The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning

The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning

by Henry Mintzberg

Harvard Business Review

Reprint 94107

HarvardBusinessReview

JANUARY-FEBRUARY 1994 Reprint Number

ROBERT H. HAYES AND GARY P. PISANO NANCY A. NICHOLS BEYOND WORLD CLASS: THE NEW MANUFACTURING STRATEGY SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT AT MERCK: AN INTERVIEW WITH CFO JUDY LEWENT MANAGING INNOVATION IN THE INFORMATION AGE THE FALL AND RISE OF STRATEGIC PLANNING SPEND A DAY IN THE LIFE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE TAKE-CHARGE MANAGER? INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS: THE RELUCTANT ACTIVISTS HBR CASE STUDY THE EXPECTANT EXECUTIVE AND THE ENDANGERD PROMOTION PERSPECTIVES TAKING ACCOUNT OF STOCK OPTIONS IN QUESTION WHAT IS BUSINESS’S SOCIAL COMPACT? WORLD VIEW IT’S TIME TO MAKE PEACE WITH IRAN FIRST PERSON WHY MY FORMER EMPLOYEES STILL WORK FOR ME 94104 94106 REBECCA HENDERSON HENRY MINTZBERG F. GOUILLART AND F. STURDIVANT N. NOHRIA AND J.D. BERKLEY ROBERT C. POZEN 94105 94107 94103 94109 94111

CINDEE MOCK AND ANDREA BRUNO

94108

94110

BERNARD AVISHAI

94102

HOSSEIN ASKARI

94101

RICARDO SEMLER

94112

Planners shouldn’t create strategies, but they can supply data, help managers think strategically, and program the vision.

by Henry Mintzberg

When strategic planning arrived on the scene in the mid-1960s, corporate leaders embraced it as “the one best way” to devise and implement strategies that would enhance the competitiveness of each business unit. True to the scientific management pioneered by Frederick Taylor, this one best way involved separating thinking from doing and creating a new function staffed by specialists: strategic planners. Planning systems were expected to planning often spoils strategic thinking, causing managers to confuse real vision with the manipulation of numbers. And this confusion lies at the heart of the issue: the most successful strategies are visions, not plans. Strategic planning, as it has been practiced, has really been strategic programming,...