Implications For Controlling Formal Plans
- Contingency plans are less possible in strategic control. The whole idea of contingency plans is much more difficult in the strategic arena. It is more difficult to generate all possible actions ahead of time in a strategic problem, because the alternatives are too numerous and too complex.
- Triggering contingency planning is more important in strategic control. Because of this difficulty in making contingency plans, triggering an examination of alternatives when things do not go according to plan becomes much more important.
- Preprogrammed variance analysis is less possible in strategic control. For an operational control model might be possible that the computer performs all possible variance analyses (in the accounting sense). For strategic control it is both difficult technically and impossible practically.
- A variance inquiry system is more necessary in strategic control. It seems important to have an inquiry system linked to the formal planning model with which combinations of deviations from plans can be explored by the human operator.
- A variance inquiry language is more necessary in strategic control. Some sort of language in which the human can do variance inquiries is highly desirable in the area of strategic control.
- An augmented formal planning system in more necessary in strategic control. A formal planning system should be augmented with the variance inquiry language described. This would permit the same system that was used to generate the plan to be used in controlling that plan, leading to both ease of additional analysis as well, as to consistency with the plan being controlling.
Previous page Next page