Strategy in transformation
Strategy impact monitoring: check early whether your strategic measures are contributing to the intended development, and correct course before targets slip.
A completed action plan shows, first of all, that activities have taken place. For strategic steering, what also matters is whether the expected impact is emerging. Forward-looking strategy impact monitoring brings this question into the leadership team’s shared work.
Examine existing key figures and their blind spots with leadership and controlling.
Identify trends and relevant strategic points to monitor.
Bring data, qualitative signals and decisions into regular reviews.
The approach distinguishes the implementation status of measures, the achievement of strategic goals and a forward-looking assessment of their impact. These perspectives complement each other: deadlines and budgets still matter, but on their own they do not explain impact.
Which changes should become visible if the underlying assumptions hold? The leadership team defines points for observation and evaluation, and the situations in which a fresh decision is needed. Contradictory observations are explicitly taken into account.
A KPI system only shows what its criteria were set up to observe.
The observations are evaluated together. This can lead to changes in measures, priorities or strategic assumptions. Monitoring thus becomes a routine for reflection that links the running business with its further development.
Book an initial callPurely rear-view key figures are not enough: organisations select only part of the information from their environment. What does not appear in the established grid can remain invisible to decisions.
Together with controlling and leadership, we therefore review the existing strategy documents, key figures and evaluation routines. Which developments can they reveal? Which assumptions about customers, the market and the company’s own performance are embedded in the figures? Where are indications of future challenges missing? The review does not begin with a new dashboard, but with an examination of this logic of observation. Those involved add relevant future trends and determine which signals would be important for their strategic goals. Qualitative indications can be just as relevant as a key figure.
We work in three steps: analysis of the established systems of observation and evaluation, consideration of trends and future challenges, and development of a forward-looking KPI system. Criteria, data sources and interpretation are discussed jointly in workshops. For each key figure, it must be clear which strategic relationship it observes and who decides in the event of a deviation.
Impact monitoring adds to this perspective the question of whether measures are having their expected impact. A completed work step is a different finding from a changed customer experience or an achieved strategic goal. We therefore agree on reviews in which responsible managers examine observations and adjust measures where needed. The result is a comprehensible routine for observation and decision-making, not an automatic claim of causality derived from a diagram.
Beobachtung und Eingreifen vorab vereinbaren: Ziele und Maßnahmen werden zunächst in einer Strategy Map konsolidiert und auf Plausibilität und Vollständigkeit geprüft. Danach werden die angenommenen Zusammenhänge und wichtigsten Ziele gemeinsam konkretisiert. Das Team legt fest, was beobachtet oder gemessen werden soll und bei welchen Abweichungen eine Entscheidung über Gegensteuern oder die Veränderung von Maßnahmen ansteht. Vereinbarte Monitoring-Routinen geben diesen Fragen einen wiederkehrenden Platz.
Wirksamkeit beobachten und bei Abweichungen nachsteuern: Wirksamkeitsmonitoring kann Beobachtungspunkte, Eskalationssituationen und Rückmeldungen zur Interventionswirksamkeit verbinden. So wird sichtbar, wo eine Entwicklung beobachtet, eskaliert oder durch eine angepasste Intervention weitergeführt werden muss.
Kennzahlen aus Strategie und Ursache-Wirkungs-Logik ableiten: Ein KPI-System sollte aus den Unternehmenszielen und der Strategy Map abgeleitet werden. Dabei werden nicht nur Kennzahlen gesammelt, sondern die Beiträge relevanter Stellhebel zur Strategieumsetzung beschrieben und mit Verantwortlichkeiten, Beobachtungspunkten und Review-Routinen verbunden. So bleibt nachvollziehbar, welche Kennzahl welchen strategischen Zusammenhang beobachtet.
Die eigenen Beobachtungssysteme überprüfen: Ein prognostisches KPI-System beginnt mit der Reflexion der bestehenden Beobachtungs- und Bewertungssysteme: Welche Kriterien prägen Entscheidungen, welche Möglichkeiten werden übersehen, auf welchen Annahmen beruhen vermutete Zusammenhänge? Anschließend werden relevante Zukunftsentwicklungen, strategische Herausforderungen und passende Beobachtungsdimensionen erarbeitet. Dazu gehören Kennzahlen sowie konkrete Kommunikations- und Entscheidungsroutinen.
Arbeitsergebnisse: Gemeinsame Beobachtungs- und Bewertungspunkte; Vereinbarte Anlässe zum Nachsteuern; Regelmäßige Reflexion über Maßnahmen und Wirkung.
Observed correlations are not automatically proof of cause and effect. Key figures and qualitative observations are assessed in their specific context.
A forward-looking KPI system begins with a critical look at the existing instruments. Which data is seen regularly, which developments have triggered decisions so far, and which important changes have remained outside attention? A financial figure often describes the result of past decisions.
To steer future developments, those involved must also ask which signals from customers, market, technology and organisation point early to a changed relationship. To this end, the team reviews strategy documents and controlling tools, describes relevant trends and drafts a suitable observation framework. For each indicator, it is clarified which assumption lies behind it and who evaluates a deviation.
A review round combines quantitative data with qualitative observations. It must not automatically infer the impact of a measure from the fact that things happened at the same time. Instead, leadership examines: what has been implemented, which goal is developing, and what plausible indications are there of an impact or an opposite effect? This leads to decisions on continuing, adjusting or stopping. The value of monitoring lies in this joint reflection and in noticing changes earlier, not in a dashboard alone.
We separate key figures according to their function in the leadership process. Some figures describe a result that has already occurred; others can point early to a changing development. For monitoring, it must therefore first be clear which strategic assumption or goal relationship a key figure is meant to test.
Leadership and specialist departments jointly determine where the data comes from, how often it is looked at and who prepares a decision in the event of deviations. A good review combines the figures with experience from markets, customer contact and implementation. A spike is not yet an explanation of its cause; it can trigger a follow-up question or additional analysis. The result is a management process capable of learning, in which key figures sharpen the strategic discussion without replacing it with a dashboard.
They often describe the past and can screen out relevant new developments that fall outside the established framework. Organisations select only part of the information around them; whatever does not appear in the framework remains invisible to decision-making. So the review does not start with a new dashboard but by examining the existing logic of observation.
With your existing strategy, your controlling tools and the assumptions behind their key figures. Together with controlling and leadership, we review strategy documents, metrics and evaluation routines: which developments can they detect, what assumptions about customers, market and performance are built into them, and where are signals of future challenges missing? Those involved then add relevant future trends.
A deliberately chosen point for monitoring an expected strategic development, linked to a decision. The leadership team defines which changes should become visible if the assumptions hold, and which deviations trigger a decision on corrective action. Qualitative signals can matter just as much as a key figure.
No. Implementation progress, goal achievement and assumed impact are discussed separately. A completed task is a different finding from a changed customer experience or a strategic goal reached. Observed correlations are not automatic proof of causality; the executives responsible assess them in context at agreed reviews.
Case study
How a utility and infrastructure group tackled questions about its future across company boundaries.
What decision are you facing? Together, we clarify your situation, the people involved and the right next step.
Director | Chief Operating Officer (COO) and Head of corporate strategy competence team
Let’s talk about your situation and what you want to develop in your organisation.