There are many ingredients required to develop and execute a successful strategy; none more important than discipline. Disruptive innovations that reshape an industry are rare. Most innovation is incremental, and successful execution is a function of hard work, time and patience.

Jeff Bezos’s insight about selling books online (which resulted in the formation of Amazon) was conceived while he worked as an analyst at an investment bank. His conversion of strategy into tactics will go down in history, as Amazon took on all the best in retailing, seemingly overnight.

Bezos remains hungry and focused. Amazon’s top 5 managers meet every Tuesday for four hours to review and rebake strategy. Not once a year, not once a quarter – every Tuesday. Twice a year his team has a two day off-site to think about “big ideas” that may require 2-3 years to implement.

Alan Kay once said, “Perspective is worth 80 IQ points.”  Where the rubber meets the road in strategy is maintaining the right perspective – the intersection of strategic thinking and tactical execution.  Business owners can easily lose perspective when they spend too much time muddled in solving day to day operational problems.

To maintain strategic discipline:

Create a strategy committee, task force or executive management team (EMT).

Each member should have a role in strategy formation and implementation and be accountable for key initiatives of the company. Meet with the EMT monthly to review progress versus goals.

Engage mid-management in strategy formation and execution

Mid-managers are often insightful in identifying latent needs as they are often closer to the customer than their senior counterparts.  Many entrepreneurial companies lack management depth. They are well served to include mid-managers in executing strategy.  Provide learning opportunities for junior managers by delegating tasks for them to complete.

Hold your teams accountable

Results oriented organizations are built from the ground up to support execution, rigorously using scorecards that drill down to individual performance. Best-in-class organizations orchestrate goal setting for individuals that align with the broader goals of the organizations.

Include outside variables in your dashboard

While most successful companies measure internal activities, few score external variables. Seek out external metrics that may be predictive of future demand. Leverage the data to plan capacity, labor, facility expansion, procurement of equipment, etc.

Bezos said, “We are willing to plant seeds and wait a long time for them to turn into trees. Every new business we’ve ever engaged in has initially been seen as a distraction by people externally and sometimes even internally.”

Great strategies convert into initiatives that become the unifying vision of the strategically successful organization. Ideas that lack resources, energy and concentration are just a distraction.

And now for my very favorite quote of the year, offered by Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn.  In reference to the Nissan Leaf, a zero emission vehicle, Ghosn said “this is the future, and everything else is going to look obsolete, like sending messages with pigeons”[i].

As Gnosh put it in an interview in Fast Company, “if you already have an emissions problem with 700 Million cars, what problems are you going to have with 2 Billion?”. In the case of Nissan, Ghosn is looking beyond the defined needs of customers and is anticipating the needs of the global market in a decade or more. It is not good enough to solve problems we can see, the strategist must seek to solve problems that are not readily apparent. To consider such scenarios, strategists must consider Social, Technological, Economic, Ecological and Political trends and consider how various combinations may change the landscape of an industry.

In my book and blog“ Intended Consequences”, I predicted remarkably volatile prices for fuel and the potential for oil to reach prices of far north of $100 a barrel. The predication which became an eventuality was based on an evaluation of “converging factors”, independent trends that combine to create a tipping point. The automobile industry is on the cusp of such a fundamental shift. Toyota has been selling the Prius since, 1997 but the initial curve for adoption was remarkably slow. What we see in evidence today are converging trends that will provide the impetus to create disruptive change in the form of rapid adoption of alternative vehicles:

Political: The U.S. government’s recent announcement of an agreement with thirteen automakers that will reset the Café fuel economy standards to require an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.[ii] The willingness of OEM’s (original equipment manufacturers), to work with the government in a race to dramatically improve fuel efficiency illustrates their understanding of radical changes in their operating environment.

Social: Shifting sensibilities towards sustainability will drive adoption. Electric cars are somewhat impractical for working people who may not have time to charge them (up to 8 hours) providing a leg up to hybrids.

Technology: The new Prius plug in will offer up to 87 miles to the gallon illustrating explosive improvement in battery technology. Many of the world’s top scientists are working on batteries that could expediently improve performance, size and cost.

Ecological: In Nissan’s case,  the rapid growth of highly polluted Asian markets is viewed as a driver for future demand. Recent disasters in the gulf and elsewhere have heightened awareness of the risks of oil exploration.

Economic: Americans are still fearful of OPEC’s influence and the ability of the cartel to manage worldwide oil prices. As battery prices decline, the value proposition of hybrids will only continue to improve, and the total cost of ownership for such vehicles will be drastically reduced.

Businesses are well advised to review such variables as to develop scenarios about their industry. It may not be possible to look into a magical crystal ball to predict the future, but careful study of trends provides us context on what products and services to develop in order to create disruption.

There has been the occasional business leader whose reign has been magical (Welch and Jobs come to mind).  Yet their business often fall to sustaining enterprise value after they leave. GE’s revenue and stock appreciation has been stuck in neutral since Welch’s departure, as the 20^th century’s most profitable company tries to find its way.  Apple has been trading all over the map in the last few weeks as the market tries to reconcile a world without the imagination of Jobs and his fancy gadgets.

A systemic problem for private companies is that a lack of management and bench strength.  This dearth of talent goes deeper then inhibiting productivity in the short term; it is a significant barrier to value creation for the entrepreneur.  If an exit is an objective (as is often the case), buyers generally want to see a strong management team and bench that can support future growth. If it is the business owner and his brother-in-law that possess all of the tribal knowledge (intellectual capital) about how a business operates successfully, the enterprise can lose luster with investors.

