Superior Strategy Execution -An other

Path to Competitive Advantage

Chapter Learnin g Objectives

LOI-

Gain command of what managers must do

capable of good strategy execution.

LO2.

Learn why resource altocation should always be based on strategic

priorities.

LO3.

Understand why policies and procedures shoutd be designed to facilitate good strategy execution.

LO4.

Understand why and how the tools for continuousty improving the
performance of value chain activities help an organization achieve

to buitd an organization

operating excellence.

LO5.

Recognize the role of information and operating systems in enabling

company personnel to carry out their strategic roles proficiently.

LO6.

Learn how and why the use of wett-designed incentives and rewards
can be management's single most powerful toot for promoting

operating excellence.

LO7.

Gain an understanding of how and why a company's culture can aid

the drive for proficient strategy execution and operating excellence.

LO8.

Understand what constitutes effective manageriaI teadership in

achieving superior strategy execution.

Chapter

1o

Superior Strategy Execution -Another Path to Competitive Advantage

Once managers have decided on a strategy, the emphasis turns to converting

it into actions and good results. Putting the strategy into place and getting
the organization to execute it well call for different sets of managerial skills.
Whereas crafting strategy is largely a market-driven activity, implementing
and executing strategy is primarily an action-oriented, make-things-happen
task that tests a manager's abilitl'to direct organizational change, achieve continuous improvement in operations and business Processes, create and nurture a strategy-supportive culture, and consistently meet or beat performance
targets. \Ahile an organization's chief executive office and the heads of major
r-rnits (business divisions, functional departments, and key operating units)
are ultimately responsible for seeing that strategy is executed successfully, the
proccss typically affects every part of the firm, from the biggest operating unit
to the smallest frontline work group. It is the middle and lower-level managers who ultimately must ensure that work grouPs and frontline employees do
a good job of performing strategy-critical activities and produce the operating
results that allow companywide performancc targets to be met. Hence, strategg
execution requires eaery manager to think through the answer to the question: "Whnt
does my area haue to do to implement its part of the strategic plan, and uthat should I
do to get these things nccomplished effectiaely and efficiently?"

The Principal Managerial Components

of the Strategy Execution Process
Executing strategy entails figuring out the specific techniques, actions, and
behaviors that are needed for a smooth straiegy-suPPortive operation and
then following through to get things done and deliver results. The exact items
that need to be placed on management's action agenda always have to be customized to fit the particulars of a company's situation. The hot buttons for
successfully executing a low-cost pro-"'ider strategy are different from those in
executing a high-end differentiation strategy. Implementing and executing a
new strate;y for a struggling company in the midst of a financial crisis is a different job than improving strategy execution in a company where the execution
is already pretty good. Whiie there's no definitive managerial recipe for successful strategy execution that cuts across all company situations and a1l types
of strategies, certain managerial bases have to be covered no matter what the
circumstances. Eight managerial tasks crop up repeatedly in company efforts
to exccute strategy (see Figure 10.1).

l.
2.
3.

Building an organization capable of executing the strategy successfully.

Allocating ample resources to strategy-critical activities.
Ensuring that policies and procedures facilitate rather than impede effechive stra tegy execution.

4.

Pushing for continuous improvement in how value chain activities are

performed.

5.
6.

Installing information and operating systems ihat enable company Personnel to perform essential activities.
Tyng rewards directly to the achievement of performance objectives.

gL,I
FIGIIRE

Part

I o.

One:

Section D: Executing the Strategy

The Eight components of strategy Erecuon

7. Fostering a corporatc culture that promotes good strategy execution.

8. Exerting the irternal leadership needed to propel implementation
forr,vard.

Holv rvell managers perform these erght tasks has a decisive impact on
whether the outcomc is a spectacular success, a colossal failure, or something in betr,veen. Tn ihe remainder of this cha-rtsr, we will discuss what is
invoh'ed in performing the eight kcy managerial tasks that shape the process
of implernenting and executin; strategy.

Buitding an Organization Capable

of Good Strategy Execution
Proficient strategy execution depends heavily on competent personnel, betterthan-adequate competitive capabilitics, and effective irternal organization.
Buildrng a capable organization is thus alwavs a top priority in strategy execution. Three types of organization building actions are paramount.

l.

Stffing tlrc orgnnizntion

together a strong management team and
-putting
recruiting and rctaining employees with the needed experience, technical
skills, and intellectual capi ta l.

Chapter

to

Superior Strategy Execution -Another Path to Competitive Advantage

Building dynamic capabilities and core competencies-developing proficiencies

in performing strategy-critical value chain activities and updating them to
match changng market conditions and customer expectations.
Structuring the organization and work ffirt----organizing value chain activities and business processes, establishing lines of authority and reporting
relationships, and deciding how much decision-making authority to push
down to lowerlevel managers and frontline employees.

Staffi ng the Organization

No company can hope to perform the activities required for successful strategy
execution without attracting and retaining talented managers and employees
with suitable skills and intellectual car:ital.

BUtLDING MANAGERIAL TALENT Assembling a capable management team is a cornerstone of the organization-building task.t While company
circumstances sometimes call for different mixes of backgrounds, experiences,
management styles, and know-how, the most important consideration is to fill ke.y
managerinl slots zuith people who are good at figuring out what needs to be done nnd
skilled in "making it happen" and delioering good results.2 The task of implementing and executing challenging strategic initiatives must be assigned to executives who have the skills and talents to turn their decisions into results that
meet or beat the established performance targets. Without a smart, capable.
results-oriented management team, the implementation-execution process
ends up being hampered by missed deadlines, misdirected or wastefui efforts,
and/ or managerial ineptness.3 Weak executives are serious impediments to
getting optimal results because they are unable to differentiate betu'een ideas
that have merit and those that are misguided.a In contrast, managers with
strong strategy implementing capabilities have a talent for asking tough, incisive questions. They know enough about the details of the business to be able
to challenge and ensure the soundness of the approaches of the people around
them, and they can discern whether the resources people are asking for make
sense sfrategically. They are good at getting things done through others, typically by making sure they have the right people under them and that these
people are put in the right jobs.s They consistently follow through on issues
and do not let important details slip through the cracks.
Sometimes a company's existing management team is suitable; at other
times it may need to be strengthened or expanded by promoting qualified
'

For an insightful discussion

of how important it is to staff an organization with the right people,

see Christopher A. Bartlett and Sumantra Ghoshal, "Building Compettive Advantage lhrough
People," MIT Sloon Monagement Revew 43, no. z (Winter zooz), pp. 34-4t.
'The mportance of assembling an executive team with exceptional ability to see what needs
to be done and an instinctive talent for fgurng out how to get t done is dscussed in iustin
Menkes, "Hiring for Smarts," Horvard Busness Review 83, no. 11 (November zoo5), pp. roo-ro9;
and justn Menkes, Executve lntelligence (New York: HarperCoLlins, zoo5), especially Chapters r-4.
r See Larry Bossidy and Ram Charan, Execution: The Discipline of 5ettng Things Done (New York:
Crown Busness, 2oo2) Chapter 1.
Menkes, Executve lnte igence, pp.68,76.
' Bossdy and Charan, Execution: The Discipline of Gexing Thngs Done, Chapter 5.

