What is e-Strategy?

I have worked in the area of "strategy" for the last 3 years, read many books and papers on the issue (coming from all the major consultants), and discussed many a clients' strategy in depth only to re-enforce my conclusion that each person has his/her own perception of what the word actually means!

I bet you all already know the issue, so why am I writing this in a forum?

Well, firstly to ask you all what is, in your opinion, an e-Strategy (compared to plain "strategy"). Your feedback will be great (from a theoretical discussion we might all improve our depth and breadth of understanding on this ambiguous topic).

Secondly I'd like to share my thoughts on what I believe to be the value of strategy consulting, and hear your feedback on my view - it will help me re-question some of my thinking.

My view goes something like this:
Why are partners at the big strategy consultancy companies paid so well?
Do they understand, or are capable of developing strategy more than anyone else?
Probably not, but they are exceptionally good at building and keeping relationships with top/profitable "accounts" (directors in the client's company). Clearly they are paid because they draw in the money!
How do they do that?
Possibly through a great understanding of the client's market and company, but more probably through the development of a common understanding, and ability to hone in on his counterparts' wavelength, then re-package the information that comes from some smart junior consultants into the words that mirror the language (and understanding of the term strategy) that the client himself will have and appreciate.

So what is the take-home point regarding strategy for consultancies?
In my humble opinion the key to a consultant's success is to understand how his/her counterpart "thinks" and pinpoint what his/her interpretation of the simple word "strategy". The rest is easy!

Looking forward to some stimulating feedback.

Sven

What is e-business? What is e-CRM? To me they are all just what they have always been except done through digital channels. They are not, and should not, be considered a separate thing - one's 'e-Strategy' is essentially a channel execution/consideration that forms part of your overall 'strategy'. "e-" to me means the digital channel sub-set of whatever it prefixes: e-learning, e-tailing, e-consultancy for that matter.

Which begs the question - why bother with the "e-" prefix at all? Isn't it all becoming part of one and the same thing - just part of doing business?

Personally I think that "e-" prefixes still deserve to live on despite the slight cringing feeling they evoke post the dot-com bust. Once upon a time "e-" in your name alone was worth a fair bit on the stock market. Now, of course, the balance has swung decidedly the other way.

Why do I think "e-" deserves to live? Because I've been in internet consulting for around 5 years now, all the time desperately trying to keep up with the frantic pace of learning required, finding out through hard experience what works and what doesn't and I feel that merits some kind of denotion of specialism. I'd be happy to admit to needing to learn a lot more about strategy development in general but in things "e-" I feel I have a lot of value to add. Just as you might be an HR consultant, a logistics consultant or whatever, can you not be an "e-consultant"? Whether you can be an "e-strategy consultant" or not, I'm less sure - is a strategy consultant who only really understands digital channels of much use?

Currently I still think there is a need for good people who really know what they are talking about in things "e-". Everyone recognises that the digital channels are just part of a wider business but there is still enough inexperience and ignorance out there (let's face it, even the most experienced people can't have been in the game that long), still a knowledge and skills gap in most organisations, so still a need for "e-consultants". In this climate you cannot afford to get things wrong, so in manys I would say the good people (the consultants one would hope) should be in even greater demand.

What is more, despite the digital gloom, it is clear that the digital channels are not going away. Things continue to develop apace - 3G, broadband, enhanced TV etc. may be longer coming than people thought or hoped but they will happen and someone needs to know how best to structure, approach and exploit the opportunities here. An e-strategist? An e-consultant?

As to what is 'strategy', I'm not sure I even want to try and go there... ;) I think basically it's about answering questions that tend to revolve around 'Should we/shouldn't we do X? What should we do? What is our best option?'

As to your evaluation of consulting partners and their relationship with senior clients, it sounds quite cynical but is also quite accurate. But of course the clients know the game too - many of them are ex-consultants anyway. I think it may be that people at this level are stimulated and interested by other people of a similar level who have interesting things to say. It is a mutual learning relationship in many ways - a meeting of minds with a fair amount of intellectual sparing. Work could get very dull otherwise...

Eduardo,
Good comments, and I believe there is a longer term validity in what you are saying. Not sure that "fast-reality" today will stand up to such idealism though - companies try as hard as possible to protect themselves in a downturn. They hold all information very close to themsleves, and actively prohibit sharing of information (the players who own most of the value chain are doing surprisingly well in todays environment). This slows down the whole process, and twists common sense into politics. As strategists we need to integrate this type of complexity into our thinking.
Thoughts?
Sven

