Strategy fails 9 out of 10 times!
We Know

In the last 12 months there has been a sudden explosion of books, articles and, yes, blogs stating that 9 out of 10 strategies fail to be implemented successfully.



We know.

It’s not new information. It’s ten years since Fortune magazine published the oft-quoted cover story, “Why CEOs Fail,” that explained, “Organizations fail to successfully implement strategy not because of bad strategy but because of bad execution.”



Seven years ago, Ram Charan followed up the article by teaming up with Larry Bossidy to write Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done. The book introduced the field of implementation to business leader and why execution was important.



Five years ago, I wrote Bricks to Bridges: Make Your Strategy Come Alive, and published our research that, yep you guessed, 9 out of 10 times strategy fails. I am not sure why the sudden explosion (your comments are welcome) but leaders get it. They now know that they can’t discuss strategy without discussing implementation.



It has not been a hard sell to convince a leader that more often than not implementation fails and that they need to do something different. Too many leaders on too many occasions have been involved in too many failures. Sub consciously they knew there was a problem. The literature over the last 10 years has supplied the numerical and logical argument to support the emotional one. It is time to move on.



We are not attempting to convince everyone that the world is round, or that heavier object do not fall to the ground faster than lighter objects or that E=MC2. Around the world, leaders understand the arguments, have recognized the opportunity and understand that a different approach is needed. Leaders are now asking, “What do we do different?”



We have peaked leaders curiosity. We have provided a solid argument and we have built the platform to move forward. We must now shift the message from what’s wrong to how to resolve the problem. Leaders want to know how they can reverse the equation.



Leaders must change their attitude, approach and actions. To do this we must provide them a framework to ensure they are taking the right action (strategy implementation is the collective individual actions taken every day by staff members who will deliver the strategy for tomorrow). The framework explains to leaders specifically what they need to do differently. Check out strategy implementation framework for an example of a framework you can use.
Many of the actions leaders need to take to successfully implement the strategy are contrary to current belief, such as, most people do not resist implementation when it is communicated correctly and strategy implementation must be reviewed not every quarter but every two weeks.



To the many things leaders must do different there is one overriding transformation they must make. Most people agree that leaders are responsible for the future of the company and thus the strategy. Why then do many leaders spend more time talking about operations than strategy? If you are looking to be successful in strategy implementation and somewhere to start, start by changing the daily dialogues among leaders. Ensure you are spending more time talking about strategy and its implementation than operational issues.

The Leaders Perspective to Implementing Strategy –People

This is blog examins the role leaders must play to successfully implement strategy. We have learned from various researches over the last eight years that as many as 90 per cent of strategies fail to deliver. Leaders must be as responsible for overseeing the execution of the strategy as they are for crafting the strategy. Research from Bridges Business Consultancy Int, a specialist in strategy implementation, identified eight areas successful companies focus when implementing their strategy – People, Biz Case, Communicate, Measure, Culture, Process, Reinforce and Review. In this series of articles we will examine the leader’s role in each of these areas.
People

Leaders are responsible for crafting strategy and overseeing its implementation but it is the staff members who must take the right actions and behaviors every day to make the strategy come alive. Too often leaders delegate the implementation and don’t follow through and as a result the implementation fails. Leaders must adopt a different attitude and a different approach towards implementation. If nine out of ten implementations fail then there must be some serious flaws in the current thinking and models. I would like to address what leaders must do different.

1. Leaders must see the staff members as the “Strategy Customer”. When implementing strategy leaders are selling the strategy to their staff members and they are the ones who must buy it (buy-in). This is a paradigm shift for many leaders. In most implementations leaders delegate the responsibility to their staff members without proper support, encouragement and the appropriate tools and techniques. Leaders then sit back and expect the implementation to be effectively carried out!

Leaders must adopt the same mindset for rolling out the strategy to the organization as they would, for example, in launching a new product to customers. When they take the time to show their staff members the respect, staff members take the time to do the same. In other words treat staff members with the same respect you treat customers.

When leaders work with their staff members in implementation, the same way you work with customers launching a product you positively change the way you view your people and as a result your staff members more readily adopt the strategy and resist it less.

