Measuring authentic strategy in local government agencies in the United Arab Emirates

The public sector is facing increased pressure to enhance effectiveness and optimize public value. Despite an increase in literature on public value and strategy (Alford and O’Flynn, 2009), this body of work still falls short in comparison to the extensive and detailed literature on strategy in the private sector, where competition is keen (Alford and Greve, 2017).

The profit-centric nature of the private sector underscores the significance of strategic decision-making and the establishment of processes that facilitate the replication of successful choices. Bryson and Roering (1988) contend that profitability and shareholder value drive private businesses, leading them to focus on capturing additional market share and expanding into new markets. While strategy in the private sector often assumes rivalry and competition in markets (Rumelt, 2011), it is argued that public sector strategy can be conceptualized as a means by which organizations enhance their performance and provide better services (Johnsen, 2018). However, neglecting competition in public sector strategy may contradict the very essence of strategy itself (Angwin and Cummings, 2017). Khalifa (2020) defines strategy as a theory of winning, emphasizing that a strategy lacking a logic on how to succeed in the marketplace is not truly a strategy (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). The heightened recognition of the public sector’s influence in attracting investment, developing human capital, and enhancing societal well-being has prompted a greater focus on competition and public sector strategies among managers and policymakers.

Awareness of the significance of strategies in local and federal government agencies varies across countries. In the United States, the recognition of the role of local government in attracting residents has existed for decades. Tiebout (1956) asserts that citizens move to a community whose local government best aligns with their preferences. Indeed, strategic planning has gained widespread adoption in the United States over the past decades, with government and public agencies embracing this approach to improve performance and achieve goals (Poister and Streib, 2005). In the UAE, where a strong emphasis is placed on competitiveness, strategic planning has been extensively employed at both federal and local levels since 2007 (Elbanna, 2010). European governments have mandated their ministries and local authorities to implement strategic planning (Joyce and Drumaux, 2014). Many Asian countries, including Malaysia, China, Thailand, and India, have integrated strategic management into their public sectors (Sarker, 2006).

Despite the global adoption of strategic planning in the public sector, its authenticity have been questioned in the literature. Prevailing concerns suggest that strategic plans formulated within the public sector may lack true strategic essence (Bryson, 2011; Poister et al., 2010). Cohen (2006) contends that public sector strategic planning tends to be too internally focused to be considered genuine strategy. Jabnoun (2023) observes that many organizations mistake strategy for goals, reducing strategic planning to mere template filling. He calls for the development of authentic strategies that are unique to each organization, rooted in a sound diagnosis, and functioning as levers for organizational performance (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). The lack of authenticity and seriousness of strategies has been addressed by many authors (Liedtka, 2008; Vermeulen, 2017) but there is no tested instrument for measuring strategic authenticity. In fact, instruments and self-assessment tools are scarcely developed in the field of strategy. Furthermore, the assessment of strategy is often left to performance measurement, which may make it late to avoid wrong decisions and to respond effectively to opportunities and threats (Rumelt, 2011). This paper addresses the lack of literature on strategic instruments and particularly the lack of measures of authentic strategy. There is also a knowledge gap on strategy practices in the Arab world, particularly within the public sector (Elbanna, 2010) that this paper aims to address.

This paper develops a valid instrument for measuring authentic strategy by assessing how authentic the strategies of RAK government agencies are. It addresses the following research questions:

• 1.

  What are the valid and reliable dimensions of authentic strategy in RAK government agencies?

• 2.

  To what extent are the dimensions of authentic strategy adopted in RAK government agencies?

• 3.

  Is there a significant difference between the adoption levels of the dimensions of authentic strategy in RAK government agencies?

RAK, one of the seven Emirates in the UAE, is situated a one-hour drive north of Dubai. The economy of the Emirate is characterized by diversity, with no single economic sector contributing more than 30 percent to its GDP. The population of RAK is a blend of nationals and expatriates hailing from around 200 countries. The government agencies in RAK play a crucial role in attracting investment and human capital, with their strategies serving as instrumental drivers for the economic development of the emirate and the well-being of its people.

