Strategy

Developing a strategy is characterised by high complexity. This results from the necessity of an integrated approach, since the decisions concern not just a part but always the entire organisation. From this, diverse, hardly predictable, uncertain behavioural possibilities can arise. The number of possible goals — which can also be in contradiction with one another — and the uncertainty about future development combine into a complex problem. In the context of digitalisation, it is proclaimed: ‘the strategic plan may indeed be dead’. The term ‘stractics’ is becoming established, which aims at planning that is closely connected with the instruments. This perspective on strategy is, in our view, tiring. It is also discussed whether the tension between strategies (high flexibility) and the structures embedded in an organisation (lower flexibility) can be resolved.

Besides the rigid planning of strategies, the responsiveness of an organisation should much rather move into focus. Anticipation and flexibility need to be thought of as simultaneously as possible. So the success of strategy development is expressed not only in the planning result, but also in an organisation’s ability to respond to changes. Organisations that engage critically with the medium- and long-term planning of their future get more out of the success factor of time than their competitors. The question that was most pressing in the times of the Corona pandemic was: what does the exit strategy from the lockdown look like? How difficult it was for those responsible to develop a strategy and, above all, to coordinate it within the network (Europe/world) can be seen as evidence of how important strategy development fundamentally is in an organisation. Above all, the trust that a communicated strategy conveys to employees is not to be underestimated. We find that strategy is increasingly perceived as something disruptive. In a shortened way, the young Mintzberg is followed, that strategy only results from individual activities of an organisation. Mintzberg, however, later qualified this perspective, but the belief that speed is the essential success factor and that change is becoming ever more dynamic calls into question the added value of strategic thinking and strategic planning. In our view, it is about responsiveness, which builds on the quality of an organisation’s learning processes. Learning is supported by the application of strategic planning, in that possible misjudgements can be systematically analysed in retrospect. That’s why trend analysis, as preparation for strategic planning, has a high importance, so that an organisation can foster learning. As an example of the now idiosyncratic understanding of strategy, Bungay should be mentioned here, who published the following five guiding principles on strategy:

1. Strategy refers only to the distant future.
2. Disruptors change their strategy constantly.
3. There is no longer any competitive advantage.
4. No strategy is needed — agility alone is enough.
5. A digital strategy is absolutely necessary.

These five points represent more or less the current zeitgeist and are, in our view, all wrong. Strategy refers, as explained, above all to the learning and adapting of an organisation in the here and now, and not only to drawing up a plan for a distant future. It supports the necessary customer-centric transformation of an organisation, which likewise has a medium- to long-term perspective. Most disruptors build on the strategy formulated by Bruce Henderson: price reduction and capacity increase. Even though this is now called hypergrowth, the idea is the same. With an increase in production volume, costs can be saved, and these can be passed on to customers in advance through price reductions. So not much change can be identified in the ‘disruptors’ with regard to strategy. Fundamentally, it is more difficult to maintain a competitive advantage, which is why organisations move to build up several competitive advantages in order to hold their own. But that there is no longer any competitive advantage at all is an extreme view. A strategy forms a framework for decision-making in an organisation. Agile working is a competency, but one that needs a clear framework all the more, so that the individual teams can work together as purposefully as possible. The term ‘digital strategy’ alone is to be avoided from the perspective of customer centricity. It can foster silo thinking in the organisation, and that in particular is what needs to be reduced as much as possible. A few years ago there was the term e-business strategy, now digital strategy. Sounds good — but strategy is simply strategy.

Definition of strategy

Strategy accordingly means orienting one’s thinking, deciding and acting towards the superordinate or highest goals or goal preconditions, and not allowing oneself to be distracted by superficial urgencies — that is, momentary advantages and disadvantages.

We agree, however, that the effort and scope of strategic planning should now be kept as low as possible, and that the focus should be on trying things out and on controlling the planning premises, rather than on working out comprehensive plans that can change quickly. So what distinguishes the classic strategy process from the modern strategy process is the extent of acquiring customer insights (not in general! — only for strategy development) and the focus on trying things out instead of deterministic implementation. The view that strategy is to be understood as an induced, deterministic planning process was, however, already qualified by Mintzberg. Strategy development also faces the challenge of optimally combining centralisation and autonomy. When, in the context of customer centricity, decisions are shifted more strongly to the employees, new challenges arise. On the one hand, the effort for strategy development should be kept as low as possible; on the other hand, more employees should actually be integrated. This development leads to strategy development as a competency of an organisation increasingly eroding, and thereby, although the supposed speed of decisions increases, responsiveness based on a learning process can come under the wheels. In addition, usually only the time horizon of strategic planning is addressed or criticised, but strategic thinking refers not only to time, but also to the development of decision options. Especially with increasing uncertainty, the development of options and their continuous review are elementary for an organisation’s success.