Factors hindering strategy implementation as perceived by top, middle and frontline managers in a South African electronics organisation

INTRODUCTIONOrganisational performance remains a topic of interest to both practitioners and academics, as it is argued that it can be improved (Aguinis, 2013). The gap between planned and realised performance has been under scrutiny for a number of years from a variety of viewpoints (Alexander, 1985; Beer & Eisenstat, 2000; Cocks, 2010; Crittenden & Crittenden, 2008; Dinwoodie, Quinn & McGuire, 2014; Evans, 2012; Hrebiniak, 2006; Jooste & Fourie, 2009; Mintzberg, 1994; Mankins & Steele, 2005; Porter, 1985; 1998; Robert, 1991; Sandy, 1991; Schaap, 2012; Tait & Nienaber, 2010, Van der Merwe, 2013; Wery & Waco, 2004). However, conclusive reasons for the performance gap are still unclear. Although many reasons are advanced for this state of affairs, authors are not in agreement (Alexander, 1985; Cocks, 2010; Crittenden & Crittenden, 2008; Evans, 2012; Hrebiniak, 2006; Jooste & Fourie, 2009; Mintzberg, 1994; Mankins & Steele, 2005; Porter, 1985; 1998; Robert, 1991; Sandy, 1991; Schaap, 2012; Tait & Nienaber, 2010, Van der Merwe, 2013; Wery & Waco, 2004). The ambiguity about the performance gap encourages the persistence of this phenomenon, with negative consequences for the long-term sustainability of the organisation, ultimately adversely affecting wealth creation.It is odd that performance gaps persist, given the voluminous publications on strategy, the tool for ensuring organisational performance. Authors differ widely about the meaning of strategy. Nag, Hambrick and Chen (2007) have defined strategy as a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving the utilisation of resources to enhance the performance of organisations in their external environment with a view to financial gain. This definition is consistent with the view that strategy is the tool management uses to achieve organisational performance manifested as goals (Andrews, 1987; Ansoff, 1965, 1988; David, 2013; Pearce & Robinson, 2009), associated with economic results (Drucker, 1954; Nilsson & Ellstrom, 2012) and expressed as financial gain (Ronda-Pupo & GuerrasMartin, 2012). To be effective, strategy should be based on 'competitive advantage' (David, 2013; Pearce & Robinson, 2009; Porter, 1985; 1998). Competitive advantage essentially means that the organisation does something better than the competition in attracting customers on the basis of value offered (Porter, 1985; 1998). To be persistent, competitive advantage should therefore be embedded in the organisation.Competitive advantage is described as valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable and associated with the resource-based view of the firm (Barney, 1991). Moreover, competitive advantage consists of three interrelated dimensions, namely (a) the arena where the organisation chooses to compete, (b) customer value (customer capital), and (c) access to the required resources, including employees or talent (human capital), processes, systems and assets (structural capital) to provide customer value in the chosen arenas (Nienaber, Cant & Strydom, 2002; Ordonez de Pablo & Lytras, 2008). Of these dimensions, resources, processes, systems and assets are entrenched in the organisation, and thus potentially persistent. Moreover, resources are the most important among these dimensions for providing customer value. Human resources play a particularly important role because of the knowledge, skills, experience and attitudes they bring to the workplace, which may change owing to changes in the workplace and/or environment (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 2002; Campbell, Coff & Kryscynski, 2012; Lewis, 2011; Lockwood, 2007; Ordonez de Pablo & Lytras, 2008; Owen, 1813; Pfeffer, 2010; Whelan & Carcary, 2011). Previous research about the performance gap generally solicited the views of top management who blamed poor strategy implementation for the gap, while a lack of resources, inadequate skills and capabilities were routinely identified by these top managers as the predominant strategy implementation barriers (Alexander, 1985; Mankins & Steele, 2005; Tait & Nienaber, 2010; Van der Merwe, 2013). …