- Email: [email protected]
Tactical implementation: the devil is in the details
Tactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
Thomas W. Porter Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Stephen C. Harper Professor of Management, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
The realities of putting tactics to work confound people on the corporate firing line every day. Today’s tumultuous marketplace and growing business complexities don’t help. And front-line managers and employees are the ones facing many of these challenges while trying to make top management dreams a reality. Attention must focus on the critical yet often neglected issue of effective tactical implementation, including many of the misconceptions and factors that contribute to its failure or success. Based on an ongoing research program on marketing implementation challenges, five key principles of tactical implementation are highlighted here, followed by eight recommendations to help managers better cope with it—recommendations that apply to all aspects of business.
“If you are embarking around the world in a hot-air balloon, don’t forget the toilet paper. Once, we had to wait for an incoming fax.” — Richard Branson
T
he unstable and ever-changing nature of today’s marketplace coupled with the increasing complexity of organizations are making the execution of tactical initiatives “devilishly” difficult. Veteran executives yearn for the good old days when life was simpler and Murphy’s Law (“If anything can go wrong, it will, and at the most inopportune time”) was the basis for jokes rather than a description of daily operations. Those at the top now have to become even more savvy to the challenges faced by front-line managers and employees, who will determine whether their visions become reality. Their strategies and tactics will give their firms a competitive edge only if they are skillfully implemented. Executives must recognize that the simplicity or intuitiveness of their tactical initiative has very little to do with the challenge of implementing it. The challenge begins not at the start of implementation but rather during the strategy formulation process, which can be critical for tactical success. Reliance on the “We’ll cross the implementation bridge when we get to it” philosophy may place the firm in a precarious position. Strategy implementation and tactical implementation can and should interrelate because it is through the design and execution of marketing tactics by front-line managers that higher-level strategies are implemented. Tactical implementation—the nuts and bolts and rolledup shirtsleeves of a firm’s operations—requires front-line managers to organize, plan, monitor, and in many cases perform the tasks necessary to translate strategic goals into marketing actions. Tactical initiatives take the form of projects because they involve nonroutine activities as well as coordination with people and groups throughout the firm. Examples include such programs as advertising campaigns, integrative promotions, sales force programs, and new product initiatives.
53
One of the challenges of studying implementation at any level is that there is often no clear boundary between it and strategy. The experience of Royal Philips Electronics in marketing its Digital Compact Cassette (DCC) technology offers a vivid example of the kinds of problems companies have with tactical implementation. After spending tens of millions of dollars on DCC development, Philips stumbled in marketing the technology. One executive concluded, “Everything that could have possibly gone wrong in the marketing has gone wrong.” The company made tactical errors such as flooding record stores with too many DCC format music titles that did not sell. Upset, retailers returned the tapes. Customers were frustrated because they could not find the music they wanted. Philips made another tactical error in handling a price cut on existing models of the DCC machine. In its effort to make way for the next year’s model, it cut prices so drastically that many stores were cleaned out long before any new machines arrived. The DCC was quickly deemed a flop, selling barely 200,000 units in its first five years. The question is: Was it introduced with a flawed strategy, or did the mistakes made during implementation ultimately doom this promising technology? That question may have no answer. Bonoma (1985) indicates that when a plan or strategy fails it can be hard to determine whether it was due to a strategic error or to the failure to effectively execute a perfectly viable strategy. Tactical implementation is not the “routine” execution of prior decisions. It requires a cascade of “additional” decisions necessary to put the strategy into place. And it involves raising and answering many of the specific who, what, when, where, why, and how questions that are left out when most strategies and initiatives are developed. Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) found that 70 decisions were needed to implement a single provision from an economic development program. Figure 1 outlines three key phases in deploying tactical initiatives: (1) strategy formulation, (2) tactical and project planning, and (3) execution. These phases can and do overlap. For example, good strategic plans will take into account implementation issues by incorporating various reality checks, reducing the likelihood of proposed tactical initiatives that are terrific in theory but impossible to implement. Likewise, it is almost inevitable that as detailed action planning takes place, additional strategic issues will emerge that will have to be addressed well after the plans have been approved. Moreover, during execution, implementers may well engage in even more fine-grained implementation planning by developing more detailed agendas, to-do lists, schedules, and budgets for specific tasks.
54
Strategic formulation: If you are not pointed in the right direction, then… The marketing component of the overall planning process demonstrates the iterative relationship and cascading nature of planning and implementation. Tactical marketing initiatives are commonly proposed and approved as part of the annual marketing planning process. Product managers play a pivotal role in this process because they specify the corresponding tactical initiatives they anticipate for the forthcoming year. Tactical and project planning: Being pointed in the right direction is not enough. Planning the details of execution can be a challenge because numerous individuals and functional groups are needed to carry out the various tasks. For example, an integrated ad campaign incorporating in-store promotion would likely require significant involvement from the brand management team, an advertising and/or promotion agency, the sales force (for enlisting participation from retailers), manufacturing (if there is any on-package labeling), and fulfillment departments. Senior management, legal, and other groups may also need to be involved. Tactical initiatives are best managed as projects because they require action plans and careful scheduling to coordinate group efforts. Execution: The blocking and tackling of implementation. The tasks and activities specified in project planning are carried out during execution. The marketing manager’s role becomes that of project manager, with the challenge of coordinating work flows, ensuring that tasks are being effectively performed, serving as the nexus of communication
Figure 1 Phases in the deployment of tactical initiatives Strategy formulation activities (Pre-implementation planning) • Project ideation • Developing initial support for project among decision makers • Estimating an expected budget and schedule • Identifying project goals and expected outcomes • Attaining approval for project Implementation planning activities (Tactical and project planning) • Detailed action planning • Resource planning • Facilitating buy-in with implementation participants • What-if analysis • Developing contingency plans Execution activities • Carrying out planned activities • Monitoring and coordinating tasks • Communicating with project participants • Overcoming unanticipated problems
Business Horizons / January-February 2003
flows, and actively initiating communication activities to ensure that everything is proceeding as anticipated.
Principles of successful tactical implementation
T
hree key factors determine the success of implementing a tactical initiative: (1) bringing it in at or under budget; (2) executing it within the scheduled timeframe; and (3) following the implementation plan. Failure often indicates the occurrence of one or more unanticipated problems or faulty assumptions that were difficult to overcome. Being on time and within budget are only valuable if the resulting tactics appropriately and accurately represent the strategic plans. Unfortunately, implementers frequently must scale back tactical initiatives because of resource constraints. While the process is critical, quality is also important. An architect may develop a fabulous design, but many of the details will be left out by necessity. The craftsmen who translate the plans into reality must make numerous detail-related decisions during implementation. It is these very details and myriad decisions by the front-line people that determine whether the structure is a shining success or a lackluster endeavor. Likewise, front-line managers must make multitudes of critical decisions during tactical implementation that can spell the difference between an initiative succeeding or failing in the marketplace. There is nothing sexy or glamorous about implementation. Implementers are like offensive linemen in football—they are the unsung heroes if things go as planned, and often the only ones singled out when something goes wrong. Too often, senior managers responsible for formulating strategies lose sight of the challenges faced by those responsible for implementing them. Five key principles make “doing things right” in tactical implementation just as challenging as figuring out “the right things to do” when formulating strategy.