2. Despite popular belief, most people do not resist change – when it is communicated correctly. For years we have churned along with the notion that when organizations are making large changes, most people resist. It could be from a fear of losing responsibility or stepping into the unknown or trying new things and, as such, we have crafted strategy implementation and people policies based on wrong assumptions.

Contrary to popular belief, our research in Bridges, over eight years, tells us that when it comes to implementation in an organization, most people do not resist it if the new strategy is presented and communicated correctly. They generally respond in one of three ways – indifference, resistance, or support. 20 per cent is resistance, 60 per cent is indifference and 20 per cent is support.

Implementing strategy is difficult. The odds are stacked against us before you even start. We need to make it as easy as possible for the organization to succeed. The 20 per cent who support the implementation come on board more readily than the others. Many of them recognize the need for change without being told the reasons. They see the benefits and immediately start to take action. They create early successes and provide success stories to share.


Key learning for leaders is that they must support the staff members who support the implementation and that is the top 20 per cent.

3. The launch of a new strategy means that you are asking staff members to do things differently. It is a leader’s responsibility to identify any new skills, knowledge or attitude staff members may need and then to provide specific training.

Leaders are responsible for reviewing the new strategy and identifying gaps that must be filled to ensure they are setting the staff members up for success. This may involve for example, on the job training, workshop training, computer based learning and/or coaching.


Leaders have been failing for too long to execute the strategy they create. The failure rate has gone unchecked for too long and it is time for leaders to change the way they view implementation.

Strategy Execution - An opportunity to leapfrog the competition during the crisis

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Strategy Execution An Opportunity Slide Share

View more OpenOffice presentations from Robin Speculand.

Make Your Strategy Come Alive 2-Hour Presentation

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Make Your Strategy Come Alive 2-Hour Presentation

View more presentations from Robin Speculand.

6 Necessary Mind Shifts for Implementing Strategy

"One of the criticisms we would have of some of our colleagues who have studied strategy (and some consultants who advice on strategy) is assuming that once you design strategy, it gets executed. They don’t look inside the process and realize that it’s much more complicated.”
- Joseph Bowler, Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School

Nine out of ten strategies fail to be successfully implemented.

This is a statistic that is growing in influence as there is a pendulum swing away from the thought that just crafting a strategy is enough and towards that it also has to implemented. You can have the greatest strategy in the world but if you cannot implement it, it is not worth the paper it is written on.

In the last few years, an increasing amount of research has emerged on how to successfully implement strategy. The company I founded, Bridges Business Consultancy Int, a pioneer in the field of strategy implementation, has been conducting research for eight years. From our studies and work with clients globally, we identified flaws in leaders’ thinking and their approach to implementation. That helps explain why nine out of ten times, leaders fail to successfully implement the strategies they create. Success in implementation starts with thinking differently and then doing things differently. After all, if we always do what we have always done, then we will always get what we have always got.

My interviews with leaders who successfully executed their strategies reveal that at some point, they dramatically shifted the way they thought about implementation. A Mind Shift occurred.

In fact, they have helped me identify six Mind Shifts that need to take place for the success of an implementation, contradicting much traditional literature on the subject. I describe these new required Mind Shifts here, noting the old mindset in quotation marks.

Mind Shift #1 – ‘When crafting strategy is complete, the hardest part is over.’ No, implementation is twice as difficult as creating strategy.

For decades, business leaders have quite rightly focused on developing a strategy for change. Business schools teach the importance of strategy and how to create the right one for a company’s needs. A leader’s role is to design that strategy. The consequence, however, is that once leaders have created their strategies, they believe they have completed most of their responsibilities. The hardest part is over. Yet they habitually underestimate the challenge of implementing that strategy. Many delegate this process to others, taking their eyes off what needs to be done to put their strategies in place. After all, they believe, it is more difficult to create a strategy than to implement it.”

This is not true. Research (from Bridges) indicates that implementing strategy is at least twice as hard as creating the right strategy. The fact that nine out of ten implementations fail supports this statement—not because the strategy was wrong, but because the execution was poorly done.

