Addressing the strategy implementation gap with a liabilities approach

Abstract

The plethora of studies existing in the field of strategic management especially strategy implementation, has exhausted theories such as agency theory, organisational theory, social system theory, social learning theory, and expectancy theory in trying to provide solutions to organisational problems, as they have not been successful in addressing the implementation gap. Poor implementation or organisational performance Aguinis (2013) is and continues to be a matter of grave concern in organisations Cooks (2010); Chimhanzi (2004); Barksdale & Darden (1971); Felton (1959) with Churchman (1975) labelling it “the implementation problem”. Strategy implementation is still ill understood, approached from various viewpoints Dinwoodie, Quinn & Mc Guire (2014); Van de Merwe (2013); Tait & Nienaber (2010) acknowledged and the typical approach of most researchers in investigating implementation is to enhance implementation prospects Chimhanzi (2004) and neglect the negative side which potentially might provide answers to most problems. Through Narrative Research, Strategy Implementation Narrative Capture Statements and in-depth interviews using Triads and Dyads were administered on Top Management, Senior Management, and Middle Management. The purpose of this study was to elicit narratives / stories to try and answer the research question: How to address strategy implementation gap with a liabilities approach? The fragmented stories were collected over a period of three months at the Water Utilities Corporation (WUC) Head Office and five other branches countrywide. The primary question which this research sought to answer was: How can the liabilities approach and insights gained enhance strategy implementation? The secondary questions were: How can these gained insights enable organisations achieve success? Why is there limited success at implementation and are there gaps existing in strategy implementation? Three liabilities notably, The Liability of Engagement, the Liability of Decision Making Autonomy and the Liability of Perceived Institutional Support (negative influences, items and means, which an organisation has access to, which contribute or detracts organisational performance to generate economic rents) have been identified following the literature review, dyads and triads data analysis, these collectively are labelled Strategy Implementation Liabilities (SILs) being negative influences, destructive holdings and processes encountered at strategy implementation. This study makes four contributions to the academic literature of strategic management and the Liabilities Theory. This study found evidence of the presence of Strategy Implementation Liabilities within the case organisation’s strategy implementation processes, and these ought to be averted, mitigated and or removed from beneficial processes of business for effective and successful implementation. Organisations have to be aware of these liabilities as potentially, they can lead to economic loss and competitive disadvantages. These identified liabilities can vary across organisations and units, depending on the strategy and the extent of the already experienced implementation barriers. Strategy Implementers/ Executors should note that they have to contend with them, they are not independent but interdependent and therefore must respond with individualised strategies which take cognisance of their strengths and weaknesses (Pretorius, 2009). Lastly, these identified liabilities require more time to overcome by organisations since they are hidden within the processes, this calls for concerted effort such as the commitment of the organisational resources. The critical recommendation would be to test the existence or prevalence of the Strategy Implementation Liabilities in other organisational settings and use the Strategy Implementation Liabilities Framework (see Figure 7.40) to identify any set of liabilities, avert,mitigate and or remove them from beneficial processes.The possible strength of the correlations between these liabilities would be determined in order to identify those liabilities which might be considered to be critical, as this would enable management to then address as a matter of priority. The possibility of identifying and recognising liabilities at the strategy formulation process could be an option such that these are noted at strategy implementation where processes could be put in place to accordingly deal with.