Files mounted on the Making Strategy Sage web site Six sets of PowerPoint slides: Introduction to Making Strategy Strategy as the Prioritisation and Management of Key Issues Strategy as Purpose: Agreeing Goals and Aspirations for the Organisation Strategy as Competitive advantage Closure These slides are intended only as a supplement to the book and do not represent a complete picture of the theory, concepts, or practice that lie behind the approach to strategy. They provide some further examples and pick out some main themes. They have been designed so that they can be modified and added to. However, the copyright of the material lies with the authors.   Four sets of PowerPoint slides that list the tasks for each of the four forums. These are directly from the book and save retyping them if required. A 2-page quick guide to the use of Decision Explorer. This guide provides the majority of the ‘hot-key’ instructions that used extensively during the Making Strategy process. Videos introducing the use of Decision Explorer in the issue management forum. This provides a quick way of ‘getting the hang’ of using the software at a basic level.

Group Explorer There is also available a Group Support System that allows participants to enter statements and links directly in to a publicly displayed Decision Explorer model. The system also allows for the rating of statements, and the indication of preferences about, for example, options to focus on, undesirable options, leverage on goals, etc. The significant benefits of the system are higher productivity, anonymity when appropriate, the ability to monitor development consensus, and facilitator monitoring of levels of participation and type of participation. The system has been used extensively over the past 10 years by a number of Business Schools, managers, and consultants. It has been used with top management teams of MNC’s as well as with pressure groups. The system requires the purchase of the Group Explorer software from Ackermann&Eden at Strathclyde Business School, a full copy of Decision Explorer, Windows Server, and 2 laptop computers (one running Windows Server and the other Windows 7). See: Ackermann, F. and Eden, C. Negotiation in Strategy Making Teams Group Support Systems and the Process of Cognitive Change. Group Decision and Negotiation. 2011; 20(3)293-314. Andersen, D.; Richardson, G. P.; Ackermann, F., and Eden, C. Using a Group Support System to Add Value to Group Model Building. System Dynamics Review. 2010; 26(4)335-346.

Making Strategy: Mapping Out Strategic Success Chapters 3 and 4 Strategy as the Prioritisation and Management of Key Issues Fran Ackermann and Colin Eden

Please note, these slides are designed to be used in addition to the book: Making Strategy: Mapping Out Strategic Success. by Ackermann & Eden, Sage, 2011 They are not designed to be used in a ‘stand-alone’ manner, or to replicate theory and practice presented in the book. The assignment design represents one possibility for a 20 credit MBA course (thus each of the 4 parts represents approx 5 credits + Closure).

Strategic Management is about agreeing which strategic issues to practically focus energy, cash, effort, emotion

Making Strategy in 4x~3hr workshops (2 days)… Making Strategy in 4x~3hr workshops (2 days)…. Or single half day workshops Workshop 1 – morning Strategy as the Prioritisation and Management of Key Issues Statement of Strategic Intent Workshop 2 – afternoon Strategy as Purpose: Agreeing Goals and Aspirations for the Organisation Workshop 3 – morning Strategy as Competitive advantage Workshop 4 – afternoon Strategy as Stakeholder Management DELIVERABLE OVERALL: Statement of strategic intent (SSI) encompassing: issue management, purpose, competitive advantage, stakeholder management

Strategy as the Prioritization and Management of Key Issues (Chapt3-4) Refer to p68 Strategy as the Prioritization and Management of Key Issues (Chapt3-4) Decide on a rough time horizon for your strategy (this is typically 2-5yrs but could be shorter).

Strategy as the Prioritization and Management of Key Issues Refer to p43, 68 a. Decide the relevant time horizon for your strategy (this is typically 2-5yrs). b. What are the (strategic) issues [issue selling/making claims on the future] that need to be resolved in order to assure the long term success of the organization over next ? years (for which the strategy is to be developed)? Collect these on a Decision Explorer view: spiral, or developing thematic clusters Refer to appendix

The Significance of “Procedural Justice” Refer to Chapt2 The Significance of “Procedural Justice” Procedural justice is concerned with the capacity of processes to enhance a sense of fairness and in so doing encourage cooperation, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviours, which in turn lead to better and implementable decisions. IT IS NOT ABOUT DEMOCRACY BUT ABOUT GOOD MANAGEMENT!

