The traditional models for strategic management are approaching limits in the light of increasing uncertainty to define what public service organisations must be able to achieve in terms of efficiency and satisfaction of stakeholder expectations. However, the dynamism of economic patterns calls for versatility that is deliberately designed.
This article aimed to explore the importance of conflating the dimensions of strategic management triangle, in conjunction with the limits of traditional models, towards effective and sustainable public sector management.
The chosen government ministry is headquartered in Harare, Zimbabwe. The ministry comprises nine departments, each headed by an appointed director who acts as the Head of Department (HOD).
A qualitative research approach was employed and a sample of eight participants, consisting of HODs, was purposefully selected from the population. Open-ended qualitative responses were analysed thematically.
The results suggest that effective and sustainable public sector strategic management requires not only a single invariant approach but a set of values, processes, procedures, tools, techniques and practices that must be selectively and strategically adapted to unique situations in order to produce desirable results.
A strategic triangle admixture of ‘legitimacy and support’, ‘operational capabilities’ and ‘public value’ offers more marginal flexibility, decreases uncertainty, generates more focus, and is easily understandable when pursuing effective public sector management. However, this approach needs to be considered in conjunction with the traditional models to optimise set goals.
Strategic management was adopted as an important management tool in the business and public sectors with its emergence in military affairs, and in reaction to an uncertain, turbulent and chaotic environment. Strategic management makes it possible to define the vectors of the organisation’s future growth with a specific setting of the activity’s strategic and tactical objectives (Van Dooren, Bouckaert & Halligan
Throughout the literature, the strategic management concept comes with contradictory definitions. A cursory observation, however, shows a significant consensus on the key activities involving ‘doing’.
Pemberton and Stonehouse (
Strategic management can therefore be described as the art and science of formulating, implementing and evaluating cross-functional decisions that allow an organisation to achieve its goals. Poister (
The ‘strategic management’ description depicts it as a deliberate part of a different set of activities to provide a unique set of values as a means of gaining competitive advantage. However, the process is affected by both internal and external variables. Therefore, strategic management procedurally increases as a social accomplishment activity for achieving certain strategic objectives and focused on the activities and engagement of various stakeholders within and outside the organisation (Hendry et al.
The complexities of an uncertain internal organisational environment have expanded dramatically. Furthermore, the rate of change in the corporate environment has accelerated in recent years, resulting in increased uncertainties (Altland & Simons
The idea of what the state can do for a society and what not is a process of continuous deliberation, debate and negotiation, and is carried out by politicians who then develop policies through the democratic process (Maas & Svorenčík
According to Immers and Duijn (
However, hierarchical governance structures have been around for a long time and have had dominance in the public sector in terms of how it conducts business, determining the timeliness, relevance and effectiveness of public policy implementation, as well as the benefits gained by the citizenry (Engida & Bardill
The ‘new public management’ (NPM) has been adopted by many governments as a government modernising framework and public sector reengineering. Indeed, the NPM provides essential lessons and analyses for public administration around the world, and African countries are no exception when it comes to putting efforts in place to achieve the goals outlined in the NPM (Pollitt & Bouckaert
This necessitates an exploration of the contextual relationships between the various public management models as applied to public sector reform in Africa, as well as the consequences emanating thereto. Moore (
The traditional public management (TPM) is dedicated to removing the corrupting power of economic and political interests. The NPM focuses on efficiency models focused on market forces (Hope
[
Previously, administration was just the application method to administer legislation (Da Silva et al.
The strategic triangle.
At the top of the three main dimensions of strategic management triangle is ‘legitimacy and support’, which represents political management, mainly seeking political support element for public sector management (managing up). The key persons here are the heads of department responsible for all three dimensions of the triangle. Next is the ‘operational capabilities’, a dimension basically catering for operations management (managing down) for maximising the efficiency and effectiveness of public sector management. The key players here are the staff responsible for operations of public sector business. The third dimension is ‘public value’, which is fundamentally ‘cooperation management’ (managing outward) for collaboration, co-production and networking between social actors. Key persons for this assignment are the middle management responsible for cooperation and operations management. The goal is to achieve public value through better social outcomes to the satisfaction of targeted beneficiaries, by improved material and service conditions.
