It is
quite unusual to see an Harvard Business Review article which is such a thinly disguised plug for a
consultancy but the explanation is in the note that tells us that one of the
authors - all of whom are from ‘Decision Strategies International’ - is also
connected with Wharton Business School. The
article puts forward a simple framework for pinning down that elusive
competence of strategic thinking, with some potentially interesting examples of
how it is applied.
Unfortunately
these examples lacked authenticity because they were all anonymous with an irritating
use of Christian names. Mike learnt how to gain better information, Bob invited
others to disagree, Liz watched consumers etc.
As the stories were all about successful outcomes, it is hard to
understand why at least some of the people featured could not have been named;
it inevitably causes one to wonder if these examples are composites or even
fictional. And it was stretching
credibility to imply that, in all these cases, it only came right after
coaching by the authors’ organisation.
The
essence of the article is a simple list of key skills for strategic thinking
which, it is argued, must all be possessed by the perfect strategic thinker; it
is not enough just to get some right.
The six skills are the ability to:
· - Anticipate
· - Challenge
· - Interpret
· - Decide
· - Align
· - Learn.
My first
reaction was that I had seen this somewhere before and it dawned on me that
there was a strong resemblance to the competency frameworks we have across in a
number of world class organisations when designing learning solutions. This does not necessarily put the authors in
a bad light; one of them heads up a research unit at Wharton and this would
rightly involve the study of best practice among top companies. But it does make one question the level of
originality.
So what
other insights are put forward to support the six headline skills? For the most part the answer is - relatively
few. The anonymous examples seem too
good to be true and the further explanations are mainly statements of the
obvious. What kind of leader is it who
doesn’t look at competitors and try to anticipate what they will do? Or encourage debates which challenge
conventional thinking? Or look for
different explanations for events? These
are the gems that come out of further explanations of the first three headings.
I could
continue with further examples of the ‘motherhood and apple pie’ comments shown
within each heading but I hope I have made the point. There is nothing here that will be new to the
seasoned HR person who has been involved in this area before. There is a questionnaire at the end that
allows readers to test their own skills in the six skills, a shortened version
of a longer test that is available on-line.
There are two statements - which are to be rated 1 to 7 – for each skill
and these are rather too general and obvious for objective assessment, unless
carried out by someone else. I would bet
strongly on any CEO rating him or herself high on every question, because it is
obviously what strategic thinkers are supposed to do. For example, would any CEO confess to not
having curiosity and an open mind?
My
overall conclusion is that this article is not of the calibre usually
associated with Harvard Business Review and will not add much value for the experienced HR person
who has considered these issues before.
To achieve that goal there would need to be much more on the ways in
which these skills can be developed.
However, the article may well be of benefit for the less experienced
person who is likely to be involved in establishing competency frameworks and
learning solutions in the future and needs a starting point.
Read the original article;
http://hbr.org/2013/01/strategic-leadership-the-esssential-skills/ar/1
No comments:
Post a Comment