Clint Eastwood is a favorite, as an actor and director. Eastwood is an icon of the American dream. Hardworking and versatile, his work ethic and eye for opportunity have made him a staple of entertainment for decades. Some of us remember it on the tv series, Rawhide. From spaghetti westerns, to Dirty Harry, to direct masterpieces like Gran torino andInvictus, Eastwood continues to push the limits of excellence. Eastwood’s mojo can be summed up in a quote from his character, Marine Chief Gunnery Sergeant Tom Highway in Heartbreak ridge, “Improvise, adapt and overcome”. What better way to move on to this value creation installment?

Improvise, adapt and overcome! In fact, the line reminds me of former Bank of America CEO Hugh McColl. McColl credited Marine Corps training with everything worth knowing about leadership. His mantra was “When in doubt, attack!” McColl celebrated his Gunnys by giving them crystal grenades to commemorate the superior results when they improvised, adapted, and exceeded.

McColl’s style is intriguing and deserves further reflection. How could a leader attack without appearing to play Whac-A-Mole at the carnival? The answer is based on the combination of strategic intention and preparation. When the leader and his trained team are clear about the objective, the “Attack!” mantra lines up very well with “improvise, adapt and overcome”.

Consider some critical thinking questions. What is the vision of the company? Also, why does anyone, especially employees and customers, care? Until these questions have solid answers, consider your team devoid of fundamental guiding principles. Assuming you have solid answers, then pose the “What?” question. In other words, what differentiable actions the team will prioritize to bring the vision to life. This is the strategy. When combined with goals, strategic intent is defined.

The team is now ready for the “How?” questions or tactics. This is where “improvise, adapt and overcome” separates the winners from the outrage. All competitive arenas are dynamic and transform under changing conditions. Consequently, the tactics change. The ability to change quickly without compromising strategic intent is a desirable core competency of the team.

How could a geographically dispersed, even global team achieve this? The answer has to start with shared values. While it is naive to assume that all employees and the company have identical values, it is imperative that their values ​​are compatible. Teams can benefit from diversity; however, they cannot work if the values ​​conflict. This is one of the chronic defects in recruitment. For example, what is the point of a furrier applying for a job at PETA or a vegan at a packing plant? Values ​​are the mortar between the bricks that build the foundation of execution.

When values ​​are clear and aligned, tactical modifications within lapses of control are reasonable risks. The team has ground rules, or rules of engagement, to improvise and adapt to overcome. How could this be seen in practical application? Suppose a teammate was on the opposite side of the globe. Not only could a 12-hour time difference complicate matters, but it also means that communications were disrupted and the decision to break the deal was at stake. Is the teammate sufficiently equipped with the experience, skills, responsibility, strategic intent, and rules of engagement to make the decision to judge? If not, leaders should review the company’s training and development process. Case studies, settlement autopsies, and mentoring are beneficial to the cause. Trained professionals are thus better prepared to say “no” in emergency situations. Alternatively, they can also take calculated risks with confidence.

If the teammate is adequately equipped, what constitutes a good decision? A practical principle is “satisfactory” or knowing enough to make a high probability choice. Another way to frame this is the Pareto principle, or 80/20. Interestingly, research confirms that analysis paralysis does not improve decision quality. Seasoned teammates who think they have enough information to make a statistically likely call should give it a try. By the time professionals know all about a decision, the opportunity may be lost. Unless professionals are dealing with life and death situations, it is acceptable to make a post-facto midway correction. For most deliverables, modifications are possible without compromising the goal. Again, alignment with strategic intent should be the guiding principle.

Satisfy has an additional practical utility: the advantage of being the first to move. When professionals think they know enough to get started, leapfrogging the competition can be an advantage. Especially in virtual industries where investment in fixed assets is almost debatable, scalability allows for dominance almost overnight. Google and Facebook are hard to get around. The laws of physics help the first to move. Momentum and inertia complement the change management aspects of the initiative.

“Improvise, adapt and overcome” is essential for the middle market. For openers, this is where most of the jobs are created. The health of the economy depends on smaller companies. Flexibility and time to market are sacrosanct. Smaller companies are less affected by groupthink, bureaucracy, and politics than larger companies. This ties into the assault phase of Tom Davenport’s training, assault, normalization, and execution cycle. Middle market prowess can make and defrag markets faster than most large companies can comprehend the same market dynamics. The point is summed up in the adage about how easily a dingy can spin in an ocean versus a battleship in a bathtub.

Is there a catch? Of course! As Amazon’s Jeff Bezos says, “It’s always the first day!” What does Bezos mean? The competitive process is continuous. Surviving today’s storm once does not grant immunity against future storms. Kansans, for example, expect tornadoes every year. Winners stand out amidst the storms.

Among the most interesting things I observe among private equity mid-market portfolio companies is that (i) the investment thesis is rarely put into practice with the portfolio company’s leadership team, and / or (ii) the plan is only done once at the beginning of the investment. Although budgeting processes can be an annual routine, strategic planning is not. This is precarious on several levels. Let’s explore some.

The places of organic and purchasing growth are basic elements of the investment thesis. Organic growth tends to drive workforce. Part of that count may be C-level and supervisor. Interestingly, that new managerial staff did not participate in the planning process that their position may have created, and as a result, they may not be reconciled to the plan. These people do not have malicious intentions. Rather, they are trapped in an “unconscious ignorance” of relevant information. Additionally, they may have knowledge of the competitive terrain that could beneficially alter the plan, whether on offense or defense.

Purchasing growth injects a different company, with a different culture, into the mix. Aside from the unpleasant odds of a successful integration, the acquired entity may (i) be unfamiliar with the granularity of the plan and / or (ii) have an execution paradigm unrelated to the logic of integration. Who reconciles the variance?

One last point is relevant to strategic intent. Leadership teams can build on strategic intent and make good tactical modifications, but they do not communicate the changes to supervisors of critical business model processes. These oversights often have unintended consequences. Examples include misdirected resources and workflow bottlenecks.

Assumption is the mother of all disasters. To make improvisation, adaptation, and self-improvement a competitive differentiator, we must embrace Patrick Lencioni’s warning about continually promoting organizational clarity. This includes metrics and communication mechanisms to promote both alignment and progress against goals. “Gunny” Tom Highway did this to make sure his company of soldiers was successful.

We start with movies. Let’s finish with a couple. Flight of the phoenix and Apollo 13 they are wonderful films that demonstrate “improvise, adapt and overcome.” On Flight of the phoenix, the strategic intention was to escape alive from an accident in the desert. The survivors built a single-engine plane from the wreckage and flew to safety. On Apollo 13, the crew, NASA and the contractors suffered a space explosion, salvaged the remaining resources to improvise a “lifeboat” and returned the crew to Earth safely. Analysts referred to the mission as a “successful failure”, with no moon landing, but no dead crew.

None of us is as smart as all of us. When the strategic intent is in the hands of trained professionals, value is created. When not, the scenario tends to look like “Who’s First?” From Abbott and Costello. Since value creation is no laughing matter, “improvise, adapt and overcome” makes a lot more sense in the mid-market.