Mintzberg Strategic Planning

[Suk Harian]

IanWilson in the leadarticle argues convincingly that in this period of rapid change we should shift fromstrategic planning to strategic thinking and strategic management. Henry Mintzberg (1994),in an article appearing in the latest issue of the Harvard Business Review titled"The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning," states that the label strategicplanning should be dropped because strategic planning has impeded strategic thinking.Mintzberg's argument is as follows:strategic planning is about analysis (i.e., breaking down a goal into steps, designing howthe steps may be implemented, and estimating the anticipated consequences of each step).Strategic thinking is about synthesis, about using intuition and creativity to formulatean integrated perspective, a vision, of where the organization should be heading. Theproblem is that strategic planning proponents believe that analysis encompasses synthesis;that in the best practice, strategic planning, strategic thinking, and strategy making aresynonymous. This belief, in turn, rests on the assumptions that prediction is possible andthat the strategy-making process can be formalized.Mintzberg argues, and Wilson wouldprobably agree, that predicting seasons of the year is simple, but predictingdiscontinuities, such as a technological innovation, is difficult, if not impossible.Moreover, Mintzberg maintains, formalizing a strategy implies a sequence from analysisthrough procedure to action. Certainly we do think in order to act; but also we sometimesact in order to think. We experiment; those experiments that work converge into patternsthat become strategies. To Mintzberg, the essence of strategy making is the process oflearning as we act. Formal systems can never internalize, comprehend, or synthesize hardinformation. Thus planning can not "learn." Mintzberg says, "Strategies candevelop inadvertently, without the conscious intention of senior management, often througha process of learning. . . . Learning inevitably plays a, if not the,crucial role in the development of novel strategies (p. 111)." Mintzberg sees strategic planning aspracticed, as strategic programming—articulating and elaborating strategies thatalready exist. When managers comprehend the difference between planning and strategicthinking, it is possible to return to what the strategy-making process should be:"capturing what the manager learns from all sources (both the soft insights from hisor her personal experiences and the experiences of others throughout the organization andthe hard data from market research and the like) and then synthesizing that learning intoa vision of the direction that the business should pursue (p. 107)." Mintzberg does not mean get rid of theplanners. Instead, those with planning responsibilities should make their contributionaround the strategy-making process rather than inside it. Planners should supply the datathat strategic thinking requires, should act as catalysts who support strategy-making byaiding and encouraging managers to think strategically, and should help specify theimplementation steps needed to carry out the strategic vision. Mintzberg distinguishes between plannersand managers. Planners do not have authority to make commitments, nor do they havemanagers' access to that "soft" information critical to strategy making.Managers are under time pressure to make decisions, to act, not reflect; they may overlookimportant analytical information. Planners have the time and the inclination to analyze.Their role should be to pose the right questions rather than to find the right answers,opening complex issues for thoughtful consideration. Planners should function as strategyfinders, analysts, and catalysts. Planners should encourage managers to think about thefuture in creative ways, to question conventional wisdom, to raise difficult questions, tochallenge conventional assumptions, and to help themselves out of conceptual ruts.Mintzberg cites Arie de Geus (1988), onetime head of planning at Royal Dutch Shell, in aclassic article titled "Planning as Learning," as arguing that the real purposeof planning is to change the mental models that decision makers carry in their heads.What are the implications of the Wilsonand Mintzberg arguments for college and university leaders? First, presidents,chancellors, provosts, and deans should focus on strategic thinking and strategicmanagement, on developing a shared vision for their school. Their colleagues with"planning" either in their title or in their assigned responsibilities shouldfunction in the role of planners as described by Mintzberg. They should not be told,"Draft the plan." Such commandments usually result in another document for thearchives.There are a number of tools available toplanners to assist them in helping senior administrators think strategically. Ian Wilsonpoints to visioning and scenarios. Perhaps Ian will present a seminar through the UNCInstitute for Academic and Professional Leadership on these topics. On the Horizon itself can serve asa tool. Our editorial board is charged with identifying signals of change in specificsectors of the macroenvironment (social, technological, economic, environmental, andpolitical) and suggesting their implications for higher education. Our lead articles focusmore broadly on what is on the horizon that can affect colleges and universities, as doour pieces in Commentary. The Situation Room focuses on emerging issues and on issuesmanagement techniques. We have begun a new section in this issue: The Internet. In thenext issue, we will began another section: Methods and Techniques. In the April issue forexample, Mark Champion and James Rieley will describe their experience with environmentalscanning and with Hoshin planning respectively as two approaches to effective planning. If you wish to contribute an article,please send me a 800-1200 word manuscript for our review. As always we welcome yourcomments and suggestions as to how we can make On the Horizon more useful to you.

Mintzberg has long been a critic of formulae and analysis-driven strategic planning. In The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, he remorselessly destroys much conventional wisdom and proposes his own interpretations.

First, the assumption that discontinuities can be predicated. Forecasting techniques are limited by the fact that they tend to assume that the future will resemble the past. This gives artificial reassurance and creates strategies which are liable to disintegrate as they are overtaken by events.

Thinkers50 will use the information you provide on this form to be in touch with you and to provide news, updates, and marketing. Please confirm that you agree to have us contact you by clicking below:

LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.

Just like in the world of Middle Earth, getting strategy right in the business world can be a challenging quest. But fear not, as Henry Mintzberg has developed a powerful framework for developing successful strategies. Drawing inspiration from the Five Wizards, Mintzberg's 5 Ps of Strategy - Plan, Ploy, Pattern, Position, and Perspective - provide different paths to achieving strategic victory. In this article, we'll explore each of these approaches in detail, using examples from the business world to illustrate their practical application. So grab your staff and let's set off on a journey to uncover the secrets of strategic success!

Plan refers to a deliberate course of action that outlines the steps necessary to achieve a specific goal. Ploy refers to a maneuver or tactic used to gain an advantage over competitors. Pattern refers to a consistency in behavior or actions over time that reflects an organization's strategy. Position refers to an organization's place in the market relative to its competitors, and Perspective refers to the way an organization views its business and the world around it.

Just as Gandalf the White is a master of planning and devising strategies to defeat Sauron and his forces, the "Plan" element of Mintzberg's framework involves creating a deliberate course of action to achieve a specific goal. For instance, IndiGo Airlines, one of India's leading airlines, adopted a single-aircraft configuration (A320) to fly on short routes with ATR aircraft. This enabled the company to cut costs and explore unexplored market routes to tier 3 cities in India, which were previously underserved. By using cheaper and more efficient aircraft, IndiGo was able to cater to low-density traffic on these routes and maintain profitability.

Radagast the Brown is a wizard who is attuned to the natural world and the patterns of life and death. Similarly, the "Pattern" element of Mintzberg's framework involves recognizing consistent patterns in behavior or actions over time that reflect an organization's strategy. For example, Apple's strategy of decreasing the prices of its older models on the same day as the new ones are released. This allows the company to increase combined device and services profits by dropping the entry-level price. Meanwhile, the top-end price is kept the same since they view it as delivering sufficient units to meet supply and demand curve equilibrium.

Alatar the Blue can be seen as representing the "Position" element of Mintzberg's framework, which involves understanding an organization's place in the market relative to its competitors. Great examples of this are the ways that Apple positioned itself in the music and media industry. iTunes integrated very well with all the devices, including Macintosh computers. This gave them an edge over their competitors for people looking for computers to serve as media centers. Apple combined design, ergonomics, and ease of use in a device and then tied it into a platform that kept that device updated with music without any hassles.

3a8082e126