Selection and maintenance of the aim is making absolutely clear, precisely what is to be achieved (by whom, when and why) to ensure all concerned remain focused and all associated actions are co-ordinated. The aim must be understood and fully accepted by all involved. All activity must be aimed at achieving and contribute towards achieving the aim and it is important to understand in reality the aim may (will) change as the battle progresses.

Maintenance of morale will be crucial in determining the outcome of combat in the event of all things being equal, ie. when no side has a clear advantage. Irrespective of context and situation – well motivated people with high morale perform better than those without. Good morale can be the difference between success and failure; morale and motivation are the responsibility of leaders.

Security within any military context is generally obvious; in the business context the principle of security is concerned with managing all the essential risks necessarily taken to achieve an outcome. This includes (say) confidentiality, copyright, financial constraints, succession planning, etc. as much as the more obvious health and safety in operations. Security is as much about facilitating and safeguarding the bold moves which gain competitive advantage as it is about looking after routine business.

Surprise is about gaining advantage by doing the unexpected; it is the deliberate ‘wrong footing’ of the enemy (competition) to bring about his/her demise. Creativity, courage and speed are the key ingredients to surprise and as such need to be nurtured and developed as an organisational attitude. In a business context the ‘enemy’ may be a competitor, a specific situation or set of circumstances.

Offensive action is about proactive, deliberate action aimed at winning through in order to achieve the stated aim – exploiting advantage, opportunity and strength to accomplish the task. Again, this is as much an organisational attitude as anything else. To understand the nature of this principle as a ‘mind set’ consider polar views of defining business success in the current ‘economic climate’ presented in this question. Is success about avoiding failure or achieving stated objectives irrespective of prevailing circumstances? Offensive action is proactively doing what is required to succeed; it is not about accepting mediocrity or avoiding failure.

Concentration of force is about applying decisive force and effort at the most decisive place and time to secure victory in battle as no army can be the best at everything all the time. In the business world this principle is about achieving the right effect in the right location to ensure the desired outcome; for example (say) timing and targeting of investment to yield the best possible return. Rarely, if ever, will the opportunity of the right force being present at the right time in the right place present itself; concentration of force is a managed deliberate act of choice.

Economy of effort is self evident; it is about efficiency in all you undertake. Essentially, it is concerned with understanding the nature and effect of attrition on the conduct of enduring campaigns. It is about shrewd decision making, careful preparation and squeezing all you can from your resources and assets in order to retain sufficient reserves to deal with contingencies and exploit opportunities as they arise. In business this is about (say) spending as little as possible on those items which do not contribute directly to the main aim in order to direct revenue where it will be more effective in achieving the aim. This is not to be confused with ‘cost cutting’.

Flexibility, attitudinal and organisational flexibility, is required to be able to recognise when change is necessary and to change when needed. This requires strength of character and moral courage to change or modify a plan or course of action when the existing one is doomed to failure. The military maxim ‘no plan survives contact with the enemy unchanged’ is borne from hard earned experience, and understanding where the fine line lies between dogged determination to succeed and sheer ‘bloody minded’ dogma leading to failure.

Co-operation is about ensuring unity of effort to achieve a shared outcome and accessing the combined attributes of diversity. The challenge is to overcome inherent disposition to favour a single perspective or approach and inevitably necessitates compromise between those involved. In an organisation, co-operation is concerned with both interpersonal actions and interdepartmental activities. There is very little to no room for significant individual, personal gain in an organisation if achieving organisational aims has primacy.

Sustainability is about ensuring longevity of both operations and effect and, as such, is primarily to do with long term logistical support to the enduring operation in a military context. For example, having the resources and support mechanism in place to ensure the commander can deliver (say) a defined number of missiles at a given rate throughout the expected duration of the battle and beyond. The business parallels are relatively easy to draw; for example, the supply chain is in place and has sufficient funding allocated to ensure enough pressings of the right type arrive at the factory every day for the expected duration of a production run. Sustainability requires dedicated and often ‘inglorious’ work, detailed analysis and application to task which require attributes and skills difficult to find and attract in business.

