Why Strategy Development and Implementation goes wrong in the public sector … and how to fix it

A clunking bureaucracy = government’s improvement on simplicity and common sense to create extra work, confusion, frustration and fruitless expenditure … and to slow things down.

Pointless complications

“A good deal of corporate planning … is like a ritual rain dance. It has no effect on the weather that follows but those who engage in it think it does. Moreover ... much of the advice and instructions related to corporate planning is directed to improving the dance, not the weather”

(Quinn cited by Mintzberg, 1994: 139).

1. Overcomplicated strategic planning process “prescribed” by the South African Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME): The result is that this “bureaucratic process” is so complicated and ‘over-engineered” for public service that officials who engage in the planning process are more concerned about compliance with the DPME ‘format’ than relevance of the Strategic Plan itself. In other words, complying with the “dance.” Auditors who dont understand the strategic planning process either, use a tick box to check that the prescription for the “dance” has been complied with - whether it makes sense or not.

2. Overly theoretical, complicated and confusing. There is no logical and easy to follow flow. Some sections are so disjointed and illogical that no wonder that those who have to implement the Plan literally put it in the drawer and do what their logic prescribes. And woe betide the state-owned enterprise that dares to simplify their strategic plan so that their people can understand and implement it. The Auditors will simply report that their Strategic Plan is non-compliant even though it makes good and better sense. “The shrine of bureaucracy is built on the ruins of common sense” (Parker)

3. The strategic plan is owned by a consultant and not the client. Because there are few government staff who really understand how to comply with DPME bureaucracy, consultants have a field day to develop strategic plans that make the auditors happy. As a result, many strategic plans are owned by the consultant and that is where they stay.

4. Cut-and-paste ‘technology”. Despite plans failing, they are simply cut and pasted to the new financial year because they are ‘technically compliant” and made the auditors happy last year, so this year will do as well.

5. Strategic Plans with unrealistic expectations serve to impress officials higher up the structure who dont know any better themselves. As as a result, much of the strategic plan is not implemented and is simply carried forward year on year.

6. Appointment of strategy “consultants” using a bureaucratic tick box exercise, selecting on price and BBBEE score, ignoring competence and know-how. This results in the blind leading the blind, strategy “experts” who have not lived strategy development in an organisation themselves but are now “experts”. Some of the strategic plans developed (and owned) by ill-appointed consultants have had to be scrapped and re-done all over again.

7. No link to Performance Management. A strategic plan and the performance management system that implements the plan need to be developed parallel with each other. Trying to link the DPME’s bureaucratic prescription to a simplified and workable Performance Management System is a nightmare and frankly, unworkable. Performance Management which works is a simple and uncomplicated process.

8. The DPME has missed the fundamental foundations of strategic planning which is developed in a strict sequence as follows

   1. Mission (or Purpose): This spells out why you exist and what your clients/customers/stakeholders are willing to pay for. For state owned entities, this is their legislative mandate. It states quite simply why you are in business and is not a long-winded theoretical expose to impress the learned.

   2. Vision follows Mission and not the other way round as per the DPME. Vision creates a clear picture of what you want to have achieved at a certain point in time. DPME says a vision is not time bound which is incorrect. Vision 2030 etc is typical of many government institutions. (by the end of the decade we will put a man on the moon and bring him safely back - Kennedy to US congress). Vision is not a repeat of Mission but a clear measurable target to be achieved.

   3. Brand Promise =Mission + Vision and is what your organisation stands for, and promises to deliver to its customers and stakeholders. Branding does not appear in the DPME’s guidelines.

   4. Values: are core to what an organisation stands for and will behave in order to deliver on its brand promise. Brand is lived from within the organisation/entity in the form of its Values. No brand and you end up with the hum drum list of “values” (which are actually expected ethics for any organisation) such as honesty, integrity, team work, respect and so the list goes on.

   5. Mission, Vison, Brand and Values form the Core Ideology of the organisation and only once this ‘core’ has been set in place, can a strategic plan start taking form.

   6. Strategic planning should be a simple process, easy to understand by all who own and execute the plan. Some of the business greats have simple and easy to follow and understand strategic plans. Minor state owned entities have complicated strategic plans that exceed 100 pages of tables and bureaucratic nonsense measures such as number of conferences attended, percentage compliance of immeasurable ‘stuff’ and still the plan fails to be properly executed. Yet the DPME has issued a 65 page instruction on how to develop Strategic Plans and Annual Performance plans which reeks of complexity and over-complicated bureaucracy.

9. Fixing failing strategic plans. Unfortunately state owned institutions have limited leeway but they can make their strategic plans work by taking the following approach:

   1. Appoint a experienced strategic thought leader and not just a ‘facilitator’ who walks in with some flip charts and follows a DPME recipe whether it makes sense or not.

   2. Spend quality time in developing a dynamic and innovative Core Ideology by getting it right with first Mission, then Vision (not the other way round), developing a Brand Promise and then crafting your values.

   3. Next is to identify the key areas of impact that your plan should have in response to live your mission and pursue your Vision. In essence, these are the key strategic thrusts of your plan.

   4. Once your key areas of impact have been identified and agreed, the rest of the strategic plans starts cascading naturally - but with the focus on simplicity. Even in the face of bureaucracy, strategic plans can be made simple and understandable to those who have to make it work - which is what our team is skilled in achieving.

   5. Craft a simplified Strategic Plan of not more than 10 pages which spells out what is to be done which can be communicated to staff.

   6. If #1-4 above is executed correctly, the rest of the strategic planning process under professional facilitation and thought leadership create strategic plans that work.