RAK government agencies have been implementing the European Foundation for Quality Management Excellence model (EFQM, 2018) since 2006. The model is used to assess management enablers and results. The enablers section of the model mandates organizations to have a strategy, providing guidelines for its development, implementation, and review. The results section addresses various performance indicators, offering guidance on their scope, usability, targets, trends, and comparisons with competitors (EFQM, 2018). In 2017, RAK government further embraced the Government Excellence Model, placing significant emphasis on strategy (GEM, 2023). The adoption of these excellence models has played a crucial role in fostering a culture of strategic management within RAK government.

The next section of this paper covers the literature including the challenge of authenticity in both private and public sectors, and the components of authentic strategy. After the methodology, the results are presented and discussed. The last section is the conclusion and research limitations.

The formulation and implementation of coherent strategies are crucial for local government agencies dealing with complex social, demographic, economic, and environmental challenges, and evolving customer expectations (Worrell et al., 1998). Consequently, strategic planning has been widely employed by local governments in America, Europe, and Asia. However, evidence of the effectiveness of strategy in the public sector remains limited (Safi and Mahmoud, 2022). Johanson et al. (2017) suggest that the effectiveness of public sector strategy remains a matter of controversy. Johnsen (2018) observes that strategic planning and management are generally viewed positively in Norwegian Municipalities. However, when objective metrics such as efficiency are considered, formal strategic planning appears to have either a negative or no discernible effect. This aligns with the findings of Andrews et al. (2012) in their analysis of Welsh local authority services.

According to McKinsey, 80 percent of public sector transformation initiatives end in failure (Checinski et al., 2019). Bryson (2003) emphasizes that challenges in effectively engaging stakeholders hinder the success of strategies in public sector organizations. Radnor and McGuire (2004) cite various difficulties faced by public sector organizations in implementing performance management systems, including environmental complexity, bureaucratic obstacles, resource constraints, resistance to change, and challenges in stakeholder engagement. Erisia-Eke and Soriakumar (2021) argued that government over-regulation, bureaucracy, and the politicized nature of governmental work pose serious barriers to effective strategic implementation. Bryson et al. (2017) state that public-sector strategic planning is not a singular entity but a collection of concepts, procedures, tools, and practices that must be applied sensitively and contingently in specific situations. They further note that it remains unclear how to best conceptualize context and match processes to context in order to produce desirable outcomes. Many authors question the seriousness of strategy in public sectors and argue that government organizations are practicing planning and not strategy (Bryson, 2011; Poister et al., 2010).

The lack of strategic effectiveness is not exclusive to the public sector; business companies, despite having utilized strategic planning longer than their public or nonprofit sector counterparts (Gordon, 1997), exhibit an alarming failure rate. Some authors estimate this failure rate to be between 50 and 90 percent (Cândido and Santos, 2015; Sirkin et al., 2005). While some attribute strategic failures to implementation challenges (Hrebiniak, 2006; Niven, 2003), others point to a lack of seriousness about strategy (Rumelt, 2011; Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024).

Tregoe and Tobia (1991) emphasize the distinction between strategy and planning. Rumelt (2011) argues that stretch goals, budgets, and endless organizational to-do lists do not constitute strategic plans; effective strategy, he posits, emerges when organizations confront imminent threats. Vermeulen (2017) argued that many strategies fail because they are not actually strategies as they do not represent a set of clear choices. Many organizations claim to have strategy just because they filled “strategy” templates, which tend to create similarity rather than uniqueness. Harney (2012, p. 127) stated that “the language of strategy (mission, vision, objectives, etc.) has become increasingly empty, promoting convergence and similarity as opposed to divergence and uniqueness”. Liedtka (2008) notes a lack of authenticity in strategy formulation. Jabnoun (2023) observes that many organizations have fragmented strategic processes, including missions, visions, and values that are disconnected from the passion of leaders and the behaviors of employees. The core values of many private and public organizations often describe general positive qualities, contradicting Selznick’s (1957) claim that values should emanate from unique institutional identities. Many organizations view a values initiative as another marketing launch or “a one-time event measured by the initial attention it receives, not the authenticity of its content” (Lencioni, 2002, p. 115).