There is no order of precedence in applying the above principles after the first, selection and maintenance of the aim. The key is all are applied in order to avoid otherwise inevitable failure. Success also involves and requires the presence of other factors and circumstances – not least of which is an element of good fortune (or luck).

Commercial history tells us that the most successful organisations, over the long term, consistently focus on “enabling” people things (leadership, purpose, employee motivation) whose immediate benefits aren’t always clear in the short term. These robust organisations are internally aligned around a clear and cohesive vision and strategy; can execute to a high quality thanks to strong capabilities, management processes, and employee motivation; and renew themselves in an ever more demanding environment more effectively than their rivals do. In short, healthy processes today drive improved performance tomorrow.

The issue in the majority of the larger organisations is the short term requirements placed upon them by their shareholders. Many Chief Executives and Senior Vice Presidents instinctively understand the paradox of performance and health, though few have expressed or acted upon it better than John Mackey, founder and CEO of Whole Foods. “We have not achieved our tremendous increase in shareholder value,” he once observed, “by making shareholder value the only purpose of our business.” No most certainly not and yet the increase in value has been long term it has been as a result of healthy strategic processes and disciplines. Outstanding strategy, effective communication and the evolution of people processes to free up mangers and leaders to focus on the future rather than immerse themselves in the problems of today. Don’t forget that people run businesses and people are the interface between a business and its customer base if they feel empowered, understand what they have to do and the route they have to take to get there, then they can create extraordinary value and longevity!

In today’s business world if you are a business leader you have two choices. You can shape your destiny or let fate take you to the destination it chooses. All too often we come across businesses that have taken the second option and found they are in a place that they did not want to be.  It’s a tough world out there with a rapidly changing environment with lots of competitors chipping away at your business. You need to ensure your business survives and flourishes through proper planning and preparation. Having some sort of Strategy that includes a vision of where you want to get to. An understanding of what might stop you. An idea of the team you would like to assist you on your way and a means of allocating your scarce resources to the most important aspects of your plan.

There is a time and place for each of these disciplines   but you need to understand the where and when and how and bring all of these disparate activities together into one coherent strategy.

So how do I put together my strategy and where do I start?

Like all good stories you need to start at the beginning by understanding your personal requirements and how these can be met by your business. There is little separation in today’s fast moving world between home and office.  This entails asking yourself lots of questions. What is it you want to achieve? (Vision) How will you do this? (Plan) Whose help and guidance do you need? (Talent Management) What resources will you need?  How much will it cost? What’s my time frame to achieve this? (Resource Priorities and Risk Management)

Hone your answers at each stage of the process by continually asking one of the most important but rarely used questions – WHY? Sometimes its best asked five times to get to the real issue or desire!

That’s a lot to take in if you’re also spending most of your time on day-to-day operational business matters. Sometimes it pays to bring someone in from outside your business to look at your strategy with fresh eyes and there are plenty of consultants who can do this. Some may also assist in the implementation of your strategy as you focus on the day to day activities. After all we all work far too much “in rather than on” our business.

But in the words of Rick Page “Hope is not a strategy” Start shaping your future to ensure that you get your business to the place it needs to be to give you the life you want!

How does vision work and why is it so important? If a leader has not got a clear picture of exactly what it is they are trying to achieve then how can they expect to know when it has been achieved? If a leader has a clear picture of their desired end state but the people they are depending upon to produce that end state do not know what it looks like then how will they know what it is they are trying to deliver? Would you set off to your work place in a morning without knowing where your work place is and what it looks like? A leader without vision is like an orienteer without a map; they are likely to run round in circles getting nowhere fast whilst their competitors get to where they want to be before them.

