Ongoing debates about strategy versus execution continue mainly because the meaning of each term is fought over while also being incorrectly overgeneralized. But when the term Execution is properly understood, it's not so easy to casually throw it around.

1. Demystifying Execution
Understanding How “Done” Gets Done

2. The mythologies of execution
Within the world of business management, social media quickly reveals an enthusiastic
discussion about strategy and execution that has the popularity of debate.
Many of the most repeated positions seem generally similar to each other. But individually,
many of those are often poorly expressed and are for the most part just gestural.
Their problem is that, although they are popular and cover a range of opinion, they don’t
stand up to scrutiny very long as stated. For example:
• Strategy and execution cannot be meaningfully separated
• Here, the unsupported assertion is that neither strategy nor execution has an independently
distinctive value.
• A successful strategy is one that can be executed; therefore, strategy fails without
execution
• Here, the unspoken idea is what exactly strategy fails at.
• Failed execution makes a good strategy into a bad strategy
• Although this really only means that a given strategy might become a regretted decision, this
statement says that no strategy can be evaluated on its own.
• Success does not need strategy but always needs execution
• Here, what is left unspoken is whatever is actually being executed.

3. The realities of execution
In comparison to that rhetoric, there are simpler, neutral descriptions of ideas that distinctively
relate activity to intention, and are easy to avoid confusing with each other:
• Strategy – a model of pursuing opportunities to obtain [something]
• Tactics – the arrangement of means to do [something]
• Execution – the assurance of effort to achieve [something]
• Performance – the degree to which [something] is actually done versus ideally done
• Value – the significance of a confirmed distinction made by [something]
• Goal – the highest required future value of [something]
• Purpose – the responsibility for producing the designated value of [something]

4. Restoring the concept of “execution”
The default context of discussion about execution is always a result – “Success” – but because it is
the default it often “goes without saying”… Ironically, this contributes to forgetting something
important: the term “execution” refers to activity, but the actual reason for using the term is to talk
about results.
This forgetting occurs gradually. Derived from studying success stories, descriptions “accounting for”
success can become generically prescriptive stories of “how to succeed”. Audiences think, “hey,
there’s a prescription available!”
Then, the prescription is shared and adopted at face value, without requiring attention to the
details. The notion of “execution” becomes generic (how to) – and furthermore, presumptive and
even symbolic of the inherent value of activity, while also skewing attention to focus on activity.
Consequently, too many people then say “execution” mainly to invoke that focus – without an
actual understanding of what makes execution useful as a distinguishing concept about activity.
The most important thing that “execution” does, conceptually, is to call for accountability of the
results of activity, versus a declared purpose. The significance of “execution” is to maintain purpose
– not just some vague idea of success – as the interpretive perspective on all of the activity being
conducted.

5. Dimension of
Activity
Standing
condition
Immediate
condition
Association of
the conditions
Guidance Control Form for
effort
Management
focus
Activity
management
PRACTICE Goal State Reconciliation Policy Principle Methodology
Impacts as
Objectives
Technique
OPERATION Outcome Function Application Model Logic Plan
States as
Intentions
Process
TRANSACTION Value Exchange Assignment Profile Role Relationship
Interactions
as Influences
Event
The perspective of “purpose”
Purposeful activity is not necessarily complicated, but its success relies on some complexity that explains why
the activity is the way it is instead of the way it isn’t.
As identified here, the actual shaping of the activity occurs and is manageable in three distinct dimensions of
effort: practices, operations, and transactions.
By definition, variation is possible within any dimension. The point of having this description is to recognize,
within overall activity, where adjustments should be made and progress should be occurring.
This framework exposes 24 factors (areas) of potential development, maintenance and change.
That degree of accountability supports the ability to make critical adjustments necessary for the purpose.
©2016 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Research

