Page 354 - Operations Strategy

WHAT is oPERATions sTRATEgy imPlEmEnTATion? 329
day-to-day running of the operation and the day-to-day implementation of the new
strategy. This means that any statement that articulates an intended change must be
specific enough to provide useful guidance and yet broad enough to allow for adapta-
tion of the implementation plan within an overall strategic direction.
But there is a problem. During the implementation from A to B in Figure 9.6, the
balance between market requirements and operations resource capabilities may not
always be maintained. Sometimes, the market may expect something that the opera-
tion cannot (temporarily) deliver. Sometimes, operations may have capabilities that
cannot be exploited in the market. At a strategic level, there are risks deriving from a
failure to achieve fit between operations resources and market requirements. And how
to understand, and cope with, these risks during implementation should be part of any
implementation plan.

Who is responsible for implementation?

A particularly important organisational relationship that can have a profound impact
on strategy implementation is that between those in the operations function who have
responsibility for formulating strategy and those who run the day-to-day operations
tasks. Of course, these two sets of people may be one and the same. Particularly in
small organisations, there is simply not enough ‘organisational slack’ to resource a
separate ‘operations strategy formulation’ function. However, in larger organisations
it is now common to have a function or department devoted to the broader aspects of
formulating the way in which operations should be managed and resources allocated.
We shall call this group of people ‘central operations’. This distinction between central
operations and day-to-day operations managers is often termed ‘staff’ and ‘line’ roles.

‘Staff’ and ‘line’ in operations
People occupying classic ‘staff’ positions have a monitoring, planning and shaping
role. They are the ones who are charged with building up the company’s operations
capability. They may look forward to the way markets are likely to be moving, judge the
best way to develop each part of the operation and keep an eye on competitor behav-
iour. All of which are tasks that need close liaison with marketing planners, product and
service development and finance. They are also tasks that need some organisational
‘space’ to be performed effectively. They are certainly not tasks that coexist readily with
the hectic and immediate concerns of running an operation. These people constitute
what could be termed ‘central operations’. People occupying ‘line’ roles are those who
run the day-to-day operations. Theirs is partly a reactive role, one that involves find-
ing ways round unexpected problems: reallocating labour, adjusting processes, solving
quality problems and so on. They need to look ahead only enough to make sure that
resources are available to meet targets. Theirs is the necessary routine. Knowing where
the operation is heading, keeping it on budget and pulling it back on course when the
unexpected occurs: no less valuable a task than the developer’s but very different.
While these descriptions are clearly stereotypes, they do represent two types of opera-
tions task. The issue, for organisational design, is whether it is wise to separate them
organisationally. It may cause more problems than it solves. Although it allows each
to concentrate on their different jobs, it also can keep apart the two sets of people who
have most to gain by working together. Here is the paradox: the development function
does need freedom from the immediate pressures of day-to-day management but it is

M09 Operations Strategy 62492.indd 329 02/03/2017 13:27