Principle #1: What seems simple can be deceptively complex. Sometimes tactical initiatives are so simple in concept it seems they could almost implement themselves. The simplicity of the idea, plan, or action will often blind planners to the devilishly complex details of implementation. Consequently, projects are sometimes undertaken without a complete recognition of how difficult it will be to put them into place. Numerous unanticipated problems are destined to crop up when this happens. Delays, budget overruns, and varying quality can have devastating effects on competitiveness. If the situation is not corrected quickly, the company’s future may be in jeopardy.
Tactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
Hickory Farms illustrates what can happen when a company enters this seemingly simple, deceptively complex minefield. Believing that baskets would be more appealing to consumers as gift items than the traditional boxed assortments, top management proposed selling gift baskets containing assorted meats, cheeses, and other sundries. From an execution point of view, however, this relatively simple idea was quite complex and touched nearly every department in the firm. The packing of boxes could be automated, while the gift baskets had to be handpacked. The baskets chosen required international sourcing, which was more complicated and time-consuming than traditional domestic purchasing and acquisition. Distribution was also a problem. Whereas boxes could be easily stacked for shipping, baskets were awkward to handle. Every one of these problems represented an initially unanticipated obstacle that had to be overcome in order to execute the firm’s strategy. Two characteristics of Hickory Farms’ gift basket initiative made implementation a challenging project. The first was associated with project novelty; the implementers were attempting to do things they had never done before. The second arose from complexity, with the initiative requiring the involvement of nearly every department. Project novelty. Defined as the degree to which implementers have the necessary project skills, experience, and know-how, project novelty must be factored into the tactical equation. More novel implementations require key participants to develop new skills or change their established patterns of behavior. Those involved are put at the base of the learning curve. Any time managers choose to pursue a more novel initiative over a conventional one, they must be prepared for the growing pains associated with trial-and-error learning and the development of new skills. Hickory Farms’ lack of experience with international purchasing made the initiative more difficult and time-consuming than had originally been anticipated. Complexity. The number and diversity of participating functions must also be factored into the implementation equation. Managing a project becomes more complex when more stakeholder groups are involved. Communication, coordination, and scheduling requirements are all more intricate. Monitoring ongoing performance and correcting deviations is affected. Oversights and misunderstandings become harder to avoid. And dealing with the variety of perspectives and preferences represented is an issue; it may be harder to identify solutions that satisfy all the participating functions.
Principle #2: Buy-in is not automatic. By their nature, decisions, plans, and strategies involve change. And few people welcome change, especially when others initiate it. Resistance can range from subtle footdragging all the way to covert sabotage. Thus, one of the 55
most critical implementation tasks involves building the mental commitment—or buy-in—to the initiative among those groups and individuals asked to carry out the tasks. Attaining such buy-in can be tough because front-line managers rarely have the authority to direct the behavior of people outside their functional unit. Without direct control, notes Kanter (1983), the managers are relegated to “campaigning, lobbying, bargaining, negotiating, caucusing, collaborating and winning votes.” This is because ideas must be sold, resources acquired, and people in other groups persuaded to change. In Philips’s troubled DCC rollout, many of the problems stemmed from retailers’ lack of buy-in to the strategy. If they had been more willing to work with Philips, the critical problem of insufficient prerecorded tapes might have been avoided. Management may garner a higher level of buy-in if it considers the people on the firing line as internal customers or even internal consultants. When Saab launched a repositioning program, its executives, using considerable insight, made a deliberate effort to bring front-line employees into the loop. In addition to stressing the value and importance of the program, managers asked employees throughout the firm to provide suggestions and recommendations for improving it. Employees and dealers alike were galvanized behind the program when they had the opportunity to view videotapes of actual in-depth interviews carried out with target customers. Seeing and hearing consumers’ emotional responses provided a powerful stimulus for change. It also led to a greater level of buy-in to the program than if management had merely given employees a table of research statistics. Most people might assume that a high level of buy-in can be achieved only if people on the firing line have the opportunity to be actively involved in determining “what is to be done” (also known as context-level decision making). Muczyk and Reimann (1989), however, found that the opportunity for lower-level managers and front-line employees to participate at the context level was not criti-
The study This article focuses attention on the critical yet often neglected issue of effectively implementing tactical initiatives. The examples and conclusions are drawn from an ongoing research program on marketing implementation challenges. Data collection for this research involved in-depth interviews with 35 front-line managers as well as survey research with a sample of approximately 175 separate tactical marketing initiatives. Although the research and observations were based on marketing, the recommendations apply to all aspects of business.
56
cal for buy-in. Instead, they found that as long as people have the chance to participate in decisions about “how things are done” (content-level decision making), they will be committed to making it happen. This does not mean management should deliberately keep the front line out of context-level decisions. It does mean that if they are out of that loop, management should make an even greater commitment to plug them into the content level to help decide “how it will be done.” Senior management buy-in is essential. The need for front-line people to buy in to a tactical initiative often overshadows the need for top management’s wholehearted support. Senior managers often falter in supporting a program when the details of implementation become known. One manager we surveyed called such tentativeness “half steps.” His example turned out to be fairly typical for that firm. Senior managers at his division wanted to reposition the company. Their strategy formulation sessions identified much that would need to change. Yet as they got deeper into the implementation, and the need for training, funding, and other resources became more explicit, they lacked the fortitude to follow through with the program. They wanted the benefits of the program without the “pain” of implementation. All too often, said the manager, they wanted to dabble in something rather than jumping in with full commitment. And they were reluctant to do an environmental impact study of the various factors involved, or to ante up all the resources necessary to enhance implementation. The reluctance to commit resources and provide “air cover” highlights the need for gaining senior management buy-in and getting them to formally sign off on the initiative. The relative visibility of the initiative within the firm can affect its perceived importance and hence the buy-in of those involved in executing the project tasks. Senior managers can help signal the project’s real importance by helping to align incentives, providing resources for training, clearly communicating support for the program throughout the firm, and not wavering in their commitment through the life of the project’s implementation. If you want buy-in, make sure the system supports it. The role of top management is to create an environment that is conducive to performance. Management systems should be designed to support the role tactical implementation plays in enhancing performance. The admonition “If you want something to happen, then you need to (1) set specific goals for it, (2) encourage it, (3) fund it, (4) monitor it, (5) appraise it, and (6) reward for it” definitely applies to the buy-in process. Like most things in life, people will focus their attention on what is relevant and rewarding to them. While senior management encouragement may help rally the troops, “financial carrots” (or consequences) that are directly tied to implementation effectiveness can go a long way toward influencing behavior. Business Horizons / January-February 2003
Program metrics affect buy-in and performance. One of the most important ways for implementers to build in financial carrots is to set clear and measurable metrics for assessing the performance of the program and those implementing it. Frequently, buy-in problems boil down to a misunderstanding of the responsibilities and obligations of project participants in executing project plans. Because clearly understanding expectations is essential, setting metrics is one of the keys to successful implementation. Metrics help clarify the tactical goals and the expected deliverables. Allowing implementers to “close the loop” and judge the effectiveness of the program or initiative, they can be set to assess both strategic outcomes and critical process (or implementation) outcomes. Cypress Semiconductor Corporation relies on metrics to foster a “no surprises” environment as a means “to do the mundane better than anyone else.” Its CEO, T.J. Rodgers (1990), noted that metrics are critical to his firm’s success because it operates in a “treacherous and unforgiving business.” In any given week, some 6,000 goals in its database come due. He noted that discipline, accountability, and relentless attention to detail are essential.