Evidence to support this conclusion continues to grow. Research spanning 16 years at Newcastle University in the U.K. concluded that “business success is governed more by how well strategies are implemented than how good the strategy is to begin with.” A frequently quoted Fortune article from June 1999 stated that companies fail to successfully implement strategy not because of bad strategy but bad execution. Bridges research over the last eight years shows that nine out of ten strategies fail to be implemented successfully.

When I ask leaders in the seminars I run in 35 cities if they would prefer to have a good strategy implemented badly or a bad strategy implemented well, most speak up for a good strategy implemented badly.

If you believe that having the right strategy means you are moving in the right direction or have the foundation from which to build, that is the wrong answer. The correct answer is having a weak strategy implemented well. Why? If an organization is good at execution, then it will have in place the tools, systems, techniques and abilities to realize that the strategy is not working. They can then go back and make the required changes to the strategy.

Consider also that no leadership team intentionally adopts a bad strategy. It is only in its execution that leaders realize that the strategy is weak. By being good at implementation, you will be able to read the signs and make the necessary changes. Remember, it is the implementation of a strategy that delivers revenue, not the crafting.

The time has come in the evolution of strategy to move from just focusing on the crucial question on how you develop a strategy to how you implement it.

Mind Shift #2 – ‘Most people resist change.’ No, most people are open to change when it is communicated in the right ways.

Contrary to popular belief most people do not resist change! This is probably the most controversial of the six Mind Shifts, because for years we have firmly believed that most staff members will resist change. Remember, if our current beliefs are accurate, we would not be failing so frequently. The question of why we mistakenly believe staff members resist change and its implications are critical to successful implementation.

From its research, Bridges discovered that when a new strategy is announced, staff members generally respond in one of four ways: indifference, resistance, disbelief and support. Which ones occur depend on what the change means to each individual.

Consider these research statistics:

· 20 per cent (and only 20 per cent) resist change. And these resisters tend to complain about anything and everything. They badmouth the implementation behind the leader’s back, complaining that the money could be spent better on bonuses instead of a ‘lost cause’ like this. They try to convince others around them that this strategy is just another management fad. Based on these characteristics, we call such people Saboteurs. If their views win out, the whole implementation fails. You can probably identify one or two Saboteurs in your organization!

60 per cent of the staff members are fence–sitters, neither supporting the implementation nor opposing it. They arrive at 9.00 am and depart at 6.00 pm. In between, they simply do their jobs. They don’t volunteer for additional work, but they don’t actively resist change, either. Based on these characteristics, we call them Groupies. Those who are Groupies like the safety they find in numbers.

20 per cent are those who welcome the change, embrace it and willingly support it. They become the early adopters who drive the change. Based on these characteristics, we call them Mavericks.

Those in the last group are not easy to spot because they are hidden among the Saboteurs. Based on their characteristics, we call them Double Agents. They initially resist, but can become Mavericks over time. Double Agents have seen change many times before and impose doubt that the new strategy will succeed. They have also been called to arms too often and have witnessed too many failures. However, Double Agents start out acting like Saboteurs, but once they assess that this implementation is the ‘one in ten’ that will succeed, they get on board, becoming supportive and active Mavericks.

So why is it commonly believed that people resist change?

Because of the four groups, Saboteurs make the most noise. As a result, they create the largest commotion and lead others to the wrong impression that most people resist change. In addition, Groupies keep quiet because they do not want to draw attention to themselves. Mavericks just get on with the work on hand.

If leaders fail to shift their beliefs, they will develop the wrong policies for addressing staff members’ reactions to the new strategy. So as a leader, what should you do? Mostly ignore the Saboteurs and support the people who support you—the Mavericks.

Mind Shift #3 – ‘It’s all about taking actions.’ No, it’s about taking the right actions.

Of course, you need to take action to implement your strategy. And of course, in business, you are always taking action, filling up the amount of time you have with activity. But the difference between success and failure is that successful leaders ask: “Are we taking the right actions?” Sure, staff members are always busy, but are they doing the work today that will deliver the planned strategy, tomorrow?

To answer this question, you have to first identify the right actions to take. When working with clients, I use the Implementation Compass (see Chapter 2) to identify the right actions based on the eight global best practices of successful implementation.

