Tag Archives: Identify

The Biggest problem with corporate strategy is trying to predict the future and to “dictate the marketplace.”!!!

21 Oct

Almost all strategic planning sessions start off with the vision, mission, goals, values, and objectives scenario – yes? This begs the question, how good is our track record for predicting the future – I bet it’s pretty bad?

Maybe it’s time to become radical, and to totally change our strategic start up design perspective. If I tell you that there is a far better way to hit the bull, more often than not would you be interested?

Would you consider yet another reality; May I change that perspective, and let’s see if that is still all true.

(My theory is if we change our perspective and not just our perceptions, we will get a much better look at the real problem, and the way we look at things, then creates scenarios in the brain, that keeps changing with the new perspective).

Because if we only believe we can’t predict the future with much certainty then we won’t bother planning it in much detail, will we? Safe to say; No one can predict with up-most certainty anything that is in the future, let alone what will happen next week…

Nevertheless, forecasting is of the up-most importance in business.

Therefore, strategist, and forecaster alike need to probe beyond that curtain of uncertainty, and predict what the eventuality could/ would be like if we stay, start the course with our current strategy.

(The academics teach us to apply the laws of averages here, to find the average, and then to summarise risk, and come up with a worst case, average and best case scenario.)

Now days we see a change, away from that norm, towards looking at broad spectrum analyse of strategic challenges – by firstly looking at both internal (environment) as well as external (environment) and scanning it for defects, and misplaced links, between structure and strategy…, translating into emergent strategy; There are two approaches to strategy making – a deliberate or emergent strategy. The deliberate strategy is analytical and structured – Vision Statement, Mission Statements, Strengths and Weaknesses (SWOT), Objectives etc.

Continue reading

The Purpose and Process of Security Access Control

5 Dec

We can speak of access control where we find a criterion for Authentication, Authorization, and Control.

The purpose of security guards and security devices at points of access. Is to create a perception of sanctuary and a presence of safety, and to enforce the access criteria.

Definition; Access control in general refers to a condition, or conditions (more than one) that must exist that specifically determines a criteria, or a set of criteria’s that has to be met, before access / entrance will be granted, thus restricting free access, by enlisting a criteria. This criteria could be simple or very complicated, physical, electronic or biometric (the recording of things such as people’s fingerprints or the appearance of their eye in order to identify them on an electronic system).By implication, anything from a key, to a credit card pin, to a finger print.

Access also implies egress, and rights

The point is exerting control over who can and who cannot access something has legal implications. Access infuses a right or a privilege that is constitutional, to a right, giving such a person user rights and denying others. Whoever has the key, code, pin, password ect., has rights of access, for or to whatever mechanism, or for whatever reason they might need it. This is called safety, which is also a right, and so too security. So we access some and egress from other rights, when we talk security, and the limitations to rights, and freedoms.

A way of thinking

Access control is a general way of talking about security, as a way of controlling people’s freedom of movement or access to any specific item, place, building, vehicle, resource or whatever. Access can be granted or denied based on a wide variety of criteria, such as predetermined.  This brings about a perception of security. By bringing about forms of control, control creates measures; processes, for dealing with entry/ access and egress, that is now referred to as a criteria for security. Continue reading

Unearthing Traditional Thinking on Strategic Alignment

8 Apr

If you slice and dice any strategy; then it just becomes a planned “fruit salad”


We need structures and functions to be sterile. Over segmentation and the division of the organisation into more or less autonomous strategic business units, that specialise, and start doing things that are not traditionally their function, with the duplication of functions and elements of strategy are never wise; it’s a recipe for sure disaster.

Where one department also share the next department’s functions, when nonetheless, they both have dissimilar core functions; for instance, where finance and HR – Human Resources – want to both share the final authority to approve leave for instance…then we have successfully created potential conflict. We see and have many such instances in business today, why?

I am sure we have heard it before, and with good reason, it’s the truth, a fact of life. That “Apples belong with Apples”, and then “Pears with Pears”, then fruit with fruit and meat with meat; so the structure stays healthy. Like with like.

Even in nature, we don’t get one tree brining forth several varieties of fruit, and a lamb will never give you pork chops, and beef fillets when slaughtered.

No its one tree with one type of fruit only. Order in all things must prevail, it is the first rule of nature, and then, then we see balance prevail, when rules triumph. Only humans have disturbed this natural order of things, subliminally we have an in bread tendency to do it, daily. How does this become relevant to strategy you may ask? It is logic! You think? Then why do we find so much chaos all over. Again, it is a contest of our will, and our minds competing – logic and reason.

