导言
战略规划让企业在今天开始做迎接未来的准备它要问的是：“我们的事业应该是什么？”它要问的是：“我们今天必须做什么才能拥有未来？”
战略规划需要做出有风险的决策，需要有条理地舍弃过去，需要对创造预期中的未来所需的工作进行明确的界定和分配。战略规划的目标是立即行动。
一、战略规划不是什么
管理者有必要弄清楚战略规划不是什么。
1. 它不是一个魔术箱或者一堆技术。它是分析型思维，是把资源投入到行动中去
在战略规划过程中，可能要用到许多技术，但没有哪一种技术是必不可少的。战略规划可能需要使用计算机，但最重要的问题，“我们的事业是什么”或者“它应该是什么”，是无法量化并编出计算机程序的。建模或者模拟可能有帮助，但它们并不是战略规划，只是用于特定目的的工具。对于某个特定场合，它们可能适用，也有可能不适用。
量化不是规划。诚然，在战略规划中，哪怕只是为了肯定没有自欺欺人，人们也应该尽可能地使用逻辑严密的方法，但是有一些最重要的问题也许只能用定性的词来表达，例如“较大”或“较小”，以及“较快”或“较迟”。这些词是不便于用定量技术来处理的。还有一些同样重要的领域，例如政治风气、社会责任或人力资源（包括管理资源），是根本无法量化的。它们只能作为限制条件或边界，而不能作为方程式中的因子。
战略规划不是科学方法在商业决策中的应用，而是思考能力、分析能力、想象力和判断力的应用。它是责任，而不是技术。
2. 战略规划不是预测。它不是设计未来。任何设计未来的企图都是愚蠢的，因为未来是不可预测的。试图设计未来，只会让我们怀疑自己正在做的事情
如果还有人抱有幻想，认为人有能力预测很短的时间以后的事情，那么不妨看一看昨天报纸上的头条新闻，然后问一问有哪些事情是谁能在十年以前预见的。
我们首先必须接受一个前提——预测这种人类行为是很不准确的，而且只要超出一个极短的时期，预测就毫无价值。战略规划之所以很有必要，正是由于我们无法做出预测。
说明预测不是战略规划的一个更有力的理由是：预测总是试图找出事件发展的最可能途径，或者最好是一个概率范围。但是，创业问题是一个将会使可能性发生变化的独特事件。创业世界不是一个物理世界，而是一个社会世界。事实上，创业的最核心贡献就是推动一个独特的事件或者开展一项独特的创新，从而改变经济、社会或者政治情况。这一贡献本身得到的回报就是利润。
施乐公司在20世纪50年代开发和销售复印机时，就是这么做的。经营活动房屋的创业者在60年代也是这么做的。当时，拖车成为一种新型永久性固定住房，几乎占领了整个美国低价住房市场。50年代，雷切尔·卡森（Rachel Carson）的著作《寂静的春天》（Silent Spring）出版，这个独特的事件改变了整个人类对环境的态度。在社会和政治领域，这正是民权运动领袖在20世纪60年代所做的，也正是女权运动领袖在70年代初所做的。
由于创业者会打乱各种预测赖以立足的概率，因此对于那些试图为组织指明未来方向的规划者来说，预测不能帮助他们实现目的；对于那些想要革新或者改变人们工作和生活方式的规划者来说，预测也没有多大的用处。
3. 战略规划所涉及的不是未来的决策，而是当前决策的未来性
决策只存在于当前。战略决策者所面临的问题，不是所在组织明天应该做什么，而是要回答：为了迎接不确定的未来，我们今天必须做什么事情？当前的思考和行动中必须包含什么样的未来性，我们必须考虑什么样的时间跨度，我们现在如何运用这些信息做出合理的决策？
决策是一台时间机器，把大量不同的时间跨度同步为一个时间——现在。我们直到现在才开始了解这一点。但是，我们还是倾向于为未来决定要做的事情进行计划。这可能很有趣，但是毫无用处。我们只有现在能够做出决策，但是我们在做决策时不能只是为了现在。最权宜、最机会主义的决策，且不说那种根本不做决定的决策，可能会束缚我们很长时间，甚至永久地和无可挽回地束缚我们。
4. 战略规划不是完全消除风险的企图
它甚至不是一种使风险最小化的企图。那样一种企图只会导致非理性和无限制的风险，并且必然导致灾难。
所谓经济活动，就是把现在的资源投入未来，也就是投入极其不确定的期望中去。经济活动的本质就是承担风险。一种重要的经济理论贝姆-巴威克定律（Boehm-Bawerk’s Law）证明：只有通过更大的不确定性，也就是更大的风险，现有的生产资料才能产生更高的经济效益。
二、战略规划是什么
我们现在可以尝试着给战略规划下一个定义了。战略规划是一个包括以下工作的持续的过程：系统地做出承担风险的当前决策，并尽可能了解这些决策的未来性；系统地组织落实这些决策所需的努力；通过有条理的、系统的反馈，根据当初的期望对这些决策的结果进行衡量。
1. 舍弃过去
做规划要从企业的目标入手。针对每一个目标领域，都必须问：“为了实现未来的目标，我们现在必须做什么？”为了实现未来的目标，要做的第一件事便是“舍弃过去”。大多数规划只涉及必须做的新增事物，例如新产品、新流程和新市场，等等。但是，在未来要做一些不同的事情，关键在于舍弃不再具有生产性的、陈旧的、过时的东西。
因此，做规划的第一步是要对每项活动、产品、流程或市场提出这样一个问题：“如果我们现在没有投入资源，我们还会进入吗？”如果答案是否定的，接下来就要问：“我们怎样才能退出，而且是迅速退出？”
系统地舍弃过去本身就是一项规划——对许多业务都是合适的。它会迫使人们思考和行动，让企业腾出人员和财力投入新事物，让人们产生行动的意愿。
相反，一项规划如果只规定要做的新增事物，没有规定要舍弃的陈旧的老事物，那就不可能取得成果。它会始终是一项规划，永远不会成为现实。可是，大多数企业（更多的政府机构）的长期规划只字不提抛弃过去的决策，也许这就是这些规划无果而终的主要原因。