Part

One:

Section D: Executing the Strategy

people from within or by bringing in outsiders. The overriding aim in building

a management team should be to assemble a critical mass of talented managers who can function as agents of change and further the cause of first-rate
strategy execution.6 When a first-rate manager enjoys the help and support
of other first-rate managers, it's possible to create a managerial whole that
is greater than the sum of ildividual efforts-talented managers who lt'ork
well together as a team can produce organizational results that are dramatically better than what one or two star managers acting individually can
achieve.T

RECRUITING AND RETAINING A CAPABLE WORKFORCE

Assembling a capable management team is not enough. Staffing the organization with the right kinds of people must go rnuch deeper than managerial jobs in order for value chain activities to be performed competently. The
quality of an orgnnization's people is alzoays nn essential ingredient of successful
stratery execution-knozoledgeable, engaged employees are n company's best source
of creatiae idens for the nuts-and-bolts operating improaements thnt lead to operating excellence. Companies like Microsoft and Southwest Airlines make a concerted effort to recruit the best and brightest people they can find and then
retain them with excellent compensation packages, opportunities for rapid

advancement and professional growth, and challenging and interesting

assignments. Having a pool of "A players" with strong skill sets and lots of
brainpower is essential to their business. Microsoft makes a point of hiring
the very brightest and most taiented programmers it can find and motivating
them with both good monetary incentives and the challenge of working on
cutting-edge software design projects. The leading global accounting firms
screen candidates not only on the basis of their accounting expertise but
also on whether they possess the people skills needed to relate well with clients and colleagues. Southwest Airlines goes to considerable lengths to hire
people who can have fun and be fun on the job; it uses special interviewing
and screening methods to gauge whether applicants for customer-contact
jobs have outgoing personality traits that match its strategy of creating a
high-spirited, funJoving, in-flight atmosphere for passengers. Southwest
Airlines is so selective that only about 3 percent of the people who apply are
offered iobs.
The tactics listed below are common among companies dedicated to staffing
jobs with the best people they can find:

1.

Putting forth considerable effort in screening and evaluating job

applicants-selecting only those with suitable skill sets, energy, initiative, judgment, aptitudes for learning, and adaptability to the company's
culture.

2.

Investing in training programs that continue throughout employees'

careeIS.

3.
6
/

Providing promising employees with challenging, interesting, and skillstretching assignments.

Menkes, Executive lntellgence, pp.65-71.

Jim Collins, Good to Greot (New York: HarperBusness, zoor), p. 44.

Chapter

4.

l0

Superor Strategy Execution

An

other Path to Competitive Advantage

Rotating people through jobs that span functional and geographic

boundaries.
Striving to retain talented, high-performing employees via promotions,
salary increases, performance bonuses, stock options and equity ownership, fringe benefit packages, and other perks.
Coaching average performers to improve thei skills and capabilities,
while r,r,'ccding out underperformers and benchwarmers.

Building Dynamic Capabilities and Core Competencies

High among the organization-building priorities in the strategy implementing/
executing process is the need to build and strengthen competitively valuable
capabilities and core competencies. Whereas managets identify the desired
capabilities and competencies in the course of crafting strategy, good shategy
execution requires putting the desired capabilities and competencies in place,
upgrading them as needed, and then modifying them as market conditions
et'olve.8 Sometimes a company already has some semblance of the needed
competencies and capabilities, rn which case managers can concentrate on
strengthening and nurturing them to promote better strategy execution. More
often, however, company managers have to significantly broaden or deepen
certain capabilitics or even add entirely new competencies in order to put strategic initiatives in place and execute them proficicntly.
Competencies and capabilities that grow stale can impair competitiveness
unless they are refreshed, modified, or even phased out and replaced in
response to ongoing market changes and shifts in company strategy. Indeed, the buildup of knowledge and
Building dynamic capablities and core compeexpcrience over time, coupled with the imperatives of
tences s a multistage process that occurs over
keeping capabilities in step with ongoing strategy and
months and years, not something that is
market changes, makes it appropriatc to view a comaccomplished overnght.
pany as a bundle of evolving capabilities and competencies. Management's organization-building challenge is onc of dcciding
when and how to recalibrate existing competencies and capabilities, and when
and holt' to develop netv ones.
Tovota, en route to overtaking General Motors as the global leader in motor
vehiclcs, has aggressivelv upgraded its capabilities rn fuel-efficient hybrid
engine technology and constantly fine-tuned its famed Toyota Production
System to enhance its already proficient capabilities in manufacturing top
cluality vehicles at relatively low costs. Liken ise, Honda, which has long had
a core competence in gasoline engine technology and small engine design,
has recently accelerated its efforts to broaden its expertise and capabilities in
hybrid engines so as to stay close behind Toyota. Microsoft totally retooled
the manner in which its programmers attacked the task of writing code for its
Vista operating systems for PCs and scrvcrs.
3

The mportance of devetoping dynamic capabilities to cope with external changes is discussed
J. Teece, Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen, "Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Manage
ment," Strategc Monogement Journal r8, no. 7
, pp. 5og 533i and Constance E. Hetfat
and Margaret A. Peteral "The Dynamic Resource'Based View: Capability Lifecycles," Strategc
Manogement Journal 24, no. ro (zoo3), pp.9g/-1oro.

in David

99

Executing the Strategy

Matching Organizational Structure to the Strategy

Building an organization capable of good strategy execution also relies on an
organizational structure that lavs out lines of authority and reporting relationships in a manner that supports the company's key strategic initiatives. The
best approach to settling on an or;anizational structure is to frst consider the
key value chain activities that deliver value to the customer. In any business,
some activities in the value chain are always more critical than others. For
instance, hotel/motel enterprises have to be good at fast check-in/check-out,
housekeepir-rg, food sen,ice, and crcating a pleasant ambience. In specialty
chemicals, the satcgy-critical activities include R&D, product innovation,
getting new products onto the market quickly, effective marketing, and exertise in assisting customers. lt is important for management to build its organization structue around proficient performance of these activities, making
them the centerpieces or main building blocks on the organization chart.
The rationale for making stra tegy-critical activitics the main building
blocks in structuring a business is compelling: If activities crucial to strategic
success are to have the resources, decision-making influence, and organizational impact they need, they have to be centerpieces in the organizational
schcme. In addition, a new or changed strategy is likely to el-rtarl new or different key activities or capabilities and therefore to require a new or different
organizational structure.e Attempting to carrv out a new strategy r,t'ith an old
organizational structure is usually unwlse.
l )'l'LS OF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES Itiscommon forcompanies engaged in a single line of business to utilize a departmental organizational structure that organizes stratcgy-cri tical activities into distinct
functonnl, product, geogrnphic, process, or $tonw groups. For instance, a technical instruments manufacturer may be organized around research and development, engineering, supply chain management, assembly, quality control,
marketin1 technical services, and corporate adminisiration. A company with
operations scattered across a large geographic area or many countries may
organize activities ar-rd reporting relationships by gcography. Many diversified
companies utilize a divisional organizational structure. A divisional structure is appropriate for a divcrsified building materials company that designs,
produces, and markets cabinets, plumbing fixtures, windows, and paints
and stains. The divisional structure organizes ail of the value chain activities
invoLved with making each type of home construction product available to
, The mpoftance of matchlng organzation design and structure to the partcular needs of strategy
was first brought to the torefront in a Landmark study of 70 large corporations conducted by
Professor Alfred Chandler of Harvard University. Chandteis research revealed that changes n an
organization's strategy bring about new administrative problems that, in turn, requre a new or
refashioned structure for the new strategy to be successfully implemented. He found that structure tends to fotlow the growth strategy of the flrm-but often not until inefficiency and inrernal
operating problems provoke a structural adjustment. The experiences of these firms followed a
consistent sequential pattern: new strategy creation, emergence of new administrative problems,
a decline in profitability and performance, a shft to a more appropriate organlzatonal structure,
and then recovery to more profltable levels and improved strategy execution. See Alfred Chandlef
Strotegv and Sttucture (Cambrdge, MA: Mlr Press, 1962).

Chapter

1o

Superior Strategy Executio

Another Path to Competitive Advantage

home builders and do-it-yourselfers into a common division and makes each

division an independent profit center. Matrix organizational structures allow

companies to specify dual reporting relationships for various value-creating
building blocks. Fo example, in the diversified building materials company
just mentioned, a matrix structure could require the marketing department
for the plumbing fixtures division to report to both the corporate marketing
department and the chief manager of the plumbing equipmcnt division.

