Strategy & Leadership

Translating strategy into effective implementation: dispelling the myths and highlighting what works
John Sterling,
Article information:
To cite this document:
John Sterling, (2003) "Translating strategy into effective implementation: dispelling the myths and highlighting what works", Strategy &
Leadership, Vol. 31 Issue: 3, pp.27-34, https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570310472737
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570310472737
Downloaded on: 06 July 2017, At: 02:44 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 10780 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2009),"Six necessary mind shifts for implementing strategy", Business Strategy Series, Vol. 10 Iss 3 pp. 167-172 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/17515630910956589">https://doi.org/10.1108/17515630910956589</a>
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

(2001),"Towards a strategy implementation framework", International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 13 Iss 7 pp.
327-338 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110110403712">https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110110403712</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:153165 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Translating strategy into effective
implementation: dispelling the myths and
highlighting what works
John Sterling
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)
John Sterling is a partner and co-founder of
Smock Sterling ± Strategic Management
Consultants, located in Lake Forest, Illinois
(Jsterling@smocksterling.com)). The ®rm
specializes in strategic planning and
management. Sterling's previous Strategy &
Leadership case study (Vol. 30 No. 6,
November/December 2002) explained how
Rubicon Technology, a high tech start-up,
successfully practices strategic focus.
DOI 10.1108/10878570310472737 VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003, pp. 27-34, ã MCB UP Limited, ISSN 1087-8572
Y
ou have heard this advice a hundred times ± ``effective implementation of an
average strategy, beats mediocre implementation of a great strategy every
time''. Yet companies nonetheless often fail to operationalize their strategies
in ways that improve the likelihood that they will be implemented effectively. A 1999
study (Corboy & O'Corrbui, Management Accounting) found that nearly 70 percent of
strategic plans and strategies are never successfully implemented.
Arguably, many of the most commonly cited causes for implementation failure are
either myths or excuses that have gained credibility from being repeated often (see
Box, ``Excuses for strategy failure: dispelling the myths''). By discrediting the myths,
we can more clearly look at a number of approaches that greatly enhance the
effectiveness of strategy implementation. These suggested practices are supported
by research and the experience of a number of effective CEOs interviewed for this
article.
The real reasons strategies fail and how to avoid the pitfalls
The real reasons that strategies fail are varied. Fortunately, the causes can often be
anticipated and the pitfalls can be avoided.
Unanticipated market changes
Strategies often fail because the market conditions they were intended to exploit
change before the strategy takes hold. Product life cycles are shorter, disruptive
technologies emerge with greater frequency, and ®nancial markets can be ®ckle. And,
many markets are experiencing rapid, discontinuous change. Larry Downes (The
Industry Standard, 2001) makes this point persuasively based on his research into
strategy execution mistakes. Speci®cally, Downes ®nds that ``technology challenges
the old rules and assumptions'' and creates daunting ``external obstacles to
execution''.
An instructive example of unanticipated market change upsetting a strategy can be
found in the death of several telecommunications start-ups. Many of those telecomm
start-ups failed because they were pursuing a fundamentally wrong business
assumption ± namely, that there would be enormous, pent-up demand for ®ber optic
| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| PAGE 27
 Excuses for strategy failure: dispelling the myths
When the conventional wisdom on why strategies fail is compared with the recent
experiences of CEOs we interviewed and a review of the academic research over the past
ten-plus years we concluded that many of the generally accepted maxims are at best only
occasionally true and at worst are myths that are perpetuated without any factual basis.

While the following myths are instructive to some degree, none should be considered a
legitimate reason for the failure of an organization to effectively implement strategy. On the
contrary, they are generally handy explanations used to paper over more fundamental
management failings and/or to avoid acknowledging that a chosen strategy simply failed in
the marketplace.

Lack of senior management (CEO) support

The notion that strategy often fails due to a lack of senior management support gains
credibility for a number of reasons:
J First, many ideas (some good, some bad) that are recommended to senior management
are not integrated into an organization's strategy. But, the good ideas persist and are
pursued at tactical levels or as stand-alone projects. When the orphan idea ultimately fails
to attract continued funding and/or senior management enthusiasm, the myth is reinforced
(i.e. ``senior management did not support the strategy''). In reality, it never was a strategy; it
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

was an idea, buried deep in the organization.

