Significant problems encountered in the implementation of a new strategy in a business

“Strategy is defined as the determination of the basic long-term goals and objectives of a company, and the adoption of courses of action and the allocation of the necessary resources to carry out those goals” Chandler (1962)

Strategy is a process and could be considered in less than three stages. These are: strategic analysis; This is the stage where through the analysis the strategist identifies the opportunities, threats, strengths and weaknesses of the environment; the strategic formulation stage, where a choice is made and the strategy implementation stage is the stage where the strategy is translated into action.

Strategy implementation or strategy implementation is defined as “the translation of strategy into organizational action through organizational structure and design, resource planning, and strategic change management.”

Looking at the definition, it becomes obvious that the implementation of the strategy is somewhat complex. Therefore, the successful implementation of a strategy would be how well the various components are successfully integrated and interact to carry it out.

To identify the significant problems encountered in the implementation of a new strategy in a business, a critical look at the components that will be applied in the implementation of the strategy would be a good indicator. These are considered below: Organizational structure and design; and strategy implementation; Translating strategy into organizational action using the organizational structure will also depend on the type of structure in use in the organization. This is so because the needs of a multinational organization are different from those of a small business. It is also possible that the degree of devolution or centralization may influence the implementation of the strategy.

For example, using a matrix structure that often takes the form of geographic and product divisions or functional and divisional structures that operate in tandem; the time needed to make decisions can be much longer than in more conventional structures. The organizational structure and design aspect of strategy implementation is concerned with how human resources are mobilized and organized in the organization to carry out the corporate strategy. The main significant problems encountered through the use of the organizational aspect in strategy implementation is the fact that most employees may leave the company if they feel they are actually being ‘used’ if they are not motivated. This is particularly so when the CEO or top management imposes the strategy on employees.

Another problem found here is the way information is passed down or up the rows. If there is a blockage that prevents the flow of information processes, it means that decisions will be made based on outdated or obsolete information. This can be solved by delegating central command to facilitate the flow of information between all ranks and files, especially in the implementation of a new strategy in a business. Acknowledgment must be given to the organizational structure and layout configuration where operational and strategic decisions are made, it must be committed if the implementation of a new strategy will be successful in any business.

The next aspect in the implementation of the strategy: resource planning establishes the resources and skills that must be created. It is about identifying the resources needed and how those resources will be deployed and controlled to build the skills needed to implement the strategies successfully. This configuration of resources depends on: the protection of unique resources, that is, when a strategy depends on the uniqueness of a particular resource, such as a patent; and must be protected; by legal means; pooling resources (mixing resources to create competition) business process reengineering (to create dynamic improvement in performance) and exploiting experience by continually learning and improving to improve competition.

One of the main problems of strategy implementation as a result of resource planning is the inability to translate strategic purpose statements, such as gaining market share, into critical factors that will make the purpose achievable and ultimately , accomplished. This critical success factor analysis can be carried out as a start in resource planning. For example, a defined schedule might be needed for an organization trying to introduce, say, a new product for Christmas. A detailed examination of the times must be carried out so that the production and its commercialization are a success; as well as the allocation of funds for this undertaking. The problem here is that due to the lack of uniformity in the times required for the different activities, it is difficult to know where to start.

Scholes and Johnson (1999) write that problem circularity is quite common in action plan development and raises the question of where to start: with a market forecast, a level of available funds, a production level constraint or what? The answer is that it may not matter too much where the starting point is, since the plan will have to be reworked and readjusted several times. A helpful guideline is to enter the problem through what appears to be the main change area. An organization planning new growth strategies may well start with an assessment of the market opportunity. Someone starting a new business can begin with a realistic assessment of how much capital they might have available.

Critical path analysis is recommended for strategies that have detailed implementation planning. Another anticipated problem is the conflict that arises between departments over the allocation of funds, especially when money is involved in the implementation of the new strategy.

The next component in the strategy implementation stage is strategic change management. It is widely accepted that strategic change is based on four underlying premises:

1. There is a clear vision within an organization of the strategy to follow.
2. Change will not happen unless there is a commitment to change
3. The approach to managing strategic change is likely to depend on the context.
4. The change must address the powerful influence of the paradigm and the cultural network in the strategy that the organization follows.

There are two types of change: incremental change, which simply builds on the skills, routines, and beliefs of the people in the organization so that the change is efficient and likely to win their commitment, and transformational change, that requires the organization to change its paradigm. over time. It could be a change in routine (“the way we do things around here”). It could also be a change in strategy that will require the change. Although the implementation of the strategy refers to the changing aspect of the structure of the organization, the control systems and planning of resources that affect the daily operations of the members of the organization; people’s behaviors and perceptions may not have changed.

To effect successful strategy implementation, management must also adopt appropriate styles for managing change processes. For example, if there is a change management problem based on misinformation or lack of information, education and communication style will be used. This involves explaining the reasons and means of strategic change. Collaboration or participation of those who will be affected by the strategic change in the identification of strategic issues; styles of intervention, direction and coercion.

Associated with managing strategic change is the problem of managing change. It becomes quite difficult to manage the change that occurs as a result of the implementation. For example, some managers will lose their position as a result of the change (delay), others might be fired as a result of an increase in size, still others might lose their job titles or the position they held dearest as a result of business process reengineering. . . This will demotivate staff and the organization may lose competent staff. Others may need to be retrained to take on new positions or may be demoted if they want to stay with the organization. This type of problem can be avoided if management adopts a participative leadership style and involves staff from the formulation through the implementation stages of the strategy.

In conclusion, it might be worth noting that just as there are numerous definitions of strategy, its style of implementation may differ and so may its attendant problems and solutions. However, since implementation involves controlling the behaviors of others and sometimes perceptions and culture, most of the problems would be human related and possible solutions would probably depend on the style of implementation. management and leadership behavior in terms of structure, availability and allocation of resources.