When approaching this question from the systemic stance, the distinction between "living" and "non-living systems" comes to mind. If you think of organizations as non-living systems, then descriptions like "the organization behaves like a machine" that runs well, or "this problem with leadership is something we need to fix with the right tools" fit the bill.
The new EFQM model was presented in Helsinki in October 2019 and invites users to exciting discussions: What has changed in the 2020 model? Where are the new priorities, and what does that mean in practice? As part of the development team of the new version of the model, I do not want to withhold "deeper insights".
The idea of positive psychology was and is not to "correct weaknesses" but rather to promote positive emotions and build strengths and virtues. This approach has long been adopted by those companies for whom mediocrity is not enough. This leads to a win-win situation: If the employees are doing well, the organization is also more successful.
Successful strategy work must not get lost in vague and unspecific topics. In any case, in practical processing the following applies: "Talk is silver - action is gold", because with it a change of perspective can succeed, a different experience, so that strategy can be attacked and arrive in real life. This also includes a critical examination of common strategy tools and a sometimes uncomfortable questioning of the way they are used in the company - only in this way will sustainable benefits arise from their application.
Who doesn't know the usual dilemma that mercilessly haunts us all in different contexts: We have well-founded, tested and, from our point of view, helpful contents that we want to pass on to interested parties. But how? In what form? In what way exactly? And not again so ... As an experienced senior consultant in the FACT Consulting team, I encounter this question more and more often. Because our clients expect something "new", with a touch of "innovation" and of course "completely risk-free in application". And it should be " easily under the skin ", almost unnoticeable, but still "very energizing!". Quite simple, isn't it?
Strategy is still popular. If there is any ambiguity or vagueness, it is elegantly shoved into the "Strategy" topic area. And you can't know that for sure anyway, it actually concerns the future and that is known to be uncertain.