ORCA\IZATIONAL 5I I{UC T UI{I AND AUTHORITY IN D[( ISIO\

\'I A K I N (; Responsibility for results of decisions made throughout the
organization ultimately les with managers at the top of the organizational
structure, but in practice, lower-level managers might possess a great deal
of authority in decision making. Companies vary in the degree of authority
delegated to managers of each organization unit and how much decisionmaking latitude given to individual employees in performing their jobs. The
two extremes are to centralize decision making at the top (the CEO and a few
close lieutenants) or to decentrnlize decision nnking by giving managers and
employees considerable decision-making latitude in their areas of responsibility. The two approaches are based on sharply different underlying principles
and beliefs, with each having its pros and cons. ln n highlq decentralized organization, decision making auth.ority is pushed down to the lozuest organizational leuel
capable of making timely, informed, competent decisions. The objective is to put
adequate decision-making authority in the hands of the people closest to and

most familiar with the situation and train them to weigh all the factors and
exercise good judgment. Decentralized decision making means that the managers of each organizational uit are delegated lead responsibility for deciding
how best to execute strategy.
The case for empowering down-the-iine managers and employees to make
decisions related to daiiy operations and executing the strategy is based on the
belief that a company that draws on the combined intellectual capital of all its
employees can outperform a command-and-control
company.ro Decentralized decision making means, for
The ulmate soal of decentralzed decson
example, employees with customer contact may be making is to ut decision-making authority in the
empowered to do what it takes to pleasc customers. At
hands of those persons or teams closest and
Starbucks, for example, employees are encouraged to
most knowledgeable about the stuaton.
exercise initiative ur promoting customer satisfactionthere's the story of a store employee who, when the computerized cash register
systcm went offline, enthusiastically offered free coffee to waiting customers.
Pushing decision-making authority deep down into the organization
structure and empowering employees presents its own organizing challenge:
how to exercise adequate control ozter tlrc actions of empowered employees so thnt
the business is not put at risk at the same time that the benefits of empoarcrment
are realized. Maintaining adequate organizational control over empowered
employees is generally accomplished by placing limits on the authority that
'" The importance of empowering workers in executing strategy and the vatue of creatng a great
working envronment are discussed in Stanley E. Fawcett, Gary K. Rhoads, and Phillip Burnah,
"People as the Brdge to Competitiveness: Benchmarking the ABCS' of an Empowered Workforce,"
Benchmorking: An lnternltonol Journal r,, no. 4 (zoo4), pp- 34Gj6o.

Part

One:

Section D: Executing the Strategy

empowered personnel can exercise, holding people accountable for their

decisions, instituting compensation incentives that reward people for doing
their jobs in a manner that contributes to good comPany performance, and
creating a corporate culture where there's strong peer pressure on individuals
to act responsibly.
ln a highly centralized organization structure, top executiztes retain authority for
most strategic and operating decisions and keep a tight rein olt husiness-unit hends,
department heads, and tlrc managers of key operating units; comparatittely little discretonary authority s grnnted to frontline ntperuisors and rank-and-Jile employees.
The command-and-control paradigm of centralized structures is based on the

underlying assumpon that frontline personnel have neither the time nor the
inclination to direct and properly control the rn'ork they are performing, and
that they lack the knowledge and judgment io make wise decisions about how
best to do it.
The big advantage of an authoritarian structure is that it is easy to know
who is accountable n'hen things do not go wel1. But there are some serious
disadvantages. Hierarchical command-and-control structures make an organization sluggish in responding to changing conditions bccause of the time it
takes for the review/approval process to run uP all the layers of the management bureaucracy. Also, centralized decision making is often impracticalthe larger the company and the mote scattered its operations, the more that
decision-making authority has to be delegated to managers closer to the scene
of the action.

Allocating Resources to
Strategy- Criti ca I Activities
Early in the process of implementing and executing a new or different strategy, top management must determine what funding is needed to execute new
strategic initiatives, to bolster value-creating Processes, and to strengthen thc
company's capabilities and competencies. This includes carefuL screcning of
requests for more people and new facilities and equipment, appro"'ing those
that hold promise for making a contribution to strategy execution, and turning
down those that don't. Should intemal cash flows prove insufficient to fund
the planned strategic initiatives, then management must raise additional funds
through borrowing or selling additional shares of stock to willing investors.
A company's ability to marshal the resources needed to support new strategic
initiatives has a major impact on the strategy execution process. Too little funding slows progress and impedes the efforts of organizational units to execute
their pieces of the strategic plan proficiently. Too much funding wastes organizational resources and reduces financial performance. Both outcomes argue for
managers to be deeply involved in revicwing budget proposals and directing
the proper amounts of resources to strategy critical organization units.
A change in strategy nearly always calls for budget reallocations and resource
shifting. Previously important units having a lesser ole in the new sategy
may need downsizing. Units that now have a bigger strategic role may need
more people, new equipment, additional facilties, and above-average increases

Chapter

to

Superior Strategy Executio n -Another Path to Compettive Advantage

in their operating budgets. Strategy implementers have to exercise their power

to put enough resources behind nen' strategic initiatives to make things happen, and they have to make the krugh decisions to kill projccts and activities
that are no longer justified. Honda's strong support of
R&D activities allowed it to develop the first low- A company's strategic priorities must drive how
polluting four-stroke outboard marine engine, a wide capital allocations are made and the size of
range of ultralow emission cars, the first hybrid car each unifs operating budgets.
(Honda Insight) in the U.S. market, ar-rd the flrst hydrogen fuel cell car (Honda Clarity). However, Honda managers had no trouble
stopping production of the Insight in 2006 when its sales failed to take off and
thcn shifting rcsources to the development and manufactue of other promising hybrid models, including a totally redesigned Insight that was laur-rched
in the United States in 2009.

nstituting Strategy-Su p portive

Policies and Procedures
I

A company's policies and procedures can either assist or become a barrier to

good stratcgy cxccution. Anytime a company makes changes to its business
strategy, managers are wcll advised to carefuilv review
existing policies and procedures and revise or discard Welkonceived policies and procedures aid
those that are out of sync. Well-conceived poLicies and strategy execution; out{f-sync ones are barriers

operating procedures act to facilitate organizational

to effective implementaton.

change and good strategy execution in three ways:

"1. lttstituting policies and procedures pro-oides top-down guidnnce regnrding hozu
certain thitrgs notu need to be done. Asking people to alter established habits
and procedures, of course, always upsets the internal order of things. It
is normal for pockets of resistance to develop and for people to exhibit
some degree of stress and anxiety about how the changes will affect them.
Policies are a particularly useful &'ay to counteract tendcncics for some
people to resist change-most people refrain from violating company
policy or going against recommended practices and procedures without
first gaining clearance or having strong jr-rstification.

2.

Policies and procedtres help enJorce needed consistenn in lnw pnrticular strntegy critical lcti-lities nre performetl. Standardization and strict conformity

are sometimes desirable components of good strategy execution. Elimi-

nating significant differences in the operating practices of different plants,

sales regions, or customcr scrvicc ccnters helps a company deliver consistent product quality and service to customers.

3.

Well-conceiaed policies and procedures pronnte n anrk climate that facilitates

good strategy exeuion. Managers can use the policy-changing process as a

powerful iever for changing the corporate culture in ways that producc
stronger fit with the nerv strategv

McDonald's policy manual spells out detailed procedures that personnel

in each McDonald's unit are expected to obsen'e to ensure consistent quality
across its 31,000 units. For example, "Cooks must turn, never fllp. hamburgers.

Executing the Strategy

If they haven't been purchased, Big Macs must be discarded in 10 minutes after
being cooked and French fries in 7 minutes." To get store personnel to dedicate themselves to outstanding customer service, Nordstrom has a policy of
promoting only those people whose personnel records contain evidence of
"hcroic acts" to please customers--especially customers who may have made
"unreasonable requests" that require special efforts.
One of the big policy-making issues concerns what activities need to be rigidly prescribed and what activities allow room for independent action on the
part of empowered personnel. Few companies need thick policy manuals to
prescribe exactly how daily orerations are to be conductcd. Too much policy
can be confusing and erect obstacles to good strategy implementation. There
is wisdom in a middlc approach: Prescribe enough policies to place bottndaries on
employees' actions; then empozuer them to act within these boundaries in whoteaer zuay
they think makes sense. Allowing company personnel to act anywhere between
the "white lines" is especially appropriate when individual creativity and initiative are more essential to good strategy execution than standardization and
strict conformitv

