There is no Line Between Strategy and Execution

I was reading "The Execution Trap" by Roger Martin

He cites a commonly used misleading phrase, "A mediocre strategy well executed is better than a great strategy poorly executed" If a strategy delivers poor results, how are we to say it was brilliant? Roger goes on to explain how the idea that strategy and execution are somehow two separate ideas is deeply flawed.

Traditionally, strategy is the purview of senior managers and consultants who then hand it off to the rest of the organization for execution. Strategy is choosing, execution is doing. 

Examples of front-line individuals developing ideas and procedures outside of a strategic role are many. All too often, organizations are not able to benefit from those developments due to preconceived notions about who are the thinkers and who are the doers.

Roger’s point is that if there is no line above which strategy happens, then why make a distinction?

How are we to avoid falling into the same trap? I would suggest a couple of ways:

1. Open lines of communication. Some managers jealously guard their resources. They want to make sure that everyone plays by rules in the interest of ‘efficiency’ or in the interest of ‘focusing on getting the job done’. Efficiency and accomplishment are good. However, organizations start to go sideways when people who want to share ideas are not allowed to. A good approach is to foster idea sharing and communication. Hold brainstorming sessions and invite all who care. 

2. Strategy is Action. Remember that strategy is action and that results are inextricably tied to that action. When implementing a strategy, you will never be able to hand off the plan to someone else to get those results. Consultants are a slippery bunch sometimes. They show up with intellectually solid plans, but seem to end their engagements with enough lead time to have a good excuse if the results don’t come in.