The Importance of Information Flows for Effective Execution

In compiling their collection Must-Reads on Strategy, the editors of the Harvard Business Review chose to devote half the volume to articles about execution. Leading this group was an article “The Secrets to Successful Strategy Execution,” by Gary L. Neilson, Karla L. Martin, and Elizabeth Powers, first published in 2008, which was reviewed recently in Strategy + Business magazine 

The “Successful Strategy Execution” article was derived from years of research (into what the authors and their colleagues call the “organisational DNA” project) on the experience of implementing strategy.

The gathering of this data began in 2002, with a question: How does a company design its organisation to generate results and successfully adapt when circumstances change? Neilson and his coauthors articulated four “building blocks” that mattered most in the execution of any kind of strategy: decision rights, information flow (including metrics), motivators and of course the “lines and boxes” structure of an organisation chart.

Curious about how different people in different types of companies applied these four aspects of organisational design, they set up an online public survey through which people could create a profile of their own companies. The link went viral. Within 14 months they had gathered 45,000 profiles — 15,000 from their own clients, and 30,000 from people who visited their website. By the time the HBR article was published, 125,000 people had filled out this profile; respondents represented more than 1,000 companies, government agencies, and not-for-profits in more than 50 countries.

Here’s what the data showed, when combined with in-depth studies from of 31 client companies: Decision rights and information flows had twice as much impact on the success of a strategy as did changes in structure or motivators.

FranklinCovey's 4 Disciplines of Execution recognises each of these building blocks in the approach it takes. We always consider the organisational structure through which the goals need to be executed, we are clear about the responsibilities of senior level, mid level and front line employees and the types of decisions they should each take and we emphasise how engaging and motivating people to make their contribution every day or every week (even with the rest of their 'day job' to content with) is key.

Critically, we also recognise the issue of information flows, and for us, this is about how the goals get translated down through the levels in a way that still maintains a clear line of sight from what was developed at senior levels. One instinct we observe here is for mid level managers to start thinking 'how' the goal is going to be achieved and to start developing projects and initiatives to address it. While this is often done with good intent, our guidance is avoid this instinct as it can in fact be a limiting factor on effectively executing an organisation's goals. Instead we encourage managers to stick with the 'discipline' of translating down the 'what' needs to be done at their level so that they can provide this clarity for the front line, whose job it then is to contribute to the 'how'.