I was looking at a SuccessFactor’s employee laptop the other day and she had a huge sticker on it with the words “Success = Strategy + Execution.” I could not help wondering to myself if this was really the equation, or just simplified marketing jargon. Granted, SuccessFactors is probably pretty darn good at what they do, and they do tend to look at talent management as strategic processes. Unfortunately, their clients are probably not there with them yet, still implementing the tactical performance and compensation processes for the most part. Still, more clients are getting to succession planning and workforce planning as a whole in the industry, which is a positive move.
Back to the question of Strategy + Execution. I’ll be honest that I’m not sure about this one. It sounds pretty good, and if you can execute on your strategy, you probably have achieved some measure of success, but I’m missing the whole change management component. When we talk about talent management, we are really talking about business tools and processes and moving HR further from these components. I do think the core of the equation is right, but you have to add change management as you roll out new policies, processes and tools to the business users. To me, success is not defined by execution of strategy, but by the resultant adoption from the business end user. Without adoption, you still have strategic failure.
Perhaps the equation should be “Success = Strategy + Behavioral Change.” Or perhaps I’m just saying the same thing.
Thoughts?
7 responses to “SuccessFactors: Success = Strategy + Execution”
I think you’re saying the same thing. Change Management is part of Execution and the desired Behavior Change is part of Success.
Jim, I’m not wholly convinced by my own argument either. I’d like to think that I’m saying the same thing, and that a concentrated effort around behavioral change is indeed part of execution, but all too often it’s not.
Change management is often given one of two roles. The first is training and communications. You can communicate and train people to death, but that’s not behavioral change. The second is that as soon as budgets get tight, real change management is the first thing to go out the window.
I’d also like to suggest that from a vendor perspective (since I saw this on a vendor laptop), most if not all vendors treat their implementations without change management. Sure they offer training, but communications and any real behavioral change strategies are left to the customer.
Jim, I agree that change is part of execution in philosophy, but I don’t agree that we actually apply it well in practice.
If I may add to the equation; I see Success more as a function of diagnosis + strategy + execution + progress check + strategy refinement. This would ideally progress as a continuous loop.
In other words, just as an Olympic athlete must know what his/her capabilities (and limitations) are before devising a strategy for winning that gold medal, any strategy would be limited without an accurate “capabilities” diagnosis.
In addition, stubbornly sticking to the original route (i.e., strategy) in the face of feedback (gained through progress checks) that suggests otherwise or at least a modification would seem unwise.
Within this context, using check-point or progress data to confirm or discredit that the path you’re on is the correct one would touch on change management and end-user issues – which would then drive strategy refinement.
Strategy and Execution do not take place in a vacuum- the folks on the other side have their own strategies and execution too.
Strategy+Execution+Luck MAY = Success.
Some situations are no-wins, some are everybody wins, some are everybody breaks even etc.
This is akin to helicopter parenting- the feeling that if you control every variable that can be controlled, you best assure a good outcome.
The truth is that business (and life) are chaotic emergent systems whose inputs and outputs are vastly complex to relate and where causation and correlation are vastly hard to seperate and where mere observation can alter past assumptions and future results.
Good generals know that sticking to basic values of fairness, truth, and effort with your own people and deception, ruthlessness, and suprise for the enemy is the best path to victory, but that victory can NEVER be assumed.
lol Martin:
“Strategy+Execution+Luck MAY = Success”
I feel like this is turning into:
“Strategy+Execution = Success, YMMV (your mileage may vary)”
Thanks Dubs ! Another beadle job completed….*successfully*
Now don’t get me started about Performance Management….world’s most useless review mirror in an “at will” labor economy….
[…] SuccessFactors: Success = Strategy + Execution Systematic HR • Wednesday, December 16, 2009 I was looking at a SuccessFactor’s employee laptop the other day and she had a huge sticker on it with the words “Success = Strategy + Execution.” Granted, SuccessFactors is probably pretty darn good at what they do, and they do tend to look at talent management as strategic processes. I could not help wondering to myself if this was really the equation, or just simplified marketing jargon. Unfortunately, their clients are probably not there with them yet, still implementing the tactical performance and compensation processes for the most part. READ MORE […]