About two years ago, Jeff and I wrote an article about building strategic capacity in Executive Update. This article was our own declaration of the “strategic planning is dead” mantra that has been circulating in the association community, although we didn’t use those exact words.
There are many, of course, who disagree with the notion that strategic planning is dead. Many of them are now writing about or attempting “new and improved” versions of strategic planning that address some of the problems with traditional strategic planning that we (and others) were mentioning.
So I don’t think we were clear enough in our original article. We’re working on a follow up document (probably an e-book) that we hope will more clearly explain our thesis. But in the meantime, let me share a critical epiphany. We still think strategic planning is dead, but that really isn’t as important point as the following point:
Strategic planning is killing us.
No matter how you do it, strategic planning consistently creates inadequate strategies. Its focus on process and plans—even if they are “living” documents—fundamentally misunderstands how organizations and systems really work, and it draws our attention away from the areas where we could be creating truly effective strategy. Strategic planning is killing us because it gives us the illusion that we are being strategic, when in fact we are merely creating structures that justify a path that feels safe because it is similar to what we have done in the past.
Our “Building Strategic Capacity” thesis was not intended to be a better way to do strategic planning. Trying to find a better way to do strategic planning is futile. That ship is sinking no matter how you dress it up. Building strategic capacity is about integrating strategy, leadership, and action in an entirely new way. It challenges the thinking behind strategic planning that so many simply take for granted, but it opens the door to new growth and potential.
More to come.
Exercise for the student: replace the term "strategic planning" in the above post with one word, "planning." Then ask if the entire post, and especially the statement "planning is dead," still make sense. Explain your answer.
Posted by: Dennis D. McDonald in Alexandria, Virginia USA | April 20, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Dennis, thanks for your comment, and thanks for helping to make our point. When leaders conflate strategy-making with planning, just as you have, they fail in their efforts at both. Our criticism of strategic planning does not devalue planning. It challenges the hegemony of a flawed and dying process that is undermining the health and vitality of our organizations.
Posted by: Jeff De Cagna | April 20, 2007 at 01:18 PM