There are similar problems when one or two employees within a company are technically superior to those around them. Often, feeling their power and value, they are unwilling to teach, document, and delegate. When management and boards allow such conditions to persist, they are doing a disservice to the shareholders and are putting the company at risk.

Organizations should:

1. Require that every manager have a delegate – Identify and develop strong number twos that can eventually step in and take on the job duties of every manager. If people can’t attend conferences or go on vacation, because no one else can cover their desk, it is a sign that they have not developed the talent around them. To develop others takes time and investment including focus on performance reviews, career pathing and training.
2. Institutionalize activities, duties and best practices – Develop thorough documentation. Companies must maintain policies and procedures if they are going to be operationally excellent. When a supplier errs, it is usually because an inexperienced junior staffer doesn’t do something the way his senior counter-part would have. Often the junior staffer is criticized, even though it is their management who put them in position to fail.
3. Teach - Great leaders are usually great teachers; they aspire to develop others through daily interaction, and the sharing of information. The inability to teach is often a sign that a manager views themselves as the only person competent enough to complete certain tasks, and makes excuses as to why they can’t find other people to step up.  Great companies have development plans for every key employee, and make resources available for their continuous improvement.

Organizations that formalize these practices in their companies will maintain a long term strategic advantage over those who do. The talent war has only just begun.

Everybody likes to think of themselves as a strategic thinker.  From advisory board members, to CPA’s and marketing consultants, lots of people list “strategic planning” within their list of competencies. Yet, there is a big difference between thinking broadly about strategy and creating a functional, tangible, strategic plan.

Strategy is somewhat esoteric, and theoretical. It deals with broad decisions that must be made about a business such as what products to offer; in which markets, using which core capabilities. The carefully crafted strategic plan has tactics woven into it, in the form of goals, objectives, initiatives, and action plans.

Unfortunately, some companies have a strategy and no strategic plan (and vice versa). If the strategy is stored solely within the confines of the thinking of the entrepreneur, there is no strategic plan.

There are books written about preparing a strategic plan in an hour and writing a marketing plan out on the back of a napkin. The napkin’s evil cousin is the one page business plan, which may tout simplicity as grand, but lacks depth, scope and detail. As the thinking goes, anything as important as the future of a business (and the implications for its employees and investors) should be explained in a few paragraphs. Using the same mindset, an airline pilot’s flight plan could be drawn on a napkin.  A cancer researcher’s thesis should be able to fit on an index card. Perhaps we can cut a few corners and keep the design of that skyscraper to a minimum. Who has the time?

The other problem with the napkin analogy is that it suggests two guys sitting in a pub dreaming up the grand strategy over a Guinness. Some of history’s most ingenious strategies may have been dreamed up that way. Yet the grand strategies do not always translate into a functional strategic plan based on research, thought, prodding, challenge and development of core capabilities such as supporting human capital and technology.

Most importantly, the people who will be responsible for buying into the grand scheme need to be included in the process of developing it. If a board of advisors or two guys in a bar craft and develop the strategy void of management’s input, they are likely to sabotage it or at least slow down its momentum.

Thus, the distinction between being a closet strategist and creating a thorough strategic plan is an important one.  The finer things in life, like a great cabernet or scotch, take time. Building a strategic plan requires patience and a level of expertise that you would expect out of a CPA or intellectual capital attorney.

Take the time to convert your strategy into a tangible strategic plan that you can share with your investors, employees, vendors and even customers (when appropriate). Isn’t the future of your company worth it?

“A wise man learns more from his enemies, than a fool does from his friends”

Baltasar Gracian

While details of Osama bin Laden’s capture are sketchy, one thing that is clear is that the U.S. military executed a nearly flawless raid with pinpoint precision.

For me, the most interesting revelation this week was that the CIA had intelligence about bin Laden’s Islamabad hideout as early as August of last year. The intelligence was seemingly developed over years of digging, prodding and fact finding, which eventually yielded a tip about one of his handlers.

While the bravery of the team that struck the compound is absolute and unquestioned, we should be equally impressed with the methodical approach exhibited by our military command, who demonstrated remarkable patience and fortitude. It seems that every detail of the strike was planned meticulously.  With the lives of American soldiers at risk, no detail was left to chance.

Strategy and tactics are born out of military doctrine, and the ability of operatives to plan their attack preciously, and execute flawlessly should give us pause.  The operation lends credence to the notion that any strategy is only as good as that tactics that support it, and that execution of bad strategy can yield devastating results. It is often necessary to have a well thought out contingency plan in the event of a calamity, such as a helicopter being caught in a “vortex”.

Both strategy and tactics are reliant on good information, and to act prematurely without knowing the facts will often generate a less than desirable outcome. As Stephen Covey points out, part of our time we spend planning, and part of it reacting. The greater the time we invest in planning, the less total energy we must expend. Whether it is in the military or business, the cost of a failed strategy can be high.

Once strategies (which is best defined as which battles should be fought) are determined, an organization must develop core competencies and resources to support them.  While the US of A may have taken a hit in recent years, we still have the finest technology and training in the world, and our enemies should still be weary of that lethal combination.

The Wall Street Journal reported that that CIA Chief Leon Panetta thought that there was a “60% chance” that bin Laden was actually present in the compound. Clearly, the decision to strike took guts. Intelligence officials and the military developed the best information available, planned the attack and took a calculated risk.  For that, our nation is eternally grateful. We should run our businesses with a similar level of preparedness.