Striving for Continuous lmprovement

in lnternal Processes
Company managers can significantly advance the cause of superior strategy
execution by pushing organization units and company personnel to stive for
continuous improvcment in how value chain activities are performed. One
of the most widely used and effective tools for improving the performance of
internai processes entails benchmarking the company's performance of value
chain activities against "best-in-indus try" and "best-in-world" performers.L
It can also be useful to look at "best-in-company" performers of an activity if
a company has a number of different organizational units performing much
the same function at different locations. Identifying, analyzing, and understanding how top companies or individuals perform particular best practices
provides useful yardsticks for judging the effectiveness and efficiency of
internal operations and setting performance standards for organization units
to meet or beat.
In striving for operating excellence, many companies havc also come to rely
on three other potent management tools: business process reengineering, total
quality management (TQM) programs, and Six Sigma quality control techniques. Business process reengineerlng involves pulling the pieces of strategycritical activities out of d.ifferent departments and unifying their performance
For a discusson of the value of benchmarking in implementing strategy, see Christopher E.
Bogan and Michael J. English, Benchmorkng for Best Proctces: Wnning through lnnovatve
Ungan, "Factors Affecting
Adaptotion (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994), Chapters 2 and 6;
An lntematonal lournal n, no. 5
the Adopton of Manufacturing Best Practices," Eenchmarking:^ustafa
(zoo4), pp. 5o4-52ot Paul Hyland and Ron Beckett, "Learning to Compete: The Value of Internal

"

Benchmarking," Benchmorking: An lnternotonal Journal 9, no. 3 (zooz), pp. zg3-3o4i and Yoshinobu Ohinata, "Benchmarking: The Japanese Experience," Long-Ronge Plannng 27, no. 4 (August

rysd, pp. 48-fi.

Chapter

lo

Superior Strategy Execution

Another Path to Competitive Advantage

in a single department or coss-functional work group.'2 When done properly,

business process reengineering can produce dramatic operating benefits. In
thc order-processing section of General Electric's circuit breaker division.
elapsed time from order receipt to delivery was cut from three 'eeks to three
days by consolidating six production units into one, reclucing a variety of former inventory and handling steps, automating the design system to replace a
human custom-design process, and cutting the organizational layers between
managers and workers from three to one. Productivity rose 20 percent in one
year, and unit manufacturing costs dropped 30 percent.l3
Tbtnl qunlity managenlent (TQM) is a philosophy of managing a set of business
practices that emphasizes contiriuous improvement in all phases of operations,
100 percent accuracy in performi:rg tasks, involvement and empowerment of
employees at all levels, team-based work design, benchmarking, and totai
customer satisfaction.la \A4rile TQM concentrates on the production of quality goods and fully satisfying customer expectations, it achieves its biggest
successes when it is extended to employee efforts in all departments-human
resources, billing, R&D, engineering, accounting and records, and information systems. It involves reforming the corporate culture and shifting to a total
quality/continuous improvement busincss philosophy that permeates every
facet of the organization.ls TQM doctrine preaches that there's no such thing
as "good. enough" and that everyone has a responsibility to participate in continuous improvement. TQM is thus a race without a finish. Success comes from
making little steps forward each day, a process that the Japanese call kaizen.
Six Sigma quality control consists of a disciplined, statistics-based system
aimed at producing not morc than 3.4 defects per million iterations for any
business process-from manufacturing to customer transactions.r6 The Six
Sigma process of define, measure, analyze, improve, and control (DMAIC,
prononnced Dee-may-ic) is an improvement systcm for existing processes

" Mchael Hammer

ry9) pp. z6-27.

and James Champy, Reengineering the Corporation (New york: HarperBusiness,

'r 6ene Hatl, lim Rosenthal, and Judy Wade, "How to Make Reengineering Really \Nork," Harvard
Busness Revew 21, no. 6 (November-December ry93), pp. rtg-t3t'4

For some of the seminal discussions regarding what TQM is and how

it works, see M. Walton,

The Demng M1nagement Method (New York: Pedigree, 1986); j. luran, Juran on eualty by Desgn
(New York: Free Press, r99z); Philip Crosby, Quality ls Free: The Act of Making euality Ceftan

(New York: McGraw-Hitl, t979); and 5. George, fhe Ealdrge Quality System (New York: Wiley,
7992). For a critique of TQM, see Mark J. Zbarack, "The Rhetoric and Reality of Total euality Man.
agement," Admnstratve Scence Quofterly 43, no.3 (September 1998), pp. 602-636.

" For a discussion of the shift n work environment and cutture that TQM entails, see Robert T.
Amsden, Thomas W Ferratt, and Davida M. Amsden, "TQM: Core Pafadgm Changes," B.islress
Horzons 39, no. 6 (November-December 996), pp- 6-14.
'6 For easy to understand overviews of what Six Sigma is all about, see Peter S. Pande and Larry
Holpp, What ls Sx Sigma? (New York: McGraw-Hill, zooz); liju Antony, "Some Pros and Cons of
Sx Sigma: An Academic Perspective," The TQM Magozine 16, no. 4 (zoo4), pp. 303-306; peter S.
Pande, Robert P. Neuman, and Roland R. Cavanagh, The Six Sigma Way: How 6E, Motorola ond
Other Top Componies Are Honing Their Performance (New York: McGraw-Hll, 2ooo); and Joseph
Gordon and M. Joseph Gordon, ir., Six Sgma Qualty for Business and Manufacture (New York:
Elsevier, zooz). For how Six Sigma can be used in smalLer companies, see Godecke Wessel and
Peter Burcher, "Sx Sigma for Small and Medium-sized Enterprses," The TQM Magozine 76, no. 4
(2oo4), pp. 264 272.

Part

One:

Sectlon D: Executing the Strategy

falling below spccification. The Six Sigma DMADV (define, measure, analyze,
design, and verify) methodology is used to det'elop 71zu Processes or products
at Six Sigma quality levels.17 DMADV is sometimes referred to as Desi;n for
Six Sigma (DFSS). The statistical thinking underlring Six Sigma is based on
the following three principles: All n'ork is a process, all processes have variability, and all processes create data that explain variability.ls To illustrate hor'
these three principles work, conside the case of a Milwaukee hosPital that
used Six Sigma to map the prescription-filling process. Prescriptions written
in the hospital originated with a doctor's write-up, were filled by the hospital
pharmacy, and then administered by nurses. DMAIC analysis revealed that
most mistakes came from misreading the doctor's handwriting.re The hospita1 implemented a program requiring doctors to type the prescription into a
computer, which slashed ihe number of errors dramatically.
While Six Sigma programs often improve the efficiency of many oPerating
activities and processes, there is evidence that innovation can be stifled by Six
Sigma programs. The essence of Six Sigma is to reduce variability in processes,
but creative processes, by nature, include quite a bit of variability. In many
instances, breakthrough innovations occur only after thousalds of ideas have
been abandoned and promising ideas have gone through multiple iteations
and extensive prototyping. Google CEO Eric Schmidt has commentecl that the
innovation process is "anti-Six Sigma" and applying Six Sigma principles to
those performing creative work at Google would choke off innovation at the
company.20
James McNerney, a GE executive and proponent of Six Sigma, became CEO

at 3M Corporation and was unable to establish a long-term track record for

innovation following his institution of Six Sigma-based principles at 3M. 3M's
researchers complained that the innovation Process did not lend itself lt'elL
to the extensive data collection and analysis required under Six Sigma and
that too much time was spent completing reports that outlined the market
poteniial and possible manufacturint concerns for projects n all stages of
the R&D pipeline. Six Sigma rigidity and a freeze on 3M's R&D budget from
McNerney's first year as CEO through 2005 was blamed for the company's
drop from number one to number seven on the Boston Consulting Group's
list of Most Innovative Companies.2r
A blended approach to Sx Sigma implementation that is gaining in popularity pursues incremental improvements in operating efficiency, while R&D
and other processes that allow the company to develop new ways of offering
value to customers are given more free rein. Managers of these ambidextrotts
organizations are adept at employing continuous improvemcnt in operating
processes but allowing R&D to oPerate under a set of rules that allows for the
development of breakthrough innovations. Ciba Vision, a global leader in contact lenses, has dramatically reduced operating exPenses through the use of
'/ Based on information posted at www.sxsigma.com, November 4, 2oo2.
'3 Kennedy Smith, "Six Sigma for the Service Sector," Quollfy Digest Mogozine, May zoo3, www.
qualitydigest.com, accessed Septembet 28, 2oo3
'e Def Jones, "Taking the Six Sigma Approach," USA Today, October 3r, zooz, p. 58'
'" As quoted in 'A Dark Art No More," The Economist 185, no. 8550 (0ctober 13, zooT), p. ro.
" Brian Hindo, '?t 3M, a Struggle between Effcency and Creativity," BusnessWeek, ,une 11, 2oo7,

pp.8-16.

