A Better Strategy Model for a Better World
When BlackRock CEO Laurence Fink issued his clarion call, he elevated societal purpose from a topic that was bubbling under the surface to one that erupted onto everyone’s radar and was pushed to the top of many company agendas. Many forces have converged to make this our new reality: a complex world with complex problems, a lack of faith in government to address
those issues, and the loud voice of consumers, who increasingly call out for companies to demonstrate stronger values and contribute to society. Study after study prove that today’s consumer—millennials in particular—prefer to buy products from and work for companies that are doing good for the world, underscoring that moral purpose drives long-term value. Without a doubt, this is the Zeitgeist of this era.
Organizations today will rise and fall based on their ability to deliver on these new demands. It’s no longer enough to have a strong balance sheet and to create innovative products and services. Companies that succeed today will be those that find a path to become profitable through a purposeful mission. And while this concept has certainly started to take root, many are still holding tight to the old strategy model, which is in dire need of disruption.
“In an environment of constant change, rapid technological advances, social and demographic diversity, leaders can no longer rely on the toolbox of the past,” said Nanette M. Blandin, a leadership scholar and president of the Nexus Institute, based in Washington, D.C.
This landscape calls for a new strategic framework incorporating the new criteria necessary for success. The model proposed in this chapter is one where profit meets purpose, where technology fuels excellence, and where marketing becomes authentic—amplifying the good a company is doing and, along the way, creating deeper engagement with today’s diverse constituencies, who can be bound together by purpose.
This landscape calls for a new strategic framework incorporating the new criteria necessary for success. The model proposed in this chapter is one where profit meets purpose, where technol
Shortcomings of the Current Model
Before we get into the new model, let’s take a quick look at why the existing one is ripe for change. Historically, companies begin by developing an overarching business strategy. It is often a very linear, time-intensive process: research, develop plan, implement, measure, rinse, repeat. Once this plan is in place, companies then develop separate strategies for other key business functions like marketing, HR, manufacturing, etc. These efforts are often siloed without the benefit of integration. Even the physical space in offices often separate these functions, with HR in one hallway, marketing in another, and finance in yet another. In best-case scenarios, these siloed functions work to align with business strategies, so they share common goals. Software applications have forced horizontal integration across functions, but we must go further than that for true integration. In worst-case scenarios, they work as completely separate entities with little commonality and no integration. In all cases, it’s a dated process ready for change.
I spoke with Mark Fuller, chairman of Rosc Global, co-founder of Monitor Group, now Deloitte Monitor, and former assistant professor at Harvard Business School. He shared his vast insights on the shortcomings of the current business strategy and how the new model delivers the type of framework necessary in today’s business climate:
I’m going to make two primary points about where today’s approach to strategy falls short. The first is there’s a nontrivial sin of omission with the concept of moral purpose. The collective service industry is very active in three of the four pillars of your strategy (business, technology, and marketing), but doesn’t deal with moral purpose, so it’s defective in that realm. There has long been this issue between the client and the consultant not talking about moral issues because they are somehow not businesslike. They’re embarrassing. And there are all kinds of reasons why. Numbers are okay to discuss because they’re businesslike. So it’s easy to show the client how much more
I’m going to make two primary points about where today’s approach to strategy falls short. The first is there’s a nontrivial sin of omission with the concept of moral purpose. The collective service industry is very active in three of the four pillars of your strategy (business, technology, and marketing), but doesn’t deal with moral purpose, so it’s defective in that realm. There has long been this issue between the client and the consultant not talking about moral issues because they are somehow not businesslike. They’re embarrassing. And there are all kinds of reasons why. Numbers are okay to discuss because they’re businesslike. So it’s easy to show the client how much more
0 comments:
إرسال تعليق