Strategy promises to deliver value to all organizational stakeholders and is the means to achieve organizational goals or performance¹⁶. However, the persistent strategy implementation failure thwarts this promise ^1,2,8. This failure jeopardizes the economic viability of organizations, with an adverse impact on society³. Researchers offer many reasons for this failure⁴. Unrelentingly topping this list is the unavailability of suitably competent employees to execute strategy^4,5. However, low levels of customer satisfaction are absent from this list²⁴. This omission is odd, as without customers there is no business²⁵.

Moreover, suitably competent employees create satisfied return customers, generating satisfactory financial performance⁴. To fix the strategy implementation failure, researchers propose many solutions^1,2,4,6,8. However, these solutions appear to be futile. The most recent solution is Open Strategy^6,7,8,9,10 aimed at gaining support and cooperation in implementing strategy.

Briefly, open strategy^6,10 is appropriately transparent and inclusive about strategic issues concerning relevant stakeholders. Transparency means the level of visibility afforded to stakeholders in understanding the content of the organization’s strategy. Visibility relates to the ‘how’ of strategy and content relates to the ‘what’ of strategy²⁸. Inclusive means the participation of all relevant stakeholders in co-creating the organization’s strategy (‘what’). Participation relates to the ‘who,’ ‘how,’ and ‘when’ or process of strategy²⁸. By opening strategy through transparency and inclusiveness organizations endeavor to gain successful strategy implementation. Transparency and inclusiveness are consistent with the structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy, which arranges coordination and cooperation, promoting openness^17,23.

The final decision-making authority about openness vests with the CEO and top management team¹⁰. Understandably so as the top management team is ultimately accountable for organizational performance. Poor organizational performance, particularly financially, results in the CEO’s firing.

This blog briefly elaborates on open strategy as a potential means to improve organizational strategy implementation, i.e., employees performing their daily activities. It illustrates how open strategy can ensure the availability of suitably competent employees to execute strategy, thus improving customer satisfaction and successful organizational performance. In essence, this blog clarifies how open strategy can unlock human competence required for successful strategy implementation. Unlocked human competence results in optimum human functioning or flourishing^11,12, which spurs innovation^19,20, and activates employee engagement^11,12 that elevates customer satisfaction¹⁷ and, in turn, generates organizational performance^24,25. The blog closes with parting thoughts. Readers are reminded that this is my view, which may only resonate with some.

Open Strategy¹⁰

Strategy is complex because of its interdependent multi-level and multi-dimensional nature²⁸. Therefore, open strategy is not necessarily a panacea for the strategy implementation failure. Open strategy should be cautiously approached as it can be dysfunctional if inappropriately used. The downside of open strategy include (a) diminished control over the progression of the strategic discussions if the agenda is not properly set and steered, (b) consuming considerable organizational resources in responding to openness, (c) decreased speed of decision-making, (d) less flexibility and control over decisions, and (e) potentially over-emphasizing cooperation at the expense of coordination.

However, when correctly used, open strategy presents many benefits. These include more creativity due to a larger group of diverse participants, better sensemaking, better understanding of strategic decisions, greater commitment to these decisions by all stakeholders, and better coordination throughout the organization. In all, open strategy aims at supporting innovation^11,19,20 which drives employee engagement^19,20 that unlocks human competence^4,18,20 creating satisfied customers, which boosts organizational performance^24,25, through transparency and inclusiveness.

Transparency: Information Sharing About the Content of Strategy

Transparency refers to information sharing about the content of strategy. Information sharing encompasses exchanging ideas and knowledge flows, enabling stakeholders to understand the content of strategy^15,16,26. Information sharing involves communication and partially relates to the ‘how’ of strategy. Communication forms part of the interaction component of the processes structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy.

Communication refers to the frequency, comprehensiveness, and mode²⁸, e.g., in-person, virtual, written, using various technologies to support communal participation, whether passive or active¹⁰. Leadership, culture, policies, procedures, and management information are components of the framework structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy and enable successful communication^17,23. Open strategy permits two-way communication, explicitly clarification, which aids in understanding strategy content. Understanding, in turn, cultivates free-willed or autonomous support and cooperation in implementing strategy.