Chapter

to

Superior Strategy Executio n -Another Path to Competitive Advantage

continuous improvement programs, while simultaneously and harmoniouslv

developing nerv series of contact Iens products that have grown its revenues
by 300 percent over a 1O-ycar period.2'z

The Difference between Business Process

Reengineering and Continuous lmprovement
Programs like Six Sigma and TQM
Business process reengineering and continuous improvement efforts like TQM

and Six Sigma both aim at improved efficiency, better product qualitl', and
greater customer satisfaction. The essential difference between business process reengineering and continuous improvement programs is that reengineering aims at qttlnt nt gairrs on

toioi

iire or.1e. or 30 to s0 percent or morc *r,"'."u,

JtXi:'JJiil#iii,lil#lllf,;liil
qnality programs stress incrementnl progress striving iQnl, Sr'SC.u, or other operational mprove_
for rnch-by-inch gains again and again in a nevcr- ment programs is to improve the performance

ending sbeam. The tn-o approaches to improved per- of strateglr-critical activities and promote
formance of value chain activities and operating superior strategy execution.
excellencc are not mutually exclusive; it makes sense
to use them in tandcm. Reengineering can be used f.irst to produce a good
basic design that yields quick, dramatic improvements in performing a business process. Total qualiil, programs can then be used as a follow-up to deliver
continuing imprtn ements.

Installing Information and Operating Systems

Company strategics and value-creating intemal processes can't be executed
u-ell without a number of intenal operating systems. FedEx has internal
communication systems that allor,r, it to coodinate its 80,000-plus vehicles
in handling an average of 7.5 million packages a day. Its leading-edge flight
operations systems allow a single controller to direct as many as 200 of FedEx's
650 aircraft simultaneously, overriding their flight plans should wcather or
other special emergencies arise. In addition, FedEx has created a scries of
e-busincss tools for customers that allorv them to ship and track packages
<>nline, revicw shipping history, generate custom reports, simplify customcr
billing, reduce internal warehousing and inventory management costs, and
purchase goods and services from supplicrs- All of FedEx's systems support
the company's strategy of providing businesscs and individuals wrth a broad
arrav of package delivery services (from premium next-day to economical
five-day deliveries) and boosting its competitiveness against United Parccl
Service, DHL, and thc U.S. Postal Service.
Telephone companies have elaborate ilformation systems to measure
signal quality, connection times, interrupts, wrong connections, billing errors,
and other measures of reliability that affect customer service and satisfaction.
British Petroleum (BP) has outfitted rail cars carrying hazardous materials
For a discussion of approaches to pursuing radical or disruptive innovations whiLe also seeking
ncremental gains in efficiency, see Charles A. 0'Reilly and Mchael L. Tushman, "The Ambidextrous
0rganization," Harvard Busness Revew 82, no. 4 (April zooQ, pp. 74-Bt.

"

sensors and global-positioning systems (GPS) so that it can track the

status, location, and other informatlon about thesc shipments via satellite and
relav the data to its corporate intranet. At eBay, there are svstems for real-time
monitoring of new listings, bidding activit" Web site traffic, and page views.
Informatlon systems necd to cover five broad areas: (1) customer data, (2)

with

operations data, (3) cmployee data, (4) supplier/partner/collaborative ally

data, and (5) financial performance data. Al1 key strategic performancc indicators have to be tracked and reported as often as practical. Long the norm,
monthlv profit-and-loss statements and morrthly statistical summaries are fast
being replaced n'ith daiiy statistical updates ancl even
monitoring' Many retarl
Having good information systems and operating up-to-the-minute performance
systems that genhave
automated
online
cornPanies
data is integral to competent strategy execution
erate daily sales rcports for each store and maintain
and operating excellence.
up-to-the-minute in\entory and sales records on each
item, Manufacturing plants typically generate daily production reports and
track labor productivitv on every shift. Many retailers and manufacturcrs have
online data systems connecting them with their suppliers that monitor the status of inventgries, track shipments and deliveries, and mcasure defect rates.
Regardless of the industry, real-time information systems permit company
managers to stay on top of implementation initiativcs and daily operations,
and to intervene if things seem to be drifting off course.

Using Rewards and Incentives to Promote

Better Strategy Execution
To create a strategy supportive system of rewards and incentives, a comPany
must emphasize rewarding people for accomplishing results relatcd to creating value for customers, not for just dutifully performing assigned tasks. Focusing jobholders' attention and energy on rvhat to Ltcltiette

ironment
ut opposed to lvhat t
tie incenresults-oricnted ' It is
of duties
rervards
to
tives
and
strategy
outcomes
business
desirecl
results. and activities instead of
and company achievements.r3 In any job, pcrforming
assigncd tasks is not equivalent to achieving ir-rtended outcomcs. Diligently
showing up for work and attending to job assignment docs not, by itself, guarantee results. As any student knorvs, the fact that an instructor teaches and
students go to class doesn't necessarily mean that the students are learning.

A properly designed reward structure

management's most powerful tool for
employee commitment to superor
execution and excellent operating

i,

gaining

Motivation and Reward Systems

It is important for both organization units and indir'.iduals to be 'rroperly aligned
with strategic priorities and enthusiastically committed to executing strategy.
To get enttlorees' sustained, energctic comnitnrcttt, flttnngcffi(nt hos to be resourcafi
'r See Steven Kerr, "On the Fotly of Rewardng A while Hoping for 8," Academy of Monogement
Executive 9, no. r (February 1995), pp. / 14; Steven Kerr, "Risky Business: The New Pay Game,"
1996, pp. 9j-96; and Doran Twer, "Linking Pay to Busness Objectves," /ourtdi
Foftune, )uly
"2,
15, no. 4 0uly-August 1994, pp. 15 78of Business Strategy

Chapter

lo

Superor Strategy Executon

Another Path to Competitve Advantage

in designing and using ffiotiaatonal tncentiues-both monetary and nonmonetary.

The more a manager understands what motivates subordiates and is able
to use appropriate motivational incentives, the greater will be employees'
commitment to good day-in, day-out stuategy execution and achievement of
performance targets.2a

Guidelines for Designing Monetary Incentive Systems

Guidelines for crcating incentive compensation systems that Iink employee
behavior to organizational objectives include:
1,. Make the performance payoff a mnjor, not minor, piece of the totnl contpensntion package. The payoff for high-performing individuals and teams must
be meaningfully greater than the payoff for average performers, and the
payoff for average performers meaningfully bigger than for below-average
performers.
2. Hatte incentiues that ettend to all managers nnd all tuorkers, not just top managenrcnt. Lower-level managers and employees are just as likely as senior
executivcs to be motivated by the possibility of lucrative rewards.

3.

Administer the reuard systenr with scrupulotrs objectiaity and fnirness.If

performance stanclards are set unrealistically high or if individual,/group
performance evaluations are not accuratc and well documented, dissatisfaction with the system will ovcrcome any positive benefits.

4.

lit*ed to good strategy execlttion and financial performance. Incentives should never be paid just because
people are thought to be "doing a good job" or becausc thcy "work hard."
An argument can be made that exceptions should be made in giving
rewards to people who'vc come up short because of circumstances beyond
their control. The problem with making exceptions for unknowable,
uncontrollable, or unforeseeable circumstances is that once good excuses
start to creep into justifying rewards for subpar results, the door is open
for all kinds of reasons whv actual rrerformance has failed to match
Tie incentiues to performance outcomes directly

targeted performance.

5.

Make sure tlzat the pert'ormance targets ench indiaidual or team is expected to
achieae involpe outcomes that the indiuidual or team can personally affect. The

role of incentives is to enhance individual commitment and channel

behavior in beneficial directions.

6.