Organizations commonly use various tools, such as SWOT analysis and PESTEL Analysis for diagnosis, especially in the public sector (Preciado, 2015). However, they may not necessarily use the output of their diagnosis to determine strategic objectives and initiatives. Hill and Westbrook (1997, p. 46) found that over twenty out of fifty surveyed companies used SWOT, yet “no one subsequently used the outputs within the later stages of the strategy process.”

An authentic strategy is considered realistic, credible, and practical, avoiding imitation or reliance on unchallenged best practices (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). Uniqueness is a key theme of authentic strategy, recognizing that different organizations deal with different realities and, as such, need distinct strategies to respond to their own unique challenges. This uniqueness should be reflected in the mission, vision, and values of an organization (Harney, 2012). Angwin and Cummings (2017) indicate that authentic strategy is unique to the organization and its environment, leading to competitive success. Authentic strategies are the product of organizational creativity and the collective insights of its people (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). Liedtka (2008) asserts that the participation of employees is a condition for strategic authenticity, and strategies lacking creativity to provide unique customer value and gain a competitive advantage are not considered authentic. Well-formulated strategies may lack authenticity if they lack a serious intent for implementation, highlighting the importance of strategic implementation in the literature (Bej and Das, 2019; Hrebiniak, 2006).

Authentic strategy is an extension of the concept of good strategy (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). Rumelt (2011) identified two types of strategy: bad strategy and good strategy. Bad strategy is characterized by fluff or restatements of the obvious, failure to face challenges due to inadequate diagnosis, mistaking goals for strategy, and setting impractical objectives. Good strategy, in contrast, is a serious approach aimed at gaining a competitive advantage. It is built around a kernel consisting of a diagnosis defining the nature of the challenge, a guiding policy or overall approach for dealing with the challenge, and a set of coherent actions designed to carry out the guiding policy. While good strategy satisfies some requirements of authentic strategy, it would not be considered authentic if formulated without the participation of employees (Liedtka, 2008).

While both authentic strategy and good strategy share the common goal of achieving a competitive advantage, authentic strategy places explicit emphasis on the requirement for creativity to ensure that the strategy effectively provides the necessary leverage to surpass competitors.

Despite the increased interest in having serious, good, or authentic strategies as opposed to non-strategies, bad strategies, or unauthentic strategies (Vermeulen, 2017; Rumelt, 2011; Liedtka, 2008; Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). There is no tested instrument that assesses how good or authentic a strategy is. A search of major business research databases such as Ebsco, Proquest, and Emerald with unlimited time frame and using keywords of strategy and scale/instrument resulted in one single paper that developed a valid of strategic openness (Radomska, 2023). Jabnoun (2023) proposed a self-assessment tool for authentic strategy but did not test it. The instrument includes the following five dimensions:

• 1.

  Authentic mission: Mission statements are recognized as a vital component of strategic management in the public sector (Taiwo et al., 2016). There is a positive relationship between mission statements and financial performance (Desmidt et al., 2011), as well as employee effectiveness, satisfaction, and retention (Kim and Lee, 2007). An authentic mission should represent a worthy cause (Khalifa, 2012) that employees are committed to pursuing in their daily work. It is unique to the organization, and its simplicity facilitates effective communication with stakeholders (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024).

• 2.

  Authentic vision: Visions statements that employees relate to improve effectiveness of private and public organizations (Darbi, 2012). They increase customer satisfaction, employees’ satisfaction and employees’ commitment (Kantabutra and Pisanu, 2009). Lack of top management passion for the vision induces employees not to take it seriously. An authentic vision is one that reflects the leadership passion and takes the thinking of employees beyond day-to-day activity (Schraeder and Self, 2010). It is realistic and acted upon by employees (Lattuch and Dankert, 2018). It is unique to the organization, simple and well communicated (Hastings et al., 2011).

• 3.

  Authentic core values: Values have a positive impact on continuous improvement, customer satisfaction, and competitiveness. Authentic core values are unique to the organization and its industry (Lencioni, 2002). They are reflected in the norms of behavior of employees and translated into actions (Jabnoun, 2017).

• 4.

  Core of authentic strategy: Strategy produces decisions and actions that shape and guide. It addresses two fundamental questions — what an organization does and why (Bryson, 2011). These questions are answered in the core of authentic strategy, which includes the three components of the kernel of good strategy (Rumelt, 2011) — diagnosis, guiding policy, and a set of coherent actions. Additionally, authenticity involves elements such as creativity, participation, and stakeholder management (Jabnoun, 2023). The diagnosis must rely on accurate and reliable data, as the use of inaccurate or incomplete information can result in incorrect diagnoses and, subsequently, inappropriate strategies. It should also be action oriented (Rumelt, 2011), focusing on the needs of stakeholders.

  The guiding policy, stemming from the diagnosis, should offer direction to the organization, empowering it to make informed choices and eliminate less viable options. A set of coherent actions, developed based on the guiding policy, is crucial for enhancing organizational capabilities and multiplying outcomes. The coherence of various projects and actions is critical in creating a competitive advantage, as underscored by Lafley and Martin (2013).

• 5.

  Implementation: Childress (2013) views strategy and execution as inseparable yet distinct elements, akin to the two sides of a coin. According to him, when these components are separated, they fail to function effectively. He characterizes strategy as a dynamic entity that manifests itself through the process of implementation, emphasizing it as a distinctive and disciplined journey that involves the entire organization. Consequently, strategy devoid of execution is deemed non-existent.

Niven (2003) highlights a staggering 90 percent failure rate in the execution of strategies for public sector organizations, attributing this high rate to the unique challenges faced by governments both internally and externally. This suggests that executing strategies in the public sector may pose greater difficulties compared to the private sector (Olivier and Schwella, 2018). Implementation includes leadership commitment, alignment with systems and structure (Hrebiniak, 2006), in addition to alignment with projects (Lippitt, 2007), and operations (Kaplan and Norton, 2008).

The initial dimensions of this instrument are authentic mission, authentic vision, authentic core values, core of authentic strategy and implementation. These dimensions are presented in the literature review. A five-point Likert scale questionnaire, including the five above initial dimensions and four general statements that measure authentic strategy, was used for this study. The questionnaire was delivered by email to all division and department managers in RAK government agencies in addition to employees of strategy and development offices. 141 responses were collected, including 104 managers and 37 employees of the strategy and development offices.

Collected responses of all items of the five original dimensions of the questionnaire are factor analyzed using principal component extraction with varimax rotation, which is a method commonly used for developing instruments (Roussel, 2005). The number of factors is unconstrained. For the sake of convergent validity, 0.5 is used as a factor loading cut-off point (Wei and Nguyen, 2020; Roussel, 2005). Factors including less than three items are eliminated. For the sake of discriminate validity, items must display a 0.2 loading difference with any other factor. The reliability of the dimensions is tested based on Cronbach alpha coefficient. A reliability coefficient of 0.8 is recommended for most studies (Lance et al., 2006). The predictive validity of the dimensions is tested using multiple linear regression. The extent to which RAK government agencies adopted authentic strategy is addressed using one-sided T test with test value of 3, while the difference between the levels of adoption of the dimensions of authentic strategy in RAK government agencies is addressed using one way ANOVA.