For example, when a large software company was rolling out its global strategy in Asia Pacific, the right action initially was to convince people why change was necessary when the company was doing so well. That’s called the Biz Case. This company rolled out a teaser campaign that ignited interest and curiosity in its new strategy, starting the implementation in the right way.

A Middle East bank created its new strategy, but did not have a common understanding among its leaders. So the strategy planners developed a Strategy Map to translate their new plan into specific objectives. They also developed measures that ensured the leadership team and staff members were all on the same page.

A local government division wanted to improve its back-office operations to support its new strategy. The division leaders required staff members to engage at two levels. First, all staff members were trained on how to map their work and identify improvements within their own scope. Second, key staff members were asked to participate in cross-functional process redesigns using the DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control – from Six Sigma) approach. Rolling out the strategy included making sure staff members tune in to both ‘radio stations’”: WII-FM (What Is In For Me) and also WEX-FM (What Is Expected From Me).

Mind Shift #4 – ‘Communication is all about making sure people understand the strategy.’ No, staff members also must know exactly what actions they need to take.

Yes, before staff members can adopt any new strategy, they must first understand it. Absolutely. Successful implementation goes beyond ensuring staff members understand the strategy; they must also know exactly what to do and be motivated to do it.

Much communication about a new strategy focuses on its launch, which is usually marked with electronic presentations, briefings and t-shirts. Shifting the focus from the initial fanfare to staff members embracing the strategy is imperative.

Launch communication also has to spell out what each staff member needs to do differently as a result of the new strategy. The question ‘what actions should I take to participate in the new strategy?’ has to be answered for everyone. And there’s more. Ways to motivate those who implement the strategy (staff members, not leaders) must be introduced. Measures to track the new strategy need to be set up. New behaviors need to be encouraged through reinforcement. Early adopters should be recognized and encouraged so others follow their lead.

When Rolls Royce rolled out its new strategy a few years ago, it used ‘strategy storyboards’ to share the new message across its broad organization. The storyboards translated abstract ideas into concrete actions. They not only explained why the strategy was important but what Rolls Royce staff members were expected to do differently. In addition, 75 managers were trained to conduct the briefing and hold at least 4000 presentations around the world. After this effort, staff members were able to both understand the strategy and know exactly what to do to help implement it.

Realize that strategy can’t be implemented if it can’t be understood, and it can’t be understood if it can’t be broken down into action steps. While strategy is designed at the top of the organization chart, it gets implemented from the bottom up. Effective communication fills the gap and brings the two together.

Mind Shift #5 – ‘What worked yesterday will work tomorrow.’ No, new strategies are needed every two or three years.

Leaders have had a habit of extending knowledge that was true yesterday when planning for tomorrow. You used to be able to rely on a strategy for eight to ten years. But those days are gone, forever.

Today, many organizations (depending on their industry and product) plan strategy for only two or three years. The cycle of change occurs more and more frequently. As a result, you can no longer depend on yesterday’s model for success; you must craft strategy more and more often. That means you need to implement a new strategy more often than ever before. The current economic crisis reinforces this need.

On the Standard & Poor’s list in 1985, 35 per cent of the companies were considered high risk (that is, their probability of achieving long-term, stable earnings growth was low). In the 2006 list, that figure had risen to 73 per cent. As another indicator, from 1973 to 1983, 35 per cent of those companies listed in the Fortune 1000 were new. From 1983 to 1993, 45 per cent of the Fortune 1000 companies were new, and from 1993 to 2003, 60 per cent of them were new. Maybe Fortune Magazine predicted company performance best when it forecast “continued chaos with a chance of disaster. The challenge is getting comfortable with it. ”

One company comfortable with constant change is Google, which provides various Internet services. The company has built a culture that not only allows its change-friendly people to adapt easily, but it has also become the number one company people want to work for in the United States. Google receives over 3000 job applications a day.

“Googleplex” headquarters today is crammed with conference rooms, hallway buzz sessions, sandy volleyball courts, youngsters whizzing around on motorized scooters, and an ‘anything goes’ spirit. In addition—

• The 17 legendary cafes on Google’s main campus offers 20 cuisines and fantastic (and free) food (e.g., lobster gets served for lunch).