Principle #3: Surprises must be anticipated and avoided. Those involved in planning should recognize the two rules of implementation: (1): “Stuff” happens; (2) When things seem to be going smoothly, remember Rule #1. Effective implementation often boils down to the ability to anticipate and avoid potential problems that can occur during a project. Although implementation problems are a fact of life, highly effective implementers succeed in part because they are more diligent in identifying and assessing risks. They look for causal links between project elements and potential negative outcomes. The “Pepsi Stuff” promotion that tied in with the film True Lies shows how implementers can be taken by surprise by not thinking through all the details of their tactical initiatives. Pepsi ran test ads for a promotion in the Northwest in which a Harrier jet could be acquired for seven million “Pepsi points.” Since points could be purchased from Pepsi at a cost of 10 cents per point, this made the price of a Harrier jet a mere $700,000. A college student sent a check to Pepsi for $700,000 in an attempt to claim the jet. Although Pepsi was ultimately able to win the legal battle, the whole episode could have been avoided with better foresight. Running what-if scenarios for various events (and doing a little math) may have revealed the possibility that someone might actually take Pepsi up on its offer. The increasing incidence of discontinuities in today’s marketplace makes it impossible for even the savviest people to anticipate all the possible ways an event might unfold. The question now becomes, “Is there anything that impleTactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
menters can do to better anticipate and avoid potential downstream problems?” Those organizing for implementation should be able to reduce the frequency and severity of surprises by using more experienced managers, engaging in a more fine-grained level of planning, identifying project risks, and developing contingency plans. Managerial experience. Keren (1987) has shown that more experienced individuals are better able to anticipate unusual or uncommon occurrences. Just as expert bridge players are better-calibrated bidders because they take into account more unusual events or hands, more experienced implementation managers are likely to have deeper, richer knowledge structures of the variety of factors and contingencies to take into account to achieve tactical objectives. Experience plays a key role in the development of perceptiveness and intuition. Perceptiveness involves the ability to see things others may not see. Intuition involves sensing subtle cause-and-effect relationships and coming up with the answer without consciously knowing how you got it. These skills are particularly valuable when there is limited information and time is of the essence. Planning for implementation. The value of detailed planning is a catch-22. Too much can lead to paralysis by analysis; too little can result in chaos. The lack of planning often produces inefficiencies, omissions, needless overlap, and high anxiety for all involved. When Crawford Greenwalt was president of Du Pont, he said, “One minute spent in planning saves three or four minutes in execution.” If his logic were carried to the extreme, however, it would result in the plan never being implemented because it would never be completed. When it comes to implementation, however, the evidence seems to suggest that developing highly detailed plans has significant value as long as it does not foster a false sense of predictability or paralysis by analysis. Detailed planning usually enhances implementers’, stakeholders’, and management’s understanding of the problem because it requires methodically thinking through the situation, which reduces the likelihood that oversights will occur. Thus, the process may have considerable value by providing significant insights. Adopting anticipatory management. Anticipatory management involves taking mental journeys into various possible futures before taking the physical journey and committing resources. Risk analysis can be a key way to enhance anticipatory planning. It uses what-if scenarios to identify factors that could potentially derail the project. Project team members are thus better prepared to identify potential problems, assess the probability that they will occur, and make changes in the plan where needed. Contingency planning is another key facet of anticipatory management. When there is little time to review the whole situation and craft a whole new game plan, having 57
fairly explicit contingency plans in the original planning process in case of undesired events can provide a firm with a “quick response” capability that will give it an edge over firms that are more reactive. Contingency plans need to be developed if: (1) the consequences of error are too high, (2) the probability of error is too high, (3) the consequences of reacting slowly are too high, or (4) a combination of two or more of these factors. The growing need for anticipatory management and contingency planning is captured in the US West ad, “You either make dust or you eat dust.”
Principle #4: Time pressure is the enemy of effective implementation. We live in an era when time is of the essence. Speed-tomarket is considered critical whether a company wants to be a first mover or a fast follower. Issues such as rapid prototyping, concurrent design and manufacturing, justin-time delivery, competing on Internet time, and 24/7 availability are seen as keys to success. The first-to-market mentality says it is more important for a product to be first than to be exceptional. However, such a fixation on time can have serious repercussions. How many e-firms rushed their offerings to market in an attempt to be the first in a particular market “space” only to earn the ill will of customers when their products failed to live up to the hype? If a company lacks the time to get it right the first time, it surely won’t have enough time to fix it and get it right later. A major pharmaceutical firm had two products in the same product class, one an established but eroding market leader, the other brand new. A strategy was developed to maintain the sales of the established product while growing sales of the new one by targeting them to two different segments. Although the strategy made sense on the surface, the effort turned out to be a disaster. Tactical implementation was contingent on the sales force’s ability to convey product information to medical decision makers. However, with no time to promote the program internally through training or other means, the sales force did not understand the specifics of the new positioning for each product. When the program was introduced to them, the result was mass confusion. The established market leader lost share and the new product floundered.
Principle #5: There will be problems to respond to. The unpredictability of what lies ahead means that as people implement plans they will have to: (1) size up the uniqueness of the situation, (2) scan the surroundings for clues that modifications need to be made during implementation, (3) determine what to do, and (4) make adjustments when it becomes apparent that the original plan will not succeed.
58
Early warning systems enable quicker detection of and response to small problems before they can escalate into major ones. Such systems are critical for the success of marketing projects. A television cable company created a promotion designed to introduce current users of digital satellite systems to its digital cable offering. Participants in the promotion were offered a free three-month trial. When their bill arrived, they were instructed to submit a coupon as payment for the monthly service. However, as too often occurs, a creative and potentially profitable marketing program backfired due to poor execution. Apparently the bill processing department was not alerted to the promotion. So when a coupon was sent in as “payment” for the service, the account was not credited as having been paid. Customer service representatives fielding complaints gave conflicting information because many were unaware of the promotion. When an account became listed as past due, it was turned over to the collection department, who proceeded to seek payment through telephone calls and irksome letters. This example highlights the importance of: (1) attending to details, (2) having people on the firing line involved in planning, (3) attaining buy-in from all departments involved in the implementation, and (4) recognizing when things are not going as planned. If those managing the digital cable promotion had been more alert to the billing problem, if the customer service personnel had stepped in to fix the problem when alerted to the situation, or if the bill processing personnel had questioned what to do with the unanticipated “coupon” being submitted as payment, the problems with this promotion could have been expeditiously resolved. Mindfulness. Effective implementers are mentally alert to the situation so that when unexpected problems emerge they are prepared to respond sooner and with fewer resources. One senior manager, reflecting on what made an individual a superior implementer, indicated that such people are “paranoid about details.” Their belief that things go wrong makes them extremely vigilant for the potential emergence of problems. This characteristic appears closely related to the concept of “mindfulness,” defined by Weick, Sutcliffe, and Obstfeld (1999) as a cognitive capability that leads to “a rich awareness of discriminatory detail and a capacity for action.” Implementers rarely have the luxury of focusing on one project at a time. Most front-line managers operate in a world of “spinning plates.” At any one time they might be working on several projects, attending to their daily responsibilities, and handling the latest crisis. Today, more and more time is spent running back and forth from one wobbling plate to the next to keep them from crashing. In a zero-sum world, the time devoted to problem solving subtracts from the time available for problem seeking. This is unfortunate because the more time that can be invested in identifying potential fires, the less time and resources will be needed to put them out. Business Horizons / January-February 2003
The role of improvisation. Effective implementation frequently requires improvisation prowess because things rarely go as planned. The experience of Jim Lovell, Jack Swigert, and Fred Haise on Apollo 13 is a dramatic example of effective improvisation when just about anything and everything went wrong. Improvisation coupled with tenacity by astronauts and ground crew alike overcame seemingly insurmountable odds to bring the astronauts safely back to Earth. They confirmed the belief that necessity is truly the mother of invention. While the kind of problems that occur while implementing tactical initiatives in the corporate arena may not match the drama of the Apollo 13 mission, they do require many of the same skills. Front-line managers must be prepared to improvise appropriate and unique responses in the face of critical unanticipated problems. Successful improvisation frequently involves creativity, teamwork, leadership by different people at different times, and the ability to devote full concentration and attention to the moment.
