final conference paper - gcwabaza and crafford 21112016 - ammended (internal)

The silent killers of strategy implementation in quantity surveying

firmsGcwabaza, L.F.1

1 Department of Quantity Surveying, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, [email protected].

ABSTRACTPurpose: The purpose of this research is to investigate the critical impeders of effective-strategy execution which quantity surveying firms must overcome in order to realize results in emerging markets.

Design/methodology/approach: This quantitative research study entailed the use of a web-based survey to interrogate the issues in the subject area. The population of relevance for the research consisted of registered Quantity Surveyors currently occupying directorial positions, or any other upper/senior managerial position in quantity surveying firms in South Africa.

Findings: The results revealed the prominent strategy-implementation obstacles, as experienced by quantity surveying firms. The results of the study indicate three critical obstacles that require attention when implementing strategic decisions: those related to the environment (unforeseeable changes in the various elements of the business environment, such as an attitude of the local populace; the inflation rate; the government and the local authorities); organizations lack of consistency and alignment between the organizational structure and the developed strategies). Additionally, there are various obstacles related to the consequences of planning (inadequate and improper use of consultants and professionals for strategy development).

Research limitations: Only a few firms confirmed having a formal strategy in place, this was further compounded by a small populace of the focus of inquiry (large Qs firms) which exist in the market, subsequently reducing the sample size to fully gain representativety of the obstacles to implementation.

Practical implications: This research study investigates the importance and effectiveness of strategy implementation in the South African quantity surveying firms; and it investigates the barriers in strategy implementation experienced in quantity surveying firms. The study facilitates the understanding of the obstacles to an implementation strategy, and how to overcome such obstacles. It provides information on the critical challenges that require immediate attention, and their influence on the performance and long-term sustainability of the firm.

Original/Value: This paper highlights critical obstacles to strategy implementation that compromise sustainable business performance.

KEYWORDS: Strategy Implementation, Strategic Management, Barriers, Strategy, Obstacles, Quantity Surveying, South Africa

2 The silent killers of strategy implementation in quantity surveying firms

1. INTRODUCTION

The evolution of the business landscape demands that businesses operating in competitive, dynamic and complex business environments continuously seek innovative mechanisms, in order to manage, as well as to sustain their business performance. Business effectiveness, efficiency, productivity, growth and survival are contingent on the businesses’ ability to conduct and manage their business operations (Mankins, & Steele, 2005). However, in reality, very few organizations realize their business objectives; and many others encounter failures. These setbacks can be attributed to various micro- and macro-environmental factors (Organizational structure and culture, alignment, competition, rules and regulations) (Downes, 2001). In the case of the successful businesses, they are able to perform well, because of their good internal management practices. As for businesses that encounter failures, they perform poorly and can hardly survive – mainly because of inefficiency, misdirected operations, as well as bad management practices (Zakaria, 2000).

In today's fast-paced, fast-changing, and increasingly competitive world, the effectiveness of business strategies has become the focus of considerable attention. When such strategies falter or fail, the consequences can be far-reaching, and even devastating. Research has revealed that companies continue to struggle with the implementation of key strategic initiatives, including those related, but not limited to: specialization, and diversification, or growth strategies (Mankins & Steele, 2005). A company with a poor strategy is doomed to fail; but even companies with well-conceived strategies will struggle to succeed if they do not implement their strategies effectively.

Strategic scholars; David (2013), Speculand (2009), and Wheelen and Hunger (2012), have opined that while firms possess the ability to devise good strategies; the problem, however, lies on the implementation. It is known that most strategic plans fail to deliver (Hrebiniak, 2005). Frequently, this is because the strategy itself is not a good one; but more often than not, the reason is a bit more banal – most of the time, it appears that strategic plans are simply not implemented. Speculand (2009) noted that nine out of ten strategies failed to be implemented successfully; and similar observations have been made in other studies.

Although considerable research has been conducted on strategic management models, as introduced by Sharplin (1985), Greenly (1989), Certo and Peter (1991) and Stahl and Grigsby (1992), the majority of which, has been dedicated to the formulation of strategy (Rahimnia, 2009), whilst strategy implementation remains less considered by researchers, ultimately creating a knowledge deficiency in the realm of implementation. Part of the failure can thus be attributed to the lack of knowledge on implementation.