• Google engineers spend 20 per cent of their time pursuing and developing their own ideas.• Google’s organizational hierarchy is flat.

• Google holds 64 per cent of the market share in its category in the U.S.

• In its 10-year history, Google has created more investor wealth in less time than any other company in history—US$10.6 billion in revenue earned.

• Sheryl Sandberg, a 37-year-old VP, made a mistake that cost Google several million dollars. When she informed founder Larry Page, he replied, “I’m so glad you made this mistake.”

The late management guru Peter Drucker observed that “maintaining yesterday is difficult and time consuming and therefore requires the institution’s scarcest and most valuable resources—and above all, its ablest people—to non-results.” Acting this way means your people are not available to create a successful tomorrow.

Mind Shift #6 – ‘Strategy must be reviewed twice a year.’ No, it must be reviewed twice a month at least!

In many management meetings, Bridges research has revealed that 85 per cent of managers’ time is spent on operational issues while about 15 per cent is spent on strategic issues. But leaders are not meant to solve day-to-day problems (although they do because it feels good and they can do it); they are responsible for crafting and implementing strategy.

What indicates that an organization is good at implementation? When that ratio gets reversed. That is, when 85 per cent of the managers’ time is spent on strategic issues and 15 per cent on operational issues.

Changing your strategy means changing the dialogue/agenda at your meetings and specifically at your management meetings. Once it’s successfully changed, the effect will cascade down through the organization. Your immediate reports will pay attention to what you pay attention to.

The catalyst for this dialogue change is frequently scheduled strategy reviews. If leaders are responsible for both crafting and executing strategy, doesn’t it follow that implementation should be discussed as frequently as possible? In my experience, successful implementation requires conducting strategy reviews every two weeks.

During these reviews, you are not analyzing the whole strategy. Rather, you break it down into small chunks. You would examine, for example, the actions being taken, the behaviors and the measures every two weeks. Then every quarter, the strategy would be reviewed in its entirety.

To predict where an organization will be in two years, therefore, do not look at its strategy on paper. Instead, pay attention to the daily actions its leaders and staff members take.

In this article, I have explained six Mind Shifts that leaders should adopt, but I probably haven’t succeeded in changing your mindset completely. Behavioral psychologists say it takes 21 days to make a change stick.

Still, I hope I have at least planted a seed of doubt in your thinking. This seed will be further fuelled by more study results and by your own experiences. Then you will be ready to adopt theses six Mind Shifts that will lead to success on your implementation journey.

Robin Speculand, the founder and CEO of Bridges Business Consultancy International, a pioneer in the field of strategy implementation. Widely acknowledged as a thought leader in implementation, Robin has written the bestselling books Bricks to Bridges - Make Your Strategy Come Alive, and Turning It On - Stories to Ignite, Excite and Engage. Robin is a masterful event facilitator and engaging keynote speaker. His work has been featured in the media, including BBC Global and Financial Times. For more details, go to bridges@bridgesconsultancy.com

Implementation Compass—A Tool to Make Strategy Implementation Come Alive

The Implementation Compass provides you with a structure that can make your strategy successful. Instead of wandering aimlessly through the implementation maze, following this Compass allows you to assess your implementation readiness and identify key areas to tackle.

The Implementation Compass—
· assesses your readiness to implement your strategy
· assists in crafting your Implementation Plan
· identifies the actions you need to take today to deliver tomorrow’s strategy.

The Implementation Compass has been developed by Bridges Business Consultancy Int based on eight years of research and testing with business clients around the world.

The Great Big Strategy Challenge

Implementation
You have just returned from the final two day regional leadership meeting. The team has finalised the strategy and the Board have signed off on it. All that is left to do is to implement it.

The leadership team spent six months crafting and crystallizing the strategy with the assistance of a strategic consultancy firm. The importance of responding to the rapid change in their market that had just transpired due to overseas competition was the initial catalyst that propelled the team to revisit the old strategy. Now after six months of hard discussion, market, competitor, financial and customer analysis the leadership team is ready to roll the new strategy out. The hardest part is over, right. Wrong!

