It's been a lot of work already in this course just to get to this topic. I've worked at the board level in a few turnaround situations. And let me tell you, it can actually take a few years before you can have a serious conversation about growth. Generally speaking, when management lacks control of the business they've got, it's very hard to have a growth discussion about the business you have yet to attain. The board leadership roles of informer and conductor as we've discussed in previous lessons have set up the strategic discussion. The informer role provided us with important context for thinking strategically and immersing directors in the business.
The conductor role structures the board agenda in such a way that matters of substance are discussed and all directors have a common understanding of the general context. The facilitator role maximizes the group dynamics to achieve a superior outcome. This lesson we're going to explore this role at an even deeper level in the strategic context. Now failure in any of these board leadership roles undermines the opportunity to fulfill the governance advantage. In the absence of having higher value matters to discuss, the board will almost automatically retreat to monitoring performance, micromanaging operations and directing inwardly rather than outwardly. Now prematurely adding on more business before the organization is capable of managing growth is also a recipe for disaster.
Though many organization has tried. In this lesson, we're learning how to leverage the board to improve strategic planning. Corporate Strategy boils down to two key concepts when we talk about the board of directors direction and alignment direction speaks to the choice of strategy itself, which may be based on much detailed analysis or as little as an intuitive hunch alignment speaks to the common understanding of strategy, which originates with the CEO is vetted by the board and then cascades throughout the organization. a starting place for strategic thinking is establishing a common understanding of what strategy means to the organization, because strategy can mean different things to different people. For our general discussion purposes here today, let's use this definition. Strategy reflects upset a choices that management is either following or proposing to follow that determines how the organization positions itself within the external context to capitalize on its internal capabilities.
These decisions are made within the overall context of mission, vision and values, which address why the organization exists and how it does business. strategic decisions are those that require an organization to make trade offs to pursue one course of action over another using its scarce resources, which include time People and or money. strategic decisions are those that either reposition an organization within its existing external environment or seek to change the internal capabilities, thereby improving its positioning. When you filter all the decisions made by an organization through this sort of lens, strategic decisions are rare. Yet you will hear of organizations making strategic decisions all the time. In fact, I'm as guilty as the next person for using that word because it attributes importance to a decision when you call it strategic.
However, for our practical discussions today, we will label all those decisions that management makes to execute strategy tactical rather than strategic. Really, these lower level decisions are alarming in nature and rightly belong under the CEO to make it doesn't make them any less important, but since they don't require the approval of the board, we can leave them aside for now. strategy formulation and development is largely a management exercise, management will study and document the current situational factors. strategic analysis tools like a SWOT analysis are often helpful in this regard. However, it's wise for the CEO. To keep the board abreast of strategy development, certain members of the board may be able to offer profound insights into the external context that might help management with strategy formulation.
For example, if one director has political connections and insights that management lacks, this informal feedback will improve the formulation process. The second benefit of engaging the board either formally or informally throughout the strategic development process is to improve and build buy in. This will help when management is seeking the board's approval of the strategic plan later on. the mindset of management should be to leverage the expertise and experience of the Directors rather than to try and formulate strategy in complete isolation seeking a perfectly developed solution. strategy development requires different thinking, different approaches and the execution and evaluation of strategic outcomes. thinking strategically requires managers and directors alike to think divergently and use creativity.
Much of the other business conducted by a board of directors uses the opposite kind of thinking that is critical thinking and precision. To facilitate a truly strategic discussion of the business, a separate board meetings should be scheduled with this sole objective in mind, away from the routine compliance and oversight matters. The agenda of the meeting should include three basic sessions. In fact, we may not even call this a meeting and call it a workshop instead, just to reinforce that it's gonna have a different feel than a typical board meeting. The board leadership role of facilitator will be Critical during this workshop, in the first session management should present a view of the current situation, particularly of the external environment, and how that is expected to evolve in coming years. This provides important context, reaching general alignment between all participants will help in reaching a consensus later on.
