WEBVTT 1 00:00:01.199 --> 00:00:04.440 Welcome to Hacking Your Leadership. I'm Chris and I'm Lorenzo. And Lorenzo in 2 00:00:04.480 --> 00:00:08.279 this episode, I want to talk about strategy. Oh, I like to 3 00:00:08.279 --> 00:00:11.919 talk about strategy. Strategy is fun. It is fun. It's as you 4 00:00:11.960 --> 00:00:16.640 move up in leadership roles. You know, we talk about the difference between 5 00:00:16.879 --> 00:00:21.519 tactical and strategic work. The more you move up in an organization, the 6 00:00:21.519 --> 00:00:25.839 more you become a leader of leaders or you know, move up within your 7 00:00:25.879 --> 00:00:31.600 career, the less of your day is spent doing tactical things and the more 8 00:00:31.640 --> 00:00:35.000 of your day is spent doing strategic things. And so when you're talking about 9 00:00:35.039 --> 00:00:40.399 creating strategies, this is a large part of the job of a leader, 10 00:00:40.799 --> 00:00:44.920 especially if you have if your team is the one who has to execute these 11 00:00:44.920 --> 00:00:49.439 strategies, hopefully you are involved in the creation of them, and hopefully you're 12 00:00:49.439 --> 00:00:52.200 involving your team in the creation of them too. The reason why I want 13 00:00:52.200 --> 00:00:55.880 to talk about it is that, you know, I've been in situations where 14 00:00:57.039 --> 00:01:00.960 a strategy was developed and you know, we had the right people in the 15 00:01:00.039 --> 00:01:03.239 room and we can go to kind of go through everything to make sure that 16 00:01:03.280 --> 00:01:07.079 it's the right strategy moving forward, and we go to execute it and it 17 00:01:07.120 --> 00:01:12.719 doesn't work, and somebody, either myself or somebody else can be very quick 18 00:01:12.719 --> 00:01:15.400 to say, oh, well, it was clearly the wrong strategy. This 19 00:01:15.439 --> 00:01:19.280 part was missing or that part was missing, or you know, hindsight's twenty 20 00:01:19.319 --> 00:01:22.280 twenty, we should have done this instead or that instead, and we can 21 00:01:22.319 --> 00:01:26.760 start picking apart the strategy itself. And I came across an article on LinkedIn 22 00:01:27.239 --> 00:01:33.000 by a person his name is doctor Mark Snookus, and he had this kind 23 00:01:33.040 --> 00:01:38.879 of infograph that talks about how there are seven things that can destroy a strategy 24 00:01:40.280 --> 00:01:44.560 that is otherwise a good strategy, and they have nothing to do with what 25 00:01:44.640 --> 00:01:48.000 the strategy is, but in actuality, how it's put together, and how 26 00:01:48.000 --> 00:01:52.519 it's implemented and shaped and put out to people to be executed. And so 27 00:01:52.840 --> 00:01:57.799 I like this because there have been times in my past where a strategy that 28 00:01:57.920 --> 00:02:01.599 didn't work was cast aside and a new was brought in and that one didn't 29 00:02:01.599 --> 00:02:05.760 work either, and we didn't stop to think, wait a minute, maybe 30 00:02:05.840 --> 00:02:08.159 it wasn't the strategy that was wrong. Maybe it was the execution of it 31 00:02:08.159 --> 00:02:12.280 that was wrong. Maybe it was a way we put it together or made 32 00:02:12.280 --> 00:02:15.759 certain assumptions about who was involved those kind of things. So I like this 33 00:02:15.840 --> 00:02:19.639 and I think it's a good topic, especially if you're listening to this and 34 00:02:19.879 --> 00:02:23.240 part of your job is developing strategy that you know has to be executed. 