Today in business, leaders are habitually underestimating the challenge of strategy implementation and as such nine out of ten strategy implementations fail.

Far too many leaders can more easily recall an implementation that failed – whether it was strategy, technology or marketing. It is time to correct this by putting the spot light on implementation.

You can have the greatest strategy in the world but if you can not implement it then it is no more value than the paper it is written on.

One of the largest contributing factors to the high number of failed implementations is that when leaders return to their offices after creating their challenge, they are commonly left on their own to work out how to implement it. They must figure out how to inform the people in their division of the imminent changes; explain what needs to change and why; review the way the team is working and the current rewards and recognition to ensure it supports the new strategy; motivate their people; assess the current measures being used and report back to their peers. It is a multitude of activities that creates a maze that many leaders become lost in. What they need is a compass to guide them through this implementation maze.

The “Implementation Compassä” is a tool that provides you with the structure for your strategy to make it come alive. Instead of wandering aimlessly through the implementation maze it allows you to assess your implementation readiness and identify the key areas to tackle. It has been developed by Bridges Business Consultancy Int (the company I work for) after 5 years of research and testing with clients around the world.

1. The Implementation Compassä works for both small and large organizations
2. Allows you to assess your current status in preparing to implement.
3. The Compass guides leaders through the eight critical elements. The degree of importance of each component varies for each organization. For example, one organization may spend more time on measurement while another focuses more on communication.
4. The Compass helps your organization maintain momentum throughout its journey.

Below is a description of the eight elements of the Implementation Compass and key questions to consider before embarking on your implementation journey.

Eight Critical Components

1. People It is not leadership that implements strategy but people

Questions to consider: Do you have the right caliber of people? Do they have the competencies to execute the new strategy? Are they motivated to do so?

2. Biz Case The emotional and numerical rational for adopting the strategy

Questions to consider: Why is the strategy center stage? Do your staff members know what to do differently on the Monday morning after implementation is announced? Do they have the right tools and techniques to implement the strategy?

3. Communicate People can only adopt a strategy if they know about it and understand it

Questions to consider: Do all your staff know what the new strategy is and why it has been adopted? Is the strategy communicated in a way that it comes alive?

4. Measure “You must inspect what you expect.” Have the right measures in place

Questions to consider: Do you have the right measures for the new strategy? Are the measures being leveraged to guide the implementation?

5. Culture You must change the day-to-day activities of your staff members and have a culture that support and fosters change

Questions to consider: What needs to change in the fundamental way you are working so as to encourage the adoption of the new culture? Are we using the language of the new strategy?

6. Process There must be congruence between what you say you are going to do (strategy implementation) and what you are doing (the process)

Questions to consider: Do your processes support or hinder the new strategy? Where can you redesign the process so it is more supportive and effective?

7. Reinforce You must reinforce the expected behaviors so that they are continuously repeated
Questions to consider: When staff members step in to the unknown and demonstrate the new behaviors, are they recognized and rewarded? Does the reinforcement encourage them to continue to demonstrate the desired new behaviors?

8. Review The weakest of the eight points among leaders – you must constantly review to make sure the right actions are being taken to deliver the right results

Questions to consider: Do you know if the actions being taken are producing the right results? Do you know what has been learned from the implementation in the last 90 days? Do you know what you need to start doing differently from today?

Strategy Implementation: we got the people factor wrong!

Most of us are familiar with the expression, “People resist change”. No they don’t! This was just one of the startling results from five years of research we conducted in south-east Asia. We then considered that Asian values may be a contributing factor, so we compared our findings to other regions and discovered similar results.

For years we have happily gone along with the notion that when organizations are making large changes, most people resist. They could have a fear of losing responsibility or stepping into the unknown or trying new things and, as such, we have carved out strategy implementation based on these wrong assumptions.

An even more startling outcome from the survey is that nine out of 10 strategies fail to be implemented successfully. Could part of the reason be that our assumptions are wrong about how people react? Once again, we then discovered that similar research in other parts of the world came to the same conclusions.

The results of the survey and our own client work with governments, multinationals and local companies across four continents started us on a journey to find out why so many strategy implementations fail (see Figure 1) and how staff members respond to changes. We were again surprised by just how many people support or go along with organizational changes.