On 17:20:44 4 September 2001 campus77 wrote:
>Sven,
>
>To me, the idea behind strategy is coincident with the
>following definition “the search of an action plan
>to create and develop a competitive advantage” (nice
>definition isn't it). This shouldn't be separated by the
>"e". The original idea stays on. But
>"e" adds more value.
>
>For any business the search of a competitive advantage is
>an iterative process that starts knowing where you
>actually are. There are different methods in order to
>identify, establish and sustain this competitive
>advantage. In fact, the “e” is now a good
>point in order to match the definition above.
>
>Strategy today should take into account that many
>companies don’t do the whole job. They normally make
>internally an “x % “ of the whole product,
>living the rest of it to other companies. That means
>optimize and identifying the most important part of the
>process and take control of it whilst improving what I
>would call “new business model” where
>flexibility will probably be the key concept of this new
>system and the Net will have a profound impact overall.
>
>Michael Porter in his recent study “Strategy and the
>Internet” says as all companies come to embrace
>Internet technology it will be neutralized as a source of
>a competitive advantage”. I don’t agree with
>that. In fact, the Net is causing deep changes to the
>structures and cultures of business. This will enable them
>to compete better in order to create unique products,
>stronger personal service, relationships and operational
>eficiencies. As the strategist Giorgio Merli says, in a
>future this will also allow:
>
>- Organize business in little operating units
>- Real access to computers and networks of information
>(Internet)
>- Use the knowledge of everybody in any operating position
>(KM)
>
>Following it, with this new virtual companies,
>transactional costs will be reduced and will allow the
>business to be more market oriented and have more real
>value to the final customer. This virtual model will need
>to:
>
>- Have and develop a vision about what should be done by
>all components of the company
>- Stablish the rules to be shared
>- Make a network of distributed companies with adecuate
>relationships among different units
>- Have a common information system that works in real time
>- A human system more interactive, flexible and open
>- Efficient production and management systems
>- Active channels for customers
>
>In this new model, the customer will have more power and
>knowledge.
>
>Waiting for comments
>
>Eduardo

On 15:09:05 13 October 2001 dwayne wrote:
>
>On 17:14:30 31 August 2001 Ashley wrote:
>>What is e-business? What is e-CRM? To me they are all
>just
>>what they have always been except done through digital
>>channels. They are not, and should not, be considered
>a
>>separate thing - one's 'e-Strategy' is essentially a
>>channel execution/consideration that forms part of
>your
>>overall 'strategy'. "e-" to me means the
>digital
>>channel sub-set of whatever it prefixes: e-learning,
>>e-tailing, e-consultancy for that matter.
>>
>>Which begs the question - why bother with the
>>"e-" prefix at all? Isn't it all becoming
>part
>>of one and the same thing - just part of doing
>business?
>>
>>Personally I think that "e-" prefixes still
>>deserve to live on despite the slight cringing feeling
>>they evoke post the dot-com bust. Once upon a time
>>"e-" in your name alone was worth a fair bit
>on
>>the stock market. Now, of course, the balance has
>swung
>>decidedly the other way.
>>
>>Why do I think "e-" deserves to live?
>Because
>>I've been in internet consulting for around 5 years
>now,
>>all the time desperately trying to keep up with the
>>frantic pace of learning required, finding out through
>>hard experience what works and what doesn't and I feel
>>that merits some kind of denotion of specialism. I'd
>be
>>happy to admit to needing to learn a lot more about
>>strategy development in general but in things
>>"e-" I feel I have a lot of value to add.
>Just
>>as you might be an HR consultant, a logistics
>consultant
>>or whatever, can you not be an
>"e-consultant"?
>>Whether you can be an "e-strategy
>consultant" or
>>not, I'm less sure - is a strategy consultant who only
>>really understands digital channels of much use?
>>
>>Currently I still think there is a need for good
>people
>>who really know what they are talking about in things
>>"e-". Everyone recognises that the digital
>>channels are just part of a wider business but there
>is
>>still enough inexperience and ignorance out there
>(let's
>>face it, even the most experienced people can't have
>been
>>in the game that long), still a knowledge and skills
>gap
>>in most organisations, so still a need for
>>"e-consultants". In this climate you cannot
>>afford to get things wrong, so in manys I would say
>the
>>good people (the consultants one would hope) should be
>in
>>even greater demand.
>>
>>What is more, despite the digital gloom, it is clear
>that
>>the digital channels are not going away. Things
>continue
>>to develop apace - 3G, broadband, enhanced TV etc. may
>be
>>longer coming than people thought or hoped but they
>will
>>happen and someone needs to know how best to
>structure,
>>approach and exploit the opportunities here. An
>>e-strategist? An e-consultant?
>>
>>As to what is 'strategy', I'm not sure I even want to
>try
>>and go there... ;) I think basically it's about
>answering
>>questions that tend to revolve around 'Should
>we/shouldn't
>>we do X? What should we do? What is our best option?'
>
>>
>>As to your evaluation of consulting partners and their
>>relationship with senior clients, it sounds quite
>cynical
>>but is also quite accurate. But of course the clients
>know
>>the game too - many of them are ex-consultants anyway.
>I
>>think it may be that people at this level are
>stimulated
>>and interested by other people of a similar level who
>have
>>interesting things to say. It is a mutual learning
>>relationship in many ways - a meeting of minds with a
>fair
>>amount of intellectual sparing. Work could get very
>dull
>>otherwise...
I concur with Ashley on most of his findings, however I think e-Strategy is in a world of its own. The strategy-making, strategy-implementing function of managers consists of five interrelated components:1. Developing a concept of the business and forming a vision of where a organization needs to be headed-in effect, infusing the organization with a sense of purpose, providing long-term direction, and establishing a mission. 2.Converting the mission into specific performance objectives. 3. Crafting a strategy to achieve the targeted performance. 4. Implementing and executing the chosen strategy efficiently and effectively. 5. Evaluating performance, reviewing the situation, and initiating corrective adjustments in mission, objectives, strategy, or implementation in light of actual experience, changing conditions, new ideas, and new opportunities. I think e-Business and e-CRM are major sub-components of e-Strategy whether it is in a digital setting or not. Dwayne D. Jakes, D.B.A.