Content of Strategy

Content of strategy covers the ‘what’ of strategy^16,28. ‘What’ revolves around the investment decision or business of the organization. The organization’s business covers, among others, the competitive arenas where the organization chooses to compete, encapsulating the competitive dynamics. Competitive dynamics include (a) who the customers are, (b) what they value, (c) how to deliver customer value, (d) competitors, (e) substitutes, (f) complementors, and (g) potential new entrants. Customers, what they value, and how to deliver customer value comprise the dimensions of competitive advantage anchoring strategy^15,17,27.

Competitive advantage: empowers organizations to outperform their rivals in delivering customer value at a lower cost (better) or differently (differentiation)^15,16. Customer value^4,14 can be any or a combination of:

• Economic value – the price to acquire or cost to use a customer-valued offering.
• Functional value – the features and benefits of a customer-valued solution to a problem.
• Psychological value – a pleasant experience, risk reduction, peace of mind, and the availability of a customer-valued product or service when needed, to mention a few examples. Economic and functional value can be more easily imitated than psychological value.

Competitive advantage is accomplished by coordination and cooperation, which align key actions with strategic intent^13,15,17,27, through the structural dimensions of organization for implementing strategy²³. Competent employees, pertinently their utilized competence, are the most critical dimension of competitive advantage securing customer value delivery²⁷. Competent employees transform inputs/resources into customer-valued offerings by performing daily tasks^17,18,19.

Competence: also called competency, refers to people’s innate motivation to master their environment¹⁸. People master their environment by learning and development (training), acquiring knowledge, skills, experience, and behaviors necessary to successfully execute their tasks^18,19. Utilized competence spurs innovation^19,20, i.e., invention which solves problems²⁵. Innovation activates employee engagement^11,12, which delivers customer satisfaction^24,25 and guarantees financial performance^19,20,24,25.

Task execution: Tasks derive from customer value and specified in job design^5,17,23. Job design also incorporates authority^17,23 associated with the job. Authority impacts the autonomy of incumbents and their relationships with organizational members. Thus, job design determines tasks and affects competence, autonomy, and relatedness – the motivational levers^12,20 proposed by SDT¹². The motivational levers produce emotion, thought, and behavior, bearing upon peoples’ free-willed cooperation in task performance, constituting strategy execution²⁰.

Policies, procedures, culture, and leadership guide task execution^17,23. Job design, policies, procedures, culture, and leadership comprise the structure component of the framework dimension of organization for implementing strategy^17,23.

Employees can only successfully execute their tasks, i.e., transform inputs/resources into customer-valued offerings, if they have timely access to all required resources^17,23. Access to resources, whether owned or shared with the ecosystem¹³, is arranged by systems forming part of the framework structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy^17,23.  The framework structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy arranges coordination or smooth functioning of the organization^13,23 and is relatively stable. Thus, understanding the content of strategy impacts and is impacted by the framework structural dimension of strategy for implementing strategy.

It stands to reason that successful task execution requires interaction, specifically communication, and sanctions, specifically power and rewards. Interaction and sanctions are embodied in the processes structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy and arranging cooperation in the organization^13,23, and are fleeting. Thus, interaction and sanctions involve transparency and inclusion, per open strategy.

Interaction and sanctions: continuously create roles in the minds of organizational members. These roles may or may not coincide with the formal roles specified in job design. Thus, relationships between organizational members create meaning and consensus while governing behavior, including employees’ free-willed pursuit of organizational performance expressed in the organizational goals²³.

In sum: competence implies that (a) employees understand their role and purpose in organizational performance, which they deem meaningful¹¹, (b) they have the chance to autonomously^12,21 apply their actualized competence, rendering them available¹¹ to safely¹¹ execute their tasks, (c) while they continuously try to improve their competence to bolster their performance^12,18,20, fostering relatedness²². Therefore, employees experience psychological presence, i.e., meaning, availability, and safety¹¹.  Hence, they are engaged and fully functioning or flourishing^11,12 and contribute to organizational performance via free-willed strategy implementation.

