Strategic Management LO15303

TJclark@aol.com
Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:58:52 -0400 (EDT)

Replying to LO15179 --

Winfried,

I like the concepts you are exploring for your course on strategic
management and planning. Some of the words or key concepts that you used
that I found interesting were competition, love, military, trigger,
target, survival, enemy, control, commitment, multicultural, and problem
solving.

I recently attended a workshop where Richard Smith from the Greenleaf
Center for Servant Leadership, (www.greenleaf.org) talked about the
metaphors that influence culture and limit the effectiveness of strategic
planning. The examples he used were: machine, war and sports (war and
sports being fairly similar). Richard suggested that perhaps instead of a
war and sports metaphor, a garden metaphor would be more appropriate for
purposes of long-term planning.

In designing a course on strategic management/planning, I would suggest a
discussion that compares and contrasts the war vs garden (or similar)
metaphor. A metaphor to me is similar to a paradigm, which is a set of
beliefs that lead to actions that can either empower or limit.

Following are a few thoughts on some of the terms and concepts that are
often used in strategic planning. I will also try to communicate how
these concepts influence actions.

1. Competition. In a practical sense, I don't think business or sports
have much in common with the military. Competition in the military is
linked to survival of the fittest - life and death of people and nations.
The competitor is generally perceived to be the enemy. Conversely, I
think the competitor for business is not an opponent but a product/service
that helps people get closer to an ideal (as defined by the customer). I
believe that either consciously or not, that people want perfection and
they want it at a reasonable price. I think in business, love for serving
the needs of the customer is the fuel that would sustain a commitment
needed for long-term success. From the customer's viewpoint, a business
that does not "survive" is probably a good thing.

a. At an Army leadership school, we had a discussion on love for the
soldiers that we have the privilege of serving and I mentioned that if we
really loved our soldiers, we would probably tell them to get out of the
Army -- the point being that what parent would want their child to die in
war?

2. Problem-Solving. I am an officer in the Army Reserve, love coaching
kids sports, and am active in community quality leadership initiatives. I
have taken the Army's strategic and tactical decision-making models for
winning war and integrated them into a continuous improvement/learning
model that leaders (age seven and older) can use to resolve almost any
type of issue or problem. I find it ironic that the same approach that we
use to win wars can also be applied to prevent them. However, fighting
wars is usually easier than preventing them. Putting a competitor out of
business can sometimes be easier than cooperating and growing the
respective market. I also believe we have the technology ( as evidenced
in many LO threads) to solve almost any of an organizations' or world's
problems but this would require all of us to spend a few hours a week,
every week for the rest of our lives, to make this happen. Who's willing
to pay the price?

a. Kids sports. One of the greatest quality improvement accomplishments
that I've experienced was helping to get rid of the scoreboard in a youth
basketball league. (The scoreboard has no value to a coach but supports a
war metaphor of winners and losers.) The outcome was that parents whose
kids were on "opposing" sides, sat together and cheered on both teams.
Coaches concentrated on fun, fundamentals, team and individual improvement
goals, and referees didn't need a police escort to leave the facility.

3. Impact of War Metaphors on Business.

a. Learning Organization. I think the American Army is an excellent
example of a learning organization. Its mission is to either deter war
and if failing that, to win it quickly and decisively at a minimum loss of
life.

Frankly, concepts like scenario planning, empowerment, systems thinking,
flexibility, feedback loops, knowledge management, ISO 9000, quality
control and improvement, etc., are part of the military culture. Like
anything else, it is not a perfect system but it was designed to be a
continually learning one. The Borg in the Star Trek TV series, are a good
example of the evolution of the military model.

Note: Computers, space technology such as satellites, radar, navigational
systems, interstate highways in the U.S., the internet, international
product standards and specifications, to name just a few, were developed
for military reasons and later adopted for civilian use. Today's quality
movement was founded on the works of Dr. Walter Shewhart of Bell Labs.
Shewhart's methods were classified as top secret during WWII. Although
they were de-classified after the War and exported to Japan, they are
still pretty much a well kept secret outside the quality profession.
Deming as well as many others, were invited to Japan by General
MacArthur's staff.

b. Military Organizational Structures. The top down military
structure that was copied by many civilian organizations after WWII and
was influenced by the machine metaphor, is a good example of the mistakes
that can be made when you copy something you don't understand. This
pyramid model was designed for an environment that could experience
immediate personnel turnover due to battle casualties. Consequently, Army
personnel are trained to function two levels higher than their current
rank. The top down structure is one of the better methods to synchronize
power in a violent and chaotic environment. The earliest reference I found
to it was in the book: The Art of War by Sun Tzu. Typically,
organizational structures in the military are designed based on mission
requirements and their effectiveness are often validated in war or
operations other than war.

c. Business Organizational Structures. In business, the customer
requirement should determine the organizational structure. Everyone in the
organization should know how they contribute to adding value to the
customer.

This type of system requires a power structure that is the inverse of the
one used by the military. This structure is often referred to as the
upside down pyramid. Servant Leadership supports this model.

In summary, it seems to me that businesses are often influenced by
methods and techniques that are effective in a military culture but can be
suboptimal for businesses. Perhaps being aware of the impact that
metaphors can have on the strategic planning will improve the quality of
the process.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to help. I would be interested to
learn how your class turns out.

Regards,

Tim Clark
tjclark@aol.com

-- 

TJclark@aol.com

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>