Keep tlrc time between achiersing the target performance outcome and the pay-

ment of the retuard as short ns possible. Cornpanies like Nucor and Conti-

nental Airlines have discovered that weekly or monthly payments for

good performance u'ork much bcttcr than annual payments. Nucor pays
weekly bonuses based on prior-week production levels; Continental
awards employees a monthly bonus for each month that on-time flight
performance meets or beats a specified percentage companywide. Annual
of motivating and empowering workers to create a working environment that s
highly conducive to good strategy executon is discussed n Fawcett, Rhoads, and Burnah, "Peopte
as the Brldge to Com petitiveness; Benchmarking the ABC5' of an Empowered Workforce."
'a The mportance

Part

One:

Section D: Executing the Strategy

bonus payouts work best for higher-level managers and for situations
where target outcome relates to overall company profitability or stock
price perforrnance.

Once the incentives are designed, they have to be communicated and

explained. Everybody needs to understand how their incentive compensation
is calculated and how individual/group performance targets contribute to
organiza tional performance targets.

Nonmonetary Rewards
Financial incentives generally head the list of motivating tools for trying to
gain whole-hearted employee commitment to good strategy execution and
operating excellence. But most successful companies also make extensive
use of nonmonetary incentives. Some of the most important nonmonetary
approaches used to enhance motivation are listed below:25

Proaide attractite perks and fringe benefits-The various options includc

full

coverage of health insurance premiums; college tuition reimbursement;

paid vacation time; on-site child care; on-site fitness centers; casual dress
every day; telecommuting; and compressed workweeks (four 1O-hour

days instead of five 8-hour days).

Adopt promotion from within policies-This practice helps bind workers to

their employers and employers to their workers, plus, it is an incentive

for good performance.

Act on suggestions from employees-Research idicates that the moves of

many companies to push decision making down the line and empower
employees increases employee motivation and satisfaction, as rvell as
boosting productivity.
Create a work atmosphere in whiclt there is genuine sincerity, caring, and mutunl
respect among zuorkers and between management and employees-A " famlly"

work environment u'here people are on a first-name basis and there is

strong camaraderie promotes teamr'ork and cross-unit collaboration.

Share information zuith employees about financial performance, strategy, opera-

tional measu res, market conditions, and competitors' actions-Broad disclosure

and prompt communication send the message that managers trust their

workcrs.

Haue attractiae office spaces and

facilities-A workplace environment with

appealing features and amenities usually has decidedly positive effects on

employee morale and productivity.
Concepts & Connections 10.1 presents specific examples of the motivational tactics employed by several prominent companies that have appeared
on Fortune's list of "The 100 Best Companies to Work for in America."
",effrey Pfeffer and John F. Veiga, "Putting People First for Organizational Success," Acodemy of
Manogement Executve r3, no. z (May 1999), pp. 37-45; Linda K. Stroh and Paula M. Caliguiri,
"lncreasng GlobaI Competitiveness through Effectve People Management," lournal of World Busi,ess 33, no. r (Spring 1998), pp. r-r; and articles in Fortune on the 1oo best companes to work
for lvarious issuesl.

ter

lO

Superior Strategy Execution-Another Path to Compctitive Advantage

WHAT COMPANIES DO TO MOTIVATE AND REWARD EMPLOYEES

Cornpanies have come up with an mpressive variety of
notvational and reward practices to help create a work

environment that energizes employees and promotes

better strategy execution. Here's a sampling of what compa

ies are

oing:

Lincoln Electric, widety known for its piecework pay

scheme and ncentive bonus plan, rewards individual
productivity by paying workers for each nondefective piece produced. Workers have to correct quality
problems on their own tme defects in products
used by customers can be traced back to the worker
who caused them. Lincoln's oiecework Dlan motivates
workers to pay attention to both quality and volume
produced. In addition, the company sets asde a substantaL porton of its proflts above a specifled base
for worker bonuses. To determine bonus size. Lincoln
Electric rates each worker on four equally important perFormance rnasures: dependability, quality,
output, and ideas and cooperation. The higher a
worker's merit rating, the higher the incentive bonus
earned; the hghest-rated workers in good proft
years receive bonuses of as much as 11o percent of
their oiecework co moensatio n.
Wegmans, a family-owned grocer with /1 stores on
the East Coast ofthe United States provides emptoyees with flexible schedules and beneflts that include
on ste fitness centers. The company's approach to
managing people atlows it to provde a very high
level of customer service not found in other grocery
chains. Employees ranging from cashlers, to butch'
ers, to store managers are all treated equalty and
viewed as experts n ther jobs. Employees'sklls are
enhanced through 5o hours of formal training per
vear and emplovees are allowed to make decisions

that they believe are appropriate for their jobs. The

companyb annuaL turnover rate is only 6 percent,
whch s less than one-hatf the 14 percent average
turnover rate in the U.S. supermarket industry.
Nordstrom, highly regarded for its superor n-house
customer servce experience, typcalLy pays its retail
salespeople an hourty wage higher than the prevailing rates paid by other department store chans plus
a commission on each sale. Spuned by a culture
that encourages salespeople to go aLt-out to satisfu
customers and to seek out and promote new fashion ideas, Nordstrom salespeople often earn twice

the average incomes of sales employees at competlng stores. The typcat Nordstrom sates person
earns nearly $38,ooo per year and sales department
managers earn, on average, $48,oo per year. Nordstrom's rules for employees are smple: "Rule #r: Use
your good judgment in all stuatons. There wilL be
no additional ru les."
At W. L. Gore (the maker of Gore'Tex), employees
get to choose what project/team they work on and
each team member's compensation is based on other
team members'rankings of his or her contribution to

the enterDrise.
At biotech leader Amgen, employees get 16 paid
holidays, generous vacation time, tuition reimbursements up to $ro,ooo, on-site massages, a discounted
car-wash, and the convenience of shopping at on-site
farmers'markets.
Sources: Forture's lists of the 1oo best cornpaies to work
for in America, 2oo2,2oo4,2oo5, and 2oo8; and Jefferson
Graham, "The Search Engine That Could," USA Todoy,
August 26,2oo3, p- Bj.

Corporate Cultures and

Superior Strategy Execution
Every company has its ort n uniquc culturc. The charactcr of a companv's
culture or wotk climate is a product of the'"vork practices and behaviors that
clefine "horn'w,c clo things rround here," its approach to people management,
ancl the "chemistry" that perneates its work environrnent. The meshing
together of stated core vahres, teliefs, business rrinciples, style of operating,
ingraincd bchaviors ancl attitudes, and rvork climate define a cornparly's

Part

One:

Secton D: Executing the Strategv

corporate culture. A company's culture is important because it influcnccs

the organization's actions and approaches to conducting business in a very
real sense, the culture is the company's organizational DNA.26
Thc psyche of corporate cultures varies widely. For
instance,
the bedrock of Walmart's culture is dedicaCorporate culture is a company's internal
tion
to
customer
satisfaction, zealous pursuit of low
work climate and is shaped by its core values,
costs and frugal operating practices, a strong work
beliefs, business principles, traditrons, work
practices, and style of operating.
ethic, ritualistic Saturday-morning headquarters meetings to exchange ideas ancl review problems, and company executives' commitment to visiting stores, listcning to customers, and
soliciting suggestions from employees. General Electric's culture is founded
on a hard-driving, results-oriented atmosphere (where all of the company's
business divisions arc hcld to a standard of being number one or two in their
industries as well as achieving good business results); extensive cross-busincss sharing of ideas, best practices, and learning; the reliance on "workout
sessions" to identify, debate, and resolve buming issues; a commitment to Six
Sigma quality; and globalization of the company.

Unhealthy Corporate Cuttures

The distinctive characteristic of an unhealthy corporate culture is the presence
of counterproductive cultural traits that adversely impact the work climate and
companv performance.2T The followin; four traits are particularly unhealt\:

1.

A highly politicized internal environment in which many issues get

resolved ancl decisions are made on the basis of which individuals or
groups have the most political clout.

2. Hostility

to change and a general wainess of people who champion new

ways of doing things.

3.

{.

An insular "not-invented-here" mindset that makes company personnel

averse to looking outside the company for best practices, new managerial
approaches, and imovative ideas.
A disregard for high ethical standards and an overzealous pursuit of
wealth and status on the oart of kev executives.