The degree of transparency remains subject to management discretion. Further, transparency does not necessarily involve inclusiveness, e.g., co-creation of strategy content.

Inclusiveness: Consultation with Relevant Stakeholders

Inclusiveness encompasses consultation with and participation of relevant stakeholders guided by a carefully set agenda to ensure productive and comprehensive strategy (co-)creation. Inclusion entails creating and sustaining an interacting community through communication and sanctions such as power and rewards. Thus, consultation forms part of the processes structural dimension of organization for implementing strategy.

Consultation ranges from passive – seeking opinions to active – consensual decision making. Effective inclusion fittingly integrates input, pertinently feedback from customers, into strategy. Inclusion does not necessarily involve higher levels of transparency.

This short description of inclusiveness suggests it covers ‘who,’ ‘how,’ and ‘when’ to consult. Who, how, and when relate to the process of strategy shaping, namely, the way in which organizations decide ‘what’ (content) to do²⁸. Thus, the content and process of strategy are intertwined, as illustrated in the Figure on the landing page.

Who to Consult

‘Who’ to consult refers to the role players in strategy shaping. Open strategy suggests a collective process instead of an individualistic or centralized process²⁸. Inputs are solicited from internal and external stakeholders. Internal role player involvement is implied in job design and part of the structure component of the framework dimension of organization for implementing strategy. Role player involvement is also integral to transparency, discussed.

How to Include

‘How’ to include addresses interaction and specifically the (a) sophistication of the strategy shaping process, including the frequency of consultations, (b) comprehensiveness of the ensuing plans, (c) degree of formality, (d) whether the plans are deliberate, emergent, or both, (e) consultation settings e.g., in-person or technology-enabled, and (f) implementation of the plans²⁸. ‘How’ overlaps partially with transparency, discussed.

 When to Consult

Open strategy suggests ‘when’ to consult is continuous or iterative rather than episodic in nature²⁸. By implication context and outcome of strategy also receive attention²⁸. Context bears on the internal and external environments impacting strategy. The external environment relates to the nature (stable, dynamic, volatile), location (domestic, regional, global), and variables from the sub-environments such as economic, political-legal, technological, and social impacting strategy. The more dynamic the context, the more often the need to consult. Outcome refers to the extent to which the planned organizational performance was realized. Deviations from goal achievement demand consultation.

This short description of inclusiveness demonstrates that the framework and processes structural dimensions of organization for implementing strategy, arranging coordination and cooperation, are at stake. Furthermore, there is an overlap between transparency and inclusiveness. Thus, it is likely that inclusion will promote transparency and vice versa.

Parting Thoughts

Open strategy might solve the strategy implementation failure if appropriately applied. Understanding the content of strategy by including stakeholders garners their support and cooperation in implementing strategy and overcoming failure.

The tenets of open strategy are transparency and inclusiveness, accomplishing cooperation and coordination, which align key actions and strategic intent. In so doing, leaders shape a competitive advantage that ensures satisfactory customer value delivery by suitably competent employees while outperforming rivals. The mechanism to succeed is structural dimensions of organization for implementing strategy. Simultaneously, this mechanism activates the motivational levers of competence, autonomy, and relatedness, which promote or obstruct human flourishing.

One may easily focus on cooperation and neglect coordination. However, strategy content and process are fused by transparency and inclusiveness, centering on customer value. Delivering customer value depends on suitably competent employees who are flourishing. Hence, there is more to open strategy than meets the eye.

There are many ways to achieve flourishing and successful strategy execution. Some ways are better than others. However, all the ways to flourishing and successful strategy execution implicitly or explicitly rely on competitive advantage, which is achieved through the structural dimensions of organization for implementing strategy. We are free to choose the route that suits us best. So, decide today and join the journey to flourishing.

