Strategy implementation: from chosen course to results with goals, owners and rhythm
A strategy only exists once it is in the diary and the budget.
In this topic: Execution and control 7
The plan was approved months ago. Why does nothing look different?
Strategy implementation: why strategies lose value on the way, and how goals, resources, owners and a fixed rhythm turn a chosen course into results.
A strategy only exists once it is in the diary and the budget
The management team signs off the new direction in November. By March the sales team is still paid on one-off orders, the IT backlog has no slot for the client portal the plan depends on, and the monthly report shows the same figures as last year. Nobody sabotaged the plan. Strategy implementation simply never started, because the choice was never translated into what steers daily work: money, people, targets and meetings.
Implementation is that translation. You turn the chosen course into a few goals and initiatives, give each one an owner and real resources, and review progress on a fixed rhythm so you can adjust when the world turns out differently. This page shows how, with a worked implementation plan.
Why strategy implementation fails, and the figure nobody can back up
Presentations on change often open with the claim that 70% of change programmes fail, but when Mark Hughes of the University of Brighton traced the published sources of that claim, he found no valid and reliable empirical evidence for it (source: Journal of Change Management, December 2011). Using it to create urgency builds your case on sand.
The documented finding is less dramatic and more useful. Michael Mankins and Richard Steele concluded that companies typically realise only about 60% of their strategies' potential value (source: Harvard Business Review, July 2005). The causes they describe are ordinary: resources that are inadequate or never made available, a strategy that is poorly communicated, actions that are not clearly defined and unclear accountability for execution. None of these is solved by a better strategy. All of them are solved by better implementation.
Five misconceptions about strategy execution
Donald Sull, Rebecca Homkes and Charles Sull surveyed managers in a large number of companies and found that the usual explanations for poor execution are often wrong (Harvard Business Review, 2015). Their five misconceptions, with what works better in a smaller firm as well as a large one:
| Misconception | What works better |
|---|---|
| Alignment guarantees execution | Most friction sits between departments, not between boss and team. Set shared goals for work that crosses departments and review it together. |
| Execution means sticking to the plan | Agree in advance which signals make you shift money or people, so adjusting is part of the plan. |
| Communicating often means people understand | Limit the number of priorities and ask managers to explain them in their own words. If they cannot, repeat less and simplify more. |
| A performance culture drives execution | Also reward cooperation across teams and reporting problems early, not just hitting your own numbers. |
| Execution is driven from the top | Give middle managers room to decide within clear limits. They see first when an assumption stops holding. |
Decisions are part of execution
Many initiatives stall not for lack of effort but because nobody knows who may decide. Paul Rogers and Marcia Blenko of Bain & Company argued that organisations implement strategy faster when decision roles are clear (Harvard Business Review, 2006). Their RAPID approach separates who recommends, who must agree, who gives input, who decides and who carries the decision out.
You do not need the acronym to apply the idea. For each initiative, write down who decides on budget and scope, who must be consulted and who only needs to be informed. Two departments that both think they decide will slow an initiative more than any lack of money.
How to implement a strategy: seven building blocks
- 01
Translate the choice into goals and initiatives
Start from the option you chose (see evaluate and choose). Set three to five measurable goals and a short list of initiatives that deliver them. The OGSM model fits this on one page.
- 02
Move money and people
Budgets tend to repeat themselves: in a McKinsey study, one-third of businesses received almost exactly the same capital as the year before (source: McKinsey Quarterly, March 2012). Show in the budget what is added and what is stopped.
- 03
One named owner per initiative
A person, not a department. The owner gets a budget, a mandate and a deadline, and reports on the initiative as a whole.
- 04
A fixed review rhythm
Initiatives monthly; goals, assumptions and resources quarterly; the strategy itself yearly. Each review ends with decisions, not just a status update.
- 05
Management information that looks ahead
Revenue and margin show the past. Add leading indicators such as proposals sent, contract renewals or turnaround time in a KPI dashboard, and compare results with the plan afterwards.
- 06
Explain the why, and what stops
Use the same words and figures at every level. Say why the course changes and what you will no longer do, until people can retell it themselves.
- 07
Adjust on agreed signals
Set a threshold for each large initiative at which you reconsider its resources. You then adjust because a signal fired, not because someone lost patience.
