Office of Strategy Management
Office of Strategy Management
In the article “Office of Strategy Management”, Kaplan and Ditto reveal that there is a disconnection amongst companies between strategy formulation and strategy execution. On average, 95% of a company's employees are unaware of, or do not understand, its strategy. They say that there is a gap in many large organizations between strategy formulation and execution, between ambitious goals and actual performance. The authors submit that if employees are unaware of the strategy, they cannot help the organization implement it effectively. Kaplan and Norton say it doesn’t have to be like that. They have studied companies that achieved performance breakthroughs by adopting the Balanced Scorecard and its associated tools to help them better communicate strategy to their employees, and to guide and monitor the execution of that strategy. While some companies have achieved better, longer-lasting improvements than others, the organizations that have managed to sustain their strategic focus have typically established a new corporate-level unit to oversee all activities related to an office of strategy management (OSM). The OSM coordinates an array of tasks. The function of the OSM is to create and manage the scorecard, align the organization, review the strategy, develop strategy, communicate strategy, manage strategic initiatives, and integrate strategic priorities with other support functions. They assert that the OSM does not do all the work, but it facilitates the processes so that strategy is executed in a more integrated way across the organization. They say that an OSM is applicable with every organization whether it is used or not. I agree with the authors the OSM sets the framework to ensure good communication throughout the company. An OSM can improve a strategy execution, and the communication of that strategy, and to ignore any of the process that an OSM seeks to achieve for an organization could lead to its failure. If
In the article “Office of Strategy Management”, Kaplan and Ditto reveal that there is a disconnection amongst companies between strategy formulation and strategy execution. On average, 95% of a company's employees are unaware of, or do not understand, its strategy. They say that there is a gap in many large organizations between strategy formulation and execution, between ambitious goals and actual performance. The authors submit that if employees are unaware of the strategy, they cannot help the organization implement it effectively. Kaplan and Norton say it doesn’t have to be like that. They have studied companies that achieved performance breakthroughs by adopting the Balanced Scorecard and its associated tools to help them better communicate strategy to their employees, and to guide and monitor the execution of that strategy. While some companies have achieved better, longer-lasting improvements than others, the organizations that have managed to sustain their strategic focus have typically established a new corporate-level unit to oversee all activities related to an office of strategy management (OSM). The OSM coordinates an array of tasks. The function of the OSM is to create and manage the scorecard, align the organization, review the strategy, develop strategy, communicate strategy, manage strategic initiatives, and integrate strategic priorities with other support functions. They assert that the OSM does not do all the work, but it facilitates the processes so that strategy is executed in a more integrated way across the organization. They say that an OSM is applicable with every organization whether it is used or not. I agree with the authors the OSM sets the framework to ensure good communication throughout the company. An OSM can improve a strategy execution, and the communication of that strategy, and to ignore any of the process that an OSM seeks to achieve for an organization could lead to its failure. If