 References

1. Alexander LD. Successfully implementing strategic decisions. Long Range Planning. 1985;18(3):91–
2. de Oliveira CA, Carneiro J, Esteves F. Conceptualizing and measuring the “strategy execution” construct. Journal of Business Research. 2019;105:333–344.
3. Goldman GA, Nienaber H, Pretorius M. The essence of the contemporary business organisation: a critical reflection. Journal of Global Business and Technology. 2015;11(2):1–
4. Morkel A., Nienaber H, McNeill R.G. Time for change: tools enhancing competitive advantage in the wine business. Journal of Global Business and Technology. 2021;17(2):20–
5. Parker Sharon K, Van den Broeck Anja, Holman David. Work design influences: a synthesis of multi-level factors that affect the design of work. Academy of Management Annals. 2017;11(1): 267–
6. Whittington R, Cailluet L, Yakis-Douglas B. Opening strategy: evolution of a precarious profession. British Journal of Management. 2011;22(3):531–
7. Goldman GA, Kruger J. Viewing “open strategy” as a viable approach to the management of strategy. Journal of Economic and Financial Sciences. 2021;14(1):a579. https://doi.org/10.4102/jef.v14i1.579
8. Tawse A, Tabesh P. Strategy implementation: A review and an introductory framework. European Journal of Management. 2021. org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.09.005.
9. Doeleman HJ, van Dun DH, Wilderom CPM.Leading open strategizing practices for effective strategy implementation. Journal of Strategy and Management. 2022;15(1):54–
10. Hautz J, Seidl D, Whittington R. Open strategy: dimensions, dilemmas, dynamics. Long Range Planning. 2017;50:298–
11. Kahn WA. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal. 1990;33(4):692–724.
12. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist. 2000;55:68–
13. March JG, Simon HA. Organizations. Cambridge: Blackwell; 1993.
14. McNeill R, Nienaber H. Bridging the academic-practitioner chasm: towards a model of hotel B2B sales. Journal of Global Business and Technology. 2018;14(1):40–
15. Porter M. Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: The Free Press; 1985.
16. Aaker DA, Moorman C. Strategic market management. 11th ed. USA: Wiley; 2019.
17. Nienaber H, McNeill R. Leadership diagnostic: unlocking human competence for effective strategy execution. In: Matos F, Rosa A, editors. Proceedings of the 18^th European Conference on Management Leadership and Governance (ECMLG). Reading, UK: Academic Conferences International, Ltd; 2022. p. 347–
18. White RW. Motivation reconsidered: the concept of competence. Psychological Review. 1959;66(5):297–333.
19. Hogan R, Warrenfeltz R. Educating the modern manager. Academy of Management Learning and Education.2003;2(1):74–
20. Hogan R, Sherman RA. Personality theory and the nature of human nature. Personality and Individual Differences. 2020;152(article number 109561).
21. DeCharms R. Personal causation. New York: Irvington; 1976.
22. Baumeister RF, Leary MR. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human need. Psychological Inquiry. 1995;117(3):497–
23. Skivington JE, Daft RL. A study of organizational ‘framework’ and ‘process’ modalities for the implementation of business-level strategic decision. Journal of Management Studies. 1991;28(1): 45–68.
24. O’Boyle E. The customer satisfaction crisis: Solve it with 3 strategies [internet]. Gallup; February 9, 2023. Available from https://gallup.com/workplace/469775/customer-satisfaction-crisis-solve-strategies.aspx.
25. Drucker PF. The practice of management. Harper & Row: New York; 1954.
26. Mintzberg, H. The rise and fall of strategic planning. New York, NY: The Free Press; 1994.
27. Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management. 1991; 17(1): 99–
28. Sami W, Nienaber H, Phillips M. Strategy-as-Practice: preliminary evidence from accommodation SMME owner-managers in South Africa. In: Yuksel E, Sharples L, Viglia G, Gursoy D (Eds.). Proceedings of the 9th Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Marketing and Management (AHTMM) conference. Portsmouth, UK: University of Portsmouth; 2019. pp. 66–