The implementation knowledge deficiency comes as no surprise. Alexander (1985) claimed that a profuse majority of literature had been written on the formulation of strategy; but only “lip service had been given to the other side of the coin, namely, strategy implementation”. Atkinson (2006) further supported these claims by stating that these studies, although increasing in numbers; are few and considered less “fashionable” than those on formulation. Additionally, no studies have been administered with the intention of investigating the implementation of strategy in quantity surveying firms in South Africa.

In a 2013 article, Julian Birkinshaw – Professor of Strategy and Entrepreneurship at London Business School – identified some of the reasons why strategy implementation fails. He observed that

Author, 03/01/-1,

Surely there have been studies on strategy implementation. Name them as well please. See how much research has been done in the South African construction industry? If not much then that can be your hook!

Author, 03/01/-1,

There are studies on implementation in the construction industry – BUT none, on the South African construction industry let alone the QS profession

Author, 03/01/-1,

There are previous studies into implementation: (Alexander, 1991; Kotter, 2007; Strabel, 1996; Eisenhardt, 2002; Okumus, 2003; Atkinson, 2006; Hrebiniak, 2008; Speculand, 2009)


organisations might continue to implement a strategy – even when key parts of the organisation know that they are no longer appropriate. To quote the article:

“Where they struggled was in converting awareness into action. The necessary knowledge about what to do existed; but the company lacked the capacity to move on it in a decisive and committed way” (Birkinshaw, 2013).

Strategy implementation covers broad and complex issues. Scholars and practitioners declare that the implementation stage is the most cumbersome stage of the strategic-management process (Zakaria, 2014). Hrebiniak (2005) recognized the difficulty of strategy execution and the reward from doing that correctly. He identified and discussed various factors and problems that can lead to the incorrect implementation of any strategy. This was further echoed in previous studies by Delisi (2001), Downes (2001), Nickols (2000). These problems are further elaborated on, as the ineffective co-ordination of implementation activities (Al Ghamdi, 1999).

Strategy implementation is "all in, or nothing"; and failed implementation has profound implications. Not only has the company not achieved its goal, not gained the revenue increase it expected and not conquered the new markets it hoped for. Businesses that do not have the capacity to implement the strategy all the way, should explore some structured-process improvements instead.

This research explores the strategy implementation obstacles, as experienced by quantity surveying firms in the South African construction industry.

2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2.1 Strategy implementation defined

Strategy implementation and execution are not easy to define; and there is no universally accepted definition for these concepts. Furthermore, substantial confusion exists on the distinction between implementation and execution of strategy; since the two terms are used interchangeably (MacLennan, 2011). For the purpose of this study, the term ‘strategy implementation’ is used synonymously with the term ‘strategy execution’. Hrebiniak and Joyce (1984) defined Strategy implementation as a series of interventions concerning organizational structures, key personnel actions, and control systems designed to control performance with respect to the desired ends.

Strategy implementation can also be defined as the process that translates strategic plans into a series of tasks and activities; and the process that ensures that these tasks are executed in a manner that is conducive to achieving the predetermined strategic plans (Ehlers & Lazenby, 2007).

2.2 The importance and effectiveness of strategy implementation

2.2.1 The importance of strategy implementation

“Over the past decade, I have watched more than 100 companies try to remake themselves into significantly better competitors. The basic goal has been the same: to make fundamental changes in how business is conducted, in order to help cope with a new, more-challenging market environment. A few of these corporate change efforts have been very successful. A few have been utter failures. Most fall somewhere in


between, with a distinct tilt toward the lower end of the scale.” (Kotter,, 1995:1).

Navigating from strategy to execution presents tremendous challenges for today’s businesses. The importance of strategy Implementation and execution are indisputable. Over the last three decades, there has been an increased focus on the implementation and execution of strategy; and managers are starting to be well aware of its value-adding properties (Rommin, 2015). Research indicates that strategy execution, rather than formulation alone, is a key requirement for superior business performance (Holman, 1999; Flood, Dromgoole, Carroll and Gordon 2000; Kaplan and Norton, 2001; Hrebiniak, 2008); therefore, a migration needs to be made from the polarization of managerial efforts – from the formulation to the implementation of strategy. Furthermore, there is increasing acknowledgement that the most important problems in the field of strategic management are unrelated to strategy formation, but rather to strategy execution (Speculand, 2009).

