In some organisations, strategy is treated as a grand blueprint, handed down from the boardroom to be executed by frontline teams. This thinking is flawed. Strategy and execution are not separate, linear functions where one follows the other in a predictable sequence. Instead, they form a virtuous circle, constantly feeding into and refining one another. Successful organisations understand that execution is not just the operational leg of strategy—it is the real-world proving ground where strategy is tested, adapted, and made relevant.
Poor Execution Is Poor Strategy in Disguise
Too often, leaders blame failures on “poor execution” when, in reality, the issue is an incomplete or rigid strategy that failed to account for execution realities. A strategy that doesn’t consider the organisation’s capabilities, operating environment, or cultural context is doomed from the start.
Consider the infamous failures of companies like Nokia, Kodak, or even the early days of the digital transformation efforts in traditional banks. Their strategies often failed because they did not adequately align with market dynamics, internal capabilities, or the speed of execution required. Execution isn’t just about carrying out a strategy; it is about validating, stress-testing, and refining it in real-time.
A strategy that is too far removed from execution realities will collapse under its own weight. If teams lack the skills, processes, or incentives to bring a strategy to life, then the strategy itself is flawed—not just the execution.
Strategy and Execution Must Co-Evolve
Rather than a top-down, one-time process, strategy must be a continuous, iterative cycle where learning from execution feeds back into decision-making. The best companies operate this way. Amazon, for example, is renowned for its "mechanisms over models" approach—strategy is never just an abstract plan; it is always tested against execution realities, adjusted, and evolved.
The Execution Discussion Is a Strategy Discussion
Many organisations make the mistake of separating strategic thinkers from execution teams. But this creates a dangerous blind spot. The execution discussion—where teams tackle constraints, operational challenges, and unforeseen risks—is as much a part of strategy as the initial conceptual thinking.
True strategy leaders engage deeply with execution teams, ensuring that feedback loops are short and responsive. Companies like Toyota, with their Kaizen (continuous improvement) philosophy, embed execution learning into strategic decision-making. Leaders who fail to do this risk creating brittle strategies that look great in PowerPoint but fall apart in practice.
Coalition and Collaboration: The Heart of Strategy Execution
Strategy isn’t formulated in isolation, and execution isn’t carried out in a vacuum. The most effective organisations build a coalition of stakeholders—executives, frontline employees, customers, and even external partners—to ensure that strategy is both ambitious and executable.
This requires breaking down silos, ensuring that strategic intent is not lost in translation across departments. Cross-functional collaboration allows for early identification of execution bottlenecks, rather than discovering them too late when momentum is lost.
The Speed of Strategic Decision-Making vs. Execution: Finding the Right Tempo
In a world of rapid change, the speed of strategic decision-making and execution must be carefully synchronised—but they don’t always move at the same pace. In some cases, strategy must move quickly while execution takes time; in others, strategic decisions require deep deliberation while execution must be immediate. The key is real-time feedback and verifiable insight, ensuring that decision-making is informed by execution realities and vice versa.
Consider crisis response and competitive pivots—when a cybersecurity breach occurs, a company cannot afford prolonged strategic deliberation. The decision to isolate systems, communicate with stakeholders, and deploy patches must be rapid, while the execution—such as rebuilding security protocols—may take weeks or months. Similarly, when consumer sentiment shifts dramatically (e.g., backlash against a product or brand), leadership must decide quickly on strategic adjustments, but changing product lines, supply chains, or business models takes longer.
On the other hand, some strategic shifts require slow, deliberate decision-making, even when execution must be swift once the course is set. For example, when pharmaceutical companies develop a new drug, years of R&D, regulatory approvals, and testing inform the strategic decision to bring a product to market. However, once approval is granted, the execution—scaling production and launching global distribution—must move at full speed.
What enables the right balance between strategic agility and execution speed is real-time data, strong feedback loops, and verifiable insights. By embedding data-driven insights into decision-making, organisations ensure they neither overcommit to rigid strategies nor react too slowly when execution realities shift.
The lesson? Speed in one area does not guarantee speed in another, and organisations must master the art of knowing when to accelerate decision-making and when to let execution catch up—all while keeping strategy and execution in sync.
Principles and Values: The Glue That Aligns Strategy and Execution
In a fast-moving world, strategy cannot predict every eventuality. This is why the most resilient companies rely on principles-based decision-making rather than rigid rules. Clear, shared values help teams navigate uncertainty and make strategic adjustments in the absence of direct guidance.
For example, Netflix’s famous culture of “freedom and responsibility” empowers teams to make real-time decisions in line with strategic priorities. Similarly, Apple’s design principles guide execution decisions, ensuring that every product iteration aligns with their overarching brand and user experience strategy.
When execution teams understand the thinking, priciples and values behind a strategy, they can make smarter, more autonomous decisions that reinforce strategic goals.
The Future of Strategy: Adaptive, Integrated, and Execution-Driven
The old model—where strategy is set in a boardroom and execution is merely a task list—is dead. In today’s volatile, complex world, companies must treat strategy and execution as an ongoing dialogue rather than a one-way directive.
Winning organisations will:
Embed execution insights into strategic thinking from day one.
Foster constant adaptation, treating execution as a real-time strategy laboratory.
Encourage cross-functional collaboration, breaking down silos between planners and doers.
Establish principles and shared values to empower execution teams in the face of ambiguity.
The bottom line? Execution is not separate from strategy—it is strategy in motion. The companies that thrive in the coming decade will be those that embrace this reality and build organisations designed for continuous strategic execution rather than rigid planning.
Sources
Books & Research on Strategic Decision-Making & Execution Speed:
John P. Kotter – Leading Change (1996)
Donald Sull & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt – Simple Rules: How to Thrive in a Complex World (2015)
Clayton Christensen – Competing Against Luck (2016)
Rita Gunther McGrath – The End of Competitive Advantage (2013)
Corporate Case Studies & Industry Reports:
Amazon’s Data-Driven Decision-Making & A/B Testing Culture - The Everything Store by Brad Stone (2013); interviews with Jeff Bezos.
Pharmaceutical R&D Decision-Making vs. Execution Speed - Harvard Business Review – “Speeding Up Drug Development” (2020).
McKinsey Report – “The Art of Speed in Decision Making” (2021)
Bain & Company – “Decision Insights: Balancing Speed and Quality” (2022)
Comments