2. 我们必须做哪些新的事情：什么时候做
规划的下一步是回答这个问题：“我们必须做哪些新的、不同的事情？什么时候做？”
每一项规划都会有这样一些领域，看起来在这些领域必须做的事情就是更加努力地做现在已经在做的事情。不过，比较明智的做法是假定我们已经在做的事情总是满足不了未来的需要。但是，“我们必须做哪些事情”还只是问题的一半，同样重要的还有“什么时候做”，它确定的是何时开始完成新任务。
事实上，每个决策都存在“短期”和“长期”两个方面。以投资一个钢铁厂为例，从方案启动到可能取得成果的最早时间（开始产出成品钢）需要5年，那么5年便是这个决策的短期。收回工厂投资及其复利需要20年甚至更长的时间，那么20年便是决策的长期。一个决策的长期，便是证明这个最初决策的正确性需要这个决策继续保持有效的时间长度，包括在市场、流程、技术和厂址等方面继续有效。
但是，谈论短期规划和长期规划是毫无意义的。有一些规划导致现在的行动，但它们是真正的规划、真正的战略决策。有一些规划谈论的是未来的行动，但它们只是一些梦想，甚至是不做思考、不做规划、不采取行动的托词。规划的实质就是在了解决策的未来性的情况下做出当前决策。是未来性决定时间跨度，而不是时间跨度决定未来性。
要经过长时间孕育才能得到结果的事情，就必须尽早开始。因此，长期规划要求对未来性有所了解：“如果想要在未来实现某个目标，我们现在必须做些什么？如果我们现在不投入资源，哪些事情是做不成的？”
重复一个常用的例子：如果我们知道美国西北部的花旗松需要99年才能生长到用于造纸浆的尺寸，那么为99年以后供应造纸浆用花旗松的唯一办法就是现在开始栽树。也许有人会发明一种生长素，但如果我们从事的是造纸业，就绝不能指望这件事情真的发生。如果造纸厂用的原料是花旗松，那么它的规划就不能只关心20年，而必须考虑99年。
还有一些决策，即使是5年也已长得荒谬可笑。如果我们的业务是整批收购别人亏本销售的货物，然后把它们拍卖出去，那么下一周的清仓拍卖就是长期的未来。任何更加长远的事情，通常都与我们无关。因此，企业及其决策的性质决定了规划的时间跨度。
时间跨度不是固定的，也不是给定的。在规划过程中，关于时间的决策本身就是一项承担着风险的决策，它在很大程度上决定着资源和努力的分配，决定着承担的风险。推迟决策本身就是一项承担着风险，而且往往是不可逆转的决策，这一点无论重复多少遍也不嫌多。在很大程度上，时间决策决定着企业的特点和性质。
总而言之，在战略规划中至关重要的是：第一，为了实现目标，要系统地、有目的地进行工作；第二，规划开始于舍弃过去，并且要把这种舍弃作为实现未来目标所做的系统努力的一部分；第三，我们要寻找实现目标的新途径，而不是认为更加努力地做同样的事情就足够了；最后，我们要深入思考时间因素并提出这样一个问题：“我们必须在什么时候开始工作才能按时取得结果？”
三、一切都要转化为工作
除非转化为具体的工作，否则规划做得再好，也只是一些美好的愿望。一项规划要经受的检验是管理当局是否真的投入资源，并为了在未来取得成果而采取行动。否则，就只有诺言和希望，没有规划可言。
一项规划必须通过对管理者提出下面这个问题进行检验：“你现在把哪些最优秀的人员投入到了这项工作中？”如果这名管理者反驳说（大多数管理者都会这么说）：“我现在不能把最优秀的人员抽出来。只有在他们完成手头的工作以后，我才能让他们开始为明天做准备。”这名管理者这么说，实际上是承认自己没有什么规划，同时也表明他确实需要一项规划，因为规划的目的正是为了揭示稀缺资源——优秀的人员是最稀缺的资源——应该用于何处。
把规划转化为工作不仅意味着需要由某个人来承担这项工作，而且意味着责任、完工期限以及对成果进行衡量，也就是对工作和规划过程本身的成果的反馈。
在战略规划中，衡量会带来一些严峻的问题，特别是概念上的问题。然而，正因为我们衡量什么以及如何衡量决定着大家认为什么是合适的，进而决定着我们看到的是什么以及我们（也包括其他人）做的是什么，所以衡量在规划过程中是极为重要的。特别重要的是，我们必须设法把各种期望包含在规划决策中（并且比较清楚地了解在时间和数值方面存在哪些重大偏差），从而及早知道这些期望是否真正能够实现。否则，我们就无法做规划。如果没有反馈，就没有从实际事件回到规划过程的自我控制方法。
管理者不能决定自己是否想要做出需要冒风险的长期决策，因为做出这种决策是管理者的天职。管理者只是有权决定自己是负责任地，还是不负责任地做出这种决策，是努力捕捉成功的合理机会，还是纯粹靠瞎蒙乱猜。由于决策过程在本质上是一个理性过程，也由于创业型决策的有效性取决于其他人的理解和自愿努力，所以决策方法越是合乎理性、越是有组织、越是以知识而非预言为依据，它就越是负责任的，越有可能生效。不过，决策的最终结果不是知识，而是战略。它的目标是立即行动。
战略规划并不是用事实代替判断，也不是用科学代替管理者。它甚至不会降低管理者的能力、勇气、经验、直觉，甚至预感的重要性和作用，这就像生物学和医学不会降低医生的这些品质的重要性一样。相反，系统地开展规划工作并为其提供知识，强化了管理者的判断力、领导力和远见。
翻译：
Peter Drucker: Strategy is not planning “what to do in the future”
introduction
Strategic planning allows businesses to prepare today for the future by asking, “What should our business be?” It asks, “What must we do today to have the future?”
