainty.
Speaker 3:Turning uncertainty into an opportunity, perhaps.
Speaker 2:Exactly. And what this also means, and this feels critical, is moving beyond, maybe, the traditional do-it-for-you consulting model. While expert input is valuable, true lasting change, that real competitive edge seems to come from a more collaborative do-it-with-you approach, building capability internally.
Speaker 3:Building the muscle within the organization.
Speaker 2:Building the muscle that's a great way to put it Fostering that strategic thinking capability, a culture of ownership, continuous improvement rather than becoming dependent on outsiders long term. So what does this all mean for you, the B2B executive? Listening, it means your organization can transform strategy, move it from being that annual, maybe painful, exercise into a living breathing capability, something that not only drives daily decisions effectively but also creates sustainable competitive advantage in this unpredictable world we're all navigating.
Speaker 3:We've certainly covered a lot of ground. We've explored that critical shift, moving away from the traditional mechanistic planning that worked okay in more predictable times towards this adaptive, rules-based approach that's really designed to thrive in our VUCA world. I think the key takeaway really for any leader wanting to drive actual results is this by adopting clear, actionable decision rules and by embracing a genuinely collaborative methodology to embed them, organizations can finally bridge that frustrating strategy implementation gap. You can foster both strategic coherence, everyone pulling together, and the operational freedom needed to adapt quickly.
Speaker 2:Coherence and freedom. That's a powerful combination.
Speaker 3:It is, and this raises, I think, an important question for every leader, every organization listening right now. The question isn't if your industry will face more volatility, more uncertainty, more complexity, more ambiguity in the coming years. I think we can take that as a given.
Speaker 2:Seems inevitable. Yeah.
Speaker 3:The real question is is your organization equipped, do you have strategy frameworks in place that can not only adapt to that constant change, learning and evolving rapidly, but also maintain coherence and focus amidst that chaos? Now, that's definitely a challenge, but viewed differently, it's also an immense opportunity. An opportunity to build sustained competitive advantage by being more adaptable, more focused, more effective than competitors who might still be stuck in those older ways of thinking. It's about turning VUCA from a threat into a potential advantage.
Speaker 2:That's a great way to frame it An opportunity. So, if you're listening and you're ready to tackle these challenges head on, ready to really transform your strategic approach the team behind these fantastic insights we've been discussing today, Arkaro they specialize in exactly this collaborative, do-it-with-you strategy implementation. They are experts at helping B2B executives like you deliver better results and, crucially, build those lasting strategic capabilities within your own teams.
Speaker 3:Getting on the pitch with you.
Speaker 2:Exactly getting on the pitch with you, and they're offering a free, no obligation, 30-minute strategy assessment. It's a chance to discuss your specific challenges, your context and understand how this emergent approach to strategy could benefit your organization. It's a focused conversation tailored to you, designed to provide real value, not some generic pitch.
Speaker 3:A chance to explore possibilities.
Speaker 2:Precisely To connect directly with Mark Blackwell for this assessment. You can email him. His address is mark. At Arkaro, that's M-A-R-K. At A-R-K-A-R-O dot com, mark M-A-R-K at A-R-K-A-R-O dot com. You can also learn a lot more about Arkaro services and explore further resources on this topic and many others related to strategy, innovation and change. Just visit their website at Arkaro that's www. arkaro. com, and you should also follow Arkaro on LinkedIn. They share a wealth of additional articles, case studies and insights there regularly, which can really deepen your understanding of all these crucial concepts we've touched on today.
Speaker 3:Lots of good stuff there.
Speaker 2:Definitely worth checking out. So thank you for listening to the Deep Dive and if you found this conversation helpful, insightful, maybe even sparked some ideas, please do share it with colleagues or anyone else you think might benefit.
Speaker 3:Spread the word.
Speaker 2:Spread the word indeed. Thanks again for tuning in.