35 00:02:23.319 --> 00:02:25.919 Yeah. No, I love it because I think that you know, over 36 00:02:27.120 --> 00:02:30.360 time, what you learn when it comes to developing strategy is that it does 37 00:02:30.439 --> 00:02:34.960 take a lot of kind of effort. It takes a lot of collaboration, 38 00:02:35.080 --> 00:02:38.120 It takes a lot of you know, not just your own self reflection about 39 00:02:38.120 --> 00:02:40.879 the strategy and your own opinions, but those of others as well. If 40 00:02:40.879 --> 00:02:46.639 you want this to be a solid strategy that's successful, it takes a good 41 00:02:46.719 --> 00:02:50.919 amount of investing in that strategy. And there are many times when you have 42 00:02:51.159 --> 00:02:54.000 kind of, you know, enough tenure and confidence in a role that you're 43 00:02:54.039 --> 00:02:57.759 just like I can kind of like copy and paste this a little bit. 44 00:02:58.039 --> 00:03:00.400 I know this is the work before I can go down the same exact plan. 45 00:03:00.240 --> 00:03:06.000 But to your point, like, I think it's so important always to 46 00:03:06.840 --> 00:03:10.080 learn from the strategy. Sometimes it is just execution, but there are parts 47 00:03:10.159 --> 00:03:15.000 of why it wasn't executed that I think you also need to think about, 48 00:03:15.039 --> 00:03:17.840 Like where did the execution stop? Where where did it hit a hurdle or 49 00:03:17.919 --> 00:03:22.879 a speed bump or would it just completely hit a brick wall? Like what 50 00:03:23.360 --> 00:03:28.319 was it that caused that to happen? And have you done enough due diligence 51 00:03:28.400 --> 00:03:31.000 to really understand and not just understand it, but you'll be able to explain 52 00:03:31.080 --> 00:03:36.080 your strategy to someone, which I think is really really important. My favorite 53 00:03:36.159 --> 00:03:38.840 mention of strategy and anytime I can get a South Park reference into the show, 54 00:03:38.879 --> 00:03:43.159 I try to, But my favorite is the underwear g nomes and it 55 00:03:43.280 --> 00:03:46.159 was like they had their little whiteboard, remember yep, Step one steal underwear, 56 00:03:46.439 --> 00:03:51.520 Step two, I don't know, step three profit right, and like 57 00:03:51.560 --> 00:03:53.960 that was the joke was like we don't like, we don't even know what 58 00:03:53.960 --> 00:03:58.319 we're doing or why we're doing it, but we feel this is going to 59 00:03:58.400 --> 00:04:00.639 lead to profit. And I think that same way some times with strategies is 60 00:04:00.639 --> 00:04:04.000 that we have an idea, we have a thought, or maybe we found 61 00:04:04.080 --> 00:04:09.479 some success in something similar before, and now we want to just implement that 62 00:04:09.560 --> 00:04:13.000 and we just assume it's going to work. And if you haven't thought about 63 00:04:13.039 --> 00:04:17.079 some of these things in in the preface of your strategy, then I think 64 00:04:17.120 --> 00:04:21.120 you have to review them if you have an issue with the strategy being executed 65 00:04:21.199 --> 00:04:25.199 right right, it's the old uh you know, step step one is this, 66 00:04:25.279 --> 00:04:27.839 Step two is you know some some something, and then step three is 67 00:04:27.879 --> 00:04:30.439 the way yay, we won You know, like they that that something something 68 00:04:30.879 --> 00:04:33.600 is something like that means something and you have to figure out what that is 69 00:04:33.639 --> 00:04:36.439 and define it that that is true. There there are a lot of people 70 00:04:36.439 --> 00:04:42.680 out there who they they will validate their own strategy by talking about whatever the 71 00:04:42.800 --> 00:04:46.360 outcome is, but there really isn't a clear tie in between the strategy and 72 00:04:46.399 --> 00:04:50.160 the outcome. It's just this is the desired outcome, and so we're gonna 73 00:04:50.160 --> 00:04:55.160 put a strategy in place and assume that will be the outcome. And I 74 00:04:55.199 --> 00:04:58.519 guess sometimes it works. But if you don't have a direct tie in of 75 00:04:58.879 --> 00:05:02.199 how A plus B equals see, you can't just hope that it's going to 76 00:05:02.279 --> 00:05:06.319 turn out that way. This has to be actually executed in this way. 77 00:05:05.720 --> 00:05:11.959 The things that doctor Snukis talks about in this article. The first thing he 78 00:05:11.959 --> 00:05:16.759 talks about inconsistency. And I like this because