A lot has been written and said in recent years about strategic thinking and strategic leadership. Like most people I've read a lot and heard people who try to explain what strategic thinking is, and how to make it a way of life in an organization. Unfortunately, talking about strategy is not the same as implementing strategy. The sad truth is that many managers and leaders can "talk the strategic talk," but only a few managers and leaders can "walk the strategic talk."

For example, air travelers, teenagers, and exercise enthusiasts all seem to have adopted iPods as their means of entertainment. Clearly, Apple's iPod has become a phenomenon of the current generation. So how was Apple Computer able to capture the market so quickly and convincingly? The story behind the iPod is a quick lesson on the difference between knowing about the importance of strategic thinking, and the ability of strategic leadership to execute a plan. On the surface it might appear that Apple technology gurus were far advanced over all other companies in their ability to adapt memory chips for use in a small playback device. But interestingly enough, the technology that Apple adapted into the iPod was common knowledge in the computer industry before the debut of the first iPod. Any company, such as Sony, Panasonic, Teac and many others could have cornered the MP3 market just like Apple did, if they could have implemented their strategic thinkng. What held these companies back from this potential success was there inability to "walk the strategic talk." Can you imagine how many corporate leaders must be kicking themselves today because of their failure to see the future, and then act on a strategic plan?

Historically, the process of developing strategy has been reserved for a few high-ranking executives who have corner offices on the top floor on an office building. Functionally, many of the best ideas have come not from those high-paid corporate executives, but rather from hourly employees who practice their own version of strategic thinking. A manufacturing company in Cleveland, Ohio, for example, had a problem with part of its product assembly process. The accountants calculated that the net loss per year in damaged product was in excess of $300,000.00, due to a small cable that would regularly bind up and then break. An engineering consultant recommended that the entire conveyer-belt system, including the cable, be replaced with an updated version at a cost of over $1,000,000.00. This was a problem because the company was not large and didn't have the capital available to purchase an entire new conveyer-belt system. The company CEO was deeply troubled by not only the loss of product each time the cable broke, but also the impending need of $1,000,000.00 in capital.

While the debate among the company's executives raged on for several weeks in mostly secret meetings, an hourly secretary in the order-processing department overheard the dilemma. The outside engineering consultant, the CEO, the executives, the maintenance people, the equipment operators, and everyone else closely involved with the decision had narrowed the choices to two possibilities: the company could continue as it had in the past and replace the cable several times each year and suffer the loss of damaged product, or the company could invest a million dollars and replace the entire system. Everyone close (too close actually) to the problem agreed that there were only two possibilities.

Rather reluctantly, the order-processing secretary approached the CEO and said, "I know this is none of my business, and I shouldn't stick my nose where it doesn't belong, but I couldn't help but overhear what is going on with the cable on the conveyer-belt. I'm the one who orders the new cable each time it breaks. And we continue to buy the cable from the same supplier, even though it keeps breaking. Have you ever considered buying a different cable?"

The CEO was impressed that the secretary was concerned, but explained, "We have to buy an exact replacement cable because it is made specifically for our need and it has to have special connectors on each end. I wish there was another choice, but there isn't. "The secretary, still very hesitant, persisted. She said, "I understand that. In fact I have to specify all of those requirements each time I place a new order for the cable. And I don't want to appear disrespectful, but my husband and I have been discussing this problem and we think there is another possibility."

Still impressed that the secretary felt empowered enough to worry about a solution, the CEO asked, "What is the other possibility you've come up with?" With a little more confidence the secretary continued, "Well, my husband and I are both pilots. We have a part interest in a small plane and when money is available we fly on weekends. It's a lot of fun. But the thing we were thinking about is that on our plane the control cables are made up of a very high tensile strength material. They have to be strong, or the plane could crash." The CEO, wanting to move on to more important issues, said, "I really appreciate your concern and advice, but as I said, the cable for our conveyer-belt has very tight specifications and the end connectors are critical. I'm sure that your idea is good, and I appreciate it, but there isn't any way we could get make-shift connectors to stay fastened to an untried aircraft cable." As the CEO turned away to end the conversation, the secretary said, "I took the liberty to check on a wayto fasten the connectors to the cables. And I've located a high-tech welding outfit that told me there wouldn't be any problem in welding them together. In fact, the owner of the company is convinced it will work."

The end of this story is interesting because not only did the fabricated aircraft cable with welded connectors work, it only cost the company $312.00 to make! And the newly devised cable operated successfully for 19 months until it bound up and broke. Then a similar cable was fabricated, which lasted over two years until it broke. And this all came about because someone refused to get caught up in doing things the way they had always been done. The secretary looked beyond the present and tradition and saw a different future. Her strategic leadership saved the company enough money in four years to pay cash for a new conveyer-belt system.

The moral to this story is that when strategic thinking is reserved for and practiced only by a few executives in corner offices on the top floor, the value of improved decision quality from the people closest to the problem is missed. We don't actually need strategic thinking in organizations. Rather, we need every employee to practice being a strategic leader. And that's how Apple cornered the MP3 market.

---

Dr. Richard L. Williams is a business consultant specializing in strategic leadership, performance coaching, quality improvement, team development, leadership development and organizational development/diagnostics. Contact us at 888-262-2499 if you have any questions.