Discussion Reply: Strategy Development, Strategy Decisions, and Decision Models

Discussion: Effective Execution, Design/Focus, and Decision Trap 

           Shannon

           I have no known conflict of interest to disclose. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Shannon

Email: 

Week 6 Discussion

Introduction

            Strategic management is a collaborative process involving interconnected stages and components that must align across the organization’s staff and business activities. Devising and executing strategic initiatives is not a solitary task but a collective effort that requires connecting with the organization’s mission and vision to achieve objectives and performance outcomes. While executive leadership is primarily responsible for strategic oversight, collaboration with management ensures that the desired strategic direction is carried out through routine business activities. This week’s discussion delves into executing an effective strategy, emphasizing the crucial role of each individual across the organization. The discourse aims to explain the strategic execution process, the influence of strategic design and focus, and the types of decision traps to recognize and avoid when crafting strategies.

Process: Effective Execution of Strategy

           The successful implementation of strategic initiatives hinges on the execution process. A well-crafted plan is a good starting point, but it is the leadership's involvement and effective communication that is essential for realizing the desired performance outcome. Leaders and managers are the organization's key drivers and must manage the strategic direction. They must know what systems, activities, and procedures must be achieved to attain results during implementation (Gamble et al., 2024). Therefore, strategic leaders of the organization must possess the skills and abilities necessary to monitor the execution process. Likewise, the core workforce must be skilled in performing the tasks to integrate the operational actions with the strategic plan. Several interconnected internal components must collectively function to realize success. For instance, the people, their competencies, the organizational structure, its resources and how they are allocated, the supportive policies and procedures, the business processes, the information and operating systems, measuring and rewarding performance, corporate culture, and talented leadership and management teams signify the significant facets of the organization that must align with strategic priorities (Gamble et al., 2024). Coordinated activities define good strategy when they focus on a driven approach and involve fundamental philosophies of the strategic mission and vision (Rumelt, 2011). How the strategic priorities are conveyed in each aspect depends on the leaders' and managers' communication skills and behavior. This is crucial to the effectiveness of the execution process, empowering each individual to take responsibility for their role in strategic execution. With this understanding, organizational leaders can approach strategic execution with confidence.

Strategic Thinking: Power of Design vs. Power of Focus

            Strategic design and focus are essential stages in the strategic process. There should be much thought that goes into deciding on the focus. For example, increasing profits and revenue, reducing cost, the capacity to grow and expand, employee engagement, customer relations, product development, innovation, and social responsibility are strategic focus areas for a business to consider (Gamble et al., 2024). Focusing on improving the brand reputation, developing a loyal consumer base, and differentiating from competitors by offering a healthier or sustainable product exemplifies strategic focal points. However, the ideal place to begin is to evaluate the competitive landscape (Rumelt, 2011). The power of the focus depends on the current marketplace and what tactics are currently in use. The organization is better positioned to develop a strategic direction when the competitive environment is clearly understood. The company needs to know what is problematic to devise a suitable solution. A lower-cost strategy is not always pertinent. For instance, product differentiation, enhanced technical support, improved customer assistance, or responsive services are authentic resolves (Rumelt, 2011). Once the strategic focus is determined, the framework for the design must identify where, when, and how the adjustments are made. This can take place by analyzing the internal system and how it functions. A coordinated design effort from a system view can define the network issues and interdependencies to formulate the modifications (Rumelt, 2011). However, Ateş et al. (2020) emphasize that the executive leadership team ensures that no communication deficiencies confuse managers tasked with operationalizing the decided strategy.

Decision Model

            Making good choices relies on assistive decision models and productive paths without pitfalls. Decision models are aids that help make various conclusions under varying conditions. However, strategic thinking can potentially hinder the decision-making process. The failure to follow the specific decision-making process can mislead the strategic formulation. Likewise, decision traps can arise in ways that impede the productive progression of the business strategy. Hristov et al. (2022) contribute to organizational behavior and behavioral strategy research by studying cognitive biases in decision-making. There are several pitfalls to avoid when making decisions, but this discussion addresses the framing and status quo trap.