when I've seen a strategy not 79 00:05:17.000 --> 00:05:23.519 work because it is applied inconsistently to me, what that says is that someone 80 00:05:23.600 --> 00:05:27.720 in the creation of the strategy felt differently about what was going to be done 81 00:05:27.839 --> 00:05:31.560 than other people did. You couldn't come to a consensus, you couldn't ask 82 00:05:31.600 --> 00:05:34.879 for a consensus, and so it was kind of tabled for later, or 83 00:05:34.879 --> 00:05:39.079 it was just assumed that whatever the decision was, that everybody was just going 84 00:05:39.120 --> 00:05:42.720 to abide by it. And then people leave the room and it's time to 85 00:05:42.759 --> 00:05:46.879 execute, and you'll have some people who absolutely disagree with the way that it 86 00:05:46.920 --> 00:05:49.120 was supposed to go, and then they'll do it their own way. They'll 87 00:05:49.160 --> 00:05:54.040 just decide arbitrarily in the moment to do it a different way. Now, 88 00:05:54.079 --> 00:05:57.480 that doesn't mean the strategy wasn't good. It means that it wasn't executed in 89 00:05:57.480 --> 00:06:00.079 a consistent way. And maybe that's why it failed. Or maybe they're right 90 00:06:00.279 --> 00:06:05.279 and and and when the way that the consensus consensus came to, maybe that 91 00:06:05.399 --> 00:06:09.639 was the wrong way and the outlier was the one that was correct. But 92 00:06:09.639 --> 00:06:13.680 but but either way, what this says to me is that there wasn't a 93 00:06:13.959 --> 00:06:17.519 clear agreement with everybody in the room when it was it was the one two 94 00:06:17.560 --> 00:06:20.480 three ready break where everybody kind of gets together and says, Hey, you 95 00:06:20.560 --> 00:06:25.399 know what, I know that there's parts of all of our ideas in this. 96 00:06:25.399 --> 00:06:28.759 This is the strategy we've come to together. If there's a if there's 97 00:06:28.800 --> 00:06:31.319 a reason that you feel like you can't execute it exactly like we all discussed 98 00:06:31.319 --> 00:06:34.199 together, then let's just keep talking. Let's talk this out again, because 99 00:06:34.399 --> 00:06:38.560 the moment we leave here, we have to execute and and we have to 100 00:06:38.720 --> 00:06:42.120 all be able to rely on that even if it wasn't exactly the way we 101 00:06:42.160 --> 00:06:45.800 wanted it to go, that we're all gonna execute it in this way because 102 00:06:45.839 --> 00:06:46.879 that's the only way we're gonna know if the strategy was right or not. 103 00:06:46.920 --> 00:06:49.519 It's the only way we're gonna know if it works is to be consistent. 104 00:06:50.240 --> 00:06:55.000 And so I think I think that parts maybe missed in a lot of conversations, 105 00:06:55.199 --> 00:06:57.680 and it's just assumed that hey, we all we all said we are 106 00:06:57.720 --> 00:07:00.000 agreement, So I guess we're all gonna actually go out next in exactly this 107 00:07:00.040 --> 00:07:03.639 way. That doesn't always happen, yeah, or sometimes it's like the lack 108 00:07:03.680 --> 00:07:06.639 of honesty in the skill gap. Because that's what I think of when I 109 00:07:06.639 --> 00:07:10.639 think of the insistency, is that the strategy is built by some people that 110 00:07:10.680 --> 00:07:15.600 have specific skills and capabilities, and they just assume that everybody is capable of 111 00:07:15.639 --> 00:07:17.600 delivering it at that same level. And then what you find out is the 112 00:07:17.600 --> 00:07:20.879 strategy that was built works well for the person who built it, and then 113 00:07:20.879 --> 00:07:26.319 the others that are trying to make it happen are not as consistent and they 114 00:07:26.360 --> 00:07:30.399 have different actions and decisions. And it's not that they're not trying, they're 115 00:07:30.439 --> 00:07:34.439 just not at that skill capability to deliver on the same level of consistency that 116 00:07:34.480 --> 00:07:38.839 the other person has. I think that when that happens, you