So, employ procedural justice Refer to p72 USE A “ROUND-ROBIN” IN TURN, ONLY ONE STATEMENT EACH, THEN AROUND THE GROUP AGAIN, AND AGAIN NO EVALUATION NO DISCUSSION, YET

Surfacing issues (‘negatives’) Refer to p58, 69 Is cathartic: ‘releases frustrations’ But also, and importantly, it reflects the need to get the attention of everyone: By developing a picture of crisis we fulfil John Kotter’s requirement to create a ‘crisis’/’burning platform’ that will mobilise attention But, then can move on to issues that derive from missing opportunities

Tips Spread around – NOT columns and rows Refer to appendix Spread around – NOT columns and rows Make sure the evaluative phrase is included “staff” becomes “exploit our best staff” Take out need, should, ought and make propositional “need to get rid of bad staff” becomes “get rid of bad staff” Use lower case except for names “Develop better advertising material” becomes “develop better advertising material” then editing from the front is likely In Decision Explorer: Change style to no border, so that can use select box to show

Try it… Target: minimum of about 20-25 issues, roughly clustered by theme Refer to p70

The timing… Time elapsed 00:55/01:35 Issue surfacing (55-95mins) [But might take you longer… this is your first attempt!]

Beginnings of an issue ‘dump’ Refer to p46 Beginnings of an issue ‘dump’

Dementia Forum: After 22 mins of issue gathering Refer to p54

The ‘Product’ Cathartic Divergent Insights, wisdom of all Full participation (from ‘round-robin’) Divergent Everything ‘out on the table’ that will affect our future success – internal, external, ‘scenario’, stakeholders, SWOT Insights, wisdom of all Thematic clusters The ‘strategic arenas’ that are demanding strategic action = very crude strategy with involvement and ownership! Refer to p77

Strategy as the Prioritization and Management of Key Issues (Chapt 3-4) a. Decide the relevant time horizon for your strategy (this is typically 2-5yrs). b. What are the strategic issues facing the organization over next ? years, for which the strategy is to be developed. Collect these on to a Decision Explorer view. c. Map out the interrelationship between these issues - what influences or drives what? Refer to p73, 81

First steps in linking to understand causality Refer to p49 First steps in linking to understand causality

Get means-ends relationship link correct!! Take out “need” and make the relationship: option to outcome. Thus, we take the action of training staff in order to reduce poor quality control Without correct coding any analysis will be meaningless!

Developing “Cause Maps” Refer to p82 “a tear-drop” Direction of Arrow “GOALS” or DISASTEROUS outcomes MEANS END ISSUES or possible STRATEGIES OPTION Desired OUTCOME more detailed OPTIONS ISSUE impacts If possible - convert the language to proposition - put in a verb, get rid of questions

Different meanings derive from what to do and why to do it Refer to p114 Different meanings derive from what to do and why to do it From: Eden, C. and Ackermann, F. Decision Making in Groups theory and practice. Nutt, P. and Wilson, D., Editors. Handbook of Decision Making. Oxford Blackwell; 2010; pp. 2301-272.

Dementia Forum: After 37 mins issues causally linked (loop in red) [15 mins of linking] Refer to p54

Try it… Target: link all issues and may be add more issues Remember Decision Explorer (DE) is the tool for creating an object in continual transition (TO) The Transitional Object (TO) is always in transition, so, at all times: Add new material, reword existing material, delete and add links All through continuing discussion

The timing… Time elapsed 01:30/02:25 Issue causal linking and exploration and elaboration (35-50mins)

“It won’t be the same if we did it again” Reliability??? Refer to p58 “It won’t be the same if we did it again” “Is it right?” It will gradually become increasingly robust as the strategic conversation continues, and the group focuses attention on what is important

Strategy as the Prioritization and Management of Key Issues (Chapt 3-4) Decide the relevant time horizon for your strategy (this is typically 2-5yrs). Each member of the group offers at least 4 strategic issues facing the organization over next 2-5 years, for which the strategy is to be developed. Map out the interrelationship between these issues - as you imagine your team might see it – what influences or drives what? Identify strategic priorities: *** as top priority, ** medium, and * low.

