Many of the executives of multinational companies achieve their positions by personally excelling as excellent performers. People who know how to get things done. The problem is that when they are asked for solutions to business or strategic problems, their response is often to do more of the same but with more intensity. The result is often to accelerate the problem rather than solve it. 

It is quite common for these managers to feel a strong impulse to stick with the first option that means action without taking the time to gather the relevant information and spend time thinking through the existing alternatives in an orderly fashion. It is the bias toward action, rather than toward the thinking that should be required of them in their new roles.  

Why have we reached a point where we consider thinking to be a collateral part of our role as senior managers? What is anecdotal and at the same time critical for the company is that we promote people who are better prepared for action than for thinking to functions where thinking is strategic, and this weakens our companies. 

My theory is that some corporations get to that point for several reasons: the fundamental one is because they don't really invest the necessary time in researching what non-customers think, that when they do it is superficial, they find it difficult to unravel the truth in the weeds and that what is obtained is filtered through the culture of the company or the executives themselves, especially if they have been in the job for years and have been successful before. 

 The degree to which managers are exposed to new realities is conditioned by their attitudes and values. This selective attention determines not only the degree to which an idea or course of action will be evaluated but, above all, the time it will take to be incorporated into the company.

The result is that there is a resistance or difficulty in incorporating new practices either by pure inertia, trying to maintain the model that has been successful until then; by imitation, trying to copy the successful models of other companies; or by "astigmatism", the inability to understand in depth the new context. I call this phenomenon Self-Imposed Corporate Astigmatism (SCA). Why astigmatism and not myopia? Because myopes at least see well up close. ACA is a blurred or distorted vision, not perceived as such among managers and on which decisions are always made similar to previous decisions even with the evidence of their ineffectiveness in the past.         

How is ACA cured? Well, sometimes it is a case of major surgery and only changes when the leaders change, but in general with a shock of electroconvulsion therapy is enough, and this comes in the form of loss of important customers to competitors considered inferior or worse prepared until that moment.    

Now, how do you learn to think strategically? If I knew for sure, I would be a professor at some famous business school, but I have some ideas. The first is that one should not go from a painful example (a case of fiasco) to a generalization. Nor should you have to do a multifactorial investigation by asking everyone you meet. Good strategic thinking sacrifices breadth for depth. There is no need to generate hypotheses, try to validate them and move from one hypothesis to another. That's great in science, but in business you have to be comfortable with uncertainty and move forward regardless. However, in-depth analysis of the facts is important and is not achieved by talking for 15 minutes with customers or employees. You can use techniques such as Simplexity Thinking to help you in the process. In my experience sales people who are in direct contact with the customer will give you much of the information you need. 

Another ACA point is if strategic decisions are made by the CEO and the rest of the management team are like palmeros in tablaos flamencos. 

To find out what kind of company you are in, ask yourself this question: Who is responsible for the strategy? It will be very common to be told that the strategy comes from the parent company, from the head office or from the "business" areas. If this is the answer, you are facing a serious case of Self-Imposed Corporate Astigmatism. We are not talking about the 4 generic slogans perfectly assumed (or so it is assumed) that come from the conferences of global directors and corporate presentations. I'm talking about what you need to do in your area to succeed and advance your position in terms of sales and profitability. 

I have another question: How much time do we really spend thinking? The answer could be embarrassing. If the answer from your executives is: between meetings, you have a problem. Again, it's the prioritization of action over thought. If you have a chance to correct, my advice is don't let memory replace thinking.  

]]>