McBain and Smith (
An organisation’s strategy is the processes and procedures followed in using resources towards implementing certain policies to achieve the institution’s key objectives (Kenis & Provan
Organisations should plan beyond vision. The concern for action led to the dropping of the word strategic planning and instead using the phrase strategic management. A ‘strategy’ is often known as the ‘game plan’ of the company, and executives frequently refer to it as their large-scale, future-oriented, plan to engage with the competitive environment to accomplish the goals of the organisation (Raab, Mannak & Cambré
In order for the public sector manager to explain the ‘strategy’ and ‘strategic’ concepts, decisions and acts that are ‘strategic’ and those that are ‘tactical’ need to be differentiated. Public service managers make various decisions daily. Those decisions that respond to routine issues are referred to as tactical, whilst those decisions with the potential to have a far more fundamental effect on the well-being or direction of the organisation are strategic (Bryson & Schively Slotterback
Strategic management is the organisation’s art and science in formulating, implementing and reviewing cross-functional decisions that will enable the achievement of set objectives (David
There must be a plan, a clear path of the organisation and a means of getting there, which involves the development of a strong competitive position
It will be important to enforce excellence in operationalising those strategies in order to establish successful output within the organisation
Innovation needs to be promoted amongst members in order to ensure that the company can adapt to demands for reform and strengthened and refreshed strategies.
Ahmadi et al. (
Strategic management aims to effectively connect an organisation to its surroundings. Political, social, technological and economic factors all play an integral role in the organisational environment (George et al.
There is a difference between public sector and private sector styles of management. The public sector is responsible for delivering public policy and performing activities such as fiscus (Maleka
The methodology of the study comprises the research design, population of the study, sampling procedures, and data collection and analysis procedures (Daymon & Holloway
A sample of eight participants, consisting of department heads (HODs), was purposefully selected from the population. To ensure trustworthiness, participants were given a chance to comment on the transcribed results, as the authors used member check. For dependability, the authors retained the audio recordings to indicate that the correct protocol has been followed (Biedenbach & Müller
The research found that management assumes that the available systems to promote the execution of the strategic plan are not clearly outlined as there is a disjoint between planning and execution. It also emerged that the mechanisms for performance evaluation are not effective because no action is taken against ministries and departments that do not reach their commitments on agreed time milestones (quarterly, biannually or annually). Furthermore, there appears to be a dual reporting structure in the operations system, as the strategy implementers can be answerable to two line managers. This position came out as one of the participants had the following to say:
‘We are indeed involved in the planning process, but our challenge is there are no punitive actions taken against underperformers and those departments who fall short of agreed targets. This means our evaluations are just ceremonial instead of doing it for corrections towards practical improvements. Sometimes those responsible for strategy execution are impeded by the dual or multiple reporting structure, which in turn confuses the system as reporting is meaningful when done to those who would have assigned the task in the first place’ (Participant 3, Director, gender undisclosed)
Consequently, during a performance cycle, dual reporting line relationships or reporting relationships in a matrix may obstruct effective strategy execution. The majority of research participants concurred that despite the fact that the policy clearly states the roles and duties of managers and staff members in the performance management process, disagreements, goal misalignments, role conflicts and miscommunication can occur during the cycle, causing these matrix linkages to be derailed. After creating objectives, most people forget about them and only revisit them at the halfway assessments/evaluations. This might easily lead to misalignments in a matrix structure, resulting in conflict and frustration as things drift and shift. The study also reveals that in the planning process, the management is indeed guided by the organisational vision, but the actual operations are characterised by episodes of budget constraints as confirmed by the following quote:
‘We plan but this is often influenced by budget restrictions as set targets are crippled by unavailability of funds in some cases and political intervention. For example, exchequer and cost centre virements are effected towards politically priority assignments which would not have been initially budgeted for, at the expense of priorly budgeted operating lines.’ (Participant 5, Director, gender undisclosed)
Thus, the top-down approach to problem-solving structures make top layers (decision makers) override bottom layers (implementers) of the bureaucracy in policy implementation. Hence, random orders from top layers often supersede priorly agreed plans. Senior managers take the view that during the execution of the strategic plan, the performance management framework is not included in the design of the strategic plan and in addressing challenges. It was clear that quarterly performance reviews are used as a mechanism to promote the strategic plan’s implementation. The findings indicate that although there is a system in place to promote the implementation of the strategic plan, the system is not well coordinated, particularly during the phase of formulation in the strategic planning process. Hence, the system tends to focus more on the implementation of the strategic plan when compared to effective for strategy formulation. In most cases, only deputy directors or above are invited to the ministerial departments’ strategic planning processes.
