It’s lonely at the top

Strategic planning is a complex messy process, fraught with competing interests and objectives. Implementing substantive change initiatives is hard, with human nature generally pushing back against change and with high failure potential for both human and technical reasons.

Sometimes the results of a strategic analysis push you towards significant change, towards making a “big bet”. This is probably the most difficult change to make, with lots of risks and valid objections and with a less clear outcome or probability of success.

We have seen strategic plans fail for all sorts of reasons, and sometimes it is simply because corporate leadership fail to pick, and stick to, a single direction in the face of inevitable fear and opposition to any divergence from the status quo.

At some point in the strategic planning process, once various options and opinions have been tabled and business cases assessed, someone needs to step up and take the initiative to propel the organization in a new direction. If you are a Board of Directors, CEO, or equivalent, that someone is probably you. If you are considering a big bet, it is unlikely that anyone else can make the decision.

It is rarely easy to pick from competing viewpoints, but you can be assured that waffling or delegating won’t solve your problem.

It certainly can be lonely at the top.

Trust and the “truth”

Some middle and senior managers will work hard to please you, withholding critical analysis lest they be seen as disruptive. Some will play the game, feigning support while consciously or unconsciously subverting change. When you solicit opinions you are unlikely to hear a consistent viewpoint, and will often detect some self-serving commentary. Some managers will carefully test which direction the winds are blowing and then jump to wherever seems safe. Some will push back out of deep seated honest conviction that you are crazy and the proposed direction is all wrong – they are not venal, they are doing what they believe is best for the organization.

This is not a cynical view of management and hierarchies, it is simply human nature for many staff to buttress their current situation or take the apparently safe position.

Developing and nurturing trust in your staff is absolutely critical. Holding confidences and eliciting real honest feedback is fundamental. Some of your team will be more forthcoming than others, but a personal touch will get you closer to the “truth”. Remember that trust, once lost, is virtually impossible to regain. But, no matter how connected and trusted you are, it is highly unlikely that unanimity of purpose will occur and a decision will have to be made that will be unpopular with some.

Why it has to be you

Most employees, even executives, will not easily advocate a big-bet idea or major change because;

• They don’t have the authority or resources to pull it off
• They don’t have a broad enough perspective to develop a powerful vision
• They fear the repercussions of change, particularly if the initiative fails
• They fear that their influence or positon will be diminished by change
• They fear ridicule if they propose something radical
• They don’t want to appear to be disloyal to a team or leader
• They see the operation thru a current, often narrow, World View
• They use conventional metrics that serve to buttress the current strategy
• They honestly believe that the proposed project or change is crazy
• They focus on the weaknesses rather than the strengths of individuals

Push back

You will get all sorts of push back on some visionary proposals. There will be reasons why it “can’t be done” or “shouldn’t be done”. If you really want to kill a great idea, insist that it needs more analysis, or worse, strike a committee.

You are likely to hear some or all of the following;

• This is not how things are done here (perhaps that is why it is needed).
• The market will reject it or the market is not ready (rarely is market clairvoyance so pure as in the face of change).
• There are too many competitors (or the flip side; we don’t want to be first).
• It is too risky (this is an easy game to play).
• The numbers don’t work (and numbers don’t lie do they).
• We can’t afford to annoy … (some presumably critical employee).
• It goes against our corporate philosophy (as if that should be static).
• It is inconsistent with our mission and vision statements (also not static).
• It will negatively impact our current products and services (defensive and territorial).
• It causes too much disruption in the hierarchy, particularly with “key employees” (yes, they run the company).

Most people, even seasoned and senior executives, are rooted in the current, and fear the unknown. The uncharted sea is full of dragons.

You have a privileged position and vision

Frequently you will be ahead of the market and ahead of your management team. This is because you have a privileged position that allows you to clearly see how everything fits and how your organization and its markets are evolving. You almost certainly have a longer horizon and a more holistic perspective on the business. That is why you are in charge.

If you have a vision, and have engaged in vigorous and thorough strategic planning and consultations, it is ultimately up to you to make the big bet. At some point, you need to select a course of action and drive the organization there. You need to acknowledge input that is both supportive and contrary, acknowledge and manage risk and uncertainty, and then move out with purpose. Some will not follow. Such is life.

You then need to articulate your plan clearly and engage in change management and organizational design activities to ensure that your project has a better than even chance of succeeding. Unfortunately, you may also have to be ruthless when dealing with those who simply can’t get on board, or worse those who actively attempt to subvert progress. Your “key employees” are replaceable and they don’t run the business. While acknowledging risk, it is fair to point out that there are uncertainties, and there may be setbacks, but that these are not sufficient to hold the organization back and that they represent manageable risks.

In their article “Only the CEO Can Make the Big Bets”, published by the Harvard Business Review, Jay Terwilliger and Mark Sebell wrote;

“Here is the Catch-22 of breakthrough, game-changing innovation: the only people who can provide the resources, money, and time to pursue big bets are those who can say yes without permission, and that usually means the CEO. And they must make decisions with their educated gut, not core business metrics or imaginary numbers.

Incremental innovation can and should be pushed down into the operating levels of the organization. But big bets must report to the top. Only top management can say yes without permission, and they must put skin in the game.”

Take the bet

If you are in charge, and your bones are telling you that there is a need to move out in some direction, take the big bet.