Managerial guidelines
T
he need for detailed planning, the value of including implementation participants early in the planning process, the need for clear metrics, and the alignment of incentives to enhance performance appear to be little more than common sense. But if implementation is simply a matter of common sense, why do firms struggle so mightily to implement their tactical initiatives? The following section highlights some “uncommon” sense about improving implementation effectiveness.
1. Hone your implementation skills. Getting to the top today takes more than an advanced degree from a prestigious B-school; you have to demonstrate that you can make things happen, which requires excellence in implementation. It may not be glamorous, but earning the label of “someone who gets things done by paying attention to the details” can be more valuable than having a freshly minted MBA. Unfortunately, most business curricula do a poor job of preparing the next wave of front-line managers for effective implementation. Likewise, many in-house management training programs are woefully lacking when it comes to providing insights into the challenges and nuances of implementation. Firms that make an effort to ensure that first-time managers develop these critical skills early will be more successful than firms that merely throw their people into the fire. Preparing for the challenges associated with tactical implementation should include case studies that foster mindfulness, as well as project management tools and what-if simulations. Tactical initiatives usually have all the
Tactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
characteristics of projects—they are unique, complex, and require a great deal of coordination and planning. However, front-line managers required to implement them often fail to take advantage of the useful tools and techniques available to them.
2. Prepare for the unexpected. There is no such thing as a perfect plan or a failsafe system. Planning and implementation is a question-andanswer process. Most managers operate in a reactive mode by spending their time coming up with answers to today’s questions and solving today’s problems. Some operate more proactively, directing their attention to identifying the questions that will need to be answered. By scanning the horizon for potential problems, they are able to prevent problems or minimize their consequences. A few managers, however, have embraced anticipatory management. By running scenarios, they not only identify emerging questions, they give their firms an edge by having the answers before their competitors or customers are even aware of the questions. Anticipatory managers not only prevent problems, they position their firms to capitalize on emerging opportunities.
3. Effective execution is not possible without a supportive infrastructure. If details are crucial to effective execution, then systems must be in place to help develop and monitor details. Plans and strategies can point people on the firing line in the right direction, but the people will not be able to hit the bull’s-eye unless they are given the infrastructure needed to “make it happen.” Management information systems must provide timely and accurate information. If awareness is a prerequisite to change, then targets need to be set, performance monitored, and contingency plans quickly triggered when variances are detected.
4. Building buy-in is a fundamental implementation task. The surest way for implementation to run into trouble is when the individuals or groups counted on to do the execution tasks fail to follow through with an appropriate or timely effort. The challenge is that employees from other functional groups often think of performing tactical initiatives as unrelated to their core responsibilities. Key structural ways to enhance buy-in include setting appropriate metrics for measuring task performance and aligning organizational systems to reward good performance. Buyin will be enhanced when participants understand the value of the initiative. Involving them in implementation planning and enlisting the aid of senior management to communicate the importance of the initiative throughout the firm are key ways to build buy-in.
59
5. Top management must provide direction, not directions. Anyone who has remodeled a house knows that plans will have to be modified as soon as the first board is removed. Our architect and craftsman example illustrated the “dilemma of details,” which is especially acute when the situation changes from one moment to the next or when implementation planners do not have extensive experience about the challenges on the firing line. The architect needs to give craftsmen a sense of what the final result should be and a set of clear blueprints. Craftsmen must then be free to analyze the unique situation, fill in the blanks, develop the details, and improvise when needed.
6. Like a fine wine, implementation takes time. Time pressure may be a fact of life in companies, but not allocating enough time to perform implementation tasks can be a big mistake, leading to a variety of errors, oversights, and miscommunications. Too often top managers set artificial deadlines based on when they would like to see things implemented rather than on a careful planning and sequencing of tasks. Planners must therefore have a thorough understanding of time requirements.
7. Management must provide air cover for “reality checkers.” Mindfulness is a valuable attribute, but some businesspeople see it as being cynical, negative, not a team player, or downright nuts. Just as companies need open-minded, free-wheeling individuals who can think outside the box in brainstorming and new product development sessions, they also need people who can find flaws and are willing to provide a timely sense of reality. Their skills need to be used when appropriate. These people also need to be protected from those who don’t like to be challenged.
8. Make simplicity a virtue. The lesson of implementation is that simplicity in concept is not equivalent to simplicity in execution. Implementation will be considerably more straightforward if tactics require minimal involvement from other units and do not require employees to perform unfamiliar tasks. Strategists and implementers who can correctly determine whether initiatives are legitimately straightforward or are seemingly simple but deceptively complex will be valuable assets.
60
I
n football, the quarterback may call the right play, but if a lineman misses a block the strategy will not succeed. Implementation success in business works the same way. An innovative strategy may be developed, but its success rides on the effectiveness of the managers on the firing line to attend to the myriad details necessary not only to enact the strategy but to do it right, on time, and within budget. If times were stable and actions could be repeated over and over, it would be a lot easier to fine-tune details and improve execution. The true test of tactical implementation in the years ahead will be whether people can do well the first time. Competing in the marketplace will be like exploring new terrain. Innovative marketers, like the early explorers, do not have precise maps to guide them. They too need people who can size up the unique situation, develop a plan of action, monitor success, and make quick changes. Firms with operating systems that can develop details, continuously monitor the things that can make a difference, and be able to come up with answers to the who, what, when, where, and how much questions—and do it all quickly—will thrive. Those that don’t will fall by the wayside. ❍
References and selected bibliography Bonoma, Thomas. 1985. The marketing edge. New York: Free Press. Crossan, Mary. 1997. Improvise to innovate. Ivey Business Quarterly (Autumn): 36-42. Fussman, Cal. 2002. Richard Branson: What I’ve learned. Esquire (January): 99. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1983. The change masters. New York: Simon and Schuster. Keren, Gideon. 1987. Facing uncertainty in the game of bridge: A calibration study. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes 39/1 (February): 98-114. Knutson, Joan, and Ira Bitz. 1991. Project management: How to plan and manage successful projects. New York: AMACOM. Muczyk, Jan P., and Bernard C. Reimann. 1989. MBO as a complement to effective leadership. Academy of Management Executive 3/2: 131-137. Noble, Charles H. 1999. Building the strategy implementation network. Business Horizons 42/6 (November-December): 19-28. Pressman, Jeffrey L., and Aaron B. Wildavsky. 1973. Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Rodgers, T.J. 1990. No excuses management. Harvard Business Review 68/4 (July-August): 84-98. Weick, Karl E., Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, and David Obstfeld. 1999. Organizing for high reliability: Processes of collective mindfulness. Research in Organizational Behavior 21: 81-123.
