Five True Cliches of Strategic Planning, III: A Stitch In Time Saves Nine

The third truth for strategic planning is that timely action takes much less energy and resources than trying to deal with problems after they've already happened.

I'm big on the words "reactive" and "proactive". They actually come up in my daily language, even when I'm not talking about work at all. "Well, let's be proactive about figuring out what's for dinner, instead of waiting until the last minute and then eating really late and keeping the baby up…blah, blah, blah." See? In reality, everyone has to be somewhat reactive, since we can't predict the future or totally control it. However, recognizing that we can't control everything or maybe not even most things, doesn't it make sense to maximize what we can?

So, my car has this really great sunroof/moon roof. The difference, at least as I understand it, is that a sun roof opens just a little bit to let air in and a moon roof opens fully because at night you're not worried about your eyes being burned out by blinding radiation. Anyway, my 2-year-old son really loves it when I open the roof and then close it -- over and over and over again. One day recently I had been doing the usual routine of opening and closing during a drive; we got home and I quickly closed the roof and bundled the baby into the house. Later that evening, my husband came in and mentioned that I'd better go out and close my roof, which was still partway open (in the sunroof position, as a matter of fact - see, I wasn't just babbling!). Given the nature of this article, this could really only go one way to demonstrate the cliche effectively, right? Yup, you bet, I decided I would just close the roof in the morning when I got in my car rather than take the time to go out and do it right then.

The next question, of course, would be this : "did it rain overnight?". The answer is "no". No, it did not rain -- it POURED buckets of rain, with wild special effects that any Hollywood studio would have drooled over. And, as a particularly loud blast woke me in the middle of the night, I had a moment of perfect clarity. "I really, really should have closed that roof." The next morning, as I spent nearly 15 minutes mopping out my car, running back in the house for a towel to sit on so that I wouldn't get my pants wet from the still-damp seat, and observing a moment of silent mourning for the paperwork I had left on the front seat, I really felt the power of being proactive rather than reactive.

Strategic plans should be all about being proactive; I mean, isn't that the whole point of planning? Yet the truth is that ignoring potential problems is quite seductive during strategic planning. Many organizations take a rose-colored glasses approach to looking at the future, or define problems so fuzzily that no one can get a grip on them. One reason for this, honestly, is that it can be extremely difficult to identify potential problems from the inside. It's hard for people to step back far enough to see the whole picture. Another reason is that people dislike putting down on paper problems that they don't know how to solve.

Two different organizations with which I worked a while ago demonstrate this reactive versus proactive stance very well. Both had large end-user populations, with a concurrent demand for end-user equipment. Both also had strategic initiatives on the plan that would require greater performance from end-user equipment. Neither had enough money in the budget for a full equipment refresh to bring the equipment of the whole user population up to speed, and neither would be able to sustain continual equipment refreshes on a regular three-year basis. One of the organizations decided that it would simply refresh equipment as it could, maintain a five-year cycle, and try to make the new initiatives work regardless. The other organization knew that this would be a stopping point for its growth. It wasn't acceptable to stop progress due to inadequate equipment, and at the same time the budget was the budget. So, people sat down and brainstormed. They reached out to partners like Mavenspire for ideas. They spent the time and energy to research and think and imagine up front, so that they wouldn't be caught flat-footed when the time came to move forward with new ideas.

Unsurprisingly, the first organization's reactive stance led to some key initiatives being significantly delayed. Some departments moved forward faster than others, which served to heighten a perceived gap in respect for different roles within the company. Employees' morale went down while frustration rose. While the organization did manage to implement much of what it planned in the end, it took much more time and energy (nine stitches) than it might have. At the same time, the second organization identified some innovative options, like the HP Renew program, to bring the cost of equipment down significantly. It coupled this reduced cost with some budget reallocation and used a staggered equipment refresh approach, focusing on the lowest level equipment first. It was able to deliver the planned innovations on time and stayed on target for its strategic plan.

In the case of my car, a few minutes would have fixed the problem before it began. In real-life business situations, it won't necessarily be so simple -- but that doesn't mean it can't be done. With focus and attention to what's really happening, organizations can indeed sew the stitch in time that will save them nine costly and time-consuming stitches down the road.

Cliche 2: If The Shoe Fits, Wear It

Cliche 4: A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand