Why do associations still embrace strategic planning? (COMMENT THREAD)

This is an open comment thread on a fundamental question:  why do associations still embrace strategic planning? 

Is the profound disconnect between strategic planning's flawed assumptions and the world in which associations operate today unclear?

Has it escaped our attention that few, if any, associations have achieved breakthrough success as a consequence of their strategic planning work?

Why are some leaders still committed to defending an approach that so many find ordinary at best, and painfully frustrating and useless at worst? 

Please share your insights and help us shed some light on this critical issue for our community.

Comments

[David Gammel]

They don't see enough benefit in a new approach yet to be worth the effort and risk of changing.

[Matt Baehr]

Board members know and do strategic planning. They want to see their association do it too. And I agree with David. They haven't been shown anything different that blows them away. They need to see a better mousetrap in action before they change theirs.

[Ben Martin]

They've been indoctrinated that strategic planning is a best practice. (OMG, I just used two of Jeff's most hated terms in the same sentence) They also just don't know what the alternatives are. It gives everyone the warm fuzzy feeling that the tactics they're pursuing are protected from on high by the strategic plan, and therefore important and untouchable.

[Dennis McDonald]

Are they saying strategic planning is bad? Or are they saying that bad strategic planning is bad? In my experience people are constantly confusing strategy and tactics.

[Virgil Carter]

Jamie, I think your concept is intriguing. There is quite a body of research and agreement that a substantial number of corporate executives feel that the way their company executes its strategy, communicates it, aligns the organization with it and measures performance against it is less than satisfactory.

There is some data to suggest a greater satisfaction at companies that make use of a formal process to develop strategy. A recent study suggests that a formal annual planning get-together works best not as an exercise to develop a definitive strategy but as an opportunity to prepare executives' minds for strategies made at other, less formal times and places. I think this ties into your concepts.

Here's some references, all from McKinsey. Interestingly, earlier studies by Drs. Kaplan and Norton, leading to their development of the Balanced Scorecard tended to many of the same findings as the more recent McKinsey research.

"Tired of Strategic Planning?", http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_abstract.aspx?ar=1191

"Distortions and Deceptions in Strategic Decisions", http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_abstract.aspx?ar=1716

"Improving Strategic Planning: A McKinsey Survey", http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_page.aspx?ar=1819

Hope these may be of interest to those interested in all the facets of strategy and the process of developing and achieving it.

[ObjepleOccups]

familiar procession buddy. sign to get more from your side :)

[grand-gambler.com]

So, that's so, because that can not be, if it had anything so there was ...