J Second, some strategic initiatives ± particularly in information technology ± are embraced
when initially proposed (sometimes enthusiastically). However, once the true costs of those
initiatives are fully understood ± in time, capital, and other resources ± the support for the
initiative evaporates. Larry Downes (The Industry Standard, May 2001) ®nds that ``the
number one cause of death for e-business ventures inside traditional companies turns out
to be the annual budget process''.
J Finally, senior management often does ± and probably should ± pull back from strategies
for a variety of reasons (e.g. competitor response, changing market conditions, disruptive
technologies, etc.). However, while the original strategy may have been announced with
great fanfare, the pull back may not be communicated at all. Thus, it appears that the
strategy lacks senior management support.

For these and other reasons, middle management often reaches the conclusion ``senior
management did not support the strategy'' ± this despite the fact that senior management
was responsible for the conception, communication, and support of that vision and strategy.

Emperor's new clothes

The myth that strategies often fail because of the ``emperor's new clothes syndrome'' ±
based on the premise that senior management is ill-informed or self deluded ± seems to have
little factual basis.

The myth gains credibility because:

J Good strategies, particularly those that are timely and adventurous ± ones that cause
chagrin among competitors and delighted surprise among customers ± are necessarily
built on imperfect and incomplete information. When initial steps are taken, surprises can
occur, and at times management will get blamed for ``not doing its homework''. But
consider the alternative. In most companies there is a greater threat of ``analysis paralysis''
± looking for that last piece of information, leading to no decision being taken ± than there is
of a know nothing strategy being pursued.
J Further, the value of executive intuition in decision-making should not be de-valued.
Weston Agor's landmark research (see The Logic of Intuitive Decision Making: A Research
Based Approach for Top Management, Greenwood Press, 1986) demonstrated that
executives cultivate and use intuitive skills to make major decisions ± particularly when high
levels of uncertainty exist or facts are limited. As a result of Agor's research, some graduate
MBA programs now include a module on the application of intuition in business.

PAGE 28
| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003
 capacity driven by the growth of the Internet. Before much of that ®ber could be laid
and lit, however, Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM) technology enabled
existing telecommunications companies to dramatically increase capacity on existing
®ber optic infrastructure. Virtually overnight, market projections related to the demand
for additional ®ber optic cable infrastructure collapsed.

Although predictions about evolving markets are notoriously unreliable, CEOs can
take a few simple steps to prepare their companies for unanticipated market change:
J Take the time to identify what market conditions have the greatest in¯uence on your
strategy. By understanding what factors have greatest impact on your strategy's
success, you can respond more quickly if they change. For instance, window and
door demand at Pella is strongly in¯uenced by housing starts ± by closely
monitoring permitting and housing starts, Pella can better position itself for demand
surges and slack.
J Recognize what you do not know ± in the words of Donald Rumsfeld, identify ``the
known unknowns''. You can monitor those factors and even prepare contingencies
for different scenarios related to the ``known unknowns''. The origins of scenario
based planning were in part driven by Royal Dutch Shell's need to understand
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

alternative futures driven by the ``known unknown'' of the future price of oil.
J Most importantly, be prepared to change your strategy or your supporting
implementation tactics as the external environment changes and your company is
impacted by ``unknown unknowns''. As an example, it will be interesting to watch
what strategic changes ``Big Three'' auto manufacturers make to wide spread
introduction of hybrid technology by Toyota and Honda (and by implication, Lexus
and Acura) in their SUVs.

While an unanticipated market change can upset a strategy, the failure to recognize
and react is what signi®cantly erodes business performance, not the change itself.

Effective competitor responses to strategy

Fundamentally, strategy is about out-performing the competition ± but a strategy can

be foiled by a highly effective response by a key competitor. For instance, Kmart's
cost cutting and price reduction strategy was quickly foiled by competitive responses
by Wal-Mart. In fact, Wal-Mart was already the low cost retailer in the discount
segment, so Kmart could have anticipated a swift and effective response from at least
one competitor and possibly others.

Ultimately, to effectively anticipate competitors' reactions to a strategy, a company

needs a solid competitive intelligence capability. This does not require one to conduct
corporate espionage to access competitive secrets. Rather, it requires that
companies understand competitors' market positions, their relative competitive
advantages and disadvantages, their historical behavior vis-aÁ-vis competitive strategy,
and the general disposition of their respective management teams. The Society of
Competitive Intelligence Professionals (SCIP) provides a wide range of training and
publications speci®cally designed to improve companies' capabilities vis-aÁ-vis
competitive intelligence.

`` By understanding what factors have greatest

impact on your strategy's success, you can
respond more quickly if they change.
''

VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003

| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| PAGE 29
 Application of insuf®cient resources

Frankly, some strategies fail because not enough resources were allocated to
successfully implement them. Lack of resources is generally a bigger threat to capital-
intensive strategies. For instance, prior to DWDM dramatically eroding their underlying
market assumptions, several telecommunications companies' simply ran out of
capital before their networks could be completed and their strategy could be
implemented. However, the problem can emerge just as readily in a middle market
company or a service company that is simply short of people and time. Ronald
Kubinski (The Conference Board, Executive Action, 2002) observed this failing in both
``fast-growth, new companies that feel understaffed due to growth demands'' and
companies ``under heavy competitive pressure'' who felt they could not spare
resources to drive strategic innovation.

It is generally a good idea to include ®nancial evaluation of a (draft) strategic plan in the
process ± in part to ensure the strategy does not inadvertently destroy shareholder
value and in part to ensure that suf®cient resources (especially capital dollars) will be
available to achieve implement. The process can be relatively simple ± crafting a base
case ®nancial model and layering the impact of strategies on top of that base case.
Alternatively, the process can be highly sophisticated, including an analysis of
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

alternative funding sources, the impact of merger synergies on ®nancial performance,

and other considerations. Regardless of the degree of modeling sophistication
employed, CEO's can expect to make smarter strategic choices up-front and to
deploy limited resources more effectively as a result.

Steve Smith, Chairman and CEO of Journal Communications (JCI) ± the oldest
employee owned company in the US ± has adopted a speci®c approach to deal
with this pitfall. JCI companies (which include newspapers, radio and television,
telecommunications and printing) develop and/or update their strategies in the spring,
do capital planning (driven by the strategy) in summer, and craft pro®t plans (i.e.
budgets) in the fall. In addition, Mr. Smith points out, ``we have a section in the pro®t
plan called `links to strategy' where companies' ®nancial plans and measures are
linked directly to their strategy''.

Failures of buy-in, understanding, and/or communication

Some strategies fail because there is insuf®cient buy-in to or understanding of the

strategy among those who need to implement it. A great deal of academic research
has been devoted to studying the impact of employee buy-in and understanding of
strategy. W.D. Giles (Long Range Planning, 1991) demonstrated that strategy
implementation fails when ``implementers do not own the strategy''. More recently,
Guffey and Nienhaus (SAM Advanced Management Journal, 2002) found a strong link
between organizational commitment (e.g. strong belief in the organization's goals
and values, willingness to exert effort on behalf of the organization, and strong
desire to maintain membership in the organization) and employees' support of the
organization's strategic plan.

Several CEOs interviewed believe that the surest way to ensure someone understands
a strategy is to involve him or her in its creation. Jim Ethier, President of Bush Brothers
± a private company with over 50 percent market share in the prepared bean market
(Bush's Best Baked Beans among other products) ± notes, ``It is hard to execute that
which you don't understand. There is a big difference between reading a plan and
being directly involved in developing it''.

Effective communication of the strategy and its underlying rationale are also critically
important ± particularly when reaching out beyond the group directly involved in the

PAGE 30
| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003
 development of the strategic plan. Emmett Boyle, Chairman and CEO of Ormet
Aluminum (the third largest integrated aluminum company in the US, with nearly 3,000
employees) underscored the need to ``have the support of customers, suppliers,
employees, unions, and communities to attain our goals. We learned that we need to
work hard to communicate our (underlying) rationale if we wish to put in place our
vision and new directions''.

Ultimately, buy-in leads to consistent execution. As Jim Collins points out in Good to
Great, ``if you begin with `who', rather than `what', you can more easily adapt to a
changing world''. And, good strategic management is a function of people actively
considering the strategy as they make day-to-day decisions about the business ± i.e.
adapting continually to a changing world.

Timeliness and distinctiveness

Some strategies fail because someone beats the company to market with a similar
idea or strategy. Similarly, some strategies fail because they leave the company
undistinguished in the market (i.e. others are pursuing the same strategy and/or
market position). For instance, how many PetStuff.com's did we really need?
Likewise, Sears has gotten into real trouble because it is not distinct in any meaningful
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

way ± other retailers stock more appliances and sell them cheaper, others offer the
same or better fashions, others offer tools and building supplies in a more focused
environment ± so why should someone shop at Sears? To get all those things under
one roof? Does anyone actually experience synergy in that combination?

Fundamentally, good strategy should distinguish the company from others in ways
that make a difference to customers. Michael Porter (``What is Strategy'', Harvard
Business Review, 1996) has written extensively and persuasively on this topic. We
would encourage CEOs to take three simple steps in developing a distinctive strategy
± understand the company's genuine strengths (particularly those that span multiple
functions), examine the marketplace to understand what market positions are (or may
be) unoccupied, focus the company's strategies on bringing its veri®able strengths to
bear in capturing those unoccupied strategic positions.

Lack of focus

A corollary to the need for timeliness and distinctiveness is the need for strategic
focus. Some companies try to be all things to all people. As a result, they lack
distinctiveness (see the Sears example above), but importantly, they also lack focus.
As a result, resources are dissipated and priorities are never clearly articulated. With
little sense of prioritization, employees are a bit like carnival plate spinners ± always
frantically working to keep things from collapsing, but never really making progress.

Rich Meeusen, CEO of Badger Meter (a world leader in ¯ow measurement and
control), was quick to underscore the importance of developing strategic focus. He
makes two key points with regard maintaining focus. First, he encourages a degree of
simplicity in de®ning strategy ± ``describe the strategy on one page so it is easy to
communicate. Once you get people focused, they are better able to execute''. Equally
important in developing strategic focus is to prioritize. At Badger Meter, ``seven
projects became top priorities out of the 100 or so projects that were in progress.
Everyone knows what the top projects are and are able to focus. No one misses a
deadline on a top priority project because they were working on something else''.

Doug Ray, Publisher of the Daily Herald in Arlington Heights, IL (one of the largest daily
newspapers in the US), made a similar point regarding maintaining focus. ``The real
challenge in strategy implementation is that from time-to-time people can lose focus

VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003

| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| PAGE 31
 as the work-a-day pressures take over. You have to reinforce that the strategy isn't
something you do in addition to your work ± it is your work''.

Bad strategy ± poorly conceived business models

Sometimes strategies fail because they are simply ill conceived. Returning once more
to the telecommunications start-ups ± some of their business models were ¯awed
because of a misunderstanding of how demand would be met in the market. That is,
their strategies did not include some means of connecting customers at the local level
(i.e. through the assets of incumbent local exchange carriers).

Other highly visible examples of truly bad strategy include:

J Replacing Coca-Cola with New Coke after testing it on new customers but not on
long time loyalists.
J Rolling up long distance networks at premium prices (Worldcom) when the
competition was ready to cut prices.
J Putting the technology executives of AOL in charge of Time Warner's media assets.

J E-commerce companies that tried to build mass markets for niche offerings by
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

paying customers to buy.

Checklist for successful implementation

Our experience and the experiences of CEOs interviewed for this column have
highlighted a number of approaches that can greatly enhance the effectiveness of
strategy implementation ± as well as improving the likelihood of success of the
underlying strategy. What follows is a simple checklist based on the proven
experiences of CEOs and the ®ndings of academic researchers.

Align organizational design and capabilities with the strategy

A critical step ± often overlooked ± is ensuring that organizational capabilities align with
the strategy. A basic assessment of organizational capabilities and the capability gaps
created by a change in strategy is a very direct means of improving alignment. Eric
Beaudan, Director of Organization Effectiveness at the Bank of Montreal, makes the
point well, ``have the presence of mind to recognize which core competencies exist or
are lacking in the organization . . . Unrecognized incompetence can lay waste to the
best of plans'' (``Failure of Strategy'', Ivey Business Journal, 2001).

Consider potential competitor reactions to the strategy

Your strategy development process should directly consider potential competitor

reactions to a strategy and how your company will respond in turn. Likewise, your
company should maintain a basic competitive intelligence capability as a matter of
day-to-day strategic management.

Involve managers in the strategy development process

Involving people directly in the strategy development process has paid off for a
number of the CEOs we interviewed. Keith Spore, Publisher of the Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel, was among the strongest advocates of involving a cross-section of

`` Unrecognized incompetence can lay waste to the

best of plans.
''

PAGE 32
| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003
 management in the process. ``Getting people involved in the creation of the plan is the
best thing we have done ± they buy-in and feel responsible for it. Not everything you
decide to do is popular, but by involving (a large group) people have a chance to air
their differences about strategy and the whole team can discover what has merit and
what does not''.

