Demystifying ExecutionUnderstanding How “Done” Gets Done

The mythologies of executionWithin the world of business management, social media quickly reveals an enthusiastic discussion about strategy and execution that has the popularity of debate.

Many of the most repeated positions seem generally similar to each other. But individually, many of those are often poorly expressed and are for the most part just gestural.

Their problem is that, although they are popular and cover a range of opinion, they don’t stand up to scrutiny very long as stated. For example:

• Strategy and execution cannot be meaningfully separated• Here, the unsupported assertion is that neither strategy nor execution has an independently

distinctive value.

• A successful strategy is one that can be executed; therefore, strategy fails without execution• Here, the unspoken idea is what exactly strategy fails at.

• Failed execution makes a good strategy into a bad strategy • Although this really only means that a given strategy might become a regretted decision, this

statement says that no strategy can be evaluated on its own.

• Success does not need strategy but always needs execution• Here, what is left unspoken is whatever is actually being executed.

The realities of executionIn comparison to that rhetoric, there are simpler, neutral descriptions of ideas that distinctivelyrelate activity to intention, and are easy to avoid confusing with each other:

• Strategy – a model of pursuing opportunities to obtain [something]

• Tactics – the arrangement of means to do [something]

• Execution – the assurance of effort to achieve [something]

• Performance – the degree to which [something] is actually done versus ideally done

• Value – the significance of a confirmed distinction made by [something]

• Goal – the highest required future value of [something]

• Purpose – the responsibility for producing the designated value of [something]

Restoring the concept of “execution”The default context of discussion about execution is always a result – “Success” – but because it is the default it often “goes without saying”… Ironically, this contributes to forgetting something important: the term “execution” refers to activity, but the actual reason for using the term is to talk about results.

This forgetting occurs gradually. Derived from studying success stories, descriptions “accounting for” success can become generically prescriptive stories of “how to succeed”. Audiences think, “hey, there’s a prescription available!”

Then, the prescription is shared and adopted at face value, without requiring attention to the details. The notion of “execution” becomes generic (how to) – and furthermore, presumptive and even symbolic of the inherent value of activity, while also skewing attention to focus on activity.

Consequently, too many people then say “execution” mainly to invoke that focus – without an actual understanding of what makes execution useful as a distinguishing concept about activity.

The most important thing that “execution” does, conceptually, is to call for accountability of the results of activity, versus a declared purpose. The significance of “execution” is to maintain purpose– not just some vague idea of success – as the interpretive perspective on all of the activity being conducted.

Dimension of Activity

Standing condition

Immediate condition

Association of the conditions

Guidance Control Form for effort

Management focus

Activity management

PRACTICE Goal State Reconciliation Policy Principle MethodologyImpacts as Objectives

Technique

OPERATION Outcome Function Application Model Logic PlanStates as Intentions

Process

TRANSACTION Value Exchange Assignment Profile Role RelationshipInteractions as Influences

Event

The perspective of “purpose”

Purposeful activity is not necessarily complicated, but its success relies on some complexity that explains why the activity is the way it is instead of the way it isn’t.

As identified here, the actual shaping of the activity occurs and is manageable in three distinct dimensions of effort: practices, operations, and transactions.

By definition, variation is possible within any dimension. The point of having this description is to recognize, within overall activity, where adjustments should be made and progress should be occurring.

This framework exposes 24 factors (areas) of potential development, maintenance and change.

That degree of accountability supports the ability to make critical adjustments necessary for the purpose.

©2016 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Research

Dimension of Activity

Form for effort

Management focus

Purposeful Activity

Measured presence

abnormal typical extended redefining

PRACTICE MethodologyImpacts as Objectives

TechniqueRange,Risk

incidental standard adaptive innovative

OPERATION PlanStates as Intentions

ProcessUrgency,Scope

emergency standard improvised experimental

TRANSACTION RelationshipInteractions as Influences

EventStrength,Criticality

exceptional standard collateral impending

Accounting for Effort as execution

Execution tracks variable activities that promote or redirect effort for the given purpose.

To support this, the variable activity is formulated for the purpose. Activity still occurs across a range of varieties from abnormal to redefining, but the formulation makes activity manageable in terms of the specific purpose.

Manageability refers to being visible and directed, addressing: what is going on, when people start doing, things the way that they do them.

In Execution, management involves interpreting and conforming the activity from the point of view of the purpose. Variety provides both challenges and options to ensuring the purpose.

©2016 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Research

WHAT IS “PRACTICE”?

Practice is a sustained recurring effort to reconcile GOALS and STATES.

To formalize practice, METHODOLOGY is prescribed to coordinatetypes of impacts that are referred to as OBJECTIVES in the methodology.

Managing impacts aims to encourage desired benefits and constrain tolerated risks. Each objective has a declared benefit and risk.

A TECHNIQUE is a formalized pattern for an action responsible for producing the impact represented by the objective. The formalization aims to make the action repeatable (mechanics) and predictably create effects (procedure). Technique is directly responsible for addressing current states, which present requirements and limits. Technique especially handles risks to objectives, in as many as four different ways.

Technique’s protection of objectives varies in order to address maintenance, quality, improvement, or transformation as demanded by the current state.

Methodology always reflects priorities that articulate a bias or principle (policy).

Examples of objectives are: compliance, expense, speed, conservation, sustainability

©2

01

6 M

alcolm

Ryd

er / Arch

estra Research

WHAT IS “OPERATION”?

OPERATION is a systematic application of FUNCTIONSto OUTCOMES.

To formalize operation, a PLAN is prescribed to coordinate types of significant states that are INTENTIONS of effort.

Intentions usually identify a significant state that does not otherwise occur on its own. Managing them puts attention on their compatibility with each other.

A PROCESS is a formalized pattern used for specifying and tracking progress towards an achievement. By comparing current activity and effects to the pattern, it can be decided whether those observed dynamics are “progressive” for the intended achievement. Process is directly responsible for addressing current states, which present issues of urgency and scope.

A Process may variously realize an intention, due to addressing current constraints affecting resources, output tolerances, and activity duration.

A Plan always reflects effects that articulate a logic or structure (model).

Examples of intentions are: opportunity, leverage, persistence, recovery, integration, security

©2

01

6 M

alcolm

Ryd

er / Arch

estra Research

WHAT IS “TRANSACTION”?

TRANSACTION is a tracked assignment of a VALUE to an EXCHANGE.

To formalize transaction, a RELATIONSHIP is prescribed to coordinate types of interactions that are INFLUENCES.

Influences usually represent an expectation of an affect. Managing influences puts attention on their predictability and reliability.

An EVENT is a defined transition from a prior state to a known subsequent current state. The new current state may or may not be desired. It can provide or eliminate an opportunity or resource used as an influence by interaction. Thus it is important to know whether the event is critical to the desired character or benefit of the relationship.

An Event supports an influence variously, as a factor of how influence itself is likely to have strength.

A relationship always reflects characteristics that articulate a role (profile).

Examples of influences are:suggestion, persuasion, attraction, support, control, restraint,

©2

01

6 M

alcolm

Ryd

er / Arch

estra Research

©2016 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Researchwww.archestra.commryder@archestra.com

Techniques

Methodology objectives

standard

innovative

adaptive

incidental

WHAT IS “PRACTICE”?

Processes

Plan intentions

standard

experimental

improvised

emergency

WHAT IS “OPERATION”?

Events

Relationshipinfluences

standard

impending

collateral

exceptional

WHAT IS “TRANSACTION”?