Strategy implementation
activities within a workplace or organisation designed to manage the activities associated with the delivery of a strategic plan
Strategy implementation is the activities within a workplace or organisation designed to manage the activities associated with the delivery of a strategic plan.
Definition
There are several definitions, most of which relate to the process of managing activities associated with the delivery of a strategic plan such as the following:
The sum total of the activities and choices required for the execution of a strategic plan
Operationalisation of a clearly articulated strategic plan
All the processes and outcomes which accrue to a strategic decision once authorisation has been to go ahead and put the decision into practice
A series of interventions concerning organisational structures, key personnel actions, and control systems designed to control performance with respect to desired ends.
Other definitions concern the processes by which an organisation identifies and allocates the actions associated with the delivery of a strategic plan such as the following:
A process by which large, complex, and potentially unmanageable strategic problems are factored into progressively smaller, less complex, and hence more manageable proportions.
The managerial interventions that align organisational action with strategic intention (Floyd and Wooldridge, 1992).
The term first became well known following the publication in 1984 of "Strategy Implementation," a highly regarded book on the topic by Lawrence G. Hrebiniak and William F. Joyce, and it is no surprise that definitions from that work appear in both of the lists given above.
Strategy implementation thinking has strongly influenced writing and work on the related topic of Strategy execution - a term that has been used to associate strategy implementation with the Balanced Scorecard approach to strategic performance management.
Process
Most authors propose specific activities and systems that they think are necessary to effectively implement a strategy (e.g. Hrebiniak and Joyce, 1984; Reed and Buckley, 1988; Wheelen and Hunger, 1992).
Strategy implementation requires the following activities to be undertaken:
Strategy articulation - Building consensus within the team responsible for delivery of the strategy about the outcomes to be achieved
Strategy validation - Engaging with stakeholders and others to confirm strategic outcomes being pursued are acceptable
Strategy communication - Convert strategic objectives into clear short-term operating objectives that can be assigned to groups for delivery
Strategy monitoring - Monitor the progress of the organisation in delivering the strategic objectives
Strategy engagement - Managerial interventions designed to ensure organisation successfully achieves chosen strategic outcomes
Strategy articulation
The purpose of articulating the strategy is to translate the strategy into a form where managers and stakeholders agree consensually on what needs to be achieved
The strategy articulation will describe the strategic outcomes to be achieved, preferably expressed in the form of quantitative or qualitative goals. This strategy articulation can, for example, be expressed in the form of a Destination Statement.
The public source identifies “Strategy implementation” as activities within a workplace or organisation designed to manage the activities associated with the delivery of a strategic plan. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Strategy, implementation and activities.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Strategy implementation”, the useful work is to connect “activities within a workplace or organisation designed to manage the activities associated with the delivery of a strategic plan” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q25047722. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1992, 1984 and 1988.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Strategy implementation”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Strategy implementation primary sources, Strategy implementation archive and Strategy research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Strategy implementation”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Strategy implementation” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.