Strategic leadership provides techniques that focus organizations when they are deciding on their purpose and best business practices that are critical for remaining competitive and relevant.
Strategic leadership balances a focused analytical perspective with the human dimension of strategy making (as documented by the Park Li Group).
It is important to engage the entire business in a strategic dialogue in order to lay the foundation for building winning organizations that can define, commit, adjust and adapt their strategy quickly as needed.
If leaders are to win, they must rely on the prepared minds of employees throughout the organization to understand the strategic intent and then both carry out the current strategy and adapt it in real-time.
There is a recognition that the product will necessarily evolve so the more important endpoint is to build the capacity for strategic thinking across the group so that change, when it occurs, can be absorbed more quickly and more completely.
Is it to provide bold, clear leadership that elicits confidence in their personal capabilities as “hero”, or is it to serve as a “coach and guide” who enables others to perform and stand in the limelight?
They feel obligated to lead from the front on strategic issues, demonstrating expertise through business insights and customer knowledge, skillfully outsmarting the competition, and outguessing the marketplace.
Human: These leaders view themselves as coaches or guides, believing that the organization's strategy is only as good as the breadth and depth of the understanding and commitment that it attracts.
The common element that binds society members together is their close-knit exclusiveness and the extraordinary access and understanding of the data and thinking that leads to the strategy.
Or, is strategy something that is continually reforming itself, never quite complete or perfected but always in a state of evolution?” At its essence, the question is, “In the organization, is the strategy process fundamentally linear with a defined beginning and end, or is it fundamentally iterative with no defined endpoint?” Analytical: From the analytical view, good strategy-making follows a linear process with each task being “checked off” as it is completed.
They are comfortable circling back on key ideas and frequently will drive the strategy process to re-visit critical assumptions and, based on the insights gained, alter course.
To integrate both dimensions into strategy making in a way that creates a winning outcome and gets the whole organization understanding and committed to this common agenda requires leaders who are clear about the strategic capacity of each of their internal stakeholder groups and who have the perspective and insights to lead in a way that incorporates both dimensions as the strategy is developed.
The important outcome is that the leader, as the executive leading the strategy process, needs to select a vocabulary and a toolset, use it consistently over time, and require others in the senior and middle ranks of the organization to do the same.
[6] The lack of clarity and ownership deeper in the organization leads to 1) misallocated resources because people are working at cross purposes, 2) excessive leadership time spent correcting and clarifying the direction because others are not convinced, or they fail to understand it, and 3) poor execution of the strategy due to diffuse and differing priorities.
Leaders can address these dynamics by broadening out the understanding and ownership of the strategy to a much larger group without sacrificing the sense of commitment at the top of the organization.
One of the best ways to address this is to identify and train a cadre of high potential line managers in the middle of the organization that can serve as champions of the strategy process to those both above and below them.
They do not replace the leadership role of the senior teams in each of these operating group but they do serve as a critical additional resource that is dedicated to creating momentum and fostering consistency.
This resource also helps to ensure that the day-to-day running the business is not neglected as the demands of building a large scale strategy dialogue come into play.
The make-up of this strategy support team (SST) generally includes 1 or more people from each of the operating groups, usually 2–3 downs from the senior person.
In partnership with the senior team from their operating group, the members of the SST serve as a coach and guide for the strategy process as it unfolds.
Additional roles for these individuals might also include facilitator, tracker and chaser, success and failure transfer agent across the businesses and writer when required.
It is also an excellent training ground for those involved and it gives the senior executive direct access to the middle of the organization while observing the performance of these high potential line managers.
Engaging this group in a discussion of the basic business model and the organizational strategy provides critical context and gives meaning to their work.
Ultimately, the strategy only comes alive and communities are built when it is used to set the broad context and is followed by a much more detailed local discussion addressing the question, “What does this mean for me and my team?”[9] The combination of the analytical and human dimensions applied to this group provides a platform of understanding among the rank and file for what the strategy is, what it means to them and why it needs to continue to evolve over time.
Building prepared minds on a large scale begins and ends with the senior person focusing on being the architect of the strategy process as much as the product.
Rowe states that strategic leadership is the ability to influence others to voluntarily make day-to-day decisions that enhance the long-term viability of the organization while at the same time maintaining its short-term financial stability.
A strategic leader influences “the organization by aligning their systems, culture, and organizational structure to ensure consistency with the strategy” (Beatty and Quinn, 2010, p. 7).
A strategic leader, in both instances, prepares for the future and considers both the long-term goal as well understanding the current contextual setting of the organization.
At these strategic opportunity points, the most important component is the timing of when to intervene and directing change verse what the intervention is put in place.
The study identified five areas in which nonprofit strategic leaders adapt the practices of for-profit strategic leaders: • Smaller scope of authority • A wider range of stakeholders who expect consensus • The need for innovative metrics to monitor performance • The requirement that nonprofit CEO's pay more attention to communications • The challenge of building an effective organization with limited resources and training.