- Published on
Bridges: a metaphor
I have a thing about bridges. They are, in my mind at least, points of connection: not only between physical locations separated by water or chasm, but also between people, and between seemingly discordant ideas.
This week I have been in the United States and Canada: in Chicago, to deliver a keynote at the Private Directors Association national conference, lead two masterclasses and fulfil other engagements; in Toronto, to speak at a Governance Professionals of Canada event and attend other meetings; and, in Knoxville, to catch up with a dear friend of some 45 years and take in some local history.
In my downtime, I have done as I usually do: sate my curiosity—taking in the local sights, sounds and smells, and getting a sense of the history. From lakes (Michigan and Ontario), rivers (Tennessee) and vistas, to monuments, plaques and people, the social fabric that makes a place, well, a place is plain to see and feel. And, as I walked, I stopped periodically, to ponder those who went before, what they might have thought, and their intentions and actions as they went about their lives.
Then, last night, as I enjoyed hospitality in Knoxville, my mind was drawn to a comment my father shared many years ago, “Bridges are made for crossing, not burning.” Now, five decades on, I would add, “Bridges should be built and then crossed.”
To cross a bridge as it is being built is folly. Not only is this a poor use of resources, the likelihood of arriving at the intended destination is low. But this is what many executive teams and boards seem to do—they work it out as they go, or they assume that someone else has the matter in hand. Sometimes, they are so busy operating that they do not look past the here and now. But that is hardly a sound way to create value or a thriving business that endures over the longer term.
The role of the board of directors is to govern, meaning to provide effective steerage and guidance. And, one of the four principles of corporate governance is ‘set direction’, meaning, to determine corporate purpose and strategy. And therein lies an awkward bridging question: If a company’s board has not set direction, what hope should the executive have of leading well; or the staff being productive; or, ultimately, of the potential of the company being realised?
The strategic governance framework is one option boards may wish to consider, as they strive to see around corners and govern with impact.
PS: For curious readers: The bridges pictured are the Gay Street Bridge in Knoxville, and the Michigan Avenue Bridge in Chicago.
After 45 years, it was nice to cross the bridge and share memories.
Safe travels until we meet again
We use the (Sydney Harbour) bridge metaphor when we get our customers to visualise where they want to take their business, i.e. what the end-state should look like on the other side of the bridge.
Just as architects create detailed plans for bridges, we then help develop comprehensive blueprints for their corporate strategy, which take into account the company's current position, desired destination, and potential obstacles along the way, working our way back from the other side of the harbour.
A strong corporate strategy, like a bridge, requires a solid foundation. This foundation consists of the company's core values, mission, and long-term vision.
Again, working our way backwards from the other side we then discuss what bridge support structures need to be in place, a.k.a. the various elements of a corporate strategy (marketing, finance, operations, etc.). Each must be strong individually and work together to create a cohesive whole.
This is followed by detailing the functional strategies: what do each of the functions within the business need to put in place and execute upon to contribute to the overarching corporate strategy. Functional strategies typically will be defined by specific workstreams: they usually do not get developed in first instance at the Board and/or executive level, but by each of the respective functional areas. The workstreams are made up of team members from within each of those areas and to benefit from cross-pollination (potentially) also from other areas of the business.
A crucial point here is the “Bridge Load Capacity”. A corporate strategy, like a bridge, must be designed to bear the weight of the company's ambitions and challenges. Overloading either can lead to collapse. Too often we’ve seen a list of “strategic initiatives” that covers more than 20 items: far too many therefore, with as an outcome that none of them get fully executed or implemented, and “the other side of the harbour” never gets reached within the expected timeframe.
Last but not least, regular maintenance is crucial for both bridges and corporate strategies. Boards and executives need to periodically review and adjust their strategies to ensure they remain relevant and effective in changing business environments.