Centro Studi , Buccino (SA), Italy
Question
Asked 26 November 2013
At what point in the strategy development process does strategic "thinking" evolve into strategic "planning?"
My strategy development techniques are based on both Michael Porter, who provides practical planning processes, and Michel Robert, who argues for "thinking" ahead of "planning."
Most recent answer
I would like to add a further consideration related to the suggestion of having the planning process sequential to a proper and creative (allow me to define in this way a lateral thinking approach) strategic thinking step.
If you ask to yourself "why?", your thinking process is tending to a closed and conclusive mental approach. The Planning process step, that has usually a well defined technical structure, in my opinion, might be a leading factor to this "why trap"!
In the other hand, if you approach the Strategic Thinking utilizing an "how ?" problem solving tendency , you set a basically open mental process, in the initial step, usually the critical one, remaining ready to explore also lateral thinking alternatives!
All Answers (4)
Somaiya Vidyavihar University
Strategic thinking is the ability to come up with effective plans in line with an organization's objectives within a particular economic situation.
The traditional strategic planning model is the fit model of strategy-making. It aims to attain a fit between internal resources and capabilities and external opportunities and threats. This mindset can lead to overemphasis on existing resources and present opportunities.
Therefore, strategic thinking helps business managers review policy issues, perform long term planning, set goals and determine priorities, and identify potential risks and opportunities.
1 Recommendation
Centro Studi , Buccino (SA), Italy
I would like to separate two factors in Strategy: the methodology and the thinking content (strategic thinking). If you look to the warfare principles they look more or less the same in western countries but they may differ consistently if you consider them basing the decision process on the oriental approach (see Sun Tzu principles). I had in my organization about twenty years ago an Army General and we were sometimes talking of the basic principles to define a strategy in the battlefield. He was always recalling a repetend : "ma-ma-ri-sor- si" , that in Italian stands for massa, manovra, riserva, sorpresa, sicurezza . Similar simple war principles are declined in all the languages and you have to take care of them, of course. You must anyhow consider that by adding some "lateral thinking" you may come out with many different strategies to be evaluated, and apparently responding to the above principles in comparable way.
Usually, by the book strategists , are very good in the technical part of the game (e.g. logistics , in Army General cases) but in today Management and competitive environment complexity, It is becoming more and more important the capability of generating potentially winning strategies expressed and generated via an interdisciplinary management approach, culture and experience.
A preminent technical approach to Planning might prove to be weak in the competitive practice and operation, if forgetting that effective Strategic "Thinking" is to be considered a prime factor regarding the strategic process.The subsidiary importance of proper Technical Planning, should be then considered, in my opinion , as an added value factor.
I have significant case histories in my mind to outline that, Strategy Wise, If you have good Planning and poor Thinking, the final result you should expect, is a poor one!
Kind regards
Alberto
1 Recommendation
Centro Studi , Buccino (SA), Italy
I would like to add a further consideration related to the suggestion of having the planning process sequential to a proper and creative (allow me to define in this way a lateral thinking approach) strategic thinking step.
If you ask to yourself "why?", your thinking process is tending to a closed and conclusive mental approach. The Planning process step, that has usually a well defined technical structure, in my opinion, might be a leading factor to this "why trap"!
In the other hand, if you approach the Strategic Thinking utilizing an "how ?" problem solving tendency , you set a basically open mental process, in the initial step, usually the critical one, remaining ready to explore also lateral thinking alternatives!
Similar questions and discussions
Related Publications
This article addresses the question of how companies can use scenarios in formulating their business strategies. A general overview of the business strategy system leads to an identification of where scenarios can be best used. Six insights from scenarios are discussed and it is concluded that the scenario process has value beyond the results for s...