POI-ITICIZID CULTURES What makes a politicized internal environment so unhealthy is that political infighting consumes a ;reat deal of organizational energy and often results in the company's strategic agenda taking
a backseat to political maneuvering. In companies where internal politics
pen'ades the work climate, empire-building managers pursue their own agendas and the positions they take on issues are usually aimed at Protecting or
expanding their turf. The support or opposition of politically influential executives and/or coalitions among dcpartments with vested interests in a particular outcomc typically weighs heavily in deciding n'hat actions the company
'6loanne Reid and Victora Hubbell, "Creating a Performance Culture," /vey Busness lournal 69,
no. 4 (March/April zoo5), p. r.
'/ John P. Kotter and James L. Heskett, Corporate Culture and Performance (New York: Free Press,

r99z), Chapter 6.

Chapter

lo

Superior Strategy Execution

Another Path to Competitive Advantage

All this maneuvering takes away from efforts to execute strategy with
real proficiency and frustrates company personnel who are less political and
more inclined to do what is in the company's best interests.
takes.

CHANGE-I{ESISTANT CULTURES Change-resistant cultures encourbehaviors-avoiding risks, hesitation

in pursuing emerging opportunities, and widespread aversion to continuous
age a number of undesirable or unhealthy

improvement in performing value chain activities. Change-resistant companies

have little appetite for being first-movers or fast-followers, believing that being
in the forefront of change is too risky and that acting too quickly increases vulnerability to costly mistakes. They are more inclined to adopt a wait-and-see
posture, learn from the missteps of early-movers, and then move forward cautiously with initiatives that are deemed safe. Hostility to change is most often
found in companies with multilayered management bureaucracies that have
enjoyed considerable market success in years past and that are wedded to the
"We have done it this way for years" syndrome.
General Motors, IBM, Sears, and Eastman Kodak are classic examples of
companies whose change-resistant bureaucracies have damaged their market
standings and financial performance; clinging to what made them successful, they were reluctant to alter operating practices and modify their business approaches when signals of market change first sounded. As strategies
of gradual change won out over bold innovation, all four lost market share to
rivals that quickly moved to institute chan;es more in tune with evolving market conditions and buyer preferences. While IBM has made strides in building
a culture needed for market success, Sears, GM, and Kodak are still struggling
to recoup lost ground.

INSULAR, INMRDLY FOCUSED CULTURES Sometimesa company

reigns as an industry leader or enjoys great market success for so long that its
personnel start to believe they have all the answers or can develop them on
their own. Such confidence breeds arrogance-company personnel discount the
merits of what outsiders are doing and what can be learned by studying bestin-class performes. Benchmarking and a search for the best practices of outsiders are seen as offering little payoff. The big risk of a must-be-invented-here
mindset and insular cultural thinking is that the company can underestimate
the competencies and accomplishments of rival companies and overestimate
its own progress-with a resulting loss of competitive advantage over time.

LNETHICAL AND CREED-DRIVEN CULTURES Companies that

have little regard for ethical standards or that are run by executives driven
by greed and ego gratification are scandals waiting to happen. Enron's collapsc in 2001 was largely the product of an ethically dysfunctional corporate
culture-while Enron's culturc cmbraced the positives of product innovation, aggressive risk taking, and a driving ambition to lead global change in
the energy business, its executives exuded the negatives of arrogance, ego,
greed, and an "ends-justify-the-means" mentality in pursuing stretch revenue
and profitability targets.26 A number of Erron's senior managers were all too
'3 See Kurt Eichenwald, Conspirocy of Fools:

True Story (New York: Broadway Books, zoo5).

Part

One:

Section D: Executing the Strategy

willing to wink at unethical behavior, to cross over the line to unethical (and
sometimes criminal) behavior themselves, and to deliberately stretch generally accepted accounting principles to make Enron's financial performance
look far better than it really was. In the end, Enron came unglued because
a few top executives chose unethical and illegal paths to pursue corporate
revenue and profitability targets. Unethical cultures and executive greed
have produced scandals at WorldCom, Quest, HealthSouth, Adelphia, Tyco,
Cendant, Parmalat. KPMG, AIG, Marsh & MclerLnan, Countrywide Financial,
and Stanford Financial Group with executives indicted and/or convicted of
criminal behavior.
H

igh -Performance

Cu

ltures

Some companies have so-called "high-performance" cultures where the standout cultural traits are a " can-do" spirit, pride in doing things right, no-excuses

accountability, and a pervasive results-oriented work climate where people go

the extra mile to meet or beat stretch objectives. In high-performance cultures,
there's a strong sense of ivolvement on the part of company personnel and
emphasis on individual initiative and creativity. Performance expectations are
clearly stated for the company as a whole, for each organizational unit, and
for each individual. Issues and ptoblems are promptly addressed-there's
a razor-sharp focus on what needs to be done. A high-performance culture
where there's constructive pressure to achieve good results is a valuable contributor to good strategy execution and operating excellence. Results-oriented
cultures are permeated with a spirit of achievement and have a good track
record in meeting or beating performance targets.2e
The challenge in creating a high-performance culture is to inspire high loyalty and dedication on the part of employees, such that they are energized to
put forth their very best efforts to do things right. Managers have to take pains
to reinforce constructive behavior, rer'ard top performers, and purge habits
and behaviors that stand in the way of good results. They must work at knowing the strengths and weaknesses of their subordinates, so as to better match
talent with task. In sum, there has to be an overall disciplined, performancefocused approach to managing the organization.30

Adaptive Cultures
The hallmark of adaptive corporate cultures is willingness on the patt of otganizational members to accept change and take on the challenge of introducing
and executing new strategies.3l In direct contrast to change-resistant cultures,

adaptive cultures are very supportive of managers and employees at all

ranks who propose or help initiate useful change. Internal entrepreneurship
on the part of individuals and groups is encouraged and rewarded. Senior
executives seek out, support, and promote individuals who exercise initiative,
of how a strategy-supportive, high-performance culture can contribute to
compettive advantage, see Jay B. Barney and Delwyn N. Clark, Resource-Bosed Theory: Creoting
and Sustaning Competitive Advontdge (New York: Oxford University Press, zooT), chapter 4.
r" Reid and Hubbell, "Creating a Performance Culture,' pp. z and 5.
?'This section draws heavily on the dscussion of Kotter and Heskel, Corporate Culture ond
Performonce, Chapter 4.
'e For a good discussion

Chapter

ro

Superior Strategy Execution-Another Path to Competitive Advantage

spot opportunities for improvement, and display the skills to take advantage
of them. As in high-performance cultlrres, the company exhibits a proactive
approach to identifying issues, evaluating the implications and options, and
quickly moving ahead with workable solutions.
Technology companies, software companies, and
Adaptive cultures are exceptonally well-suited
Intemet-based companies are good illustrations of
to companies competing in faschanging
organizations with adaptive cultures. Such companies
market environments.
thrive on change-driving it, leading it, and capitalizing on it (but sometimes also succumbing to changc r'r'hen they make the
wrong move or are swamped by better techlologies or the superior business
models of rivals). Companies like Google, Intel, Cisco Systems, eBay, Apple,
Amazon.com, and Dell cultivate the capability to act and react rapidly. Thev
are avid practitioners of entreprener-rrship and innovation, with a demonstrated willingness to take bold risks to create altogether new products, new
busincsses, and new industries. To create and nurture a culture that can adapt
rapidly to changing or shifting business conditions. they make a point of staffing their organizations r,r'ith people who are proactive, r,'ho rise to the challenge of change, and rt,ho havc an aptitude for adapting.
In fast-chan;ing business environments, a corporate culture that is receptive to altering organizational practices and behaviors is a virtual necessity.
Horvever, adaptive cultures work to the advantage of all companies, not iust
those in raprd-change environments. Every company operates in a market
and business climate that is changing to one degree or another. As a cornpany's
stratery euoloes, an ndaptiue culture is a de.finite nlly in the stra tegy-implenrenting,
stregy-executirtg process as contpared to cttltures tltat hnae to be conxed nnd cajoled
to chnnge.