Strategic planning requires risky decisions, an orderly abandonment of the past, and a clear delineation and allocation of the work required to create the desired future. The goal of strategic planning is immediate action.
First, what is strategic planning Not
Managers need to be clear about what strategic planning is not.
It’s not a magic box or a bunch of technology. It’s analytical thinking, it’s putting resources into action
Many techniques may be used in the strategic planning process, but no one technique is essential. Strategic planning may require the use of computers, but the most important questions, “What is our business?” or “what should it be,” cannot be quantified and computer programmed. Modeling or simulation can be helpful, but they are not strategic planning, just tools for a specific purpose. They may or may not be appropriate for a particular situation.
Quantification is not planning. It is true that in strategic planning one should use as logical a method as possible, if only to be sure not to deceive oneself, but some of the most important questions can perhaps only be expressed in qualitative terms, such as “larger” or “smaller”, and “sooner” or “later”. These words are not easily dealt with by quantitative techniques. There are equally important areas, such as political climate, social responsibility or human resources (including management resources), that cannot be quantified at all. They can only be used as constraints or boundaries, not as factors in an equation.
Strategic planning is not the application of the scientific method to business decision making, but the application of thinking, analysis, imagination and judgment. It is responsibility, not technology.
Strategic planning is not forecasting. It’s not designing the future. Any attempt to design the future is foolish, because the future is unpredictable. Trying to design the future only makes us doubt what we are doing
If anyone is still under the illusion that man has the power to predict very short periods of time, let us look at the headlines in yesterday’s newspapers and ask what could have been foreseen ten years ago.
We must first accept the premise that predictions of such human behavior are highly inaccurate and worthless beyond a very short period of time. Strategic planning is necessary precisely because we cannot predict.
