I caught The Wizard of Oz on TV recently (in HD!), which clearly influenced the title of this post. I figured the title was appropriate seeing as how a first look by an organization into things like strategies, tactics, and priorities may indeed evoke the same reaction Dorothy and her pals experienced when thinking about the scary unknowns (oh, the terrors!) of the forest. They freaked themselves out so much they raced around like goofballs knocking each other down. This post was on my mind at the time…somehow I started thinking about how I’ve seen organizations bolt from strategies, tactics, and/or priorities until they run themselves into the ground…and there you go. The title.
You see, during the interview process for a firm a few months ago, I was asked to respond to a series of essay questions. The last question in the series, still clearly stuck in my head some months later, presented the image below along with the following directive:
Place yourself in the following chart by moving the red dot, and then describe why you positioned yourself where you did.
Simple, right? As I was reviewing the questions for the first time, I remember thinking exactly that. And wow…was I ever wrong. As I started drafting my response, I actually ended up having a very strong reaction to this particular request, which caused me to spend more time on it than on the responses to any of the other questions.
Why the strong reaction? Because this seemingly simple task actually caused me to dive deep to think long and hard about how I react not only to the day-to-day events in the workplace, but also how I meet long-term goals and challenges—whether I set them for myself or whether they are part of an organization’s goals and challenges.
Nope—this one wasn’t easy at all. To respond appropriately, I wasn’t just outlining things I’d done in the past, like building programs, listing metrics, or discussing project management or training tools I’d used. I wasn’t just describing how I’d managed a situation, like how I’d dealt with a difficult relationship or meeting. For this question, I had to think about the why behind the things I’d done to arrive at the core of how I think what I think, and the reasons and processes for thinking and working the way I do.
After all, my first impulse was to plop that red dot right down in the center of the grid. I’m that good, right? And you’re that good, aren’t you? Aren’t we all that good?
It’s definitely important to ask all the other questions to discover note-worthy experiences or characteristics of a prospective employee, like individual tactical abilities, level of soft skills, or generally whether or not someone is a good culture fit for the organization. But a question like this one—and removing the temptation to place the dot in the center by making that action a no-no—is an excellent gauge of experience, maturity, culture fit, and analytical thinking, as well as how these things match (or don’t) how the organization works and what the organization needs at the time. (And see here for what I would consider a complementary post to this one. It contains a list of skills I believe most employees should have—not only project managers as the post may suggest. These include soft skills, which would not be an appropriate fit for this type of question.)
So where did I end up putting the red dot? It took some pretty deep thoughts (and yes, a little Jack Handey slipped in there from time to time)—thoughts that occurred over a period of a couple of days, actually. This request spoke volumes to me, and I wanted my answer to shout back in response and ring true to who I am.
So check it out below—here, for your reading pleasure, is the image from the essay along with my response.
Place yourself in the following chart by moving the red dot, and then describe why you positioned yourself where you did.
I am equally comfortable with the strategic and tactical execution aspects of an engagement. In today’s business climate, I believe that to provide the most value to the organization, I must be at ease with and successful in the even balance of both aspects. A balance of strategy and tactics is inherent to good business practices, and that balance should also be applied when managing any project, conducting training, or engaging clients.
Having a strategic focus necessitates a clear-cut understanding of the organization’s goals and objectives, an ability to recognize patterns, predict outcomes, anticipate issues, and incorporate all these to knowingly respond to a changing environment. Participating in the strategic aspects of an organization means knowing why the organization exists and where it will be in the future. It means understanding the organization’s industry. It also allows for a more well-rounded understanding of the tactical execution aspects.
A tactical focus involves planning and executing actions to realize and support the organization’s strategic goals. Appropriate tactical execution will improve efficiency in an organization; processes, products and functions that do not directly correlate to an organization’s strategic goals will be removed. While there are bound to be those out there who would prefer to (or actually do) focus on just the tactical aspects of an execution, I believe that doing so without an understanding of the strategic focus is a form of blind implementation that does little in the way of effectively moving initiatives and relationships, and therefore an organization, forward.
Plainly said, an understanding of strategy allows for the proper weight to be applied to a tactical action, and appropriate and well-executed tactical efforts support the strategy.
Balancing strategic and tactical aspects of any engagement—whether looking at the holistic goals of the company, fostering relationships, creating a marketing campaign, defining a sales focus, or managing a project—is paramount to an organization’s success. While it is certainly possible within an organization to develop a full strategic plan and define many tactical actions, if the two do not support each other then the meaning behind both can be lost.
I also have a preference for balancing multiple priorities; I believe that the traditional idea that an organization must limit itself to one priority at a time no longer promotes success in today’s ever-changing business climate. In order to excel, I am required to balance multiple priorities. At the same time, I must make sure to dedicate essential focus to each priority to ensure that each is completed correctly and capably. Multiple priorities are both drivers and results of running an effective organization. Successful organizations and their employees are, as part of thoughtful strategy and day-to-day business, required to balance multiple priorities to prosper.
Yesterday’s employee would have been considered stellar if the “hands-on” part of any initiative were completed competently. This is no longer the case. Today’s successful employee will understand the organization’s strategic goals and objectives, devise and align appropriate tactical actions required to fulfill those goals, and display excellence in the management of the multiple priorities that are naturally part of today’s business environment.
Posted by Nicki 