PART 2 OF 2
From ‘To Do’ to ‘Must Do’
Strategic Planning Best Practices
BY KEN NAGLEWSKI
In Part 2 of this two-part article, Seabiscuit Partners’ Ken Naglewski turns his attention to flawed strategies
and planning mishaps CEOs need to recognize and avoid. Part 1, which appeared in the Monitor’s 2011
Conference Issue, identified core elements of the strategic planning process and provided a perspective
on strategic planning practices.
In his vexing parody, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll wrote, “One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire Cat in a tree. ‘Which road do I take?’ she asked. His
response was a question: ‘Where do you want to go?’ ‘I don’t know,’
Alice answered. ‘Then,’ said the cat, ‘It doesn’t matter.’”
KEN NAGLE WSKI
Principal, Seabiscuit
Partners, LLC
Strategic Context and Perspective — (What Do We Do Now?)
Against a backdrop of well-reported accelerating changes in the
world economic order (e.g., the economic rise of China, India and
other emerging markets), shifting production and rapid increases in
technological know-how, an organization that does not understand its
position in the market or how it will remain competitive risks becoming
irrelevant. Status quo is a risky position. The marketplace for nearly
all companies is changing too quickly for an organization to be behind
the curve on planning its future.
Strategic thinking and effective planning are not easy endeavors.
They can be emotional, politically divisive and fraught with the risk
of choosing the wrong strategy for an unforgiving marketplace. But,
strategic planning is the most important job of the CEO. The CEO (and
his or her advisors) must have a realistic and dispassionate insight
into the reality of the current situation and seasoned foresight into
He has been able to objectively view the internal and external
landscape with a fresh perspective and without the drag of any
internal political entanglements to failed programs. [regarding
Ford’s CEO Mulally]
the possibilities of a marketplace where the only constant is change
and there might be a montage of potential strategies.
Failure to have a plan occurs more often than one would think. In
many organizations the annual business plan together with a set of
financial projections (often prepared by the CFO with little input from
others) constitutes what planning there is. Many companies claiming
to have a strategic planning process merely go through an annual
process of financial goal setting. Their business plan tends to be
reactive to the actions of competitors and wants of existing customers
and based on internal opinions versus the reality of the marketplace
determined from good business intelligence. Without concrete direction, the organization tends to drift with the economic tides.
Arthur A. Goldsmith, professor of management at the University
of Massachusetts, noted in his paper entitled, “Making Managers
More Effective,” “If organization strategy is a key to organization
performance, it follows that savvy managers ought to work in a
methodical way to develop sound strategies for the organization. Too
often managers have not.”
For many businesses a strategy is needed to at least stay relevant in
the marketplace. The once mighty and dominant Sears, for example,
has been outflanked by myriad of more nimble competitors. Its
income has plummeted to approximately break even, and it is now
fighting to stay relevant in the marketplace.
In addition to the cardinal sin of not having a well-conceived
strategy, there are many reasons businesses fail in both strategic
planning and execution. Here are a few.
Fix Blurred Mission Statements — (Raison D’ Entre)
The effectiveness of vision and mission statements as a part of an
overall strategic direction should not be undervalued. These statements became de rigueur in the 1970s. Few are crafted carefully and
most people seem to view such statements as blasé. Many mission
statements could apply to any company. Can you guess which well-
