Strategic planning is not simply about defining organizational objectives and monitoring performance indicators. It also requires continuously questioning whether those objectives remain appropriate, whether the indicators measure what truly matters, and whether the assumptions underlying the strategy are still valid.
Organizations can collect enormous amounts of information, produce sophisticated reports, and monitor numerous performance indicators while gradually losing their competitive position.
The problem is not necessarily a lack of information. It may be the inability to distinguish relevant information from unnecessary data or to recognize when the strategic plan itself needs to be reconsidered.
Effective strategic management therefore requires more than monitoring results. It demands a systematic examination of objectives, indicators, and the scenarios that supported strategic decisions.
Strategic Planning Begins with the Right Objectives
The quality of strategic planning depends fundamentally on how organizational objectives are established.
Objectives should reflect the organization’s mission, competitive environment, internal capabilities, and expectations regarding future developments.
However, defining objectives is not enough. Organizations must also determine how progress will be evaluated and which information will be required to support strategic decisions.
This involves identifying meaningful performance indicators and establishing mechanisms to monitor their evolution.
A common mistake is to assume that once objectives and indicators have been established, strategic management becomes primarily an exercise in measuring results.
In reality, the validity of those objectives and indicators must remain open to examination.
An organization may achieve its performance targets while simultaneously moving in a strategically undesirable direction.
When Accurate Information Leads to Poor Decisions
Information quality is essential to strategic management, but accuracy alone is insufficient.
Information must also be relevant, timely, and connected to the decisions that management needs to make.
A company may have highly accurate operational reports while lacking the information necessary to identify changes in customer behavior, emerging competitors, or technological disruptions.
Similarly, performance indicators may demonstrate operational efficiency without revealing deterioration in the organization’s long-term competitive position.
This distinction is fundamental.
Accurate information is not necessarily strategically useful information.
The challenge is not simply to collect more data but to determine which information is necessary to understand organizational performance and anticipate relevant changes.
Excessive reporting can even create an illusion of control.
Managers may feel confident because they have access to extensive dashboards, although those dashboards may be monitoring variables that no longer adequately reflect strategic reality.
Strategic Control Must Question the Plan Itself
Traditional performance monitoring often emphasizes the comparison between planned objectives and actual results.
Although necessary, this approach can be insufficient.
Strategic control should operate at three interconnected levels.
1. Evaluating Strategic Objectives
The first question concerns organizational objectives.
Are the objectives still consistent with the organization’s environment, capabilities, and long-term interests?
An objective that was appropriate when the strategic plan was developed may become inadequate as conditions change.
2. Evaluating Performance Indicators
The second question concerns the quality of the indicators used to monitor strategic progress.
Do they measure the dimensions of performance that truly matter?
Indicators can be technically accurate while providing an incomplete or misleading representation of organizational performance.
Consequently, achieving an indicator’s target does not necessarily mean achieving the intended strategic outcome.
3. Evaluating Strategy Execution
The third question concerns implementation.
Are organizational actions producing the expected results? Are resources being allocated appropriately? Are strategic initiatives contributing to the established objectives?
These questions are essential, but they cannot be considered independently of the first two levels.
An organization can execute a strategy efficiently and still pursue inappropriate objectives.
The Role of Scenario Analysis in Strategic Planning
Scenario analysis provides an important foundation for evaluating strategic decisions.
When developing a strategic plan, organizations make assumptions about future economic conditions, technological developments, competitive behavior, regulatory changes, and other relevant factors.
These assumptions influence the selection of objectives and strategies.
However, scenarios are not predictions that must inevitably materialize.
They are structured representations of plausible future conditions intended to improve strategic understanding and decision-making.
As new information becomes available, management must examine whether the assumptions supporting the original plan remain reasonable.
If the environment develops differently from what was anticipated, the organization may need to revise its strategies, indicators, or objectives.
Importantly, the failure of an anticipated scenario to materialize does not automatically indicate that the original planning process was defective.
Uncertainty is inherent in strategic decision-making.
The relevant issue is whether the organization has developed mechanisms to recognize meaningful changes and respond appropriately.
Distinguishing Execution Problems from Strategic Problems
Consider an organization whose operational indicators consistently meet their targets while its competitive position continues to deteriorate.
Management might initially conclude that the company needs additional resources, improved processes, or greater operational efficiency.
However, these measures may fail if the real problem lies in the strategic assumptions underlying the plan.
Perhaps the organization is serving a declining market.
Perhaps its objectives no longer reflect customer expectations.
Or perhaps the indicators emphasize short-term efficiency while overlooking long-term competitiveness.
The diagnosis must therefore begin with a reassessment of objectives and the scenarios that supported them.
Only then can management determine whether the problem concerns execution, measurement, strategic direction, or a combination of these factors.
This broader perspective helps organizations avoid reinforcing ineffective strategies through increasingly sophisticated control systems.
From Performance Monitoring to Strategic Learning
Effective strategic control should not function merely as a mechanism for verifying compliance with previously established targets.
It should also support organizational learning.
This requires management to question assumptions, examine unexpected developments, and remain willing to reconsider decisions.
Strategic planning should therefore be understood as a continuing process rather than a document periodically reviewed and approved.
Performance indicators provide essential feedback, but their interpretation must remain connected to changing organizational circumstances.
The objective is not constant strategic revision. Excessive changes can undermine consistency and organizational commitment.
Instead, organizations need a disciplined process for distinguishing temporary deviations from developments that justify reconsidering the strategic plan.
Conclusion: Are We Following the Right Plan?
Strategic planning and strategic control are inseparable.
Planning establishes objectives, strategies, and the information required to monitor progress. Strategic control evaluates performance while also examining whether the foundations of the plan remain valid.
Organizations should therefore avoid confusing successful indicator performance with strategic success.
The central challenge is to maintain alignment among objectives, performance indicators, organizational capabilities, and changing external conditions.
Strategic control is not merely about determining whether an organization is following its plan. It is also about questioning whether it is still following the right plan.
That distinction can separate organizations that simply monitor performance from those capable of learning, adapting, and sustaining their strategic relevance.
Visit my Home Page
Affonso Henriques
PhD by ESADE Business School & Law – Barcelona – Spain