know there 117 00:07:39.319 --> 00:07:44.480 a strategy can't just be high level. We're gonna do this high level thing 118 00:07:44.480 --> 00:07:47.600 and then all of a sudden we win. That's why a solid strategy has 119 00:07:47.639 --> 00:07:53.040 to have component parts of it that where you can benchmark along the way whether 120 00:07:53.120 --> 00:07:57.519 or not those things are there. And so if a person is is not 121 00:07:57.600 --> 00:08:01.480 being able to execute, if you don't have the ability in that moment to 122 00:08:01.519 --> 00:08:03.879 figure out whether or not they're not executing because they're not bought into it, 123 00:08:05.319 --> 00:08:07.360 or they're not executing because they don't have the skills to do it. If 124 00:08:07.360 --> 00:08:11.120 you're not able to look very quickly and see which one of those things it 125 00:08:11.199 --> 00:08:15.199 is. It means you didn't bake in the right controls into the strategy to 126 00:08:15.199 --> 00:08:18.319 figure out, you know, whether or not you can validate your actions going 127 00:08:18.360 --> 00:08:22.040 forward. You know, a strategy is nothing without your ability to validate it. 128 00:08:22.160 --> 00:08:26.120 There are two other ones that doctor Snuocus mentions on here. One is 129 00:08:26.240 --> 00:08:31.159 rigidity inability to adapt or change, and another one is conformity no creative edge. 130 00:08:31.200 --> 00:08:35.039 I look at those it's really similar to each other here. You know, 131 00:08:35.240 --> 00:08:39.279 when it comes to people executing a strategy, they will be more likely 132 00:08:39.360 --> 00:08:43.039 to buy into that strategy when they can put their own personal touch on it 133 00:08:43.080 --> 00:08:46.440 as well. So if you're if you're hyper defining every single element of this 134 00:08:46.799 --> 00:08:50.240 to the point where people can't bring their own elements of who they are to 135 00:08:50.320 --> 00:08:54.759 the process, it's going to be really difficult to have buy in from people 136 00:08:54.159 --> 00:08:58.159 to make that happen, unless you're talking like the military or something where it 137 00:08:58.200 --> 00:09:01.559 has to be rigid and you know step one, step two that have three. 138 00:09:01.759 --> 00:09:05.799 In most organizations, a strategy doesn't have to be that rigid. The 139 00:09:07.440 --> 00:09:11.120 rigid part can be you know, the things that that we must get done, 140 00:09:11.440 --> 00:09:13.080 the things that we can't change, and then everything else. Everything else 141 00:09:13.120 --> 00:09:18.440 should kind of be left to people, local leaders or leaders of smaller teams 142 00:09:18.679 --> 00:09:20.759 or individuals to kind of bring their own spin to it, because that's a 143 00:09:22.240 --> 00:09:26.080 how you figure out whether or not it's being executed correctly in some parts of 144 00:09:26.120 --> 00:09:30.799 an organization versus others. But it also allows them to feel like they're not 145 00:09:30.879 --> 00:09:33.600 just being told what to do when they're a robot. They're being valued for 146 00:09:33.679 --> 00:09:39.200 the the kind of the nuances they can bring to the execution, and they're 147 00:09:39.200 --> 00:09:41.159 being asked to just work exactly like their coworkers might be working. I agree 148 00:09:41.200 --> 00:09:48.200 completely. You have to create some space here to allow leaders to leverage their 149 00:09:48.240 --> 00:09:50.600 strengths and then be able to kind of make up for their opportunities. So 150 00:09:50.679 --> 00:09:54.200 I think like I think of it like in this context of a larger strategy 151 00:09:54.200 --> 00:09:58.639 for maybe like a company, an organization, or like multiple markets or whatever 152 00:09:58.639 --> 00:10:03.720 that might be, you're going to have some some adaption that needs to happen 153 00:10:03.840 --> 00:10:09.679 as a result of maybe something going on locally and in the UH. It 154 00:10:09.720 --> 