A stronger reason why forecasting is not strategic planning is that forecasting always tries to figure out the most likely path of events, or preferably a range of probabilities. However, the issue of entrepreneurship is a unique event that will change the possibilities. The startup world is not a physical world, it’s a social world. In fact, the core contribution of entrepreneurship is to promote a unique event or launch a unique innovation that changes an economic, social or political situation. The reward for this contribution is itself profit.
That’s what Xerox did when it developed and sold copiers in the 1950s. Mobile home entrepreneurs did the same thing in the ’60s. At that time, the trailer became a new type of permanent fixed housing, almost the entire United States low-cost housing market. In the ’50s, Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring was published, a unique event that changed the entire human attitude to the environment. In the social and political spheres, this is exactly what civil rights leaders did in the 1960s, and it is exactly what women’s rights leaders did in the early 1970s.
Because entrepreneurs mess with the probabilities on which predictions are based, predictions do not help planners who are trying to figure out the future direction of their organizations; Forecasts are also of little use to planners who want to revolutionize or change the way people work and live.
Strategic planning is not about future decisions, but about the future of current decisions
Decisions exist only in the present. The question for strategic decision-makers is not what their organisation should do tomorrow, but what must we do today to prepare for an uncertain future? What future must be included in current thinking and action, what time horizon must we consider, and how can we use this information to make sound decisions now?
A decision is a time machine that synchronizes a large number of different time spans into one time-now. We are only now beginning to understand this. Still, we tend to plan for what we decide to do in the future. It may be fun, but it’s useless. We can only make decisions now, but we can’t make decisions just for now. The most expedient and opportunistic decisions, not to mention the decision not to make a decision at all, can bind us for a long time, even permanently and irretrievably.
Strategic planning is not an attempt to eliminate risk entirely
It is not even an attempt to minimize risk. Such an attempt would only lead to irrational and unlimited risks and would inevitably lead to disaster.
Economic activity is the investment of present resources into the future, that is, into highly uncertain expectations. The nature of economic activity is to take risks. An important economic theory, Boehm-Bawerk’s Law, proves that only through greater uncertainty, that is, greater risk, can existing means of production produce higher economic benefits.
Second, what is strategic planning
We can now try to define strategic planning. Strategic planning is an ongoing process that involves: systematically making current decisions that take risks, and knowing as much as possible about the future of those decisions; Systematically organizing the efforts needed to implement these decisions; The results of these decisions are measured against original expectations through structured, systematic feedback.
Let go of the past
Planning should start from the enterprise’s goal. For each target area, the question must be asked: “What must we do now to achieve our future goals?” In order to achieve future goals, the first thing to do is to “let go of the past.” Most planning involves only new things that must be done, such as new products, new processes, new markets, and so on. But the key to doing something different in the future is to let go of what is no longer productive, old, obsolete.
So the first step in planning is to ask each activity, product, process, or market the question, “If we didn’t invest the resources now, would we be in it?” If the answer is no, the next question is: “How can we exit, and exit quickly?”
Systematically letting go of the past is a plan in itself – and is appropriate for many businesses. It forces people to think and act, frees up people and money to invest in new things, and creates the will to act.
On the other hand, a plan that prescribes only new things to be done, and no old things to be abandoned, is unlikely to be fruitful. It will always be a plan, never a reality. However, the long-term plans of most businesses (and, more often, government agencies) make no mention of discarding past decisions, which is perhaps the main reason why such plans go nowhere.
What new things do we have to do: When
The next step in planning is to answer the question: “What new and different things must we do?” When do you do it?”
In every project there are areas where it seems necessary to work harder on what is already being done. However, it is wiser to assume that what we are already doing will never meet the needs of the future. But “what must we do?” is only half the problem. Just as important is “when?”, which defines when to start a new task.
In fact, there are “short term” and “long term” aspects to every decision. In the case of investing in a steel plant, it takes five years from the start of the project to the earliest possible time to bear fruit (start producing finished steel), so five years is the short term for this decision. It takes 20 years or more to recover the plant investment and its compound interest, so 20 years is the long term for decision-making. The long term of a decision is the length of time that the original decision needs to continue to be valid, including in terms of market, process, technology, and site.
But it is pointless to talk about short – and long-term planning. There were plans that led to the current actions, but they were real plans, real strategic decisions. There are plans that talk about future actions, but they are just dreams, or even excuses for not thinking, not planning, not taking action. The essence of planning is to make current decisions with an understanding of their future. It is the future that determines the time span, not the time span that determines the future.
