QUESTION $3[20$ MARKS$]$

Atsmon:

In your book, you talk about people preferring to hear good news$$what you call $$success theater.$$ To

countermand that, you suggest they ask simple questions like, $$What about that plan is difficult?$$ As

strategists, we should quickly get to the core of the challenge that must be overcome, right?

Rumelt:

The first step people struggle with is accepting the idea that strategy is about overcoming challenges.

I worked with a government group that spanned $12$ different agencies and they had a strategy that had

$22$priorities$.$ They insisted they could achieve them, and I kept saying, $$But you have to deal with

why that$$s hard. If it was easy, it would already have been done.$$ They worried that if they said, $$We

have a problem,$$ Congress might not give them money, so they had, in this case, an ambition theater

focused on $$We can do it$!$

Likewise, many businesspeople believe it$$s bad to talk about problems. Peter Drucker said that you

shouldn$$t focus on problems but opportunities. It$$s sort of this macho tradition, and I love that, but if we

are dealing with strategic stuff, we have to deal with the reality that it$$s difficult. For example, how do

we deal with our technology not being up to par? You can$$t transition to better technology without

exploring why that is difficult, organizationally and intellectually and in terms of skills..

Are public entities such as Eskom the victims of $$success theatre$?$ When monitoring and

evaluating strategy, why is it important that leadership elaborates on the challenges they face

as much $$ if not more so $$ than they celebrate their wins? Explain in detail.