Business Horizons / January-February 2003
Thomas W. Porter Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Stephen C. Harper Professor of Management, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
The realities of putting tactics to work confound people on the corporate firing line every day. Today’s tumultuous marketplace and growing business complexities don’t help. And front-line managers and employees are the ones facing many of these challenges while trying to make top management dreams a reality. Attention must focus on the critical yet often neglected issue of effective tactical implementation, including many of the misconceptions and factors that contribute to its failure or success. Based on an ongoing research program on marketing implementation challenges, five key principles of tactical implementation are highlighted here, followed by eight recommendations to help managers better cope with it—recommendations that apply to all aspects of business.
“If you are embarking around the world in a hot-air balloon, don’t forget the toilet paper. Once, we had to wait for an incoming fax.” — Richard Branson
T
he unstable and ever-changing nature of today’s marketplace coupled with the increasing complexity of organizations are making the execution of tactical initiatives “devilishly” difficult. Veteran executives yearn for the good old days when life was simpler and Murphy’s Law (“If anything can go wrong, it will, and at the most inopportune time”) was the basis for jokes rather than a description of daily operations. Those at the top now have to become even more savvy to the challenges faced by front-line managers and employees, who will determine whether their visions become reality. Their strategies and tactics will give their firms a competitive edge only if they are skillfully implemented. Executives must recognize that the simplicity or intuitiveness of their tactical initiative has very little to do with the challenge of implementing it. The challenge begins not at the start of implementation but rather during the strategy formulation process, which can be critical for tactical success. Reliance on the “We’ll cross the implementation bridge when we get to it” philosophy may place the firm in a precarious position. Strategy implementation and tactical implementation can and should interrelate because it is through the design and execution of marketing tactics by front-line managers that higher-level strategies are implemented. Tactical implementation—the nuts and bolts and rolledup shirtsleeves of a firm’s operations—requires front-line managers to organize, plan, monitor, and in many cases perform the tasks necessary to translate strategic goals into marketing actions. Tactical initiatives take the form of projects because they involve nonroutine activities as well as coordination with people and groups throughout the firm. Examples include such programs as advertising campaigns, integrative promotions, sales force programs, and new product initiatives.
53
One of the challenges of studying implementation at any level is that there is often no clear boundary between it and strategy. The experience of Royal Philips Electronics in marketing its Digital Compact Cassette (DCC) technology offers a vivid example of the kinds of problems companies have with tactical implementation. After spending tens of millions of dollars on DCC development, Philips stumbled in marketing the technology. One executive concluded, “Everything that could have possibly gone wrong in the marketing has gone wrong.” The company made tactical errors such as flooding record stores with too many DCC format music titles that did not sell. Upset, retailers returned the tapes. Customers were frustrated because they could not find the music they wanted. Philips made another tactical error in handling a price cut on existing models of the DCC machine. In its effort to make way for the next year’s model, it cut prices so drastically that many stores were cleaned out long before any new machines arrived. The DCC was quickly deemed a flop, selling barely 200,000 units in its first five years. The question is: Was it introduced with a flawed strategy, or did the mistakes made during implementation ultimately doom this promising technology? That question may have no answer. Bonoma (1985) indicates that when a plan or strategy fails it can be hard to determine whether it was due to a strategic error or to the failure to effectively execute a perfectly viable strategy. Tactical implementation is not the “routine” execution of prior decisions. It requires a cascade of “additional” decisions necessary to put the strategy into place. And it involves raising and answering many of the specific who, what, when, where, why, and how questions that are left out when most strategies and initiatives are developed. Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) found that 70 decisions were needed to implement a single provision from an economic development program. Figure 1 outlines three key phases in deploying tactical initiatives: (1) strategy formulation, (2) tactical and project planning, and (3) execution. These phases can and do overlap. For example, good strategic plans will take into account implementation issues by incorporating various reality checks, reducing the likelihood of proposed tactical initiatives that are terrific in theory but impossible to implement. Likewise, it is almost inevitable that as detailed action planning takes place, additional strategic issues will emerge that will have to be addressed well after the plans have been approved. Moreover, during execution, implementers may well engage in even more fine-grained implementation planning by developing more detailed agendas, to-do lists, schedules, and budgets for specific tasks.
54
Strategic formulation: If you are not pointed in the right direction, then… The marketing component of the overall planning process demonstrates the iterative relationship and cascading nature of planning and implementation. Tactical marketing initiatives are commonly proposed and approved as part of the annual marketing planning process. Product managers play a pivotal role in this process because they specify the corresponding tactical initiatives they anticipate for the forthcoming year. Tactical and project planning: Being pointed in the right direction is not enough. Planning the details of execution can be a challenge because numerous individuals and functional groups are needed to carry out the various tasks. For example, an integrated ad campaign incorporating in-store promotion would likely require significant involvement from the brand management team, an advertising and/or promotion agency, the sales force (for enlisting participation from retailers), manufacturing (if there is any on-package labeling), and fulfillment departments. Senior management, legal, and other groups may also need to be involved. Tactical initiatives are best managed as projects because they require action plans and careful scheduling to coordinate group efforts. Execution: The blocking and tackling of implementation. The tasks and activities specified in project planning are carried out during execution. The marketing manager’s role becomes that of project manager, with the challenge of coordinating work flows, ensuring that tasks are being effectively performed, serving as the nexus of communication
Figure 1 Phases in the deployment of tactical initiatives Strategy formulation activities (Pre-implementation planning) • Project ideation • Developing initial support for project among decision makers • Estimating an expected budget and schedule • Identifying project goals and expected outcomes • Attaining approval for project Implementation planning activities (Tactical and project planning) • Detailed action planning • Resource planning • Facilitating buy-in with implementation participants • What-if analysis • Developing contingency plans Execution activities • Carrying out planned activities • Monitoring and coordinating tasks • Communicating with project participants • Overcoming unanticipated problems
Business Horizons / January-February 2003
flows, and actively initiating communication activities to ensure that everything is proceeding as anticipated.
Principles of successful tactical implementation
T
hree key factors determine the success of implementing a tactical initiative: (1) bringing it in at or under budget; (2) executing it within the scheduled timeframe; and (3) following the implementation plan. Failure often indicates the occurrence of one or more unanticipated problems or faulty assumptions that were difficult to overcome. Being on time and within budget are only valuable if the resulting tactics appropriately and accurately represent the strategic plans. Unfortunately, implementers frequently must scale back tactical initiatives because of resource constraints. While the process is critical, quality is also important. An architect may develop a fabulous design, but many of the details will be left out by necessity. The craftsmen who translate the plans into reality must make numerous detail-related decisions during implementation. It is these very details and myriad decisions by the front-line people that determine whether the structure is a shining success or a lackluster endeavor. Likewise, front-line managers must make multitudes of critical decisions during tactical implementation that can spell the difference between an initiative succeeding or failing in the marketplace. There is nothing sexy or glamorous about implementation. Implementers are like offensive linemen in football—they are the unsung heroes if things go as planned, and often the only ones singled out when something goes wrong. Too often, senior managers responsible for formulating strategies lose sight of the challenges faced by those responsible for implementing them. Five key principles make “doing things right” in tactical implementation just as challenging as figuring out “the right things to do” when formulating strategy.
