"I can imagine where you might be coming from with this question. Like so many of us, you may have seen strategy processes consumed by envisioning what could be, heavy on big-picture vision but light on what it might take to get there. The resulting strategies can struggle to offer practical guidance. On the flip side, I have also seen strategy processes cling too tightly to what we're comfortable committing to, inadvertently reinforcing organizational inertia."
"The greatest incoherence seems to occur when the juxtaposition of the terms strategic and planning is taken too far. This happens when strategy dreams up a big, hairy, audacious goal, then proceeds to take the form of a concrete plan. The SMART goals and methodical, multiyear timelines that result can often have little bearing on reality. These are the processes that get mocked as "strategy theater.""
Strategy processes often emphasize visionary goals while neglecting the resources and capabilities required for implementation, producing strategies that lack practical guidance. Other processes constrain ambition to familiar commitments, which can reinforce organizational inertia and limit strategic possibilities. Confusion intensifies when strategic thinking is prematurely converted into rigid, detailed plans with SMART goals and multiyear timelines that fail to match operational reality. Capability and capacity planning assess people, systems, budgets, and culture to determine readiness to execute chosen strategies. Clear assessment of gaps and prioritized investments in organizational capacity enable realistic commitments, phased implementation, and stronger alignment between strategy and execution.
Read at Nonprofit Quarterly | Civic News. Empowering Nonprofits. Advancing Justice.
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]