00:10:13.960 could be everything from hours of operation to demographics of customers to whatever that might 155 00:10:13.000 --> 00:10:16.639 be. But there needs to be a little bit of movement there that you 156 00:10:16.639 --> 00:10:20.879 can have to change it slightly to still be able to fall within the framework 157 00:10:20.919 --> 00:10:24.000 of the strategy, but allow there to be some some uniqueness to it, 158 00:10:24.240 --> 00:10:28.720 and then then the conformity like like you have to. I think the best 159 00:10:28.759 --> 00:10:35.159 strategies are ones that are clear in in an impact. They're clear in what 160 00:10:35.399 --> 00:10:41.440 the result is that we're going after. It's aligned with the uh the priorities 161 00:10:41.480 --> 00:10:46.279 of an organization that they defined. But they also give the teams a little 162 00:10:46.279 --> 00:10:48.960 space there to say, like, you know, there may be a little 163 00:10:50.000 --> 00:10:52.759 bit of a different take that you could take onto this that would be helpful. 164 00:10:52.759 --> 00:10:54.159 There's a little bit of a different way that you might be able to 165 00:10:54.159 --> 00:10:58.960 to make this a little bit more localized to the team, and that matter. 166 00:11:00.120 --> 00:11:03.919 That matters a lot with strategy. It feels much better. You can't 167 00:11:03.000 --> 00:11:07.679 always have everybody in the room and there's always going to be strategies. It 168 00:11:07.759 --> 00:11:09.720 kind of have to be like here. It is like like those in the 169 00:11:09.759 --> 00:11:13.080 room to help develop this larger strategy have been here, this is what's been 170 00:11:13.120 --> 00:11:16.080 decided. Here it is for you. But there has to be a little 171 00:11:16.080 --> 00:11:20.159 space in there where a team can be a little creative and make it theirs, 172 00:11:20.519 --> 00:11:24.639 because then that that I think has a lot more impact and a lot 173 00:11:24.679 --> 00:11:28.919 more stickiness when a team can take a larger strategy kind of in the macro 174 00:11:28.000 --> 00:11:31.240 and bring it into the micro and say, and let's make it our strategy. 175 00:11:31.279 --> 00:11:35.000 So I definitely agree with that. Yeah, And looking at this list, 176 00:11:35.240 --> 00:11:39.960 are there any on here inconsistency, complexity, rigidity, ambiguity, conformity, 177 00:11:41.000 --> 00:11:43.840 inertia, and diffusion any of these seven that you look at and the 178 00:11:43.879 --> 00:11:48.080 first thing you think, it takes you right back to a time when this 179 00:11:48.279 --> 00:11:52.519 exact thing happened to you, When when a strategy when you could see it 180 00:11:52.519 --> 00:11:54.679 was a good strategy, but it just wasn't working because of you could see 181 00:11:54.759 --> 00:11:58.639 one of these things was happening, and it maybe you have like a you 182 00:11:58.679 --> 00:12:01.559 know, extra spidy sense that goes up when when one of these things happens 183 00:12:01.720 --> 00:12:05.799 all the time, right now, right right right now. There's a strategy 184 00:12:07.120 --> 00:12:13.120 that I've had to reread the strategy in the math around why we're doing something 185 00:12:13.799 --> 00:12:18.159 like four times, and I still don't understand. It's so complex. It 186 00:12:18.279 --> 00:12:22.720 like like if you can't explain it in sixty seconds, it's too complex, 187 00:12:22.200 --> 00:12:26.440 Like it should be that easy at least for like the big picture of what 188 00:12:26.480 --> 00:12:31.080 the strategy is, about, what it's solving for, what the goal is, 189 00:12:31.480 --> 00:12:33.399 what some of the expectations are. You don't have to get into all 190 00:12:33.440 --> 00:12:37.480 the minutia of it. But once it starts to like get all over the 191 00:12:37.519 --> 00:12:41.600 place, and if this, then that, if this, like if it 192 00:12:41.639 --> 00:12:46.320 feels like a thousand character Excel formula, you know, and I'm