Principle #1: What seems simple can be deceptively complex. Sometimes tactical initiatives are so simple in concept it seems they could almost implement themselves. The simplicity of the idea, plan, or action will often blind planners to the devilishly complex details of implementation. Consequently, projects are sometimes undertaken without a complete recognition of how difficult it will be to put them into place. Numerous unanticipated problems are destined to crop up when this happens. Delays, budget overruns, and varying quality can have devastating effects on competitiveness. If the situation is not corrected quickly, the company’s future may be in jeopardy.
Tactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
Hickory Farms illustrates what can happen when a company enters this seemingly simple, deceptively complex minefield. Believing that baskets would be more appealing to consumers as gift items than the traditional boxed assortments, top management proposed selling gift baskets containing assorted meats, cheeses, and other sundries. From an execution point of view, however, this relatively simple idea was quite complex and touched nearly every department in the firm. The packing of boxes could be automated, while the gift baskets had to be handpacked. The baskets chosen required international sourcing, which was more complicated and time-consuming than traditional domestic purchasing and acquisition. Distribution was also a problem. Whereas boxes could be easily stacked for shipping, baskets were awkward to handle. Every one of these problems represented an initially unanticipated obstacle that had to be overcome in order to execute the firm’s strategy. Two characteristics of Hickory Farms’ gift basket initiative made implementation a challenging project. The first was associated with project novelty; the implementers were attempting to do things they had never done before. The second arose from complexity, with the initiative requiring the involvement of nearly every department. Project novelty. Defined as the degree to which implementers have the necessary project skills, experience, and know-how, project novelty must be factored into the tactical equation. More novel implementations require key participants to develop new skills or change their established patterns of behavior. Those involved are put at the base of the learning curve. Any time managers choose to pursue a more novel initiative over a conventional one, they must be prepared for the growing pains associated with trial-and-error learning and the development of new skills. Hickory Farms’ lack of experience with international purchasing made the initiative more difficult and time-consuming than had originally been anticipated. Complexity. The number and diversity of participating functions must also be factored into the implementation equation. Managing a project becomes more complex when more stakeholder groups are involved. Communication, coordination, and scheduling requirements are all more intricate. Monitoring ongoing performance and correcting deviations is affected. Oversights and misunderstandings become harder to avoid. And dealing with the variety of perspectives and preferences represented is an issue; it may be harder to identify solutions that satisfy all the participating functions.
Principle #2: Buy-in is not automatic. By their nature, decisions, plans, and strategies involve change. And few people welcome change, especially when others initiate it. Resistance can range from subtle footdragging all the way to covert sabotage. Thus, one of the 55
most critical implementation tasks involves building the mental commitment—or buy-in—to the initiative among those groups and individuals asked to carry out the tasks. Attaining such buy-in can be tough because front-line managers rarely have the authority to direct the behavior of people outside their functional unit. Without direct control, notes Kanter (1983), the managers are relegated to “campaigning, lobbying, bargaining, negotiating, caucusing, collaborating and winning votes.” This is because ideas must be sold, resources acquired, and people in other groups persuaded to change. In Philips’s troubled DCC rollout, many of the problems stemmed from retailers’ lack of buy-in to the strategy. If they had been more willing to work with Philips, the critical problem of insufficient prerecorded tapes might have been avoided. Management may garner a higher level of buy-in if it considers the people on the firing line as internal customers or even internal consultants. When Saab launched a repositioning program, its executives, using considerable insight, made a deliberate effort to bring front-line employees into the loop. In addition to stressing the value and importance of the program, managers asked employees throughout the firm to provide suggestions and recommendations for improving it. Employees and dealers alike were galvanized behind the program when they had the opportunity to view videotapes of actual in-depth interviews carried out with target customers. Seeing and hearing consumers’ emotional responses provided a powerful stimulus for change. It also led to a greater level of buy-in to the program than if management had merely given employees a table of research statistics. Most people might assume that a high level of buy-in can be achieved only if people on the firing line have the opportunity to be actively involved in determining “what is to be done” (also known as context-level decision making). Muczyk and Reimann (1989), however, found that the opportunity for lower-level managers and front-line employees to participate at the context level was not criti-
The study This article focuses attention on the critical yet often neglected issue of effectively implementing tactical initiatives. The examples and conclusions are drawn from an ongoing research program on marketing implementation challenges. Data collection for this research involved in-depth interviews with 35 front-line managers as well as survey research with a sample of approximately 175 separate tactical marketing initiatives. Although the research and observations were based on marketing, the recommendations apply to all aspects of business.
56
cal for buy-in. Instead, they found that as long as people have the chance to participate in decisions about “how things are done” (content-level decision making), they will be committed to making it happen. This does not mean management should deliberately keep the front line out of context-level decisions. It does mean that if they are out of that loop, management should make an even greater commitment to plug them into the content level to help decide “how it will be done.” Senior management buy-in is essential. The need for front-line people to buy in to a tactical initiative often overshadows the need for top management’s wholehearted support. Senior managers often falter in supporting a program when the details of implementation become known. One manager we surveyed called such tentativeness “half steps.” His example turned out to be fairly typical for that firm. Senior managers at his division wanted to reposition the company. Their strategy formulation sessions identified much that would need to change. Yet as they got deeper into the implementation, and the need for training, funding, and other resources became more explicit, they lacked the fortitude to follow through with the program. They wanted the benefits of the program without the “pain” of implementation. All too often, said the manager, they wanted to dabble in something rather than jumping in with full commitment. And they were reluctant to do an environmental impact study of the various factors involved, or to ante up all the resources necessary to enhance implementation. The reluctance to commit resources and provide “air cover” highlights the need for gaining senior management buy-in and getting them to formally sign off on the initiative. The relative visibility of the initiative within the firm can affect its perceived importance and hence the buy-in of those involved in executing the project tasks. Senior managers can help signal the project’s real importance by helping to align incentives, providing resources for training, clearly communicating support for the program throughout the firm, and not wavering in their commitment through the life of the project’s implementation. If you want buy-in, make sure the system supports it. The role of top management is to create an environment that is conducive to performance. Management systems should be designed to support the role tactical implementation plays in enhancing performance. The admonition “If you want something to happen, then you need to (1) set specific goals for it, (2) encourage it, (3) fund it, (4) monitor it, (5) appraise it, and (6) reward for it” definitely applies to the buy-in process. Like most things in life, people will focus their attention on what is relevant and rewarding to them. While senior management encouragement may help rally the troops, “financial carrots” (or consequences) that are directly tied to implementation effectiveness can go a long way toward influencing behavior. Business Horizons / January-February 2003
Program metrics affect buy-in and performance. One of the most important ways for implementers to build in financial carrots is to set clear and measurable metrics for assessing the performance of the program and those implementing it. Frequently, buy-in problems boil down to a misunderstanding of the responsibilities and obligations of project participants in executing project plans. Because clearly understanding expectations is essential, setting metrics is one of the keys to successful implementation. Metrics help clarify the tactical goals and the expected deliverables. Allowing implementers to “close the loop” and judge the effectiveness of the program or initiative, they can be set to assess both strategic outcomes and critical process (or implementation) outcomes. Cypress Semiconductor Corporation relies on metrics to foster a “no surprises” environment as a means “to do the mundane better than anyone else.” Its CEO, T.J. Rodgers (1990), noted that metrics are critical to his firm’s success because it operates in a “treacherous and unforgiving business.” In any given week, some 6,000 goals in its database come due. He noted that discipline, accountability, and relentless attention to detail are essential.