In the second session, management can present their strategy, and the board should not be judging a management's presentation. The objective of the session is to get ideas on the table. The CEO and his or her management team needs to present their ideas in a way that encourages feedback and isn't prescriptive. There's a delicate balance between presenting ideas with confidence and inviting constructive criticism. And then once again, the facilitator should work between the CEO and the directors to ensure that an adequate balance is maintained between proposing and challenging of the ideas In the third session, the board will probe the strategy and ask questions. The setting necessarily needs to be less formal, less structured, and much different than how typical board meetings flow.
Initially tools such as brainstorming, can broaden the thinking, introduce new ideas or extend existing ones. It's a meeting environment where it's okay to challenge each other. It's okay to question and it's okay that we don't know all the answers. Let's look at a few ideas the facilitator can use to moderate these discussions. The dialogue should be robust with all members of the board and the management making a contribution. Some facilitation techniques that may help to really develop a rich and deep dialogue include first using the breakout groups, mixing managers with the directors to discuss the proposed strategy.
Secondly, designating one or two small groups to play the role of devil's advocate make it there. So job to explore all the things that could go wrong with the proposed strategy. A third idea is that other groups may be able to explore other leading alternatives that were proposed by management. small group dynamics encourage freer interaction, and the ability to share more ideas than the larger group can reconvene and each group can summarize their discussions to get a much fuller perspective. And from that point on, the facilitator will narrow discussions seeking areas of consensus and mapping areas that warrant further discussion or information, which may result in another round of small group discussions. The conclusion of the strategic workshop could be the board's approval of the management's proposed strategy, possibly with some modifications Incorporated, or there could be agreement on the set of questions that need to be answered first.
The important outcome is that consensus is reached on certain aspects of strategy, if not all of it. This strategic discussions will underpin future meetings of the board in the following ways. First of all, it sets expectations, expectations about which initiatives will be pursued and the anticipated results. Secondly, it will provide context through which future performance will be evaluated. Thirdly, it aligns understanding of strategy, which ties into compensation structure and leadership development and risk management. The outcome of the strategy workshop is not your typical batch of legally framed meeting minutes.
Instead, you should document the discussion in a strategy blueprint that is 10 pages or less and written in plain language. The contents of the document should include a concise review of the situational analysis, including the identification of key strategic drivers for the business, a summary of the key components of business strategy that discusses the competitive positioning of the business within this external context or discussion. The key implementation and execution points, and this should include identifying the key performance metrics that would measure the success of the strategy. This might be financial or non financial metrics using balanced scorecard principles. And finally, a discussion of the internal and external risk factors, along with a framework for risk management, risk appetite and resource constraints would also be helpful to document. This document defines a starting point and establishes a baseline as quarter's pass in the years finish.
Results and accomplishments should refer back to this blueprint. Reflection exercise is always a good way to kick off future strategy sessions. It helps maintain the continuity of the discussion throughout the passage of time. It also helps elevate to our conscious awareness, the connection between strategy formulation and results. Some organizations will execute to the blueprint, others will deviate widely. Understanding how those deviations arose helps to improve the next round of strategy formulation.
In this lesson, we talked about three really important ideas about how the board can add massive value to strategic management and the board leadership role of the facilitator. Strategy is all about setting direction and alignment. When the board is included, the governance process has the ability to add value and move discussions beyond compliance and monitoring. The board does not formulate strategy management does however the board should be an active contributor throughout the strategic management process. And thirdly, the strategy session should be facilitated much differently than a typical board meeting. The outcome of the session provides a foundational level understanding and expectation for all future management board interactions.
By far the majority of organizations and particularly small ones operate in the absence of a formal documented strategic plan yet by the very nature that they are still in business is evidence that they have some sort of strategy. a strategic plan is not necessarily about changing direction. It can be just as much about confirming your existing strategy and approving the alignment of your resources. When the CEO uses the board as a sounding board, both alignment and direction can be that much stronger. In our next lesson, we're going to look at the elements that make up governance advantage.