"What do you consider to be the processes, divisions, policies, practices, and mental models/assumptions (culture) that support [organisation] in achieving its strategic objectives?"and
"WHAT ARE THE EMERGING REQUIREMENTS FROM KEY STAKEHOLDERS THAT YOU BELIEVE [organisation] SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN DEVELOPING THEIR STRATEGY (trends, patterns and Key Driving Forces (KDF’s) in the environment?)"While I understand each of the words used, I don't actually understand how questions like this can be answered, particularly as the organisation (which I won't name) doesn't even exist yet. I suggested this to the consultants undertaking the questionnaire and their response went like this:
"I appreciate your comments. But our CURRENT REALITY is focused mainly on Major Current Concerns for the [organisation] across People, Processes and Systems. As a result of this 'SWOT analysis', the issues arising during inception and late operations would be discussed during the strategy session AFTER scoping of the strategic initiatives, Key Result Areas, measures and targets. Before such is established, the requirements for operations seem irrelevant as the initiatives are unknown. In addition, with the questionnaire providing answers of strengths, weaknesses, and performance indicators (KRAs) as from stakeholders, the [organisation] will develop initiatives that will enable them to maximize on strengths, minimize weaknesses and meet stakeholder needs."I sometimes think there should be a law outlawing the unnecessary and wasteful use of words.