The Framing Trap

            The framing trap can develop from different circumstances. The information can be offered in a way that skews the outcome. For instance, features or benefits of a decision could be highlighted in a way that makes them appear better than they are (Hammond et al., 1998). For example, the states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania changed their laws concerning auto insurance in similar ways; however, they framed the presentation to the people differently, which resulted in a loss of millions for the state of Pennsylvania that could have been gained by using a different framing (Hammond et al., 1998). How the information is presented, or the description of the problem to solve, is vital to the solutions. When the problem is stated incorrectly, it undermines decision-making (Rumelt, 2011). Likewise, when slanted viewpoints are incorporated into conclusions, it can derail the strategic process in the planning stage (Rumelt, 2011). Furthermore, framing traps have distinct forms that are densely related to perceptual traps, such as the status quo (Hammond et al., 1998).

The Status Quo Trap

            Falling into the status quo trap can lead companies down a path of hindrances. The status quo decision trap can prevent growth and reduce competitiveness. This happens because leadership fears change, is risk-averse, or routinely makes safe decisions (Rumelt, 2011). These can be signs of an ineffective culture that is inwardly focused and change-resistant (Gamble et al., 2024). Work can entail discouragement and reward, but the difference rests in characterizing an empty endeavor and an undertaking confronted with thorns and thistles (Keller & Alsdorf, 2012). Although rational thought is recommended for avoiding the pitfall of the status quo, Krogerus (2018) argues that irrational decision-making frameworks can help resolve complex decisions. The theory of unconscious thinking explains the concept of intuitive verdicts (Krogerus, 2018). This is a viable option for overcoming the uncomfortable change process.

            Many decision traps can negatively impact decision-makers, but there are ways to avoid them. Leaders are assigned the task of visualizing and circumventing decision deceptions that arise. Hristov et al. (2022) found that managers must have the necessary cognitive information about their responsibilities and the role of others in the decision-making process. Reframing the problem, conducting inquiries and critical analyses, and thoroughly investigating the problem and viable solutions are recommendations to counteract decisive trickery. Furthermore, becoming capable of detecting harmful strategic components is a learned trait that enhances judgment toward increasing strategic effectiveness (Rumelt, 2011).

Conclusion

            The effective execution of strategies requires an integrated and comprehensive approach. When completed correctly, the strategic process will coordinate the formulation, planning, and implementation across all organizational levels. This is because the CEO, executive leadership team and management-level employees take on different roles throughout each stage. The literature reflected the potential for impeding influences to shift the intended direction according to strategic decisions and plans, thus indicating the significance of aligning divisional business strategies with the organization's outlook to eliminate the pitfalls of bias and traps.

Annotated Bibliography

Ateş, N. Y., Tarakci, M., Porck, J. P., van Knippenberg, D., & Groenen, P. J. F. (2020). The dark side of visionary leadership in strategy implementation: Strategic alignment, strategic consensus, and commitment. Journal of Management, 46(5), 637-665.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318811567 Links to an external site.

In this article, (Ateş et al., 2020) provide a converse view of when leadership strategy can impede business strategy. The framework for the study relies on research focused on visionary leadership and strategic processes. Utilizing theoretical concepts and insight, the authors aim to examine team commitment to a strategy under visionary leaders. An assessment of the distinct mechanisms used by operational-level managers across two Western European service industry organizations comprising 136 teams was part of the data discovery for the study. Additionally, the study entailed qualitative interviews with managers and employees at one of the organizations. The researchers utilized a supplemental analysis of the strategic consensus content using a rate system response from employees to support the assertion that strategic commitment from team members is diminished when a manager’s vision does not align with the organizational strategy. The findings indicate that the visionary leadership of team managers is positively linked to strategic implementations. However, as intended, the authors proved the detriment that visionary leadership can cause when its direction deflects from the CEO’s strategic vision for the organization. Indeed, the author's findings offer significant implications for theory and practice.

           Specific elements support the quality of the article and the authors. Through the article, Ateş et al. (2020) evolved from traditional thinking that highlights positive correlations to bring awareness of potential hindrances from misaligned strategic intellect. The complex and thorough study provides a solid theoretical framework supported by numerous conceptual examples and expert resources. The study structure included primary and secondary research with supplemental data to further the initial evidence discovery. The study sample is credible and authentic. The authors completed an unbiased study using valid methodologies, increasing the article’s quality. Moreover, the researchers are credentialed, have numerous publications in the discipline, and are affiliated with higher learning institutes. They are highly valued in the academic world as high-level scholars.

