Time to ditch the ‘pillars’ in your strategic planning

YOU FINALLY have time to look back at outputs from prior strategic planning retreats. A quick glance reveals an approach they used which includes ‘pillars’. If so, be aware: there are some drawbacks to this technique that could lead to a weak plan.

But you must make a decision about what to use going forward. You need to craft an approach. But why should you be wary? To understand why, let’s go back to the process typically followed.

It usually begins with a review of the company’s vision and mission statements. Then, a SWOT and PESTEL analysis of the environment are also done. Next, the team brainstorms projects which are necessary for the organisation to achieve the vision. Finally, these projects are grouped into three to five pillars based on common themes.

The final product is often diagrammed as a building with the vision and mission statements in the roof, supported by the pillars. However, its simplicity belies the fact that there are some good reasons to use a different approach.

1. Pillars are merely semi-random lists

A review of the contents of each pillar shows that the link between its items is tenuous. They are simply a list of activities which are nice to do, grouped together using some common attribute. Why is this a problem?