Well the point I want to drive home here today is this; Duplication is waist, and always bottlenecks enterprise at some point. We get many examples of misalignments, overlapping, and diversification…of business functions, we need to gauge the impact and results of all these aspects of doing “business unusual”,  to see if it is good business practice, best practice, or just plain smart or not?

If not, then we need to re-think our “logic”. The same principle applies with all things strategically relevant, that need to comply with logic, and reason, then natural laws;

1)You must decide what you want from your strategy and be very specific with the results expected; then only will you be able to move to;

  • When you want it, how you want it, and how much of it you want, specifics is key to getting some required detail, to create order with, that sprouts required balance, in structuring events and elements of strategy

2)Your mind can only think critical if we deal with one aspect at a time

  • We need to see it in order to have it done; same with functions, if all things reside with one person, or department, then we have created order, then follows structure and it results in balance. Then we know with a certainty who, what, where, when, and how…

3)Don’t waver; a woman is never half pregnant, she is or she’s not, we are either going for it flat out, or not at all…

  • You must do things with conviction; half hearted effort does not boil the food well, like true passion will boil it over. Don’t have disproportionate efforts dealing with aspects, proportionality in all things, equates to balance again. Slicing ad dicing department functions into smaller or different entities, only assist with weakening efficiency…never a good idea.

4)Persistence is the best weapon against stagnation; there is nothing that beats the persistent person and his effort on earth, no rock to hard, no mountain to high, no ocean to wide, no wind to strong, nothing…

  • Make sure you have the right man with the right tool for the job…directing.

5)Be results driven; win small battles, on your way towards winning the bigger wars, to have a successful overall campaign.

  • You cannot manage that which you cannot measure; strategy is all about measures, when segmented and divorced from its normal flow it becomes a fruit salad, a mix of things undistinguishable. Strategy requires differentiation and distinction, we need to be able to say, hay the “banana” has gone rotten, replace… etc. Not possible when you only see fruit salad.

The resolution is taking this avenue;

With “Strategic Targeting” we try to find and identify those things that blur and block our aim, and thus our reality. When we need to see clearly; it is the mental process of – Identify, Clarify, Quantify and defining of our objectives and goals first. We cannot do this if we cannot differentiate or measure what we want, have, etc. Always Identify, Clarify, Quantify for ourselves first, and then start pointing the way for others, with this knowledge. Without strategic targeting to keep us on aim, we tend to want to specialise, then segment and over “divisionallise” to our own detriment.

“Only fools rush in and then onward” on a hunch that is – once again, only when strategic parts stay and remain clear, visible, can we see when they fail, and where.

Clearly understood instructions, and expectations when seeking for solution, come from having set directives to follow. Then we won’t find haphazard management that creates specialisation, and diversification, to stick plasters on soars, cuts and burses, of the organisation due to its misalignment with its strategic intent. By staying true to the requirements of its core function.

Progress is only possible, and felt at the service levels, when we follow clear guidelines and protocol. When our work functions are not segregated or dispersed across many tiers and business functions of the structure, and business units.  Solutions become clear; only when we have a transparent and totally accountable person, people, unit, division, or department as a concept to work with.

The concept must be fully encompassing, and be a total solution. The collective envisions the contemplated solution against; what we know now, or have assumed, and have to work with, vs. who, where, what, when, and how this will solve the problem – and “who” will be responsible.

Only then; will planning become specific and directed – because initiative flows again. Only; when we know who to blame, and then also who to compliment, will we know we have structure that works, and unites people with their work and responsibility. If there is; no direct responsibility, then you will find no discipline, no order, no accountability, no structure ,and then no balance…lots of NO;s just because of one misalignment, take care.

It’s not always about efficiency, but also effectiveness – working hard towards that which is becoming significant – and worthy of our effort and time spent – only then does planning become a useful exercise if it connects its burden with people, to make it their business.

Here at this point, when we see and recognise that strategy has duality – two sides of a coin exiting as one entity. One part peoples things and thinking, and the other part systems and structure that need to unite.

Only if we stay close to this knowledge; then will we create opportunities to make our competition irrelevant…at some point.

Now – Read the book or Ebook; Read more in my new book Strategic Management, The Radical Revolutionary Strategic Management Matrix for Predators by Reinier Geel, now available at Trafford; http://www.trafford.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?Book=339320

%d bloggers like this: