The Challenge of Too Many Chiefs and Not Enough Indians: Bridging the Gap Between Strategy and Execution in Project Management
In many organizations, a familiar issue arises: “Too many chiefs, not enough Indians.” It often seems like there’s an abundance of senior leaders, advisors, and consultants who provide guidance and offer direction, but fewer people who are actually getting things done. This disconnect between strategic direction and execution can severely hinder project success, particularly in smaller teams or organizations.
The Gap Between Direction and Execution
Take, for example, the process of commissioning or procurement. While there may be an abundance of experts offering templates, advice, and forms, when it comes time to do the actual work—sending letters, getting contracts signed, making calls, and attending meetings—the same leaders and experts are often too busy to help. The reality is that, in many cases, few individuals are truly dedicated to the execution of these tasks.
In my experience as a project manager, I’ve often felt like the conductor of an orchestra. The conductor doesn’t typically play every instrument, but they ensure that each one plays in harmony with the others. However, in smaller jurisdictions or organizations, where resources and specialists are limited, the project manager often has to wear multiple hats. The conductor becomes not only the one leading the orchestra but sometimes the one writing the music, agreeing on the lyrics, conducting, and playing several instruments—often depending on what the project needs at any given time.
The Importance of Breadth Over Depth
In smaller organizations, where resources are scarce, breadth of knowledge is more important than depth of specialization. While having deep expertise in a particular field is invaluable, a generalist with enough knowledge to keep the project moving is often just as crucial. When you don’t have the capacity for deep specialization, you need enough understanding to guide the project and support specialists who can step in for short bursts of expert help.
Yet, in many organizations, there’s still a preference for specialists over generalists. This preference can create gaps in execution. Experts may provide valuable insights on niche issues, but without a broader understanding of the overall project, their advice may fall short. Execution requires a wider perspective—one that encompasses the interdependencies and complexities of various tasks.
Fact:
A study by *Harvard Business Review* found that companies with a balance of both generalists and specialists in their project teams are more likely to achieve successful outcomes. Generalists bring the big-picture thinking needed to connect the dots, while specialists ensure the technical details are handled properly.
Execution Trumps Perfection
There’s often an overemphasis on perfection at the expense of timely execution. While it’s essential to have a strategy and plan in place, the truth is that execution often matters more. A strategy with no execution is merely a plan, while even a poorly conceived strategy, if executed well, is more effective than a perfect strategy that never sees the light of day.
Rather than obsessing over the ideal or perfect outcome, project managers should embrace the concept of “good enough.” In the world of project management, especially in resource-constrained environments, “perfect” can often become the enemy of progress. The pursuit of perfection leads to procrastination, delays, and missed opportunities.
Fact:
According to the *Project Management Institute (PMI)*, projects that focus on delivering a minimum viable product (MVP) and iterating along the way are 30% more likely to succeed compared to those that try to perfect every detail before execution.
The Cacophony of Confusion in Execution
One of the most common challenges when managing projects in smaller teams or organizations is that stakeholders often try to “play several pieces of music at once.” Rather than following a single, structured plan, team members may try to tackle multiple tasks simultaneously, leading to confusion and inefficiency. It’s not a well-organized performance where everyone follows an agreed-upon order. Instead, it’s like everyone’s trying to do everything all at once, resulting in a cacophony.
When resources are stretched thin, it becomes easy to focus on offering advice rather than actually doing the work. The result? Tasks are left unfinished, or worse, they’re done poorly. This gap between strategy and execution creates frustration and misalignment, often leaving team members feeling stuck in an endless loop of planning without meaningful progress.
Fact:
Research by *PMI* shows that 60% of project failures are due to a lack of focus on execution. When resources are over-extended and leaders are too distracted by planning, projects tend to suffer from delays, miscommunication, and quality issues.
Balancing Strategy and Execution
A well-conceived strategy is necessary, but execution should always be the priority. To successfully bridge the gap between strategy and execution, organizations must focus on achieving a balance between direction and action. Execution provides the momentum needed to achieve goals, while strategy aligns the team toward those goals.
The best approach involves a mix of both: clear, actionable strategy and solid, well-executed plans. Leaders must empower their teams to act swiftly and effectively, even if the strategy isn’t perfect. This combination leads to the best outcomes—moving forward with a “good enough” plan is often better than waiting for the ideal, but unexecuted, strategy.
Fact:
According to a *McKinsey* study, companies with clear strategies and effective execution are 50% more likely to meet project goals and deliver on time. Strategy and execution are not mutually exclusive—they are two sides of the same coin.
Conclusion: Embracing the Power of Execution
In smaller organizations or jurisdictions, the need for generalists who can bridge the gap between strategy and execution is more critical than ever. Instead of focusing on perfection, leaders must adopt a pragmatic mindset—valuing practical execution over idealized plans. While specialists provide essential technical depth, generalists ensure the project moves forward by keeping the big picture in focus.
Ultimately, projects are most successful when there’s a balance between strategy and execution. By focusing on “good enough” and emphasizing action over perfection, organizations can drive projects forward, even in resource-constrained environments. It’s time to stop waiting for the perfect strategy and start executing on the ones we have.