Consistent and persistent communication

Because so many strategies fail for a lack of buy-in, understanding, or poor

communication, ensure that resources are dedicated to continuing, persistent
communication. Talk about how recent events relate to the strategy. Relate business
results (good and bad) back to the strategy. Be candid about what is working and
what is not ± and tell people what you are doing to ®x it. Jim Ditter, President of
Norlight Telecommunications, invites one or two implementation teams each week to
leadership team meetings to provide an update on progress. One key bene®t is that
``people always have a sense of what is going on. They can get the word back to rest
of the organization through the functional groups. As a result, no one thinks he or she
is the only one working on strategy implementation''.

Action planning and budgeting

Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

Action planning and budgeting are among the oldest management tools and yet they
remain effective for ensuring that implementation occurs and that tactics align with
strategy. Plan the initiatives you will undertake and budget for implementation and
capability development. As Steve Smith of Journal Communications noted, ``every
operating company's pro®t plan (i.e. budget) includes discussion of how the budget
and related action plans tie back to the strategy''.

Monitoring and accountability

Effective implementation requires continual monitoring ± of progress in implementing

the plan, of the competitive environment, of customers' satisfaction, and of the
®nancial returns generated by the strategy. And, monitoring is meaningless if it is not
accompanied by accountability ± and change when change is warranted.

The Institute of Management Accounting recently surveyed its members to determine

how well performance measures advance strategy and execution (www.imanet.org).
Over half of the respondents believe their performance measures are ``poor or less
than adequate in communicating strategy to employees''. Only companies using
a Balanced Scorecard approach rated their systems effective in supporting and
communicating strategy.

Jim Ditter of Norlight Telecommunications also underscored the importance of

holding individuals and teams accountable for implementation. ``We do ratings on
implementation progress (1-9 system) and also explore what is working and what is
not working on a continuing basis. It helps to keep implementation on track and
enables us to adjust quickly to challenges and obstacles''. Jim Ethier of Bush Brothers
adds, ``If enough people are engaged in implementation and you are monitoring
and discussing it all the time, people are embarrassed not to be engaged in
implementation''.

Symbolic actions

Often, symbolic actions are the most powerful means of spurring and reinforcing
strategy implementation. Symbolic actions can take many forms including
ceremonies, physical settings, effective use of language, the stories that are told
and retold, and leadership from the top. We have seen a wide range of creative

VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003

| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| PAGE 33
 symbolic actions that underscored how serious management was about the strategy.
For instance, when the then Big Five consulting ®rms adopted ``hotelling'' for their staff
consultants (assigning only temporary space to individuals when they were in the
of®ce), they not only saved overhead dollars ± they sent a clear message that staff
consultants were suppose to be at client's sites, not in the of®ce.

Alignment of information resources with the strategy

Finally, aligning information technology with strategy is a critical process. This includes
applications of information technology as varied as enterprise systems, customer
relationship management, Web-based technologies, and manufacturing technolo-
gies. Aligning information technology is a double-edged sword ± companies often
cannot execute strategies in the new millennium without technology and they should
not implement new technology without a strategy behind it. Tim Felt, CEO of Explorer
Pipeline Company (a large re®ned products pipeline running from the Gulf Coast to
Chicago) noted, ``Our number one priority is system integrity (keeping the product
in the pipe and operating at the highest safety levels). As we expand, effective
information systems are an important element enabling us to maintain high levels of
control and safety''.
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

PAGE 34
| STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP
| VOL. 31 NO. 3 2003
 This article has been cited by:

1. Katja Hutter, Bright Adu Nketia, Johann Füller. 2017. Falling Short with Participation — Different Effects of Ideation,
Commenting, and Evaluating Behavior on Open Strategizing. Long Range Planning 50:3, 355-370. [CrossRef]
2. Bo Hu, Ulrike Leopold-Wildburger, Jürgen Strohhecker. 2017. Strategy map concepts in a balanced scorecard cockpit improve
performance. European Journal of Operational Research 258:2, 664-676. [CrossRef]
3. BernardoSamuel Moretti Samuel Moretti Bernardo sbernardo@nortegubisian.com.br AnholonRosley Rosley Anholon
rosley@fem.unicamp.br NovaskiOlivio Olivio Novaski novaski@fem.unicamp.br SilvaDirceu Dirceu Silva dirceuds@gmail.com
QuelhasOsvaldo Luiz Gonçalves Osvaldo Luiz Gonçalves Quelhas quelhas@latec.uff.br Department of Manufacturing
Engineering and Materials, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil Faculty of Education, State University of
Campinas, Campinas, Brazil Faculty of Engineering, Fluminense Federal University (UFF), Niterói, Brazil . 2017. Main causes
that lead strategies to decline at execution phase: an analysis of Brazilian companies. International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management 66:3, 424-440. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Bright Adu Nketia. 2016. The Influence of Open Strategizing on Organizational Members’ Commitment to Strategy. Procedia
- Social and Behavioral Sciences 235, 473-483. [CrossRef]
5. Seyed Farhad Hosseini, Seyed Hamid Khodadad Hosseini, Asadollah Kordnaiej, Parviz Ahmadi. 2016. Survey and Explain
the role of Sensemaking in Successful Strategy Implementation in Iran’s Automotive Companies. Verslas: teorija ir praktika
17:3, 202-215. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

6. Simon Croom, Marko Svetina, Alan Betts. 2016. Does customer or competitor performance drive operations prioritisation?.
Production Planning & Control 1-15. [CrossRef]
7. ThanyawatpornkulRapeerat Rapeerat Thanyawatpornkul Rapeerat Thanyawatpornkul is a Doctoral Business Administration
candidate at School of Management, (SOM), Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand. He obtained his master’s degree
in engineering from AIT in 2001 and master’s degree in business administration, specialization in International Business, from
SOM-AIT in 2004. He has more than 15 years of experience in FM. Currently, he is the General Manager of Honeywell
Thailand. He is also a Visiting Lecturer and Resource Speaker at Bangkok University and Chulalongkorn University, Thailand.
SiengthaiSununta Sununta Siengthai Sununta Siengthai earned her PhD in 1984 in Labor and Industrial Relations from the
Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She is a Professor at SOM, AIT,
Thailand. Before joining AIT, she taught and researched at the School of Business Administration, National Institute of
Development Administration, Thailand, and Faculty of Commerce and Accountancy, Thammasat University, Thailand. Her
current research projects and activities at AIT focus in the area of human resource management and development, as well as
industrial relations in the new economy. JohriLalit M. Lalit M. Johri Lalit M. Johri is a Fellow in International Business at
Oxford University’s Said Business School. He directs the Oxford Advanced Management Programme. He holds MSc in Physics
and MBA and PhD in business administration. He also holds a Diploma in International Teachers Program in Management
(UK) and diploma in Management Consultancy (Japan) and has attended Aspen Seminar (USA). Before joining Oxford, Lalit
was a Professor of International Business and the Founder Director and Executive of the MBA program, AIT, and a full-
time Professor at Delhi University, India. He is a Visiting Professor in several business schools and corporate academies in
Europe and Asia. Recipient of several fellowships, he was awarded Aspen Scholar for the Year 1998 award by Aspen Institute,
Washington, USA, for outstanding professional accomplishments and public contributions. School of Management, Asian
Institute of Technology, Pathumthan, Thailand Said Business School, Oxford University, Oxford, UK . 2016. Employee’s
perspective towards strategy execution in facility management in Thailand. Facilities 34:11/12, 682-702. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
8. Joe O'Mahoney. 2016. Archetypes of Translation: Recommendations for Dialogue. International Journal of Management
Reviews 18:3, 333-350. [CrossRef]
9. Jürgen Strohhecker. 2016. Factors influencing strategy implementation decisions: an evaluation of a balanced scorecard cockpit,
intelligence, and knowledge. Journal of Management Control 27:1, 89-119. [CrossRef]
10. Joanna Radomska. 2015. The Concept of Sustainable Strategy Implementation. Sustainability 7:12, 15847-15856. [CrossRef]
11. Carlos J F Cândido, Sérgio P Santos. 2015. Strategy implementation: What is the failure rate?. Journal of Management &
Organization 21:02, 237-262. [CrossRef]
12. Harri Terho, Andreas Eggert, Alexander Haas, Wolfgang Ulaga. 2015. How sales strategy translates into performance: The
role of salesperson customer orientation and value-based selling. Industrial Marketing Management 45, 12-21. [CrossRef]
13. Roger Durand, Phillip J. Decker, Dorothy M. Kirkman. 2014. Evaluation Methodologies for Estimating the Likelihood of
Program Implementation Failure. American Journal of Evaluation 35:3, 404-418. [CrossRef]
 14. Brian David Smith. 2014. Capturing an elusive phenomenon: developing and testing a multiple perspective model of marketing
strategy implementation. Journal of Strategic Marketing 22:1, 16-40. [CrossRef]
15. Mas Bambang Baroto, Nader Arvand, Fauziah Sh. Ahmad. 2014. Effective Strategy Implementation. Journal of Advanced
Management Science 2:1, 50-54. [CrossRef]
16. Polboon NuntamanopSchool of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Pathumtani, Thailand Ilkka KauranenIndustrial
Engineering and Management, Aalto University, Aalto, Finland Barbara IgelSchool of Management, Asian Institute of
Technology, Pathumtani, Thailand. 2013. A new model of strategic thinking competency. Journal of Strategy and Management
6:3, 242-264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Bochao WangDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA Young
B. MoonDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA. 2013.
Hybrid modeling and simulation for innovation deployment strategies. Industrial Management & Data Systems 113:1, 136-154.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. JONGWOON WILLIE CHOI, GARY W. HECHT, WILLIAM B. TAYLER. 2013. Strategy Selection, Surrogation, and
Strategic Performance Measurement Systems. Journal of Accounting Research 51:1, 105-133. [CrossRef]
19. Maria Gondo, Karen D. W. Patterson, Sarah Trujillo Palacios. 2013. Mindfulness and the Development of a Readiness for
Change. Journal of Change Management 13:1, 36-51. [CrossRef]
20. Marjorie Corbridge, Mark Power, Rebecca KopecekMore Effective Implementation of Strategic Change 264-277. [CrossRef]
21. Shulian ZhangManchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK David BamfordThe Business School,
Downloaded by University of Cape Town At 02:44 06 July 2017 (PT)