Analysing for clues about priorities SORTING OUT CANDIDATE PRIORITIES THAT MAY BE FIRST DRAFT STRATEGIES (see appendix) How ‘busy’ are some issues? Domain [ >DOMT and/or >CENTRAL] What issues (not goals) are the top outcomes? List heads [ >LH ] Which issues resolve the most other issues? Create hierarchical sets Select heads [ >LH ] swipe across them so that boxes appear around them [ >hieset sc ] (sc = selected concepts) [ potent ] gives the most potent listed at the top Check for feedback loops [>loop ] Does this identify statements that can represent all different themes? PRIORITIZE: add ***/**/*: double click on statement then press end-end, then type in the number of * Refer to appendix

Identifying busy/central concepts weightings B A 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.33’ A B Domain 6 3 Central 7.5 8 More equal for ‘centrality’ Refer to appendix

Using Potency as the basis for Prioritizing Refer to appendix

Finding ‘heads’ [>LH]: these are the closest to the goals/ends

For example, Laddering down (using CTRL-I) to include all causal chains that impact ‘head’ 13 which one of the heads (closest to a goal) Gives a ‘tear-drop’ in blue (representative only) Some ‘means’ also have other ends – see ‘unseen’ (dashed) links – these are turned on from the ‘view/show unseen links’ menu (or [>SUL]

Laddering down from 9 produces another purple ‘teardrop’: hierarchical set (hieset) Note that statements 25&67 (in red) hits 2 ‘heads’ (57 and 9): they are more ‘potent’ than other actions. (NOTE: the colours/styles used here are only for the purpose of illustration to show the different hiesets)

Laddering down from statement 86 creates another green ‘hieset’ with nothing common to the hiesets created from laddering down from 9 or 13 – suggesting independence.

Detecting potency in DE Establish ‘heads’ of interest (and possibly sub-heads Select them (boxed) DE>hieset sc [create a hierarchical set based on selected concepts: sc] DE>potent [determine which concepts hit the most selected concepts]

Detecting potency

Try it… Link and establish priorities BUT: watch out for some ‘top end’ statements being goals not issues – good or bad high level outcomes These will not be issue priorities, but ‘ends’ where issues are the strategic ‘means’ And check for at least one priority in each cluster (but use judgment)

The timing… Time elapsed 02:10/03:25 Analysis and prioritising (40-60mins)

Summary All strategic issues “out on the table” Refer to p84 All strategic issues “out on the table” Understand how issues and problems are interconnected That some issues drive and reinforce others That resolving one issue can help resolve others Resolving some issues can be potent in resolving a lot of other issues Issues at the ‘top’ tend to be ‘headline’ issues (or draft goals) Issues with a lot of arrows in and out of them tend to be important Domain and central analyses These properties help establish strategic priorities DELIVERABLE after a morning (or less): initial strategy – a negotiated agreement about strategic priorities Reevaluation of issues as a result of seeing them (listening to them) Seeing them in the context of others: what I think is important relates to what others think is important

Dementia Forum: After 83 mins (up to coffee break) – issues prioritized and summary map produced (using the collapse command in DE>col issues) Refer to p54

Strategy Deliverable… Refer to p56 Initial Statement of Strategic Intent for Strategy to Manage Dementia [EXAMPLE see page xxx] Our primary strategic focus will be to not be inhibited by what we have now as a basis for planning – and rather aspire to what we need. We expect this attitude to be a key driver for developing our ability to: acknowledge future demographics and increased dependency of patients in the community broaden the range of accommodation options for people with dementia and [resolve] inadequate choice of a variety of good quality long term care homes in all areas, increase availability of specialist dementia care, provide a more holistic and person centred approach to meeting integrated care needs Alongside aspiring to what we need there will be a parallel focus on creating an increased feeling of shared responsibility for range of services between Social Work Department and NHS. Together these priorities will help us reduce difficulties around early diagnosis & support where diagnosis is uncertain. Taking a shared responsibility will increase the probability of gaining more funding, which is central to helping resolve most of our strategic priorities. In addition it will help us attack our key goals of: increasing availability of specialist dementia care, reducing delays in accessing home care services, providing a more holistic and person centred approach to meeting integrated care needs, and resolving the inadequate choice of a variety of good quality long term care homes in all areas. Significant strategic priorities will be to increase the quality of care in private sector and broaden the range of accommodation options for people with dementia. Delivery of these priorities will be supported by our daring to review building based services and dispose of what isn't needed and build YES BUILD what is needed, which will help us respond and manage the needs and impact of patients with dementia in general & community hospitals. However, more importantly success will help us to resolve inadequate choice of a variety of good quality long term care homes in all areas. Our last key strategic focus is to promote knowledge, skills and understanding amongst service providers, family carers and the public, in order to help us provide a more holistic and person centred approach to meeting integrated care needs and also respond and manage the needs and impact of patients with dementia in general & community hospitals.

Assignment: Part 1 Save DE model Write and Save SSI Refer to assignment details slides Save DE model File name= ‘group name’_IM Write and Save SSI Write Reflections piece on making strategy as Issue Management (process/negotiation and content considerations) Refer to p56