Changing a Problem Culture

Changing a company culture that impcdcs proficient strategy execution is
among the toughest management tasks. It is natural for company personncl
to cling to familiar practices and to be wary, if not hostile, to new approaches
toward how things are to be done. Consequently, it takes concerted management action over a period of time to root out certair unwanted behaviors and
replace an out-of-sync culture with more effective ways of doing things. Tfte
single ntost uisible factor that distinguislrcs ntccessfttl cttlture-change efforts from
fniled attenryts is competent lendership nt the top. Great powct is needed to force
major cultural change and overcome the unremitting resistance of entrenched
cultures-ar-rd great power .is possessed only by the most senior executives,
especially the CEO. However, while top management must be out front leading the culture change effort, instilling new cultural behaviors is a job for the
rr,'hole management team. Middle managers and frontline supervisors play a
key role in implementing the new work practices and operating approaches,
helping win rank-and-file acceptance of and support for the changes, and
instilling the desired behavioral norms.
As shown in Figure 10.2, the first step in fixing a problem culture is for top
management to identify those facets of the present culture that pose obstacles
to executing new strategic initiatives. Second, managers have to clearly define
thc desired new behaviors and features of the culture they want to create.

Part

One:

FIGURE 1o.2

Section D: Executing the Strategy

Steps in changng a Problem cultur

Third, managers have to convince company Persomel u'hy the Present culture
poses problems and why and how new behaviors and operating approaches
will improve company performance. Finally, all the talk about remodeling the
prcsent culture has to be followed swiftly by visible, forceful actions on the part
of management to promote the desired new behaviors and work practices.

MAKING A COMPELLING CASE FOR A CLITURE

CIIANCI

ThC

place for management to begin a major remodeling of the corporate culture is

by selling company personnel on the need for new-style behaviors and work
practices. This means making a compelling case for why the company's new
strategic direction and culture-remodeling efforts are in the organization's besi
interests and why company personnel should whole-heartedly jon the effort
to do things somewhat differently, This can be done by:

.
.

Citing reasons wl-ry the current strategy has to be modified and why new
strategic initiatives are being undertaken. The case for altering the old
strategy usually needs to be predicated on its shortcomings-why sales
are growing slowly, why too many customers are opting to go with the
products of rivals, why costs are too high, and so on. There may be merit
in holding events where managers and other key personnel are forced to
listen to dissatisfied customers or the complaints of strategic allies.
Citing why and how certain behavioral norms and work practices in
the current culturc pose obstacles to guld. execution of new strategic
initiatives.
Explaining why new behaviors and work practices have important roles
in the new culture and will produce better results.

Management's efforts to make a persuasive case for changing what is

deemed to be a problem culture must be quickly followed by forceful,, highprofile actions across several fronts. The actions to implant the new culture
must be both substantive and svmbolic.

Chapter

lo

Superior Strategy Execution -Another Path to Competitve Advantage

SUBSTANTIVE CULTURE-CHANGING ACTIONS Noculturechange

effort can get very far when leaders merely talk about the need for different
actions, behaviors, and work practices. Company executives have to give the
culture-change effort some teeth by initiating a series of actiotts that comPany
persoru'rel will see as unmistakable support for the change program. The strongest
signs that management is truly committed to instilling a new culture include:

1.

Replacing key executives who stonewall needed organizational and

culfural changes.
2. Promoting individuals who have stepped forward to advocate the shift
to a different culture and who can serve as role models for the desired
cultural behavior.
3. Appointing outsiders with the desired cultural attributes to high-profile
positions-bringing in new-breed managers sends an unambiguous
message that a new era is dawning.
4. Screening all candidates for new positions carefully, hiring only those
who appear to fit in with the new culture.
.5. Mandating that all company personnel attend culture-training programs
to better understand the culture-related actions and behaviors that are
expected.

6.
7.

Designing compensation incentives that boost the pay of teams and

individuals who display the desired cultural behaviors, while hitting
change-resisters in the pocketbook.
Revising policies and procedures in ways that will help drive cultural
change.

SYMBOLIC CULTURE-CHANGINC ACTIONS There'salsoan important place for symbolic managerial actions to alter a problem culture and tighten
the strategy{ulture fit. The most important symbolic actions are those that top
executives take to lead by example. For instance, if the organization's strategy
involves a drive to become the industry's low-cost producer, senior managers

must display frugality in their own actions and decisions: inexpensive decorations in the executive suite, consen'ative expense accounts and entertainment
allowances, a lean staff in the corporate office, few executive perks, and so
on. At Walmart, all the executive offices are simply decorated; executives are
habitually frugal in their own actions, and they are zealous in their own efforts
to control costs and promote greater efficiency. At Nucor, one of the world's
low-cost producers of steel products, executives fly coach class and use taxis
at airports rather than limousines. Top executives must be alert to the fact that
company personnel will be watching ther actions and decisions to see if thcy
are walking the talk.32
Another category of symbolic actions includes holding ceremonial events to
single out and honor people whose actions and performance exemplify what
is called for in the new culture. A point is made of holding events to celebrate

Judy D. Olian and Sara L. Rynes, "Making Total Quality Work; Aligning Organizatonal Processes,
Performance Measures, and Stakeholders," Humon Resource Management 30, no. 3 (FalL t99r),

p. 324.

,!t6

Part

One:

Section D: Executng the Strategy

each culture-change success. Executives sensitive to their role in promoting

thc stratcgy-culture fit make a habit of appearing at ceremonial fr.rnctions to
praise individuals and groups that get with the program. They show up at
employee training programs to strcss stratcgic priorities, values, ethical principles, and cultural norms. Every group gathering is seen as an opportunity
to repeat and ingrain values, praise good deeds, and cite instances of how the
nen' work practices and operating approaches have led to improved results.

Leading the Strategy-Execution Process

Leading the strategy-execution process requires senior managers to be out in
the field, seeing for themselves how well operations are going and gau;ing
the progress being made. Company managers need to be diligent and adept
in ferreting out problems and issues, learning n,hat obstacles lie in the path
of operating excellence, and then clearing the n'ay for progress-the goal
must bc to get to better results speedily and productively. And there has to be
constructive, but unrelenting, pressure on organizational units to (1) demonstrate growing consistency in strategy execution and (2) achieve performance
targets-ultimately, it's all about producing excellent strategy execution and
financial results.
There comes a time at every company when managers have to fine-tune
or overhaul the approaches to strategy execution and push for better results.
Clearly, when a company/s strategy execution effort is not deliverng good
results and making measurable progress toward opcrating excellence, it is the
leader's responsibility to step forward and push corrective actions. Success in
initiating corrective actions usually hinges on thorough analvsis of the situaton, the exercise of good business judgment in deciding what actions to take,
and good implementation of the corrective actions that are initiated. Successful
managers are skilled in getiing an organization back on track rather quickly.
Managers that struggle to show measurable progrcss in gcncrating good results
and improving the performance of strategy-critical value chain activities are
candidates for being replaced.
The challenges of leading a successful strategy execution effort are, r,'ithout
question, substantial.33 But the job.is definitely doable. Because each instance
of executing strategv occurs under different organizational circumstances,
thc managerial agenda for executing strategy always needs to be situationspecific there's no ncat generic procedure to follow. And as r,r'e said at the
beginning of the chapter, executing strategy is an action-oriented, makcthe-right-things-happen task that challenges a manager's ability to lead and
direct organizational change, create or reinvent business processes, manage
and motivate people, and achieve performance targets.
r3 For a good discussion of the challenges, see DanieL Goleman, "What Makes a Leader," Horvard
Business Review 76, no. 6 (Novem ber-December 1998), pp. 9z-1o2, Ronald A. Heifetz and Donald
L. Laurie. "The Work of Leadershp," Harvord Business Review 75, no. r (January February 1997),
pp. 124-134; and Charles M. Farkas and Suzy WetLaufer, "The Ways Chief Executive officers Lead,"
Hlvord Busness Revew 74, no. 3 (May June 1996), pp. rro-rzz. See atso, Michael E. Porter,
Jay W. Lorsch, and Nitin Nohria, "Seven Surprises for New CEOS," Horvarrl Business Revew 82,

no. ro (0(fobel no4), pp. 6z-2.