Not only must a workforce know and understand what is they are trying and expected to achieve but also how to do so. This is why clear, concise and well articulated direction is important. Woolly direction leads to uncertainty and ineffective action which leads to dysfunction and, ultimately, in failure to achieve the desired outcomes. Undoubtedly, when you set off to your workplace in the morning you know by which route you are going and how you are going to get there. A leader without direction is like an orienteer without a compass; they can only follow their competitors around the course and finish the race in last place.

Having a clear vision is only the start. If a vision is to be realised then it must be effectively communicated in a way which has meaning and can be understood by those who need to know what it is. Good direction need not necessarily be detailed but it must be clear and understood by those requiring direction. Also, there is little point in a leader giving direction which is not resourced; a plan must be deliverable and seen to be so otherwise it is no more than a work of fiction which will fail to yield the desired results. Good leadership is like good orienteering. Make sure you have the right map for the ground you are on, acquire and use the necessary equipment correctly to orienteer your way most efficiently and effectively through the course, quicker than your competitors to win the race.

Strategy is about all this, it consists of four key tenets Vision, Risk Mitigation, Talent Management and the prioritisation of resources. The tenets are interdependent and require an overall strategy to hold them together and keep them synchronised. Strategy is not about two years it’s about 5- 10 years. Strategy is about inspiration and vision in a changing environment, it affords an opportunity to select a course and change a course, dependent upon the situational requirement to map out a route that matches the circumstances and yet still delivers the required end state. Strategy is synonymous with great leadership and it informs and inspires those managers and those teams that work for great leaders. Leaders need to understand and use strategy.

Firstly, it was published over a year after the time generally acknowledged as the start of our prevailing economic situation. I use the word prevailing rather than current because as we draw to the end of 2011 the current forecasts for 2012 offer little optimism or hope of change for the better. The HBR article refers to ‘the current crisis’ in 2009 and forecasts economic crisis as the future norm existing beyond the recovery from recession. For me, as we enter the fifth consecutive year of ‘current crisis’, this poses the question ‘double dip’ or new economic environment?

Secondly, specialising in leadership, strategy and cohesion; the prevailing economic environment provides opportunities which simply do not exist in a benign situation. As much as regularity, dependability and certainty instil confidence they are the arena of the manager; whereas, irregularity, challenge and uncertainty provide opportunities not otherwise available to a leader. No amount of tweaking of financial mechanisms, directives or policy changes are likely to impact sufficiently on global competition, political instability, energy concerns and climate issues to remove risk and uncertainty.

So what should we do? ‘Batten down the hatches’ and rely on the same old measures and techniques that got us where we are today whilst hoping someone will ‘fix’ something somewhere to make all things good again? Or realise leadership and organisational adaptability are required to overcome the relentless challenges of our ‘new economic environment’? The problem is this, as difficult as the former may be it is undoubtedly a much easier option than the behavioural and organisational change required by the latter. Either way, the outcome is not guaranteed success though one course of action is more likely to succeed than the other.

The message in the HBR article referred to does not appear to have been popular at the time and I doubt it will be today. Perhaps because there is no ‘spoonful of sugar’ offered with the medicinal advice therein. This said, it remains worth reading all the same on http://hbr.org/2009/07/leadership-in-a-permanent-crisis/ar/1

Beware of the power of ‘spin’ and guard against it! It was widely reported last week the UK achieved a third quarter growth of 0.5%; furthermore, the global economy grew by about 4.5% during the same period. Yet our economic news was still dominated by a ‘doom and gloom’ perspective. The reality is growth is neither recession nor regression and ‘good news’ does not make good news copy. As an aside, I know of one CEO of a regional chamber of commerce who was unable to get his good news publically aired last week. Given these growth figures and that we enjoy unprecedented access (and support) to the global market place, areas of opportunity must exist to explore and exploit.

