The Process of Strategic Planning is More Important than the Plan Itself - Literature review Example

RUNNING HEAD: THE PROCESS OF STRATEGIC PLANNING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PLAN ITSELF The Process of Strategic Planning is More Important than the Plan Itself Name Institution Date Introduction According to Marke et.al (2012), many organizations have in the past been engaging in only the tactical planning, which involves laying down yearly goals and objectives that were then employed by the top management to evaluate not only the organization’s productivity but individual employees as well. On the other hand, unlike this earlier iterations, present-day strategic planning models have acknowledged that planning ought to be an ongoing activity and that plans ought to be amended on a continuous basis so as to integrate not only new data but also facts, knowledge and trends in order to mirror the ever-evolving internal and external environments where the organizations function. This idea has in fact provoked the question as to whether the process of strategic planning is more important than the plan itself. It is therefore in view of this that this particular paper intends to analyze why this statement is correct. The statement that process of strategic planning is more important than the plan itself is indeed correct. According to Marke et.al (2012), more often than not, a major emphasis has always been put on the plan, a situation that is rather unfortunate since the real value of planning lies with the process of planning itself. Many organizations that have been able to develop as well as implement strategic plans have confirmed that the planning process is actually more significant that the ensuing plan because it is often the process that actually makes the plan be successful. In fact, Winston et.al (2013) stresses that the actual advantage of the process of strategic planning is the process and not the plan document since in most cases no plan is always perfect. Alternatively, Marke et.al (2012) highlight that the process of strategic planning may not always bring about a perfect experience but it has a sequence of small actions that together enable organizations carryout things rightly as they head towards the right direction. Some largely and highly-structured organizations have actually been able to develop institution-wide processes of strategic planning. BMW, for instance, has been able to put in place a strategic planning model to enable it optimize its distribution of various products to its worldwide production sites over a 12 year planning horizon (Fleischmann et.al,2006). This comprises not only material supplies but also the distribution of finished cars within the world markets. With the strategic planning in place, the Germany-based company has been able to determine its investment needs in its three major production departments including final assembly, paint shop and body assembly, for each of its sites as well as determining the financial impact on its cash flows. According to Fleischmann et.al (2006), the model has in fact not only enhanced the transparency but also the flexibility of the company’s strategic planning process. The statement that the process of strategic planning is more important than the plan itself can also be argued as correct based on the fact that it is no longer a purely top-down process whereby the upper management not only creates but also disseminates plans to their subordinates who have then to implement the plan. On the contrary, it acknowledges the significance of involving all the employees from all the organization levels to be part of the strategic process. It is thus a team effort thing and as Saffold (2005) argues, this is the most effective way to come up with a plan as all the interested parties of the organization are represented. A major advantage of this is that members of the organization as well as the various departments involved in the process gain a significant approval of the not only the importance but also the value of the strategic planning. . According to Marke et.al (2012) therefore, if one intends to transform an organization, the process of planning is more important that the plan created since the participation within the process transforms individuals, which is a real description of what organization change. A notable example of this as highlighted by Schmid & Grosche (2008) is the case of Toyota, a Japanese automotive producer whose employment of strategic planning has enabled it to revolutionize automotive production. According to Schmid & Grosche (2008), its production system is especially distinguished by the very fact that it does not only attain lean structures and processes but it also puts emphasis on its employees and challenging them to continuously strive at improving the work processes as well as product quality. As such, a number of aspects of the firm’s system including the recognition of employees in its strategic planning decisions imply that the firm views its employees as among its most vital resources. The statement that the process of strategic planning is more important than the plan itself can also be argued as correct based on the fact that it builds not just on the predictable future trends but also on data as well as the competitive assumptions. Strategic planning is thus ideas-driven, more qualitative and considerably tries to offer a well-defined organizational vision or focus, a factor that makes confirms its sufficient reliability in terms of ensuring a plan’s dependability over the period of the plan’s implementation (Steiner, 2010). As Ferrell & Hartline (2012) highlight, strategic planning often assumes that organizations not only have to be considerably responsive to the dynamic and ever-changing business environment but also assumes that organizations can adapt. As such, given the unpredictable environments in which business organizations have to operate, they have to plan strategically, as a result, base their respective plans on not just trends but also on well-informed assumptions regarding the future of their institutions and the globe or legal information and therefore not presume that current conditions are bound to continue as they will certainly not. According to Shimokawa (1995) ,the Japanese auto industry, for instance, having gone through the stubborn recession following the bubble economy burst and the drastic yen appreciation since the year 1993, had been at crossroads for strategic planning.However, with the recent restructuring of the industry’s domestic business contents and business systems as well as strengthening overseas production alongside developing an international strategy seen through the creation of global networks for overseas production and business bases, much has really changed.Consequently,firms such as Honga,Isuzu and Mazda have benefited from this global strategy, especially within the North American markets. According to Dickenson (2009), a large number of these Japanese firms have had to develop their organizational structures and their strategic planning platforms that incorporated important attributes of the Japanese manufacturing strategies into a homogenous focus that actually addressed the demands of the market. Another argument supporting the statement that process of strategic planning is more important than the plan itself is correct can be based on the objective-nature of strategic planning. According to Roussel (2011), strategic planning is often objective in as far as evaluating what a business is and what the business intends to be. It pursues success by thwarting the status quo from paralyzing the organization progress, as such, strategic planning results in strategic management and becomes an important part of thinking as regards all the management operations such as information, compensation, organization, budgeting, leadership development, employee education ,and decision-making support systems. A case in point as argued by Fleischmann et.al (2006) is that of BMW, a Germany automotive manufacturer which having recognized its deficiencies in its planning process, initiated a project to enable it enhance its strategic loading plan. This significantly helped the firm in terms of improving its decision support as regards its overall strategic planning, a factor that indicates the objective-nature of strategic planning in pursuit of success. Conclusion From the above analysis, it is actually correct that the process of strategic planning is more important than the plan itself. The paper has generally highlighted various reasons to back this particular statement including the fact that it is often the process that makes the plan be successful; the objective-nature of strategic plan in its pursuit for organizational success; its predictability of future trends and competitive assumptions and its participatory nature witnessed through its recognition of the significance of involving all the employees from all the organization levels as regards matters of planning. References Dickenson, K. (2009).Cultural Influences on Manufacturing Strategy Development and Execution in Japanese Automobile Parts Manufacturing Facilities in the United States Fleischmann,B,Ferber,S & Henrich,P,2006, Strategic Planning of BMW’s Global Production Network, Vol. 36, No. 3,Pp. 194–208 Ferrell, C & Hartline, M. (2012). Marketing Strategy, Cengage Learning Marke, J, Sloane, R & Ryan, L. (2012).Legal Research and Law Library Management, Law Journal Press Roussel, L. (2011).Management and Leadership for Nurse Administrators, Jones & Bartlett Publishers Shimokawa, K. (1995).Restructuring and Global Strategy of the Japanese Automobile Industry and Its Perspective Schmid, S & Grosche, P. (2008).Managing the International Value Chain in the Automotive Industry: Strategy, Structure, and Culture, Bertelsmann Stiftung Publishers Saffold, G. (2005).Strategic Planning: Leadership through Vision, Evangel Publishing House Steiner, G. (2010).Strategic Planning, Simon and Schuster Publishers Winston et.al (2013).Strategic Planning for Not-for-Profit Organizations, Routledge Read More