Using factor analyses with the criteria specified above resulted in three dimensions of authentic strategy in RAK government agencies. These dimensions are: (a) strategy uniqueness, (b) leadership commitment and stakeholders’ management, and (c) implementation. The Cronbach alpha coefficients of these three dimensions were 0.933, 0.934, and 0.874 respectively (Table 1). These results indicate that the three dimensions are reliable (Lance et al., 2006). This supports the internal cohesiveness of the items forming each dimension and creates a good foundation for replacing them with one latent variable.

To check the predictive validity of the instruments, this study tested the following regression model:

AU= f (SU, LCSM IMP) where AU is the mean of items describing the dependent variable, authentic strategy, SU is the mean of items of strategy uniqueness, LCSM is the mean of items of leadership commitment and stakeholders’ management, Imp is the mean of items of implementation.

The above regression model was conducted using SPSS. The model had a significant F value and an R-squared of 0.786. This means strategy uniqueness, leadership commitment and stakeholder’s management, and implementation explain 78.6 percent of the variations in authentic strategy. The resulting model is:

Table 2 shows that the above regression coefficients have significant T values.

The above result supports the validity of the instrument indicating that the three above dimensions do measure authentic strategy. The resulting valid dimensions are well established in the strategy literature in general (Bej and Das, 2019; Johanson et al., 2017; Carmouz et al., 2019), particularly in the literature on authentic strategy (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024).

To assess the extent of the adoption of authentic strategy, a one-sided T-test was conducted for the three dimensions of authentic strategy, in addition to the dependent variable of authentic strategy, using a test value of 3. The results of the test, shown in Table 3, indicate that the mean values for the four variables are significantly higher than 3. This suggests that RAK government agencies have indeed adopted authentic strategy.

Conducting a one-way ANOVA reveals an F value of 0.8520 with a significance level of 0.439, indicating that there is no significant difference between the adoption of the three dimensions of authentic strategy (refer to Table 4).

The paper provides a valid and reliable measure of authentic strategy to help improve strategic management process and outcomes. The instrument developed in this paper may help public sector institutions in different parts of the world to assess their strategies. As a self-assessment tool, it can identify areas of improvement in the strategic process and ensure that public sector strategies are authentic and unique to their institutions.

The paper contributes to the scant literature on instruments for assessing strategies. It also contributes to filling the knowledge gap on strategy in the Arab public sector. Three dimensions of authentic strategy are identified: (a) strategy uniqueness, (b) leadership commitment and stakeholders’ management, and (c) implementation. Strategy uniqueness and implementation are key themes of authentic strategy (Jabnoun and Khalifa, 2024). Implementation has been strongly emphasized in the strategy literature (Bej and Das, 2019). Both dimensions are mentioned in the statements of the dependent variable of this questionnaire.

Leadership plays a key role in formulating and executing strategy (Johanson et al., 2017). Leaders create a vivid vision for any strategic program. They champion the core values and make sure they are translated into actions. Effective leaders communicate the strategy to employees and align their behaviors with its guidance (Vermeulen, 2012). Managing stakeholders is one of the roles of effective leaders. The EFQM model that RAK government agencies used includes stakeholders’ relations in the sub-criterial of both leadership and strategy. Identifying and involving stakeholders is one of the main components of strategic planning (Carmouz et al., 2019). Engaging stakeholders is one of the main challenges of strategic management in the public sector (Bryson, 2003). Government agencies of RAK working on strategy since 2006 have adopted the dimensions of authentic strategy. There was no significant difference in the level of adoption of the three dimensions.

This paper delved into authentic strategy within a local government context. The findings of this study might not be directly transferable to the private sector, where a stronger emphasis is often placed on competitive dynamics. Moreover, the methodology employed in this paper utilized a statistical survey, providing a comprehensive overview of authentic strategy implementation. Going into more details about the implementation of authentic strategy in RAK government may require employing a case study approach that can offer a more profound, albeit more focused, understanding of the adoption of authentic strategy.