Figure 1: Top challenges faced in implementing strategy

Bridges Business Consultancy Int. (henceforth “Bridges”) surveyed businesses from various industries across south-east Asia over a five-year period about the challenges they face when implementing strategy, as part of the research that we carried out for our book: Brick to Bridges – Make Your Strategy Come Alive.

Ranking Challenge
1 Gaining support and action
2 Communicating the change
3 Overcoming resistance from staff
4 Support of senior management
5 Aligning processes
6 Tracking success of implementation
7 Changing rewards and recognition
8 Acquiring customer feedback
9 Implementing new technology
10 Acquiring budget

(© Bridges, 2005)

[End of Figure 1]


Dynamics of change: saboteurs, groupies and mavericks

The term “implementing strategy” translates to staff members as their having to change the way they work and/or do more work. They generally respond in one of three ways – indifference, resistance or support. Across the organization, the distribution of these responses falls into a bell curve.

On the left side of the curve is the 20 percent of staff members who resist change. These people tend to complain about anything and everything. They badmouth the implementation behind the leader’s back and complain that the money should be spent on bonuses instead of on lost causes like yet another management fad. Based on their characteristics, we call them “saboteurs”. If they win, the whole implementation fails.

The middle group of the bell curve, comprising 60 percent of the staff, sits on the fence. These people neither support the implementation nor oppose it. They come in at 9am and leave at 6pm. In between, they just do their work. They don’t volunteer for additional work, but they don’t actively resist change. Based on their characteristics, we call them “groupies”. They like the safety in numbers.

The final 20 percent are those who welcome the change, embrace it and willingly support it. They are the early adopters, and are drivers of the change. Based on their characteristics, we call them “mavericks”.

What we need to do differently

Previously, leaders led people through strategy implementation as if most were resisting. The successful strategy implementations that we studied recognized the three different groups, and knew where to focus their energy and how to lead each group.

Which group do we start with - saboteurs, groupies or mavericks? Take a moment to think about which group you have focussed on in the past. The right group to focus on is the 20 percent who welcome and support the change – the mavericks.

Why?

We know that implementing strategy is difficult. The odds are stacked against us before we even start. We need to make it as easy as possible for the organization concerned to succeed. The 20 percent who support the implementation will come on board more readily than the others. Many of them recognize the need for change without being told the reasons. They see the benefits and immediately start to take action.

By starting here, you will attain early wins that can be shared and celebrated with the rest of the organization. In addition, this group provides you with the feedback necessary for tweaking and improving the implementation.

While this positive group is adopting the implementation, it influences the middle group. Remember, those in the middle group sit on the fence and could fall either way. If they are influenced by the positive 20 percent, they will start to respond positively to the implementation. They are the followers. Although that middle 60 percent do not have the enthusiasm and drive to charge out of the starting gate, you can move them along at a steady pace in the right direction.

Once you have 80 percent of the organization moving in the right direction, you have created a critical mass and built up enough impetus for the strategy to start. But what happens to the remaining 20 percent, who resist the change?

About half of these (10 percent of the total staff) will resist but, if handled correctly, will eventually start to move in the right direction. They drag their feet and make a lot of noise, but ultimately fall into line. The remaining 10 percent, if you are lucky, will leave your organization and join your favorite competitor! Maybe they had the right competencies when they were hired, but today, they will slow you down and possibly cause trouble. Regard them as not being right for the job. It is time to say, “Thank you and goodbye!”

General Electric uses a similar approach to this bell curve, calling it the vitality curve. The vitality curve, also in the shape of a bell curve, identifies the top 20 percent of performers, the middle 70 percent and the bottom 10 percent. Every year, the bottom 10 percent is asked to leave.

After a few years, we identified a fourth group, who were initially hidden. Based on their characteristics we call them “double agents”. They initially resist, but can become mavericks. (See Figure 2)

Why is there the notion that people resist change? Because of all the groups, saboteurs make the most noise and, as a result, create the largest impression.