just like, 193 00:12:46.399 --> 00:12:50.240 where's the comma and the parentheses? Like it's just too complicated. I 194 00:12:50.279 --> 00:12:54.600 see that happen a lot. It makes sense for the person who made it, 195 00:12:54.600 --> 00:12:56.919 it doesn't make sense for those that are trying to execute it. Absolutely 196 00:12:56.960 --> 00:13:03.159 for sure. I think the the diffusion for me is not that it's necessarily 197 00:13:03.200 --> 00:13:07.399 like no clear priorities. It just might not be aligned with the priorities that 198 00:13:07.440 --> 00:13:11.840 we just talked about thirty minutes ago or yesterday. So constantly like changing priorities, 199 00:13:11.120 --> 00:13:15.720 yeah, like that that will destroy a strategy so fast because then I'm 200 00:13:15.720 --> 00:13:18.759 like, well, wait a minute, Like this isn't even aligned with what 201 00:13:18.799 --> 00:13:22.039 we talked about yesterday. So like I don't know how much I'm gonna put 202 00:13:22.039 --> 00:13:24.879 effort into this, like because now I gotta kind of I gotta I gotta 203 00:13:24.879 --> 00:13:28.600 hedge my bets here, like which one is going to win? So like, 204 00:13:28.679 --> 00:13:31.120 I don't know if I'm gonna get my full effort into this. So 205 00:13:31.200 --> 00:13:35.639 that's definitely something that I would say sticks out to me that as a leader, 206 00:13:35.720 --> 00:13:39.480 I'm like, oh, you know, I don't know. I don't 207 00:13:39.480 --> 00:13:43.799 know if I need more clarity here. I need to understand this because it's 208 00:13:43.840 --> 00:13:46.120 not aligned with what we just said. Yeah, I think another thing that 209 00:13:46.159 --> 00:13:48.720 I think of when I think when I hear no clear priorities. And this 210 00:13:48.840 --> 00:13:54.480 is just from a long history of seeing this happen, even if you don't 211 00:13:54.519 --> 00:13:56.279 have, you know, two competing parts of the business who seem to have 212 00:13:56.320 --> 00:14:01.120 different priorities, and now you're left thinking, Okay, which whose coattails do 213 00:14:01.159 --> 00:14:05.720 I need to stand on here? Because one person's you know, drive or 214 00:14:07.240 --> 00:14:09.840 push for the organization. You know, the organization has that person's ear right 215 00:14:09.840 --> 00:14:13.039 now, but maybe not this person. So I need to, you know, 216 00:14:13.120 --> 00:14:16.519 choose my priorities based on the almost the politics of the moment. But 217 00:14:16.679 --> 00:14:22.720 what I see also happen is when priorities change and they start conflicting with each 218 00:14:22.759 --> 00:14:26.039 other over time, not not when you have to choose between two in the 219 00:14:26.080 --> 00:14:30.919 same time. But when there's a priority for a quarter and then another quarter 220 00:14:31.000 --> 00:14:33.960 comes up, and then the priority is not just different than the previous quarter, 221 00:14:35.120 --> 00:14:39.039 because that's fine, you can priorities can change, But when the strive 222 00:14:39.240 --> 00:14:43.200 for the priority of the current quarter actually goes in the opposite direction or in 223 00:14:45.120 --> 00:14:48.759 the spirit of being against the priority of the previous quarter or a previous year, 224 00:14:48.919 --> 00:14:54.600 and it's almost like, how many times can you tell your people something 225 00:14:54.720 --> 00:15:00.600 that changes or that differs and expect them to just forget what they pushed for 226 00:15:00.840 --> 00:15:05.080 three months ago or six months ago or a year ago. You need to 227 00:15:05.240 --> 00:15:09.960 really have a compelling reason as to why the direction is changing so much so 228 00:15:09.080 --> 00:15:13.399 where the priority is not just different than the previous one, but goes against 229 00:15:13.440 --> 00:15:16.720 the previous one. If you're gonna do that, it's not all it's not 230 00:15:16.799 --> 00:15:20.440 always a bad thing, but you need to be able to explain very articulately 231 00:15:20.919 --> 00:15:24.919 why that's happening. Otherwise you're gonna people who think that these goals or priorities 232 00:15:26.240 --> 00:15:28.440 just change arbitrarily based on whatever number you want to move on a scorecard, 233 00:15:28.679 --> 00:15:31.600 and that's not a good way to make people feel like they're part of something 234 00:15:31.639 --> 00:15:35.960 larger than themselves absolutely, And one thing I would highlight is I love the 235 00:15:35.000 --> 00:15:39.960 fact that he calls out that this is destroying a solid strategy, meaning that 236 00:15:39.000 --> 00:15:43.080 there are minimum expects, that there are bad strategies and they're just bad strategies. 237 00:15:43.120 --> 00:15:46.200 But this is like, this is a good, solid strategy that is 238 00:15:46.360 --> 00:15:50.960 not being executed because of one of these things. So I love that part, 239 00:15:52.240 --> 00:15:54.120 and with that it brings us to this episode is a one minute hack, 240 00:15:54.360 --> 00:15:58.559 but first a few worse from our sponsors. All right, for this 241 00:15:58.600 --> 00:16:00.159 episode, one minute Hackers wants you to do. So think about the last 242 00:16:00.200 --> 00:16:07.159 strategy that you were in charge of implementing or designing or executing that didn't work 243 00:16:07.200 --> 00:16:11.039 out the way you wanted it to the last strategy that failed. It's very 244 00:16:11.039 --> 00:16:14.399 easy to pick apart a strategy and figure out where it failed if it was 245 00:16:14.440 --> 00:16:17.960 a poor strategy. But if you're scratching your head and thinking, I don't 246 00:16:18.000 --> 00:16:21.720 know why this strategy failed, think about it in the context of these seven 247 00:16:21.759 --> 00:16:25.080 things. We'll put the descriptions in the We'll put the words in the podcast 248 00:16:25.159 --> 00:16:29.799 descriptions. You can read them. Inconsistency, complexity, rigidity, ambiguity, 249 00:16:30.120 --> 00:16:34.200 conformity, in inertia, and diffusion are all reasons why a solid strategy can 250 00:16:34.200 --> 00:16:37.600 fail. So before you throw out a strategy that may have been a good 251 00:16:37.600 --> 00:16:41.600 strategy and assume that there was something you're missing somewhere that it just wasn't a 252 00:16:41.600 --> 00:16:45.159 good strategy, think about it through the lens of these seven things and make 253 00:16:45.200 --> 00:16:49.039 sure that it wasn't just a great strategy that wasn't executed in the right way 254 00:16:49.519 --> 00:16:52.440 as opposed to going back to the drawing board and redesigning a new strategy. 255 00:16:52.519 --> 00:16:56.120 Yeah, I think it's a great woe in a hack and it's you know, 256 00:16:56.200 --> 00:17:00.200 so much of this And I think just in learning, in in leadership 257 00:17:00.240 --> 00:17:04.400 development and self development is around the just idea of self reflection and thinking about 258 00:17:04.559 --> 00:17:07.799 you know, uh, when these things fall apart to your point, like 259 00:17:07.839 --> 00:17:11.559 a bad strategy of bad strategy, Like there's a lot of things that can 260 00:17:11.640 --> 00:17:17.640 The timing was wrong, the the you know it didn't it wasn't it was 261 00:17:17.720 --> 00:17:19.680 maybe like kind of like tone deaf to a degree of what's going on. 262 00:17:21.079 --> 00:17:25.279 There wasn't any collaboration that was done. There wasn't any dialogue, you know, 263 00:17:25.440 --> 00:17:27.240 like there's it's pretty easy to be like why I can tell you exactly 264 00:17:27.279 --> 00:17:32.000 why that didn't work. Right, It's much tougher again when you're scratching your 265 00:17:32.000 --> 00:17:34.880 head being like this really should have worked. I don't like where did this 266 00:17:36.000 --> 00:17:40.559 go wrong? These things, I think are the great, great examples of 267 00:17:40.599 --> 00:17:44.319 like where to start, what to look at, what to consider, and 