Principle #3: Surprises must be anticipated and avoided. Those involved in planning should recognize the two rules of implementation: (1): “Stuff” happens; (2) When things seem to be going smoothly, remember Rule #1. Effective implementation often boils down to the ability to anticipate and avoid potential problems that can occur during a project. Although implementation problems are a fact of life, highly effective implementers succeed in part because they are more diligent in identifying and assessing risks. They look for causal links between project elements and potential negative outcomes. The “Pepsi Stuff” promotion that tied in with the film True Lies shows how implementers can be taken by surprise by not thinking through all the details of their tactical initiatives. Pepsi ran test ads for a promotion in the Northwest in which a Harrier jet could be acquired for seven million “Pepsi points.” Since points could be purchased from Pepsi at a cost of 10 cents per point, this made the price of a Harrier jet a mere $700,000. A college student sent a check to Pepsi for $700,000 in an attempt to claim the jet. Although Pepsi was ultimately able to win the legal battle, the whole episode could have been avoided with better foresight. Running what-if scenarios for various events (and doing a little math) may have revealed the possibility that someone might actually take Pepsi up on its offer. The increasing incidence of discontinuities in today’s marketplace makes it impossible for even the savviest people to anticipate all the possible ways an event might unfold. The question now becomes, “Is there anything that impleTactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
menters can do to better anticipate and avoid potential downstream problems?” Those organizing for implementation should be able to reduce the frequency and severity of surprises by using more experienced managers, engaging in a more fine-grained level of planning, identifying project risks, and developing contingency plans. Managerial experience. Keren (1987) has shown that more experienced individuals are better able to anticipate unusual or uncommon occurrences. Just as expert bridge players are better-calibrated bidders because they take into account more unusual events or hands, more experienced implementation managers are likely to have deeper, richer knowledge structures of the variety of factors and contingencies to take into account to achieve tactical objectives. Experience plays a key role in the development of perceptiveness and intuition. Perceptiveness involves the ability to see things others may not see. Intuition involves sensing subtle cause-and-effect relationships and coming up with the answer without consciously knowing how you got it. These skills are particularly valuable when there is limited information and time is of the essence. Planning for implementation. The value of detailed planning is a catch-22. Too much can lead to paralysis by analysis; too little can result in chaos. The lack of planning often produces inefficiencies, omissions, needless overlap, and high anxiety for all involved. When Crawford Greenwalt was president of Du Pont, he said, “One minute spent in planning saves three or four minutes in execution.” If his logic were carried to the extreme, however, it would result in the plan never being implemented because it would never be completed. When it comes to implementation, however, the evidence seems to suggest that developing highly detailed plans has significant value as long as it does not foster a false sense of predictability or paralysis by analysis. Detailed planning usually enhances implementers’, stakeholders’, and management’s understanding of the problem because it requires methodically thinking through the situation, which reduces the likelihood that oversights will occur. Thus, the process may have considerable value by providing significant insights. Adopting anticipatory management. Anticipatory management involves taking mental journeys into various possible futures before taking the physical journey and committing resources. Risk analysis can be a key way to enhance anticipatory planning. It uses what-if scenarios to identify factors that could potentially derail the project. Project team members are thus better prepared to identify potential problems, assess the probability that they will occur, and make changes in the plan where needed. Contingency planning is another key facet of anticipatory management. When there is little time to review the whole situation and craft a whole new game plan, having 57
fairly explicit contingency plans in the original planning process in case of undesired events can provide a firm with a “quick response” capability that will give it an edge over firms that are more reactive. Contingency plans need to be developed if: (1) the consequences of error are too high, (2) the probability of error is too high, (3) the consequences of reacting slowly are too high, or (4) a combination of two or more of these factors. The growing need for anticipatory management and contingency planning is captured in the US West ad, “You either make dust or you eat dust.”
Principle #4: Time pressure is the enemy of effective implementation. We live in an era when time is of the essence. Speed-tomarket is considered critical whether a company wants to be a first mover or a fast follower. Issues such as rapid prototyping, concurrent design and manufacturing, justin-time delivery, competing on Internet time, and 24/7 availability are seen as keys to success. The first-to-market mentality says it is more important for a product to be first than to be exceptional. However, such a fixation on time can have serious repercussions. How many e-firms rushed their offerings to market in an attempt to be the first in a particular market “space” only to earn the ill will of customers when their products failed to live up to the hype? If a company lacks the time to get it right the first time, it surely won’t have enough time to fix it and get it right later. A major pharmaceutical firm had two products in the same product class, one an established but eroding market leader, the other brand new. A strategy was developed to maintain the sales of the established product while growing sales of the new one by targeting them to two different segments. Although the strategy made sense on the surface, the effort turned out to be a disaster. Tactical implementation was contingent on the sales force’s ability to convey product information to medical decision makers. However, with no time to promote the program internally through training or other means, the sales force did not understand the specifics of the new positioning for each product. When the program was introduced to them, the result was mass confusion. The established market leader lost share and the new product floundered.
Principle #5: There will be problems to respond to. The unpredictability of what lies ahead means that as people implement plans they will have to: (1) size up the uniqueness of the situation, (2) scan the surroundings for clues that modifications need to be made during implementation, (3) determine what to do, and (4) make adjustments when it becomes apparent that the original plan will not succeed.
58
Early warning systems enable quicker detection of and response to small problems before they can escalate into major ones. Such systems are critical for the success of marketing projects. A television cable company created a promotion designed to introduce current users of digital satellite systems to its digital cable offering. Participants in the promotion were offered a free three-month trial. When their bill arrived, they were instructed to submit a coupon as payment for the monthly service. However, as too often occurs, a creative and potentially profitable marketing program backfired due to poor execution. Apparently the bill processing department was not alerted to the promotion. So when a coupon was sent in as “payment” for the service, the account was not credited as having been paid. Customer service representatives fielding complaints gave conflicting information because many were unaware of the promotion. When an account became listed as past due, it was turned over to the collection department, who proceeded to seek payment through telephone calls and irksome letters. This example highlights the importance of: (1) attending to details, (2) having people on the firing line involved in planning, (3) attaining buy-in from all departments involved in the implementation, and (4) recognizing when things are not going as planned. If those managing the digital cable promotion had been more alert to the billing problem, if the customer service personnel had stepped in to fix the problem when alerted to the situation, or if the bill processing personnel had questioned what to do with the unanticipated “coupon” being submitted as payment, the problems with this promotion could have been expeditiously resolved. Mindfulness. Effective implementers are mentally alert to the situation so that when unexpected problems emerge they are prepared to respond sooner and with fewer resources. One senior manager, reflecting on what made an individual a superior implementer, indicated that such people are “paranoid about details.” Their belief that things go wrong makes them extremely vigilant for the potential emergence of problems. This characteristic appears closely related to the concept of “mindfulness,” defined by Weick, Sutcliffe, and Obstfeld (1999) as a cognitive capability that leads to “a rich awareness of discriminatory detail and a capacity for action.” Implementers rarely have the luxury of focusing on one project at a time. Most front-line managers operate in a world of “spinning plates.” At any one time they might be working on several projects, attending to their daily responsibilities, and handling the latest crisis. Today, more and more time is spent running back and forth from one wobbling plate to the next to keep them from crashing. In a zero-sum world, the time devoted to problem solving subtracts from the time available for problem seeking. This is unfortunate because the more time that can be invested in identifying potential fires, the less time and resources will be needed to put them out. Business Horizons / January-February 2003
The role of improvisation. Effective implementation frequently requires improvisation prowess because things rarely go as planned. The experience of Jim Lovell, Jack Swigert, and Fred Haise on Apollo 13 is a dramatic example of effective improvisation when just about anything and everything went wrong. Improvisation coupled with tenacity by astronauts and ground crew alike overcame seemingly insurmountable odds to bring the astronauts safely back to Earth. They confirmed the belief that necessity is truly the mother of invention. While the kind of problems that occur while implementing tactical initiatives in the corporate arena may not match the drama of the Apollo 13 mission, they do require many of the same skills. Front-line managers must be prepared to improvise appropriate and unique responses in the face of critical unanticipated problems. Successful improvisation frequently involves creativity, teamwork, leadership by different people at different times, and the ability to devote full concentration and attention to the moment.