           Ateş et al. (2020) contribute scholarship focused on strategic management. The topic fits precisely with this week's discussion on effective execution and strategic focus. This study explores how strategic leaders operationalized strategy and the relationship between their visionary efforts and their team's commitment to the strategy. This adds essential knowledge on the influence of visionary managers not aligned with strategic priorities designed by the organization’s CEO. Furthermore, the article uniquely examines strategic management. The study results capture the negative correlation that can be overlooked as problematic. The research identifies a vital role in strategic implementation to explain where strategic focus and execution can fail because of misaligned strategies. This is an excellent perspective for the group to evolve the discussion.

Hristov, I., Camilli, R., & Mechelli, A. (2022). Cognitive biases in implementing a performance management system: Behavioral strategy for supporting managers’ decision-making processes. Management Research News, 45(9), 1110-1136.  https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-11-2021-0777 Links to an external site.

Hristov et al. (2022) contribute to scholarship focused on cognitive bias. The authors intend to explore how managers' decision-making is influenced by cognitive bias in the implementation process. They also intend to discover the effect of managerial practices on corporate strategy. The outcome intends to identify challenges that might exist. Likewise, it aims to offer solutions that identify probable drivers and critical connections. The methodology incorporates semi-structured interviews with over 100 experienced performance management and cognitive psychology professionals. They served as evaluations and evaluators. The study findings discovered that recurring cognitive biases negatively impact critical strategic implementation phases. This data assisted in the author's development of supportive guidelines for corporations to integrate behavioral strategy into strategic decisions about transitions and implementations.

            An assessment of the article’s quality unveils the vital practical implications contributed by the study. There are varied interconnected perspectives involved in decision-making. Hristov et al. (2022) provide a vital perspective recognizing the criticality of cognitive bias. This is an impactful study for management because thoughts are integrated into the comprehensive strategic approach of formulation, planning, and execution. The authors use valid study participants and methods – the quantitative data is statistically analyzed, and a structured thematic approach evaluates the qualitative data. The research methodology is sound and supported by peer-reviewed, expert-level knowledge and theoretical thought. This greatly attributes quality to the scholarly work and the authors.

             Hristov et al. (2022) contribute insight on management research on management practices to this week’s discussion. The theories and concepts from this scholarly work increase this week's discussion by highlighting the significant role of leadership and management in operationalizing strategic decisions. The authors contribute a relatable perspective that adds to the discussion on decision models and the potential ensuing traps they can encounter. The scholarship also explains cognitive biases and how they influence the implementation of strategic business initiatives. This adds valuable insight worthy of sharing with the group.

References

Ateş, N. Y., Tarakci, M., Porck, J. P., van Knippenberg, D., & Groenen, P. J. F. (2020). The dark side of visionary leadership in strategy implementation: Strategic alignment, strategic consensus, and commitment. Journal of Management, 46(5), 637-665.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318811567 Links to an external site.

Gamble, J.E., Peteraf, M.A., & Thompson, A.A. (2024). Essentials of Strategic Management: The quest for competitive advantage (8th ed.). McGraw Hill.

Hammond, J.S., Keeney, R.L., & Raiffa, H. (1998, September – October). Decision making and problem solving: The hidden traps in decision making. Harvard Business Review.

Hristov, I., Camilli, R., & Mechelli, A. (2022). Cognitive biases in implementing a performance management system: Behavioral strategy for supporting managers’ decision-making processes. Management Research News, 45(9), 1110-1136.  https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-11-2021-0777 Links to an external site.

Keller, T., & Alsdorf, K. L. (2012). Every Good Endeavor: Connecting your Work to God’s Work. Penguin Books.

Krogerus, M., Tschäppeler, R., & Piening, J. (2018). The decision book: Fifty models for strategic thinking (New, fully revised ed.). W.W. Norton & Company.

Rumelt, R. P. (2011). Good strategy, bad strategy: The difference and why it matters (1st ed.). Crown Business.

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.