Things that take a long time to bear fruit must be started as soon as possible. Therefore, long-term planning requires an understanding of the future: “What must we do now if we want to achieve something in the future?” What can’t be done if we don’t invest resources now?”
To repeat a commonly used example: If we know that it will take 99 years for Douglas fir in the northwestern United States to grow to pulp size, then the only way to supply Douglas fir for pulp after 99 years is to start planting trees now. Maybe someone will invent an auxin, but if we’re in the paper business, we can’t expect that to happen. If the raw material of the paper mill is Douglas fir, then its planning cannot only be concerned with 20 years, but must consider 99 years.
There are also decisions that are ridiculously long even after five years. If we were in the business of buying goods in bulk that others were selling at a loss and then auctioning them off, the next week’s clearance sale would be the long-term future. Anything longer term is usually irrelevant to us. Therefore, the nature of the enterprise and its decisions determines the time span of planning.
The time span is not fixed or given. In the planning process, the decision about time is itself a risky decision, which to a large extent determines the allocation of resources and efforts, and determines the risk taken. You can never repeat it too often that postponing a decision is itself a risky and often irreversible decision. To a large extent, the time decision determines the characteristics and nature of the enterprise.
To sum up, it is essential in strategic planning to: first, to work systematically and purposefully in order to achieve goals; Second, planning begins with abandoning the past as part of a systematic effort to achieve future goals. Third, we need to find new ways to achieve our goals, rather than thinking that trying harder to do the same thing is enough; Finally, we need to think deeply about the time factor and ask the question, “When do we have to start working to get results on time?”
Turn everything into work
Unless it is translated into concrete work, no matter how well the plan is done, it is only some good wishes. The test of a plan is whether management is actually committing resources and taking action to achieve results in the future. Otherwise, there are only promises and hopes, not plans.
A plan must be tested by asking managers the question, “Which of your best people are you putting into this job right now?” If the manager counters (as most managers do), “I can’t get my best people out right now.” Only after they’ve done the job at hand can I get them to start preparing for tomorrow.” By saying this, the manager is in effect admitting that he has no plan, and that he does need one, because the purpose of planning is precisely to reveal where scarce resources – and good people are the scarcest of resources – should be spent.
Translating planning into work implies not only the need for someone to undertake the work, but also responsibility, deadlines and the measurement of results, that is, feedback on the results of the work and the planning process itself.数字化转型网www.szhzxw.cn
In strategic planning, measurement raises some serious questions, especially conceptual ones. However, precisely because what we measure and how we measure it determines what we think is appropriate, and thus what we see and what we (and others) do, measurement is extremely important in the planning process. It is particularly important that we find ways to incorporate expectations into planning decisions (and to get a clearer picture of the significant deviations in time and value) so that we know early on whether they will actually be met. Otherwise, we can’t plan. Without feedback, there is no method of self-control from the actual event back into the planning process.
Managers cannot decide whether they want to make long-term decisions that involve taking risks, because making such decisions is the manager’s job. Managers simply have the right to decide whether they are making such decisions responsibly or irresponsibly, trying to take a reasonable chance of success, or simply guessing. Because the decision-making process is essentially a rational one, and because the effectiveness of entrepreneurial decision-making depends on the understanding and voluntary efforts of others, the more rational, organized, and based on knowledge rather than prophecy, the more responsible it is and the more likely it is to work. However, the ultimate result of decision-making is not knowledge, but strategy. Its aim is immediate action.
Strategic planning is not about replacing judgment with facts, or replacing managers with science. It does not even diminish the importance and function of competence, courage, experience, intuition, or even foreboding in managers, just as biology and medicine do not diminish the importance of these qualities in doctors. On the contrary, systematic planning and providing knowledge for it enhances managers’ judgment, leadership and vision. 数字化转型网www.szhzxw.cn
本文由数字化转型网（www.szhzxw.cn）转载而成，来源于领教工坊；编辑/翻译：数字化转型网宁檬树。
免责声明: 本网站(http://www.szhzxw.cn/)内容主要来自原创、合作媒体供稿和第三方投稿，凡在本网站出现的信息，均仅供参考。本网站将尽力确保所提供信息的准确性及可靠性，但不保证有关资料的准确性及可靠性，读者在使用前请进一步核实，并对任何自主决定的行为负责。本网站对有关资料所引致的错误、不确或遗漏，概不负任何法律责任。
本网站刊载的所有内容(包括但不仅限文字、图片、LOGO、音频、视频、软件、程序等) 版权归原作者所有。任何单位或个人认为本网站中的内容可能涉嫌侵犯其知识产权或存在不实内容时，请及时通知本站，予以删除。
