The most Misused word – “STRATEGY”

        The most Misused word – “STRATEGY”

Recently I was browsing the net and found a very valuable website and an article by Kevin Delaney. Though, it is about people using their job title as ‘Strategy’ which in his opinion should not be used and rightly so. Unless one is involved from the scratch in attaining the corporate vision’s strategic intent– A long journey and a success strategically and beyond successfully

I just want to quote and very correctly expressed;

“So what’s the alternative to having a job title with “strategy” in it? Empowering people who don’t have the word “strategy” in their job titles to think strategically about what they’re executing on for the business. The best component parts of strategy include approaching a business with a long-term perspective and understanding how its different parts come together to accomplish goals. Providing data analysis and research support for operational managers is one way to empower them to think strategically. Charging them with thinking entrepreneurially and making them responsible for long-term success is important as well. (Andy Grove’s High Output Management is helpfully pragmatic reading here.)”

I will come to this a bit later, though I will try my best to remain simple, logical and short. Coming back again on the related domain Mintzberg believes and successfully proven that strategy is evolved. That means, it’s always there where one has the capacity to unearth or see the opportunity. It could be something ‘novel’ (New) or gaps in the existing structures’ of different player’s functional and operational inefficiencies. One develop effective tactical plans to penetrate these gaps to offset their strengths, rather, capitalize on their weaknesses, ‘operationally and functionally’.

Christensen, emphasize on the word ‘innovation’ and its capacity to disrupt, while innovation is basically based on unseen opportunities or existing gaps in the market and to ‘disrupt the market players through it. ‘Innovation’ plan, planning and its implementation gaming relates to something ‘functional design or ‘craftsmanship’ according to the intended goal or vision. While, its implementation/execution has various components, including marketing, branding, sales, customer services and so on… Executing the business plan and model in shapes of ‘value mapping, Kpi’s , value streams under given strength of resources is based on creating objectives/benchmarks.

The rules are set to achieve each set of objectives to go further on the next objectives in sequences. As long as the set benchmarks are attained the journey goes on until the ‘strategic intent – goal’ is achieved. The journey can take years to be proved successful if it shows sustainable results and further growth.

What it means is this journey will only be a strategy after the goal attainment. It explains that there is no strategy created in the beginning, only if strategic intent is successfully established. And on what? Firm’s business goal programming to develop perfect sequence of objectives & related benchmarks and executing there defined (though ever changing situational value attribute) through ‘distinctive, coherent, separate or interconnected operational components and tools – ‘Tactical planning and tactically executed in tandem or otherwise according to the basic design of goal programming and defined objectives – A business strategy modeling ‘ , called Marketing, sales, communications, digital…etc etc. a long list. Since execution of operations based on desired and given functions of a visionary intent are short term and only an implementing tool, like ‘Sales plans are tactical in nature, changing every moment.

Therefore, sales compliments marketing & vice versa and both extends the objectives of the ‘Intended Business Strategy” if it will take place as a consequence of ‘Mission & Vision’. Marketing and sales etc are neither visions nor mission, but just tactical tools for ‘strategizing’ the execution part.

As a consequence, I fail to understand how there can be a Marketing, Sales, branding and other forms of component strategies, as they are simply strategizing tools to be executed operationally? Neither do I understand why in academics, marketing management, Marketing and Strategic marketing are taught separately? Either all of them are strategic or none of them…Though all aid in attaining strategic intents through successful operational execution.

To conclude my ‘fuzzy logic’, I would like to share; I read an article few years back published in HBR, “When marketing is a strategy?’ (2013). I read it again and again but failed to understand what it expressed? But at least there are people who are not confused enough to label strategy as an attachments to everything.

Marketing (All sorts) - Sales - Services - IT - Communication. Engagement are all 'executions' and thus 'operational functions' of a Business Strategy in the making under the umbrella of Corporate Strategy - which deals with strategic intent of all Stakeholders in the domain. While the operational perimeters deals with the end user - aiding the overall Strategic process in the making & not the strategy itself.

I come across educated people daily and also so TV talk shows saying phrases like ‘Short term strategies, going to office choosing the best route strategy, dealing with a wife strategy and sleeping strategy even ‘flirting’ strategy’. What is happening to this very well informed, knowledgeable and intellectual world?

If someone disagrees with me, please enlighten me on my misconceptions...

• Farooq Omar - SVN & [email protected]