Managerial guidelines
T
he need for detailed planning, the value of including implementation participants early in the planning process, the need for clear metrics, and the alignment of incentives to enhance performance appear to be little more than common sense. But if implementation is simply a matter of common sense, why do firms struggle so mightily to implement their tactical initiatives? The following section highlights some “uncommon” sense about improving implementation effectiveness.
1. Hone your implementation skills. Getting to the top today takes more than an advanced degree from a prestigious B-school; you have to demonstrate that you can make things happen, which requires excellence in implementation. It may not be glamorous, but earning the label of “someone who gets things done by paying attention to the details” can be more valuable than having a freshly minted MBA. Unfortunately, most business curricula do a poor job of preparing the next wave of front-line managers for effective implementation. Likewise, many in-house management training programs are woefully lacking when it comes to providing insights into the challenges and nuances of implementation. Firms that make an effort to ensure that first-time managers develop these critical skills early will be more successful than firms that merely throw their people into the fire. Preparing for the challenges associated with tactical implementation should include case studies that foster mindfulness, as well as project management tools and what-if simulations. Tactical initiatives usually have all the
Tactical implementation: The Devil is in the details
characteristics of projects—they are unique, complex, and require a great deal of coordination and planning. However, front-line managers required to implement them often fail to take advantage of the useful tools and techniques available to them.
2. Prepare for the unexpected. There is no such thing as a perfect plan or a failsafe system. Planning and implementation is a question-andanswer process. Most managers operate in a reactive mode by spending their time coming up with answers to today’s questions and solving today’s problems. Some operate more proactively, directing their attention to identifying the questions that will need to be answered. By scanning the horizon for potential problems, they are able to prevent problems or minimize their consequences. A few managers, however, have embraced anticipatory management. By running scenarios, they not only identify emerging questions, they give their firms an edge by having the answers before their competitors or customers are even aware of the questions. Anticipatory managers not only prevent problems, they position their firms to capitalize on emerging opportunities.
3. Effective execution is not possible without a supportive infrastructure. If details are crucial to effective execution, then systems must be in place to help develop and monitor details. Plans and strategies can point people on the firing line in the right direction, but the people will not be able to hit the bull’s-eye unless they are given the infrastructure needed to “make it happen.” Management information systems must provide timely and accurate information. If awareness is a prerequisite to change, then targets need to be set, performance monitored, and contingency plans quickly triggered when variances are detected.
4. Building buy-in is a fundamental implementation task. The surest way for implementation to run into trouble is when the individuals or groups counted on to do the execution tasks fail to follow through with an appropriate or timely effort. The challenge is that employees from other functional groups often think of performing tactical initiatives as unrelated to their core responsibilities. Key structural ways to enhance buy-in include setting appropriate metrics for measuring task performance and aligning organizational systems to reward good performance. Buyin will be enhanced when participants understand the value of the initiative. Involving them in implementation planning and enlisting the aid of senior management to communicate the importance of the initiative throughout the firm are key ways to build buy-in.
59
5. Top management must provide direction, not directions. Anyone who has remodeled a house knows that plans will have to be modified as soon as the first board is removed. Our architect and craftsman example illustrated the “dilemma of details,” which is especially acute when the situation changes from one moment to the next or when implementation planners do not have extensive experience about the challenges on the firing line. The architect needs to give craftsmen a sense of what the final result should be and a set of clear blueprints. Craftsmen must then be free to analyze the unique situation, fill in the blanks, develop the details, and improvise when needed.
6. Like a fine wine, implementation takes time. Time pressure may be a fact of life in companies, but not allocating enough time to perform implementation tasks can be a big mistake, leading to a variety of errors, oversights, and miscommunications. Too often top managers set artificial deadlines based on when they would like to see things implemented rather than on a careful planning and sequencing of tasks. Planners must therefore have a thorough understanding of time requirements.
7. Management must provide air cover for “reality checkers.” Mindfulness is a valuable attribute, but some businesspeople see it as being cynical, negative, not a team player, or downright nuts. Just as companies need open-minded, free-wheeling individuals who can think outside the box in brainstorming and new product development sessions, they also need people who can find flaws and are willing to provide a timely sense of reality. Their skills need to be used when appropriate. These people also need to be protected from those who don’t like to be challenged.
8. Make simplicity a virtue. The lesson of implementation is that simplicity in concept is not equivalent to simplicity in execution. Implementation will be considerably more straightforward if tactics require minimal involvement from other units and do not require employees to perform unfamiliar tasks. Strategists and implementers who can correctly determine whether initiatives are legitimately straightforward or are seemingly simple but deceptively complex will be valuable assets.
60
I
n football, the quarterback may call the right play, but if a lineman misses a block the strategy will not succeed. Implementation success in business works the same way. An innovative strategy may be developed, but its success rides on the effectiveness of the managers on the firing line to attend to the myriad details necessary not only to enact the strategy but to do it right, on time, and within budget. If times were stable and actions could be repeated over and over, it would be a lot easier to fine-tune details and improve execution. The true test of tactical implementation in the years ahead will be whether people can do well the first time. Competing in the marketplace will be like exploring new terrain. Innovative marketers, like the early explorers, do not have precise maps to guide them. They too need people who can size up the unique situation, develop a plan of action, monitor success, and make quick changes. Firms with operating systems that can develop details, continuously monitor the things that can make a difference, and be able to come up with answers to the who, what, when, where, and how much questions—and do it all quickly—will thrive. Those that don’t will fall by the wayside. ❍
References and selected bibliography Bonoma, Thomas. 1985. The marketing edge. New York: Free Press. Crossan, Mary. 1997. Improvise to innovate. Ivey Business Quarterly (Autumn): 36-42. Fussman, Cal. 2002. Richard Branson: What I’ve learned. Esquire (January): 99. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1983. The change masters. New York: Simon and Schuster. Keren, Gideon. 1987. Facing uncertainty in the game of bridge: A calibration study. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes 39/1 (February): 98-114. Knutson, Joan, and Ira Bitz. 1991. Project management: How to plan and manage successful projects. New York: AMACOM. Muczyk, Jan P., and Bernard C. Reimann. 1989. MBO as a complement to effective leadership. Academy of Management Executive 3/2: 131-137. Noble, Charles H. 1999. Building the strategy implementation network. Business Horizons 42/6 (November-December): 19-28. Pressman, Jeffrey L., and Aaron B. Wildavsky. 1973. Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Rodgers, T.J. 1990. No excuses management. Harvard Business Review 68/4 (July-August): 84-98. Weick, Karl E., Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, and David Obstfeld. 1999. Organizing for high reliability: Processes of collective mindfulness. Research in Organizational Behavior 21: 81-123.
Business Horizons / January-February 2003