Skip to main content

STRATEGIC ACTIONS



Once a strategy has been selected, leaders must figure out what actions have to be taken to successfully implement it, and they must take all of them. Often that means walking away from old systems and setting up entirely new ones. At Ameritech, the decision to enter new fields meant actually lobbying to give away the company’s monopoly on local phone service in order to get permission to enter new fields. As a result, Weiss and Notebaert found that they had to address every aspect of the business from redefining winning (they expressly mentioned the importance of rewarding shareholders for the first time) to reorganizing the company into business units, to redefining leadership through personnel changes and leadership development. Fundamentally, they saw that they had to rebuild the company from the ground up. At Intel, Grove and his colleagues faced a similarly daunting challenge. Once Grove had made up his mind to leave the memory chip business, he had to figure out how. What impact would this have on customers, for example? Did the company need a full product line to offer computer manufacturers? Was the technology in memories so central to Intel’s other products that it had to stay a part of the company? To answer these questions, Grove conducted discussions with Intel employees and others over lunches and at technical conferences, staff meetings, and product planning sessions. Even despite his firm conviction that the decision he and Moore had made was correct, when Intel managers asked, “Are we getting out of the memory business?” Grove still struggled with actually saying, “Yes.” He, as much as anyone, had built Intel and identified the company with its success in the memory business. It was hard for him to abandon it. He subsequently found himself taking half-steps to get out of the memory business. He would at one moment decide to do it, but then approve the R&D budget for new memory chip designs. Finally Grove started to turn the corner. He was ready to make the strategic moves necessary to implement the new plan. In what was for Grove the crossing of the Rubicon, he told the sales force to notify customers that Intel would be getting out of the memory business.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FUNCTIONS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

Function of the Holy Spirit. This list of the 70 Functions of the Holy Spirit come from her research. He leads and directs. (Matthew 4:1; Mark 1:12; Luke 2:27; 4:1; Acts 8:29; Romans 8:14) The Holy Spirit speaks – in, to and through. (Matthew 10:20; Acts 1:16; 2:4; 13:2; 28:25; Hebrews 3:7) He gives power to cast out devils. (Matthew 12:28) He releases power. (Luke 4:14) The Holy Spirit anoints. (Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38) The Holy Spirit “comes upon” or “falls on”. (Matthew 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 2:25; 3:22; 4:18; John 1:32,33; Acts 10:44; 11:15) He baptizes and fills. (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 1:15,41,67; 3:16, 4:1; John 1:33; Acts 1:4-5; 2:4; 4:8,31; 6:3,5; 7:55; 10:47; 11:24; 13:9,52; 1 Corinthians 12:12) He gives new birth. (John 3:5,8) He leads into worship. (John 4:23) He flows like a river from the spirit man. (John 7:38-39) He ministers truth. (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13) He dwells in people. (John 14:

SETTING A DIRECTION VS PLANNING AND BUDGETING

Since the function of leadership is to produce change, setting the direction of that change is fundamental to leadership. Setting direction is never the same as planning or even long-term planning, although people often confuse the two. Planning is a management process, deductive in nature and designed to produce orderly results, not change. Setting a direction is more inductive. Leaders gather a broad range of data and look for patterns, relationships, and linkages that help explain things. What’s more, the direction-setting aspect of leadership does not produce plans; it creates vision and strategies. These describe a business, technology, or corporate culture in terms of what it should become over the long term and articulate a feasible way of achieving this goal. Most discussions of vision have a tendency to degenerate into the mystical. The implication is that a vision is something mysterious that mere mortals, even talented ones, could never hope to have. But developing

ALIGNING PEOPLE VS ORGANIZING AND STAFFING

A central feature of modern organizations is interdependence, where no one has complete autonomy, where most employees are tied to many others by their work, technology, management systems, and hierarchy. These linkages present a special challenge when organizations attempt to change. Unless many individuals line up and move together in the same direction, people will tend to fall all over one another. To executives who are overeducated in management and undereducated in leadership, the idea of getting people moving in the same direction appears to be an organizational problem. What executives need to do, however, is not organize people but align them. Managers “organize” to create human systems that can implement plans as precisely and efficiently as possible. Typically, this requires a number of potentially complex decisions. A company must choose a structure of jobs and reporting relationships, staff it with individuals suited to the jobs, provide training for those who need it,