This confirms a knowledge and skill deficiency in the implementation of strategy; and subsequently, it implies that links between high failure rates of organizational initiatives and dynamic business landscapes are largely due to poor or failed execution of new strategies (Kaplan and Norton, 2008). Research conducted by Becker et al. (2001:213) found that, for the average business, a 35% improvement in the quality of strategy implementation was directly associated with a 30% increase in shareholder value. However, a similar improvement in the sustainability of the strategy itself had no effect on organizational performance. Based on these research findings, one may deduce that effective strategy implementation is more important than the content of the strategy itself.

Hrebiniak (2005:6) noted that effective and conscientious implementation of strategy can lead to creating and maintaining the competitive advantage, in addition to maximising the shareholders’ wealth.

“We [had] better remember that in the end, it’s all about execution. You can be right on paper; but if you don’t execute, it’s not going to work,” stressed George Shaheen, former CEO at Accenture (Rommin Adl, 2015).

2.2.2 The effectiveness of strategy implementation

“Simply knowing what to do is not enough; in the final analysis, success is judged in terms of actual rather than intended results. Choice and action determine [the] actual results, and each is incomplete without the other.” From “Implementing Strategy” (Hrebiniak and Joyce, 1984).

The key to achieving better and sustainable performance lies in improving strategy execution. A raft of implementation literature counsels that forging new business processes is the desired approach. But such literature obscures a precise truth: superior execution can only be achieved by a small number of specific activities that develop managers’ alignment, mindset and capabilities (Higgins, 2005:3). Effective execution calls for unique, creative skills, including leadership, precision, and attention to detail, breaking down complexity into digestible tasks and activities, and communicating in clear and concise ways throughout the organization, and to all its stakeholders (Cocks, 2010).

The effectiveness of a firm’s strategies depends on the utilization and exploitation of the existing resources. To the extent that firms have pools of underused resources, these create unique, firm-specific opportunities for exploitation (Montgomery, 2004). The calamitous problem with strategy implementation is the de facto success rate of


proposed strategies. Research studies have shown this to be as low as 10 per cent (Judson, 1999). The good news is that businesses are improving in their strategy implementation efforts; and the failure rate has fallen from 90% (2002) to 67% (2016) (Bridges, 2016).

Barlett and Ghoshal (1987:12) noted that in all the companies they studied, the issue was not a poor understanding of environmental forces or inappropriate strategic intent. Without exception, they knew what they had to do; their difficulties lay in how to achieve the necessary changes. Supporting this, Miller (2002) reports that organizations fail to implement more than 70 per cent of their new strategic initiatives. Translating strategy into actions is an arduous task for many firms, more so than the formulation of strategy; and it requires a consistent, straightforward methodology to driver strategic behaviour, to galvanize the management team and to enhance the firm’s ability to navigate in troubled waters (Allio, 2005).

The study of implementation has evoked limited attention from strategists; and it is no surprise that very few firms are successful in their implementation initiatives, regardless of their merit. This is documented by the overwhelming literature on formulation in strategic-management literature. Despite this abysmal record, strategy implementation does not seem to be a popular topic at all. “A deep and cohesive body of strategy implementation research does not [yet] exist” (Noble, 1999:119).

In addition, strategy implementation is considered the most difficult component of the strategic-management process (David, 2001:6; Hrebiniak, 2005); and the majority of implementation efforts fail to bring about strategic success (Business day, 1999: 37; Mankins and Steele, 2005:64-72).

2.3 Barriers to effective strategy execution

Strategy execution is not solely a matter of operationalizing activities through co-ordinated commands over resources, employees and their work (Cocks, 2010). It has been declared that one of the pivotal obstacles to successful execution lies in the shortcomings and challenges of functionally based businesses, where co-operation, among many, if not all, functions is necessary. Laxity in the execution of strategy would not only result in inferior business performance, but also difficulty in recreating strategy (Bonoma and Crettinden, 1998).

Nevertheless, success in execution is not merely a product of formal structures for winning organizations (Hubbard et al., 2007) – structures in these organizations are perpetually adapting to new and old assignments. Research conducted by Alexander (1985) surveyed and identified twenty-two major obstacles to strategy implementation, of which ten were cited by over 50% of firms sampled as major problems. Al Ghamdi (1998) conducted a similar study, which researched fifteen implementation obstacles, and discovered that six of these were problems experienced by over 70% of the sampled group.

He identified these six obstacles to comprise: implementation requires more time than that allowed for at planning; major problems emerged during the implementation stage; poor co-ordination, and other non-implementing activities divert attention from implementation. Furthermore, unclear implementation tasks and activities, and poor information systems can complicate the problem-solving situation (Al Ghamdi, 1998).

Based on case studies, research suggests that there are various types of obstacles experienced by different business; and these fall into two categories: endogenous problems to the business (micro-problems) and exogenous problems (macro-problems) generated by external forces in the business environment. These issues are directly influenced by the


extent of flexibility companies have to initiate strategic initiatives successfully (Downes, 2001).

A research survey of 400 managers by Hrebiniak (2005) further contributed to the identification of additional deterrent factors that cause obstacles to successful strategy implementation. These include: the lack of understanding of the role of organizational structure and design in the execution process; the lack of feeling of ownership towards strategy or execution plans among key employees; inadequate guidelines, or a model, to facilitate strategy-execution activities; the inability to generate “buy-in” or agreement on critical-execution steps or actions; the lack of incentives or inappropriate incentives to support the execution objectives, as well as insufficient financial resources to execute the strategy.

Zakaria (2014) further elaborated that impediments to implementation are largely the result of incompetence, poor co-ordination and the lack of commitment.

Several researches have been conducted to examine the potential factors affecting successful strategic implementation (Alexander, 1991; Kotter, 2007; Strabel, 1996; Eisenhardt, 2002; Okumus, 2003; Atkinson, 2006; Hrebiniak, 2008; and Speculand, 2009). All these researchers describe information systems, resource allocation, personnel management, formal organizational structure, and organizational culture, as factors that affect the implementation of strategy. What is imperative about the aforementioned studies is that all of them have provided a list of barriers to the successful implementation of strategy.

After examining and checking for redundancy, a list of implementation obstacles was developed. In this study, the obstacles are categorized into five dimensions of strategy-implementation obstacles. The dimensions are: obstacles related to the consequences of planning; organizational obstacles; management obstacles; individual obstacles and environmental obstacles.

3. THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study builds on previous quantitative research on strategy in the realm of quantity surveying in the construction industry. Leedy and Ormrod (2001) alleged that quantitative research is specific in its surveying and experimentation; as it builds upon existing theories. Quantitative research seeks explanations and predictions that can refer to other persons and places. The intention is to establish, confirm and validate relationships, and to develop generalizations that contribute to theory (Leedy and Ormrod, 2001, p. 102). The quantitative research method was pursued; because the study population was spread across South Africa; and because of geographical dispersion, a qualitative approach was not feasible.

3.1 Population

The population of relevance for the research consisted of registered quantity surveyors currently occupying directorial positions, or any other upper/senior managerial position in quantity surveying firms in South Africa. A population of 741 registered firms was derived from the ASAQS online directory. A judgemental non-probability sampling technique (Zikmund, 2003) was utilised. The main selection criteria were based on accessibility to the test subjects, as well as the consideration of individuals who would be suitable. As many as 50% of the population, i.e., directors of QS firms, was sampled; and this amounted to 371 directors in SA, altogether.


3.2 Questionnaire Administration

The questionnaire was designed to investigate the prevalent and recurrent implementation obstacles in quantity surveying firms, as identified by previous research. The questionnaire and covering letter was distributed via an online web-survey to registered QSs; and it was also made available on the ASAQS website. The questionnaire was pilot tested with three registered QSs prior to distribution. Between 4 September and 12 September 2016, the process of data collection was undertaken. Emails were sent out in the first week, supplemented by two reminder emails in the second and fourth weeks. Responses were received from 44 respondents; of which 1 respondent had to be removed from the study; as one respondent had submitted the questionnaire twice (11.6%, N= 371).

The data analysis was done by using Microsoft excel. Frequency distribution, descriptive statistics to analyse the data dispersion, and percentage were the means of analysing the data. Interpretation was based on the mean and standard deviation score of the five dimensions; obstacles related to the consequences of planning, organizational obstacles, management obstacles, individual obstacles and environmental obstacles. To facilitate the comparison of results from the questionnaire; a 7-point evidence Likert scale was used to survey the implementation obstacles, the following scale was used to interpret the data obtained.

Table 1 Data-analysis scale

Range Median1.000 to 1.857 Not at all evident1.857 to 2.714 Poor evidence2.714 to 3.571 Less than adequate evidence3.571 to 4.429 Adequate evidence4.429 to 5.286 Good evidence5.286 to 6.143 Excellent evidence6.143 to 7.000 Superior evidence

4. RESULTS

In this research, the first step of the descriptive analysis was to rate the current status of the dimensions of impeders to successful strategy implementation in the quantity surveying firms studied. The results suggest that all 5 factors surveyed have a considerable preventive role in the implementation of strategy. The main objective of this study was to investigate the obstacles to strategy implementation, as experienced by South African quantity-surveying practices. The results of the study indicate three obstacles that require critical attention, when implementing strategic decisions: those related to the environment; organizations and obstacles related to the consequences of planning. This is followed by the two least-serious dimensions: management and individual (personnel) obstacles. The mean, mode and standard deviation are shown in Table 1 through to Table 5.

4.1 Environmental Obstacles


The environmental obstacles variables are shown in Table 1. The study results reveal that obstacles related to the environment are the most critical, when attempting to implement a strategy. These findings are not surprising; as notable research on strategic management has characterized the environment as complex and unpredictable. Unforeseeable changes in the various elements of the business environment, such as the attitude of the local populace, the inflation rate, government and local authority priorities can all have a crippling impact on the businesses’ implementation tactics and their overall performance. These results echo the findings of Ali & Hadi (2012), which indicates that environmental factors are some of the crucial obstacles to effective strategy implementation.

Table 1 Environmental Obstacles

Rank Variables Mean Std. Dev Mean Evaluation

1 Economic obstacles (inflation, down turn of the market, etc.)

3.66 2.06 Adequate Evidence

3 Political obstacles and changes


3 State laws and regulations related to company activities.


4 Effects of competitive environment (the competitors, markets, etc.)

3.39 1.87 Less than Adequate Evidence

5 Cultural and social impeders


4.2 Obstacles Related to the Consequences of Planning

The second-most challenging obstacle consists of the obstacles related to the consequences of planning, as shown in Table 2. According to the results of this research, Inadequate and improper use of consultants and professionals of strategic development is the major barrier to effective implementation. These findings are in agreement with the findings of Al-Ghamdi (2015), which suggests that businesses must, as much as possible, make employees part of the planning process; and their suggestion must also take into account all those stakeholders, who would be affected by the change process. This, in turn, should facilitate clarity for the respective roles and goals of the business. Furthermore, successful strategic results are achieved when those responsible for crafting the strategy are also part of the execution team (Speculand, 2009; Hrebiniak, 2008).

The process of formulating and executing a strategy are parts of an integrated, strategic-management approach (Thompson, Strickland &


Gamble, 2008). Haudan (2009) criticises executives for assuming that once a strategy is designed, it gets to be executed; and it highlights executives’ failure to look inside the process and realise that execution is much more complicated than they thought.

Table 2 Obstacles Related to the Consequences of Planning

Rank

Variables Mean

Std. Dev Mean Evaluatio

n

1 Inadequate and improper use of consultants and professionals of strategy developing


3 Lack of conversion of appropriate strategic plans into business plans and short-term operational objectives and the distribution of these goals between different sectors.


3 Inadequate identification of company's major problems and lack of focusing on them in strategic planning process


4 The time limit for implementation of strategies


6 Inadequate concentration on need and demands of customers and other beneficiaries of company


6 Weakness and ambiguity being in the developed strategies.


7 The ineffective role of experts, and drafters of strategy in the implementation of the company business strategy


8 Inaccuracies in strategic business planning


9 Poor relationship between strategies and short-term goals

2.63 1.62 Poor Evidence

10 Poor consensus between 2.59 1.43 Poor


decision makers and implementers of strategic business planning.

Evidence

4.3 Organization Obstacles

Table 3 reflects the results for the organization obstacles. The third serious obstacle relates to organization obstacles. More specifically, the results of the study indicate that a lack of consistency and alignment between organizational structures and developed strategies are lacking. According to Kroon (1995), the successful implementation of a strategy demands a compatible business culture. This obstacle deals with how well people across the company understand the company’s strategy, and realizes why it is critical to success to recognize the actions required to make it a reality. Leaders and employees must understand the businesses strategy and communicate with it persistently. Incentives and rewards should be aligned to the targets that define strategic success. This is the social side of the alignment, the place where executives convince the business to understand and support their initiatives (Pateman, 2008).

Table 3 Organization Obstacles

Rank

Variables Mean

Std. Dev

Mean Evaluatio

n

1 Lack of consistency and alignment between organizational structure and developed strategies.


3 Lack of proper communication between individuals, departments and units of the organization.


3 Inadequate control systems and performance measurement and feedback.


4 Inadequate financial resources to implement strategies.


6 The instructions, procedures and processes within the company being intangible and inappropriate.


6 Inappropriate allocation of 2.95 1.89 Less than


financial resources within the company

Adequate Evidence

9 Inappropriate educational systems for performing processes and various steps in the implementation of business strategies.


9 Lack of effective coordination between different levels of company


9 Lack of proper information systems in organization.


9 Lack of programs, tools and models for implementing the strategy.


11 Organizational culture incompatible with organization strategies.


12 Low efficiency and success of marketing systems of company.


13 Inadequate and poor information sharing between individuals and units involved in implementing the strategy.


14 Existence of inadequate physical facilities and equipment.


15 Destructive competitive activities between the units and existing of unit-based vision in the company.


16 Inadequate motivation systems in company.


17 Improper utilization of new technologies and practices in manufacturing and other business processes of



company.18 Existence of work

compensate system and improper services in the company.


4.4 Management Obstacles

The management obstacle variables are reflected in Table 4. The study results indicate that, inadequate commitment of managers to the organization and its strategic plans is ranked as the most critical impediment. Executives assume that after they have crafted their strategy, they can move on, falsely believing that the bulk of the work is complete. Speculand (2009) argues that executives’ failure to take personal responsibility for the execution process is a major contributing factor to most unsuccessful executions. Top management must develop adequate commitment in middle managers and operational levels. This result is emphasized by Heed (2002); as he declared that 91% of successful businesses emphasized the imperative role of committed and capable management.

Table 4 Management Obstacles

Rank

Variables Mean


n

1 Q5-4 Inadequate commitment of managers to the organization and its strategic plans.


3 Inadequate understanding of managers and employees of company strategies and future prospects.


3 Inadequate protection and consideration of company's managers and other beneficiaries to implementing the business strategies.


4 Political factors related to the company power.


6 Existence of inappropriate style of leadership and management in the company.


6 Inappropriate management of staff

2.61 1.56 Less than Adequate


Evidence

7 Managers fear of endangerment of their job security.


4.5 Individual (Personnel) Obstacles

Individual (personnel) obstacles are shown in Table 5. Individual (personnel) obstacles have the lowest impact among the five obstacles in implementing the strategies of quantity surveying firms. However, this does not imply that this obstacle can be ignored; and it has little to no relevance; however, it has a lesser role in comparing with the other obstacles. Amongst the five variables of Individual obstacles; people's inadequate understanding of their company’s business strategies has the most significant role in preventing the effective implementation of strategies. If strategic decisions are made by top management, and then communicated vertically down the company, they risk the potential of creating obstacles (Groons, 1985). Lawrie (2014) echoes these findings, by stating that once the strategy has been articulated clearly, it needs to be shared with the people in the organisation who will carry it out; and their thoughts and feedback should be incorporated. This process helps to validate the strategy; and it also provides tangible confirmation that those who would execute the strategy understand clearly what is required – two steps, which in our experience, are often missing.