It has also been found that the mechanism followed by the public sector or ministerial departments in facilitating the proper implementation of the strategic plan may not have harmonised standard operating procedures. The research found that, in terms of strategic planning systems or processes, there are diverse opinions as some officials claim that the ministry has no inclusive approach to planning in which all officials and/or stakeholders are involved and afforded the opportunity to engage in the process, yet others confirmed the presence of all-encompassing annual planning workshops. It also emerged that there is a lack of understanding between the officials involved in the medium-term strategic structure processes, hence in terms of key performance areas and strategic management, the departments of the ministry are lacking.
The study results indicate that most of the public sector management attempts to strategically manage, align policies with the plan, fully engage workers in the execution of the strategy, continuously remind employees about strategic corporate governance, tracking strategy and execution to adapt it to suit the challenges and realities of the time. Furthermore, the study found that the failure of people to convert the plan to a corporate goal is the main challenge with strategic management. Based on the results, the authors suggest that strategic management decisions and the political landscape be addressed when managing public sector in order to build a successful strategic plan that will have a positive impact on institutional efficiency. The long-term strategies of public sector are therefore driven mainly by political considerations whilst short- to mid-term strategies are dominated by the operations and coordination activities. This trend is however situational, although in the case of Zimbabwean public service the strategic triangle was able to record the development of value by expanding three corners of the strategic triangle in daily management aligned to rational incrementalism.
Generally, strategic management was found to be more beneficial when organisations apply approaches to strategic management that matches the situation they are in. According to the study’s findings, strategic management provides the following benefits. It brings about clearer definition of objectives, provides better guidance to the entire organisation, makes managers and organisational members more alert to new opportunities and issues threatening development, and helps in overcoming risks and uncertainties and therefore contributes to organisational success. This ultimately leads to improved value addition in the services given to the public. The study further found that strategy increases the quality of business decisions; it creates a more proactive management posture, helps to unify the organisation and promotes the development of a constantly evolving business model that will produce sustainability and fair service delivery for the public sector. Using the strategic management approach, where managers at all levels of a business interact in planning and implementation, has great behavioural consequences almost similar to those of participative decision-making.
Finally, the research found that a strategic triangle can be used as a viable tool for value creation.
Political variables dominate the strategy debate for long-term strategies. The mid- and short-term time horizons are dominated by collaboration and operations, although this trend can differ from case to case. Nonetheless, evidence indicates that by extending the three corners of the triangle through tactical measures in line with rational incrementalism, the strategic triangle may generate value. The overarching vision and themes centred on the creation of value can be achieved by a well-coordinated upward management (political), downward management (operations oriented) and outside management (coordination with various stakeholders) for mutualism symbiosis between the public and private sectors, as illustrated in
Value creation by using the strategic triangle.
In relation to the present case study, the strategic triangle illustrates how public value is created when a strategy or action has democratic legitimacy such as community support, the support of the authorising environment such as a governing board and the government has the operational capacity to effectively implement the strategy or action. The study participants also demonstrated that there is a feedback mechanism in place because when public value is created, it is accompanied by improved legitimacy and support as society and elected officials have better trust in the government, as well as increased operational capacity. When managers strengthen the legitimacy and support perspective, it becomes simpler to acquire inputs such as money, volunteers and other resources into government organisations. When they strengthen their operational capabilities, those inputs are more efficiently and effectively transformed into public-value-generating outputs, resulting in increased legitimacy and support.
The key to strategic success is the establishment of strong partnerships internally and externally. The challenge of constantly developing and adjusting the strategy and means of attaining it seems to be more within the purview of the public sector manager because the political level might not be able to provide guidance on value creation. In order to shape broad support, the strategy itself together with a modern understanding of strategic management must be conveyed through the organisation in a manner that ensures ownership, so that strategy and adaptation are owned by all levels, usually because adaptation can take place at a tactical level. In view of the increasing complexity and the versatility of public service organisations, the multistep, goal-oriented approach to strategic management appears to be insufficient.
Logical incrementalism offers the best fit to complement given that real public circumstances are ambiguous, uncertain, and can easily change. The strategic triangle offers more marginal flexibility, decreases uncertainty, generates more focus, and is easily understandable.