6. Dimension of
Activity
Form for
effort
Management
focus
Purposeful
Activity
Measured
presence
abnormal typical extended redefining
PRACTICE Methodology
Impacts as
Objectives
Technique
Range,
Risk
incidental standard adaptive innovative
OPERATION Plan
States as
Intentions
Process
Urgency,
Scope
emergency standard improvised experimental
TRANSACTION Relationship
Interactions as
Influences
Event
Strength,
Criticality
exceptional standard collateral impending
Accounting for Effort as execution
Execution tracks variable activities that promote or redirect effort for the given purpose.
To support this, the variable activity is formulated for the purpose. Activity still occurs across a range
of varieties from abnormal to redefining, but the formulation makes activity manageable in terms of
the specific purpose.
Manageability refers to being visible and directed, addressing: what is going on, when people start
doing, things the way that they do them.
In Execution, management involves interpreting and conforming the activity from the point of view
of the purpose. Variety provides both challenges and options to ensuring the purpose.
©2016 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Research

7. WHAT IS “PRACTICE”?
Practice is a sustained
recurring effort to reconcile
GOALS and STATES.
To formalize practice,
METHODOLOGY is
prescribed to coordinate
types of impacts that are
referred to as OBJECTIVES
in the methodology.
Managing impacts aims to
encourage desired benefits
and constrain tolerated
risks. Each objective has a
declared benefit and risk.
A TECHNIQUE is a formalized pattern for an
action responsible for producing the impact
represented by the objective. The formalization
aims to make the action repeatable (mechanics)
and predictably create effects (procedure).
Technique is directly responsible for addressing
current states, which present requirements and
limits. Technique especially handles risks to
objectives, in as many as four different ways.
Technique’s protection of objectives varies in order
to address maintenance, quality, improvement, or
transformation as demanded by the current state.
Methodology always reflects
priorities that articulate a bias
or principle (policy).
Examples of objectives are:
compliance, expense, speed,
conservation, sustainability
©2016MalcolmRyder/ArchestraResearch

8. WHAT IS “OPERATION”?
OPERATION is a systematic
application of FUNCTIONS
to OUTCOMES.
To formalize operation, a
PLAN is prescribed to
coordinate types of
significant states that are
INTENTIONS of effort.
Intentions usually identify
a significant state that
does not otherwise occur
on its own. Managing
them puts attention on
their compatibility with
each other.
A PROCESS is a formalized pattern used for
specifying and tracking progress towards an
achievement. By comparing current activity and
effects to the pattern, it can be decided whether
those observed dynamics are “progressive” for
the intended achievement. Process is directly
responsible for addressing current states, which
present issues of urgency and scope.
A Process may variously realize an intention, due to
addressing current constraints affecting resources,
output tolerances, and activity duration.
A Plan always reflects effects
that articulate a logic or
structure (model).
Examples of intentions are:
opportunity, leverage, persistence,
recovery, integration, security
©2016MalcolmRyder/ArchestraResearch

9. WHAT IS “TRANSACTION”?
TRANSACTION is a tracked
assignment of a VALUE to
an EXCHANGE.
To formalize transaction, a
RELATIONSHIP is
prescribed to coordinate
types of interactions that
are INFLUENCES.
Influences usually
represent an expectation
of an affect. Managing
influences puts attention
on their predictability and
reliability.
An EVENT is a defined transition from a prior
state to a known subsequent current state. The
new current state may or may not be desired. It
can provide or eliminate an opportunity or
resource used as an influence by interaction.
Thus it is important to know whether the event
is critical to the desired character or benefit of
the relationship.
An Event supports an influence variously, as a
factor of how influence itself is likely to have
strength.
A relationship always reflects
characteristics that articulate a
role (profile).
Examples of influences are:
suggestion, persuasion, attraction,
support, control, restraint,
©2016MalcolmRyder/ArchestraResearch

10. ©2016 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Research
www.archestra.com
mryder@archestra.com

12. Techniques
Methodology
objectives
standard
innovative
adaptive
incidental
WHAT IS “PRACTICE”?

13. Processes
Plan
intentions
standard
experimental
improvised
emergency
WHAT IS “OPERATION”?

14. Events
Relationship
influences
standard
impending
collateral
exceptional
WHAT IS “TRANSACTION”?