Table 5 Individual (Personnel) Obstacles

Rank

Variables Mean


n

1 People's inadequate understanding of their company business strategies.


2 Employees fear of endangerment of their job security


3 Low capacity and capability of staff in line with the objectives and tasks.


4 Lack of team spirit among employees.


5 Employee resistance to change process within the company.



5. CONCLUSION

The empirical findings of this research send some valuable messages for those who are directly responsible for the implementation of strategic decisions. In general, the study reveals the prominent strategy-implementation obstacles, as experienced by quantity surveying firms. The results of the study indicate three critical obstacles that require attention, when implementing strategic decisions: those related to the environment, the organization and the obstacles related to the consequences of planning. This is followed by the two-least serious dimensions: management and individual (personnel) obstacles. The obstacles identified in this study are in line with those previously identified in earlier studies.

The study reveals that strategic plans formulated by Qs firms are susceptible and vulnerable to environmental changes and shifts, which indicates inconsistency in the planning and also the shortcomings of the strategic plans themselves for not satisfactorily predicting and establishing countermeasures for potential environmental obstacles. It also evident from the study results that a lack of commitment from management to follow-through with intended strategic decisions derails implementation initiatives. There is initial effort to implement, however, not maintained throughout the prescribed implementation period – this can also largely be attributed to divergent strategies and complexity in converting strategy into daily operational tasks and objectives.

Interestingly, the study revealed that the silver lining linking the prominent obstacles to implementation was ineffective communication of the strategy and proposed implementation plan.

It is important to note, that failed strategy implementation may have pervasive consequences. The business has not only, not achieved its goal, not acquired the desired revenues, and not conquered the new markets it hoped for. This study is important as, not only does it contribute towards overcoming the knowledge deficiency within strategy implementation literature, but it is also the first of its kind within the quantity surveying profession. Further study is required to critically assess the effectiveness of Qs firms in implementing strategic decisions and the framework used in the execution process, this, together with the findings from this study shall help firms create a fail-safe model for implementation, and purpose made for the Qs profession.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS

From the research findings, we can deduce that planners should place more emphasis on implementation issues while they are drafting their plans. Most of these obstacles are avoidable if they have been accounted for during the formulation stage.

A comprehensive approach is required for translating strategy into tangible results. Effective execution calls for explicit day-to-day operational objectives and requirements of all the employees, together with a greater understanding of the bigger picture. Deliberate effort and attention comprise the cornerstone of the execution process – to ensure success. Executives who seek quick and effortless alternatives to execution would more often than not fail in their attempts. To address the shortcomings in execution, strategic objectives should be expressed as business deliverables; which, in turn, communicate the specific actions, required for the successful execution of strategy and the realization of business goals. The suggested guidelines for a more sophisticated implementation process revolve around four I’s: Identify Inform, Involve and Incentivize. This requires:


a) More sophisticated obstacle identification, delineation and role clarification

b)[a)] Development of better information and communication systems and feedback mechanisms

c)[b)] Employee and managerial involvement in both the formulation and implementation of strategies

d)[c)] Motivational reward incentives tied to successful implementation.

Those involved should always be on the alert on the threat and challenges that can develop from the various obstacles. A proactive approach on the part of those involved in implementing strategy or project could reduce the risk of the obstacles becoming a much bigger threat.

REFERENCES

Abu Baker, A. H., Tuail, M. A., Yusof, M. N., and Virgiyantyi, W. 2011. Implementation of strategic management practices in the Malaysian Construction industry. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Science. 5(1):140-154.

Alexander, L. 1985. Successfully Implementing Strategic Decisions. Long Range Planning 18(3):91-97.

Al-Ghamdi, S. M. 1998. Obstacles to successful implementation of strategic decisions: the British experience. European Business Review 98(6):322-327.

Ali, M. and Hadi, A. 2012. Surveying and identifying the factors affecting successful implementation of business strategies in companies from Fars Province industrial towns. International Journal of Business and Social Sciences. 3(1): 265-272.

Argyris. C. 1999. On Organisational Learning. Oxford: Blackwell.Atkinson, H. 2006. Strategy implementation: a role for the balanced

scorecard? Management Decision. 44(10):1441-1460.Barlett, C. A. and Goshal, S. 1996. Release the entrepreneurial hostages

from your corporate hierarchy. Strategy & Leadership. 24(4):36-42.Bin Zakaria, M., bin Dahalan, J. and Ahmad, N. 2004. Strategy

implementation obstacles encountered by Malaysian engineering contractors. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Technology and Operations Management.

