Replying to LO26109 --
Peggy said:
> "There is no such thing as 'strategic management'. SM is a term invented
> by business schools to claim that it is possible, still, to command and
> control [CnC], to predict, if things are done basically the same but
> slightly differently."
>
> I have read similar themes on this listserv. People seem to be a bit
> adverse to the idea of strategic management. Maybe there are existing
> mental models here that might be worth exploring?
>
> If so ...
Picking up first on your last words, Peggy: 'strategies are
recommendations, not recipes.'
I agree 50%, but/and that's why SM is increasingly useless. SM, despite
having the 's' word in its name is still about predictability, planning
and control. SM is designed to be recipes - algorithms in the jargon.
In a fast changing environmrent what's needed are heuristics, rules of
thumb. To quote my own book 'scanning not planning'.
> I see strategies as simply recommendations on how a success or failure can
> be repeated or avoided based on analysis of previous courses of action
> that were successful or unsuccessful.
Strategies are focussed on now, not the past, they're about possibility.
>Strategy is a way of simplifying the complex, of communicating best practices.
I think you mean 'SM is a way of simplifying the complex'. Strategies are
about engaging with the complex. Simplifying is so old paradigm, dahling.
>As such, I see strategies as a form of language, of learning.
And yet I have to agree with this!
...snip...
> As such, I think effective strategic management
once we prefix words like 'effective' in front of a meme, the meme is
revealed to be moribund...
...snip...
> I see the flaw behind strategy is not necessarily the concept - look,
> listen, do, and evaluate --
-yes, that is a strategy, a heuristic, not an algorithm or recipe...
> but the people who are more comfortable
> relying on the "experts," their own education, qualifications, etc. Those
> who think that they alone have the skills and experience needed to drive
> the organization's mission, etc. Those that lump their people with other
> resources but separate from cash. Those whose risk-aversion plan is to
> position their actions so that they can always claim that their analysis
> and methodologies are sound and in line with accepted practices. "Blame
> Porter, not me!"
>
> I see the flaw behind strategic management is, again, not the concept, but
> the people who don't want to trust their own judgment and their own people
> anymore.
'Twas ever thus, and not just re strategy, of course...
>There are so many different strategies
maybe there are, in fact, many different 'things' but I bet most of 'em
aren't strategies...
>floating around that
> people want explicitly communicated and tailored solutions endorsed by
> experts.
>
> Things have become so complex. Yet it could be simple, if only people
> would realize that strategies are recommendations, not recipes.
Again agree 50%, yes to strategy, but no to 'it could be simple'...
Best wishes
Arthur Battram
--:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Arthur Battram is the author of 'Navigating Complexity: the essential guide to complexity theory in business and management' published by the Industrial Society. Now available in paperback - navigate the Amazon to find it... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.