This article, using the strategic triangle as a foundation, attempts to explain what types of management control practices allow and/or constrain public value. In this way, it complements previous research on public value, the increasing interest in the strategic triangle as an analytical framework for analysing empirical data and the demand for more empirical studies on the subject. Moore’s (
The implication of the findings of the study is that strategic planning and decision-making has an important role in organisational development and sustainability. Various types of strategies used in strategic management by organisations require top-level executive managers to map for long-term organisational sustainability and to face or deviate from the competition. Consistency and a levelled eye on all relevant stakeholder inclusiveness are important in the translation of a strategy into a corporate purpose.
Strategy making has traditionally utilised strategic management, underpinned by rational strategic planning, to craft and implement strategic moves. However, rapidly changing environmental dynamics have created an operational environment contrary to the traditional paradigm of predictability, linearity and controllability expected by the rational strategic planning approach to strategy making.
Strategy is usually linked with the external environment in which the firm operates. Whether formulated with specific environmental threats and opportunities in mind or emerging incrementally from within the organisation much of what becomes or is interpreted as strategy has evolved with at least some sensitivity towards the external world (Ferlie & Ongaro
In the strategic management, many contingency factors have been suggested to influence strategy.
Numerous summaries of the contingency literature have concluded that the external environment exerts a strong influence on strategy formulation or on the relationship between strategy and other variables such as performance (Gaddis
Ignoring these factors in the traditional strategic management practices can derail the strategy execution of any organisation, regardless of whether the organisation operates in the private or the public domain. With this study drawing from experiences in the corporate sector for improvement of the organisational efficiency in the public sector, the findings indicate that the need for strategic management in the corporate sector is equally the same as in the public sector, if not actually greater in the public sector spheres. However, the increased instability and turbulence in the present global, political and economic environment requires leaders and managers to operate in a tactical context because it seems that strategic management from now on will operate in a chaotic environment. Therefore, change management would be the order of the day.
Strategic planning and management are approaches to identifying and addressing challenges. It is noteworthy that not a single invariant activity, but a set of values, processes, procedures, tools, techniques and practices must be selectively and strategically adapted to unique situations in order to produce desirable results. Whilst there are a range of generic approaches, the boundaries between strategic planning and management are not necessarily obvious, but the two are usually a hybrid (Bryson, Edwards & Van Slyke
Based on the findings of the study, the authors recommend the following.
At the start of the planning process, the ministry should hold workshops on the medium-term strategic structure and the strategic plan every financial year. The relationship or connection between the medium-term strategic framework and the strategic plan, the correlation between the priorities of the medium-term strategic structure and the strategic plan, the intention of aligning the medium-term strategic structure with the strategic plan, and its role in the strategic planning phase should be clearly expressed during the workshops in order to ensure common understanding and agreement amongst all officials.
Departments should ensure that there is a connection between the strategic plan and its implementation. To promote the proper development and execution of the strategic plan, the ministry and its departments need to establish standard operating procedures or guidelines for the process. It is necessary for the departments under the ministry to review the effects of the previous strategic plan in order to include the objectives that were not attained when the strategic plan for the coming year is being formulated.
A Planning and Reporting Committee, chaired by the Permanent Secretary (Chief Operating Officer) and consisting of all heads of departments, should be formed by the ministry concerned and the respective departments. The committee will have the task of verifying quality assurance and authorising the strategic plan, the annual performance plan and the operating plans. The ministry needs to put stringent mechanisms to ensure that departments report on what has been scheduled and do not deviate from reporting on what is in the strategic plan or annual performance plan and take action against those who do not follow what is stated in the approved strategic and annual performance plan. Departmental heads (managers) are expected to report to the Planning and Monitoring Committee on their respective main performance areas, and departmental or sectional reports should be accepted by the committee prior to submission to the Permanent Secretary for approval and submission to the National Treasury.
Consolidating the findings from the research study, a strategic thinking approach framework is proposed. Each component of the framework uses its inventive and proactive nature to enable a revised worldview of internal and external threats and opportunities by encouraging entrepreneurial and creative synthesis. This will enable organisations to create new perspectives and unique combinations; define achievable strategic intent and generate future value for organisational stakeholders to ensure success, through competitive advantage, in a radically changing, uncertain and complex operational environment.
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
N.C. contributed to the design and implementation of the research, to the analysis of the results and to the writing of the manuscript. W.F. and H.W. supervised, edited and funded the research.
This article followed all ethical standards for research, with ethical approval obtained from the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, with project number HSS/1228/017D.
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, N.C., upon reasonable request.
The views expressed in the submitted article are those of the authors and not an official position of the institution or funder.