1. Executive Summary
Between 2012 and 2015, Ericsson confronted a widening “strategy–execution gap” across 110,000 employees in 150 countries. The company replaced its top-down cascade with a purpose-driven, strategy-to-ownership model: a 100-plus Strategy Engagement Network, interactive learning journeys, and real-time feedback loops. The shift lifted the global Strategy Engagement Index to 87% (vs 80% target), baked strategy into every BU plan, and sparked a culture of transparency and shared ownership.
2. Business Challenge
By 2012, Ericsson’s strategy looked bold on paper—yet it was stalling in practice. Industry disruption, a matrix of 110,000 employees across 150+ countries, and a flood of simultaneous change programmes were fragmenting focus and diluting accountability. Surveys and field audits showed strategy messages cascading downward but failing to stick at execution layers, widening a costly “strategy–execution gap.
Leaders recognised that more slide decks or town-hall broadcasts would not fix the problem. What the organisation lacked was ownership: line managers and frontline teams needed to shape, question, and internalise the strategy—not just hear it. Without that behavioural buy-in, business-unit plans diverged, KPIs mis-aligned, and speed of response to market shifts slowed.
Key question: How do you turn a top-down strategy into a shared, lived commitment—so 110,000 people across every region plan, measure, and act as one?
3. Strategic Response
Ericsson shifted from a “strategy-to-communication” model to a “strategy-to-ownership” model. The organization-wide transformation was anchored in three core principles:
- Make strategy shared and lived, not just cascaded
- Focus on the emotional and behavioral journey of change
- Build a learning system that feeds back from frontline to boardroom
The response emphasized interactive engagement, alignment of systems and behavior, and leadership role modeling to turn strategy into shared action.
4. Key Initiatives and Execution
- Strategy Engagement Network
- Activated a global network of 100+ strategy engagement leads embedded in regions, BUs, and functions
- Delivered training, tools, and toolkits to localize and activate strategic direction
- Employee Dialogues and Town Halls
- Organized strategic workshops, regional roadshows, and live dialogues with executive leadership
- Used storytelling to bring strategy to life, with a focus on impact, relevance, and clarity
- Digital Learning Journeys
- Built interactive learning paths tied to strategic pillars
- Embedded check-ins, reflections, and manager toolkits to drive conversation and alignment
- Strategy in Planning
- Integrated strategy into annual planning processes
- Linked operational targets, KPIs, and investment priorities to long-term direction
- Feedback and Adaptation Loops
- Established structured mechanisms to capture frontline input
- Used field insights to adjust messaging, clarify priorities, and identify capability gaps
5. Results and Outcomes
| Metric | Result |
| Strategy Engagement Index | 87% globally (vs. 80% target) |
| Alignment in Planning | Strategy reflected in BU, regional, and function-level plans |
| Cultural Shift | Greater transparency, co-ownership, and openness to learning |
| Behavioral Reinforcement | Leaders began consistently modeling strategy-aligned behavior |
6. Frameworks Applied
- Kotter’s 8-Step Process for Leading Change
Structured the emotional journey of change—urgency, alignment, activation, reinforcement. - Strategic Learning (Willie Pietersen)
Created a repeatable cycle: Learn → Focus → Align → Execute → Learn. - McKinsey 7S Framework
Ensured strategy was reinforced through structure, systems, style, and shared values.
7. Pitfalls and Lessons Learned
1. Confusing Communication with Execution
Leaders often believe that once the strategy is shared, the organization will act. But without activation and reinforcement, communication doesn’t lead to change.
Lesson: Move beyond messaging. Treat communication as the starting point for dialogue, alignment, and ownership-building.
2. Misalignment Between Strategy and Execution Layers
Strategy documents may live in the C-suite, while execution decisions are made in regions, functions, and teams—often with misaligned priorities or understanding.
Lesson: Embed strategy into operating plans, KPIs, and business rhythms at every level—from HQ to frontline.
3. Underestimating Cultural Resistance
Even well-designed strategies fail if they conflict with organizational habits, identity, or norms.
Lesson: Understand and work with cultural realities. Engage influencers and legacy carriers early to build trust and pull, not just push.
4. Over-Reliance on Top-Down Cascades
Strategy cascades often become translation exercises—too linear, too passive.
Lesson: Make strategy interactive. Use workshops, storytelling, co-creation, and role-modeling to internalize direction across layers.
5. Lack of Learning and Adaptation Loops
Many strategies assume a fixed plan rather than a dynamic environment. Execution stalls when teams can’t adapt or course-correct.
Lesson: Build structured feedback loops and real-time sensing mechanisms. Execution is a learning process—not just delivery.
8. Ideal Use Cases
This case is ideal for organizations that want to:
- Bridge the gap between strategy design and execution at scale
- Build emotional and behavioral alignment to strategy
- Treat execution as a people-centered journey—not a project plan
- Operationalize strategic learning and feedback loops
Applicable for:
Global organizations, complex matrixed environments, change-intensive transformations
9. Key Insight
Strategy execution is not communication—it’s inclusion and ownership.
Execution succeeds when people feel the strategy, shape it, and own its outcome.
10. References
- Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leading Change
- Pietersen, W. (2010). Strategic Learning
- Waterman, R.H., Peters, T.J., & Phillips, J.R. (1980). Structure Is Not Organization, McKinsey Quarterly
- McKinsey & Company (2023). Seven Steps to More Agile Strategy Execution
11. Appendix: Framework Critique and Limitations
Kotter’s 8-Step Process
Strength: Practical for mobilizing change across layers
Limitation: Assumes linearity—may not fit adaptive or emergent strategy environments
Strategic Learning
Strength: Builds organizational learning muscle
Limitation: Requires senior commitment to experimentation and adaptation
McKinsey 7S
Strength: Holistic view of organizational alignment
Limitation: Can become checklist-driven without clear ownership