268 00:17:44.319 --> 00:17:47.319 then starts to like, you know, to peel that back and like maybe 269 00:17:47.160 --> 00:17:51.960 where were there some assumptions that were made on behalf of those building the strategy 270 00:17:52.119 --> 00:17:56.880 or things that that weren't considered when you're you're thinking about like lack of clear 271 00:17:57.000 --> 00:18:00.960 direction, right, and from an ambigu standpoint, you could say, like 272 00:18:02.119 --> 00:18:04.240 I thought it was pretty direct with like what we're going to do here, 273 00:18:04.640 --> 00:18:08.640 but if if your team is not clear in the direction, not you thinking 274 00:18:08.680 --> 00:18:12.400 that you're clear, but if it landed with a team in a way that 275 00:18:12.440 --> 00:18:15.240 they were not clear about it. You need to get that insight. You 276 00:18:15.279 --> 00:18:18.640 need to spend the time asking some of these questions. And that's probably what 277 00:18:18.720 --> 00:18:22.359 I would do with this, is like, all right, what do I 278 00:18:22.359 --> 00:18:25.519 think it was? But what questions would I ask? How would I verify 279 00:18:25.599 --> 00:18:30.200 or validate that it was inconsistency that caused this, or how did I verify 280 00:18:30.240 --> 00:18:33.559 it it was it was too complex or not. Was I able to explain 281 00:18:33.599 --> 00:18:37.799 it in sixty seconds? Was my leader who I shared this with, were 282 00:18:37.799 --> 00:18:40.240 they were able to explain it in sixty seconds or less? Like these are 283 00:18:40.279 --> 00:18:42.559 things that you can do to really verify and validate what was going on. 284 00:18:42.640 --> 00:18:45.839 Yeah, that's spot on. I also think this is a good list to 285 00:18:45.920 --> 00:18:51.240 keep with you when you're creating a strategy because some of them are truly about 286 00:18:51.279 --> 00:18:55.160 the way it's the execution is, but some of it can be referenced during 287 00:18:55.200 --> 00:18:59.880 the course of creating a strategy, things like complexity or you know, or 288 00:19:00.079 --> 00:19:03.359 or diffusion of not having clear priorities. These are things that to consider as 289 00:19:03.400 --> 00:19:07.759 you're going through the strategy because when you're creating one, to be able to 290 00:19:07.799 --> 00:19:11.000 check off some of these boxes and say, Okay, it's not overly complicated, 291 00:19:11.160 --> 00:19:14.119 it's not too rigid. It lets people kind of bring their own spin 292 00:19:14.200 --> 00:19:18.319 on things. These are things that can help the strategy. When you leave 293 00:19:18.359 --> 00:19:21.599 the room with the people will all put it together and you have to say 294 00:19:21.599 --> 00:19:25.359 ready break and you go execute it. Now, going out of those meetings 295 00:19:25.519 --> 00:19:29.720 with this in mind will probably make those people more likely to execute it in 296 00:19:29.759 --> 00:19:32.759 a way that sets it up for success, and you'll have to do, 297 00:19:32.880 --> 00:19:34.559 you know, kind of less of this reflecting later on to try to figure 298 00:19:34.559 --> 00:19:40.599 out why a strategy that was otherwise good failed, because it's really tough to 299 00:19:40.640 --> 00:19:45.240 revisit a good strategy that has failed, even if it was a good strategy. 300 00:19:45.359 --> 00:19:47.759 Meaning if this, if these are the reasons that failed, but it 301 00:19:47.799 --> 00:19:51.680 was a good strategy, it's much harder to get people's buy in and kind 302 00:19:51.680 --> 00:19:56.039 of reinvigorate them round a process that has already failed once. So if you 303 00:19:56.039 --> 00:19:59.079 can prevent it from failing to begin with, that's always a better route. 304 00:19:59.119 --> 00:20:02.039 Absolutely, And with that it brings us to the end of this episode. 305 00:20:02.039 --> 00:20:03.960 This is Hacking Leadership. I'm Lorenzo and I'm Chris, and we'll talk to 306 00:20:04.000 --> 00:20:04.720 you all next time.