There are different approaches companies and industries will take in terms of their strategy execution, and business managers shared some insight into some tools and methods in this regard during a panel discussion on the second day of the Africa Strategy Conference.
RES Corporation MD Nick Jackson said that, from the company’s strategy framework perspective, it typically took a 30-year outlook, which was then brought down to five and then one year.
The business reviewed its strategy, mission, value and objectives every year and then rolled these out to its business units. He explained that this involved the top 40 or 50 managers, even from lower levels, who go through the process of reviewing the strategy.
Jackson mentioned that some people were, however, reluctant to share their knowledge, which sometimes made it difficult for managers to freely share their strategy with different departments in the organisation. This was mitigated by means of a walkabout session once a quarter, whereby strategy was discussed at every level in the organisation.
Siemens business development head Lizelle Schindler said the company globally had about four strategic frameworks, which dealt with customer impact, technology with a purpose, growth mindset and empowered people.
Within these, it has different ways of measuring and monitoring.
For example, one tool within this is yearly customer satisfaction surveys for the customer impact framework.
For employees, this could entail quarterly satisfaction checks, and then the usual monthly reviews, to ensure everything remains on track and that any issues can be addressed.
She further explained that these tools and methods differed according to the level of the company. The time periods for reviews also differed.
Dimension Data chief digital officer Jay Reddy, meanwhile, explained that the information technology sector changed on an exponential level yearly; therefore, the business typically had to reinvent itself every three years, with fundamental transformation in terms of how it offered services in the market.
In line with this constantly changing landscape, the company had developed a model that focused on growth plans and aligned its priorities with these, and incorporated day-to-day models into this.
These are then sorted into two groupings, namely short term and medium term.
He noted that long-term strategies for the industry were almost non-existent, as trying to predict the landscape more than three years into the future was impossible. Therefore, strategy focused on the short and medium term.
Biovac CEO Dr Morena Makhoana also noted that his industry was different, owing to the nature of vaccine making.
This is a typically capital heavy industry and, in the absence of a pandemic, moves very slowly, as vaccines have to go through the process of clinical trials and getting the product through the value chain.
He expanded that the facilities the industry built also took a long time, for example, if a decision was taken to build today, it will only came to fruition in four years.
Therefore, a company must ensure it has the investment and funding to support this, and, once a decision has been made, the business is essentially committed to that for a minimum of ten years.
Secondly, Biovac also differs in terms of its customers, which are typically large organisations that buy vaccines, such as governments, public institutions or multilateral organisations.
Therefore, it needs to consider the end customer, in terms of safety of the vaccine, but it also needs to consider the buyer as part of its long-term strategy, as this is very difficult to change – once a government or organisation has committed to buy a vaccine, this cannot be undone easily.
Moreover, he said, most important to the company was having people at the centre of its strategy, as having the required scientists and skillsets was imperative to actually producing the product. This also ensured the company was able to retain its staff, and did not lose out to global organisations.