Figure 2: How to identify each group

Groupies
Groupies believe there is safety in numbers and, as such, are passive even though the change is an opportunity for them. Groupies are the backbone of any organization. They do the day-to-day work that has to be done.

Saboteurs
Saboteurs are out to sabotage the implementation. To identify saboteurs in your organization, ask “Who is likely to respond actively but to see the change as a threat?” If the saboteurs win, the organization loses.

Double agents
After observing many teams tackle the challenges of implementation, Bridges came to recognize another group who, over time, demonstrated different characteristics. The double agents are hidden among the saboteurs, which is why they were not initially identified. Initially, double agents appear to oppose the implementation. They stand back to see if this strategy is just another management fad or if it will last. When they see that it is succeeding, however, they switch from opposing it to being strong supporters. Only by their own free will can double agents cross over and become supporters. This happens once they see the desired actions taking place. To identify double agents in your organization, ask “Who is likely to respond actively and see the change as a threat, but is open to persuasion?” Double agents can be convinced only through actions, not words.

Mavericks
Mavericks willingly and enthusiastically support the implementation. To identify mavericks in your organization, ask: “Who is likely to respond actively to the force of change and see it as an opportunity?” A secondary question you can ask to identify Mavericks is: “If your boss told you to fire 80 percent of your staff, whom would you keep?” In most organizations, leaders do not recognize and reward mavericks enough.

[End of Figure 2]


How do you effectively lead each of the groups?

Mavericks need to be supported and rewarded for their contributions. A leader shows the mavericks what needs to be done and then steps back and lets them get on with it. When the results are achieved, the leaders say “thank you”, and reward the people who made the implementation happen.

Groupies must be driven and encouraged. Groupies, remember, sit on the fence and can fall either way. Therefore it is important that a leader walks among the groupies, driving them forward and encouraging them to get involved.

Saboteurs must be handled carefully and effectively. To reinforce a key message, do not let saboteurs become the focal point of your leadership efforts.

Double agents have to be persuaded and convinced. An individual, no matter how charismatic, cannot lead them. They will only come on board when they see the right actions taking effect and are convinced that the organization has crossed the point where it will not turn back.

Here is a simple way to remember the effective leadership style for leading each of the groups. It involves the three leadership styles:

1. Lead from the front. To lead saboteurs through an implementation, you must be in control and hands-on. Be aware of what they are doing and how they are doing it. This means leading them from the front, in the direction you want them to go rather than the direction they want to go.

2. Lead from the middle. With groupies, you must get in among them. They will naturally follow, so you do not need to be at the front. But you must be among them to guide them gently in the right direction, show them what to do and encourage them along the way.

3. Lead from behind. With mavericks and double agents, it is best to lead from behind. The mavericks simply need to be shown what and why. Then they will embrace the change. Your role is to support and recognize them for adopting the change and new behaviors. Double agents cannot be pushed or challenged. Rather, they must be left to come around on their own terms, with some gentle direction from behind. By communicating the actions already taken and the results achieved, they will not go amiss.


Box-out quotes

“We were again surprised by just how many people support or go along with organizational changes.”

“By starting with the mavericks, you will attain early wins that can be shared and celebrated with the rest of the organization. In addition, this group provides you with the feedback necessary for tweaking and improving the implementation.”

Robin Speculand is the CEO of Bridges Business Consultancy Int, which specializes in making strategy come alive.

He is a specialist in implementing strategy and author of Bricks to Bridges – Making Your Strategy Come Alive and Turning It On – Sure-Fire Business Stories to Ignite, Excite and Entertain. Bricks To Bridges can be purchased through Gazelle Book Services Ltd, Tel 01524 68765 Fax 01524 63232 and is available on Amazon.

Before founding Bridges, he was Asia Pacific Regional Vice President for Citigroup. He has lived and worked in the UK, US and Australia, and has operated in Asia since 1989. He holds an MBA from the National University of Singapore. Robin is the founder and president of Business Roundtable for Innovative Management, a Singapore-based management think tank and a founding member of Asia Speakers Association. He can be contacted at: bridges@bridgesconsultancy.com or via Bridges Business Consultancy Int website: http://www.bridgesconsultancy.com/
or by phone at (65) 6886 0123