Certo, S. and Peter, J. 1991. Strategic Management. Singapore: McGraw-Hill

Cocks, G. 2010. Emerging concepts for implementing strategy, The TQM Journal. 22(3):260-266.

David, F.R. 2013. Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases (14th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

David, F.R. and Adams, D. 2009. Strategic management: Concepts and cases.

DeLisi, P. 2001. Strategy Execution: An Oxymoron or a Powerful Formula for Corporate Success. Organizational Synergies, http://www.org-synergies.com.

Downes, L. 2001. Strategy Can Be Deadly – Industry Trend or Event, The Industry Standard, (May 14).

Eisenhardt, K.M. 2002. Has strategy changed? Slaon management Review. 43(2): 88-91.

Hanley Jr., C. A. 2007. The execution challenge: Translating strategy into action. Bank Accounting & Finance. 20(6):17-20.

Haudan, J. A. 2007. Successful strategy execution takes people – Not paper. Employment Relations Today. 33(4): 37-41.

Higgins, J.M. 2005. The Eight S’s of Successful Strategy Execution. Journal of Change Management. 5(1): 3-13.


Holman, P 1999. Turning great strategy into effective performance. Strategy Strategic Planning Society, UK.

Hrebiniak, L.G. 2005. Making strategy work: Leading effective execution and change. Pearson Education Inc: New Jersey.

Hrebiniak, L.G. and Joyce, W.F. 2001. Implementing strategy: An appraisal and agenda for future research.

Hubbard, G. 2000. Strategic Management. Thinking, analysis and action. Australia: Prentice Hall.

Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. 1992. The balanced scorecard – measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review. 70(1):71-79.

Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. 2000. Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it. Harvard Business Review. September-October: 1-11.

Kotter, J.P, 1995. Leading Change: why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 7471, 1.

Leedy, P. D., and Ormrod, J. E. 2001. Practical Research: Planning and Design. Upper Saddle River, N.J., Merrill Prentice Hall

Mankins, M. and Steele, R. 2005. Turning great strategy into great performance. Harvard Business Review. 83(7/8):65-72.

Nickols, F. 2000. Strategy Is . . . A Lot of Things. Distance Consulting. Okumus, F. 2003. A framework to implement strategies in organizations.

Management Decisions. 41(9):871-882.Olsen, M. D., Tse, E.-Y. and West, J.J. 1992. Strategic Management in

Hospitality Industry. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Pateman, A. 2008. Linking Strategy to operations: Six stages to

execution. Business Performance Management. 6(4):10-13.Rahimnia, F., Polychronakis, Y. and Sharp, J.M. 2009. A conceptual

framework of impeders to strategy implementation from an exploratory case study in an Iranian University. Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues. 2(4):246-261.

Rommin Adl. 2015. Bts Insights. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.bts.com/news-insights/articles/the-heat-is-on-ceos-under-pressure-to-perform, [Accessed 9 September 2016].

Saunders, M., Mahn, R., and Smith, R. 2008. Benchmarking Strategy development practices. Benchmarking: An international Journal. 14(5):609-623.

Speculand, R. 2006. The Great Big Strategy Challenge. Strategic Direction. 22(3):3-6

Speculand, R. 2009. Beyond Strategy: The Leader’s Role in Successful Implementation. John Wiley and Sons: Singapore.

Stahl, M.J. and Grigsby, D.W. 1992. Strategic Management: Formulation and Implementation. Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Strabel, P. 1996. Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review. 74(3):86-92.

Thompson, A. A., Strickland, A. J., and Gamble, J. E. 2008. Strategic Management Concepts and Cases, 16th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Wheelan, T.L. and Hunger J.D. 2012. Strategic Management and Business Policy (13th ed.). Pearson Education Inc: United States of America.

Zikmund, W.G. 2003. Business research methods, 7th edition. Ohio, USA: Thompson South-Western.

final conference paper - gcwabaza and crafford 21112016 - ammended (internal)

Documents