An implementation plan in practice
Kestrel Analytical is a testing laboratory with 85 staff and revenue of €9.0 million. It tests food, water and environmental samples, mostly as one-off jobs for whoever sends a sample. The chosen strategy: become the regular laboratory for mid-sized food producers through multi-year monitoring contracts, faster results and an online client portal. Over five years, contract revenue should rise from 25% to 55% of total revenue and the operating margin from 7% to 11%. The plan for year one:
| Initiative | Owner | Resources | Milestone | Measure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monitoring packages for dairy, meat and bakery producers | Commercial director | Two new account managers (€160,000 a year), €20,000 for sales material | Packages launched by end of Q1; 15 contracts signed by end of Q4 | Contract revenue as a share of total revenue |
| Client portal with barcode sample intake | IT lead | €220,000 one-off, external developers | Live for the first 20 clients by end of Q2 | Share of samples registered through the portal |
| More microbiology capacity | Laboratory director | Two technicians moved from chemistry; second analyser planned for year two | Extended shift running by end of Q3 | Average turnaround for standard microbiology tests |
| Prune the test catalogue | Quality manager | None; frees analyst hours and reagent stock | 40 of 180 test types dropped or passed to partner labs by end of Q2 | Margin per test family |
| Quarterly strategy review | Managing director | Half a day per quarter with the management team | First review at end of Q1 | Progress, assumptions and signals |
Fictitious Firmfocus example. Amounts in euro; the logic works in any currency.
The money: the first two initiatives cost €160,000 + €20,000 + €220,000 = €400,000 in year one. Stopping two general trade fairs frees €60,000 and pruning the catalogue releases €40,000 of reagent stock, so €100,000 comes from things the lab stopped doing. The other €300,000 comes from operating cash flow, against an operating profit of €630,000 (7% of €9.0 million).
The agreed signal for the commercial initiative was at least six signed contracts by the end of Q2. At the review there were four. Prospects said they wanted proof of the faster turnaround before committing for three years. The team introduced a three-month trial at contract prices and moved the start of the second account manager back two quarters. That saved €40,000 (half of €80,000 a year), which paid for a temporary technician on the dairy line, because speed was what buyers were testing. The year ended with 13 contracts: below the 15 planned, but well above where the trend in June pointed.
An initiative with an empty cell is still an intention. And note that stopping work, here the trade fairs and the rarely used tests, helped fund the new direction.
Strategy implementation in a small business and a larger organisation
Small business
In a firm with ten or twenty people, the scarce resource is usually the owner's time, so freeing that comes first. Add the initiatives to a meeting you already hold and work on no more than two or three at once. Before you commit, check what the choice does to revenue, costs and cash in the Business Planner.
Larger organisation
The bottleneck sits between units and in the budget cycle. Give initiatives that cross units one owner with their own budget, agree when resources move between units, and review a few units in depth each quarter instead of all of them briefly. Large organisations also need a clear rule for who may stop an initiative.
Pitfalls in strategy implementation
- Too many initiatives at once: ten parallel projects means each gets a tenth of the attention. Finish before you start.
- An unchanged budget: if next year's budget looks like last year's, the strategy has not reached the organisation.
- A department as owner: "sales" cannot be called to account; a named person can.
- Reviews without decisions: a meeting that only reads out status reports teaches people that progress is optional.
- Nothing stops: new work on top of all existing work overloads the same people who must deliver the change.
- Forgetting the people side: new roles, targets and habits need attention of their own. See change management.
Implementation is the first building block of execution and control. To set goals for the coming years, use the OGSM model; for quarterly focus in teams, use OKRs. If the strategy itself is not yet on paper, start there: all topics are in the strategy overview.
What is strategy implementation?
Is it true that most strategies fail?
How often should progress be reviewed?
What is the difference between an implementation plan and an annual plan?
Sources
- Harvard Business Review: Mankins and Steele, Turning Great Strategy into Great Performance (July 2005)
- Harvard Business Review: Sull, Homkes and Sull, Why Strategy Execution Unravels and What to Do About It (March 2015)
- Journal of Change Management: Hughes, on the evidence behind the change failure rate (December 2011)
- McKinsey Quarterly: Hall, Lovallo and Musters, How to put your money where your strategy is (March 2012)
- Harvard Business Review: Rogers and Blenko, Who Has the D? How Clear Decision Roles Enhance Organizational Performance (January 2006)
Maak gebruik van onze ondernemerstools en de laatste branche-informatie
Verkrijg direct toegang tot alle stappen, downloads en tools voor ondernemers.
- Toegang tot de meest actuele bedrijfstakcijfers
- Ondernemingsplan online tool — schrijf en download naar MS Word
- Download tools en templates voor ondernemers
- Vergelijk en bewaar uw eigen cijfers met het branchegemiddelde