‘Niche’ is not always nice and can be a barrier to flexibility. The business ‘We Only Press Green Shirts’ is going to suffer if there are insufficient people who want their green shirts pressing. The skills, assets and resources required to press green shirts are the same as those required to press shirts of all colours, not to mention a vast array of other garments. Overly simple perhaps but my point is clear; if your client base or market share is reducing what is it you do which can be applied in another way to make a profit?

Perception really matters when assessing the future of a business. If the diminishing client base of “We Only Press Green Shirts” is seen as being due to the real term reduction in disposable income available for a discretionary spend service, I suspect conventional thinking would most likely lead to assuming the business is destined to fail. However, if we consider the client base from a different perspective it may be possible to see an opportunity. For example, those who are working in the UK are tending to continue to work long hours and most working families are reported to be struggling to allocate the time needed for domestic work.

So, are you struggling to survive or trying to thrive? Do you possess the flexibility of perspective to recognise opportunity where others see only threat? Do you have the strength of mind and determination to succeed? What is your strategy for succeeding in the current economic situation and will it be sufficiently flexible to meet the needs of a dynamic market place?

“In more than 40 years of close observation of the U.S. space program, I don’t think there has ever been more uncertainty and fear of impending program collapse. One result of the current confusion is the too-widespread impression that  the final flight of the shuttle means that the U.S. program of human spaceflight has come to an end” writes John Logsdon.

So what is strategic leadership and how would it have prevented the infighting within the US’s Space Programme and allowed it to carry on in a relatively seamless manner?

For me strategic  leadership is about vision it’s about long term projection and the ability to communicate  a dream and make that dream tangible within an organisation. The problem with long term is the ambiguity induced by time. Things change over a period of time and things are changing faster than ever as the pace of life quickens. This makes strategic vision really difficult but really essential in leading an organisation.  More difficult as it is more intangible and  it is more essential to hold an organisation on its course in a swiftly changing environment. Moral courage, drive and determination are all required in a strategic leader in shaping the future and taking an organisation forward.

Strategic leadership also involves risk and its mitigation. Risk is another thing that very few modern organisations have a handle on as evidenced in the recent US banking Crisis and even the more recent struggles with national debt within the European community. Risk involves three things the ability to identify future threats to an organisation, to put in place means of identifying the proximity of those threats and finally preparing  strategies and plans to mitigate those threats. Now again the speed of life makes the management of risk much more difficult as the unforeseen happens in an instant. Take the recent riots in UK  sparked by the police and  the independent police complaints commission  not dealing sensibly with the unfortunate death of a suspected criminal. Now a true strategic risk practitioner may not have seen that coming but surely they would have controlled the rioting in London sooner certainly before it spread to other cities or prevented it taking place in other cities by having contingencies in place. Threats need to be pre-empted if they are to be mitigated hence strategic managers of risk need to be aware of  and sensitive to their changing environment through exploring worst case scenarios. This can be easily accomplished by modelling, gaming or red teaming. Thinking the unthinkable allows for effective contingency planning and aids risk mitigation.  Identified risk also needs to be communicated and devolved to as close to the action as possible, for it is here that the truly empowered and enlightened employee can prevent the threat.

Strategic Leadership is also about talent management; making sure that the right people are in the right place at the right time. Whether they have been nurtured or hired is irrelevant, it is ensuring that they are where they are needed.   I like the following quote as it epitomises talent management to me:

“The best leader is the one who has the sense to surround himself with outstanding people and the self restraint not to meddle with how they do their jobs” Author unknown

Don’t talent manage people out of the organisation by telling them what to do and how to do it . Mentor and develop them to exploit their own individual potential and maximise their utility to the organisation by empowering them by telling them what you want done and affording them the authority and resources to do it ! They will develop and learn even when wrong; now that’s talent management!

Strategic leaders are brave, they are prepared to tolerate mistakes providing they are learned from. Strategic leaders are visionary and excellent communicators. Strategic leaders are risk takers but every risk they take is calculated and every threat mitigated as far is possible.  They believe in the power of the organisation rather than their own power. That’s why true strategic leaders are rare creatures!