The Shocking Simplicity of Strategic Thinking - Gary Hamel case

World renowned strategy guru Gary Hamel has made an excellent video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aodjgkv65MM

 

 

The watching of that video makes one wonder what is the true nature of strategic thinking. It is intriguing to realize that here top thinker of certain topic (strategy) gives a presentation about latest ideas of his domain and, somewhat shockingly,  everything on that video is clear and very simple. It is safe to assume that every layman would immediately understand every word and every idea discussed on this video. How is this possible? What this all tell about strategic thinking? What this all tell about the way how strategic thinking is often perceived and presented?

Let us take any other discipline and let us imagine that the most advanced thinker would give a presentation about the latest findings on his field. I believe quite often layman could not follow at all what the thinker would be presenting. And even if the thinker liked to make a very special effort and speak to everyone, like Brian Greene about String theory, we would sense how he is making extra effort to make most complex issues at least somewhat understandable to us all. We would also be acutely aware that the expert could easily change his speaking mode and after that change we would immediately “drop off the wagon”.

In the case of strategic thinking things seem to be different - outright clarity and simplicity seem to prevail. How is this possible? I believe that we have to start to perceive strategic thinking a bit differently. But before going to that let us take couple perspectives on the Gary Hamel’s presentation. First, it can be said generally that simplicity is not the thing that comes first, it is something what comes last. So when a person really knows his topic, he is able to present even difficult matters clearly. Secondly, in the strategy world this video is naturally a business case in itself and it would probably difficult to sell something which would be very difficult to understand. Certainly this video increases the demand so that different organizers all over the world want to get Gary Hamel to give his presentation in their seminars. Also it is fair to recognize that this is just a very short video within which the expert tells his case as clearly and as convincingly as possible. And the presentation is just excellent.

Yet, I propose that we should also attach something important to every discussion and every presentation about strategy. This is because doing strategy in any real setting is actually very, very difficult and demanding. It is not a simple case, easy to follow and that's it. And although any presentation can operate on its own right, we should perhaps always try to remember to connection between presentation and real world.

 

Hence I would propose that we should attach at least following three caveats to every presentation about strategy:

1)      Let us always evaluate the logic of the presentation. Is it something which is nice to hear or does it seem to correspond the facts of real life. For instance, in this video under discussion we hear how organizations in the future will take into account the needs of us humans. Absolutely great idea. However, in real life this humanization of organizations is certainly one trend but old style will continue in many industries and in many organizations. Sometimes the old style is due the incapability to change and sometime it may be that the realities of certain industry are such that freedoms in certain positions in certain kind of processes just are rather limited. It may also be that in some areas of business and organizational activities very intensive coordination will be the way to succeed also in the future and in those cases people just do their part in the extremely well planned process and that’s it.

2)      Strategy in action is not just ideas, it is much, much more and often these other things are the ones which determine whether the organization succeeds and moves towards desired direction. These so called other things include, a lot of all kind of work day after day, an ability to stand all kinds of pressures and all kinds of uncertainties, and also an ability to learn all the time, because the planned route never works, there will be failures and dead ends.

3)      Strategy is not a one man show. There are people around and each of us has something to say in every strategy development and implementation. Also everything happens in some business environment which is constantly changing. This means that in real world we all operate in middle of numerous willing people and all kind of surprises which may rapidly change the whole setting. Clarity and simplicity are not part of the picture.

 In sum. What is strategic thinking? Can we take strategic thinking out from the complex world and examine it is something very simple and clear? Is it beneficial to do so? What kind of discussion about strategy would be most useful to those people how try to make their organizations more successful?

I believe deeper and deeper understanding about real life and about situations where people operate is the cornerstone of strategic wisdom.

 

Enjoying life - use of language - the Savo case

There is a very special area in our dear Finland where people speak a bit differently - that area is Savo. You can find that part of a country around Kuopio city. The very special way how Finnish language is used in Savo region has caused several interpretations among other Finns.

The two main interpretations have been: 1) When a person speaks the Savo language it is a hearers task to be very vigilant and decide what part of the speak can be trusted and what part should be left in doubt. 2) And more directly the suspicion towards Savo speakers has been expressed by saying that users of the Savo language should be approached with care because it may difficult to know what they really mean. Generally speaking it is clear that Finland is a so called low context country where words are considered crucial in communication, please see Edward T Hall.

In Finland people do respect highly different parts of the country and also different dialects are considered as a national richness and hence all dialects and also Savo language are actually cherished. And it is simply just great that this is the way how things are here in this country. Hence, also the comments what people direct towards the Savo speakers should be viewed from this perspective of appreciative respect and interest.

Nevertheless, I think that it is now time to join this discussion which revolves around Savo language. Hence, in this blog I propose an other interpretation concerning the real essence of Savo language. Surely, this text is just a short commentary, but it still purports to offer a somewhat new angle to our everyday discussion. I believe that in more general terms this blog briefly examines the use of language in everyday situations and how clever people are in using their own language and their own dialects in Finland and certainly around the Globe. Also this text may on its part demonstrate that the whole world is really a learning environment - have you ever visited a cafeteria without learning something new?

My interpretation here is based on new anectode which happened just a moment ago. I had a lucky opportunity to hear from a side how very advanced Savo speaker, a person who had already celebrated her 70th anniversary spoke in a phone with her friend. As such the discussion was very general in nature, it was about everyday topics so there was no secrets in that phone conversation. Hence I did not consider my role as an accidental hearer any way difficult.

However, structure of the discussion was simply enchanting and I think that I understood something new about the Savo language. The speaker was telling about her everyday matters and events, but this was not the main crux in that phone discussion.  What was most arresting was that the speaker kept throwing verbal knuckleballs all the time (I will say few words about knuckleballs at the end of this blog). When looked from the outside people may think that Savo language, and apparently other dialects as well,  are mainly about somewhat peculiar pronunciation and special speak which is peppered with unique words.  But in essence dialects are about something else. The essence seems to be a way of being together, where a special way of speaking creates unique connection between people. Also a key element in that special speaking seems to be a celebration of a clever use of language - the use of words, expressions and images which all the time challenge and invite the other to join to that very active and certainly energizing interaction.



I would tentatively propose that perhaps the rich and joyful use of Savo language could be viewed against the history, against those conditions of life which where present not so long ago. The living conditions also in Savo region have been challenging, sometimes even the rye bread may have been a scarcely available - to put it mildly. Thus people have endured a lot of grueling, hard work and a lot of all kids of challenges and real suffering. Could it be that a very rich use of language has been a way say to the other - please join me to this rich use of language, we are both living now in this moment and there is so much enjoyment in this moment and in this life.

Joyful and invigorating discussions in every dialect and every language!

P.s. And what comes to the knuckleball I am enormously thankful to wikipedia because there this concept is opened with a masterful wording:

A knuckleball (or knuckler for short) is a baseball pitch with an erratic, unpredictable motion. The pitch is thrown so as to minimize the spin of the ball in flight. This causes vortices over the stitched seams of the baseball during its trajectory, which in turn can cause the pitch to change direction—and even corkscrew—in mid-flight. This makes the pitch difficult for batters to hit, but also difficult for pitchers to control. The challenge also extends to the catcher, who must at least attempt to catch the pitch, and the umpire, who must determine whether the pitch was a strike or ball.