University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK Claire MoxhamUniversity of Liverpool Management School, University of

Liverpool, Liverpool, UK Benjamin DeheThe Business School, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK. 2012. Strategy
deployment systems within the UK healthcare sector: a case study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management 61:8, 863-880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
22. Josep Bisbe, Joan Barrubés. 2012. El Cuadro de Mando Integral como instrumento para la evaluación y el seguimiento de la
estrategia en las organizaciones sanitarias. Revista Española de Cardiología 65:10, 919-927. [CrossRef]
23. Josep Bisbe, Joan Barrubés. 2012. The Balanced Scorecard as a Management Tool for Assessing and Monitoring Strategy
Implementation in Health Care Organizations. Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition) 65:10, 919-927. [CrossRef]
24. Neil A. Morgan, Constantine S. Katsikeas, Douglas W. Vorhies. 2012. Export marketing strategy implementation, export
marketing capabilities, and export venture performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 40:2, 271-289. [CrossRef]
25. Neil A. Morgan. 2012. Marketing and business performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 40:1, 102-119.
[CrossRef]
26. Sineenad Paisittanand, L. A. Digman, Sang M. Lee. 2010. Strategic Implementation Effectiveness. International Journal of
Strategic Information Technology and Applications 1:2, 55-81. [CrossRef]
27. Strategy and Implementation 13-26. [CrossRef]
28. Max Saunders, Robin Mann, Robin Smith. 2009. Constructs and systems: Connecting strategy deployment and performance
excellence. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 20:1, 115-128. [CrossRef]
29. Anna Moses, Pär Åhlström. 2008. Problems in cross-functional sourcing decision processes. Journal of Purchasing and Supply
Management 14:2, 87-99. [CrossRef]
30. Fiona Lettice, Karen Brayshaw. 2007. Using graphical techniques to communicate strategy: an exploratory study. Strategic
Change 16:4, 145-159. [CrossRef]
31. Peter R. J. Trim. 2005. The GISES Model for Counteracting Organized Crime and International Terrorism. International
Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence 18:3, 451-472. [CrossRef]
32. 2003. What makes a strategy work?. Strategic Direction 19:11, 4-6. [Abstract] [Full Text]
33. Ehap Sabri, Likhit VermaMastering Change Management for Successful Supply Chain Transformation 117-147. [CrossRef]
34. Reza AboutalebiFailure-Avoidance in the Implementation of Tourism and Hospitality Strategies 89-108. [CrossRef]
35. Ehap Sabri, Likhit VermaMastering Change Management for Successful Supply Chain Transformation 841-873. [CrossRef]