Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

follow and control it every moment – instead of controlling symptoms and fighting consequences,
which would not be the job of a strategist; it would be the job of a controller.
At the points of bifurcations, a manager may create or eliminate very small (but still to be crucial)
factors at the level of fluctuations or substructures, and thereby guide further development. For
example, a manager accidentally meets with an employee who is deliberating over an offer for a
similar position in another organization. He may accept it because of some provisional gain. He
may not accept it because there are some advantages in staying where he is. The boss, who
‘accidentally’ meets him in the corridor, may express a very positive mood and drop a hint about a
possible promotion. Then the employee will stay. Or the boss may very warmly let him understand,
how sorry he is that there is no chance for promotion in the organization, even for such a good
specialist. Then the employee will leave. Either choice will change the situation. They may happen
accidentally; or they may be controlled. Would it be a strategic course of action for the manager?
We think - yes - because it will have a long-term effect on the organization.
The course of action is strategic when the object of action is a certain continual factor (or set of
factors) that will influence the further development of events. It is also strategic when the object of
action is possible bifurcation, because it also changes the landscape for the future. It does not
matter who does it. Top managers are usually in a better position to change landscape-forming
factors, although they are not in an exclusive position. The leader of a small team or head of a
technical subdivision may also contribute to significant changes in landscape that are formed by
factors controllable at their level. And bifurcations may be controlled by anybody who is smart
enough. That is why many organizations move in directions determined by certain ‘grey cardinals’
(man behind) who have little official power, but control nearly everything that strategically counts.
Apology of strategic planning
Another characteristic feature of strategic management is that it is intentionality aimed at a certain
future situation. It is directed by the desirable future position. Thus, the future position should exist
somewhere in the mind of a manager as a clear objective (zone of comfort), or as a SMART goal
(a point in the zone), or, at least as vain dream. Where does this optimistic hypothesis (that a
certain future position offers an advantage in acquiring some designated gain) come from?
Let’s see. An organization is proceeding along its way within a given landscape. If the manager is
doing nothing – one of several possible future states will come in time. If only one future state is
possible, or these future states are all equal in value, and any one is good enough – then there is
nothing for the manager to do. The best strategic course of action then will be to do nothing (as
General Kutuzov did after Napoleon trapped himself in the cold Russian winter).
143