The Economics of SharePoint Governance Part 2 – Strategic and Tactical SharePoint Governance Decision Making

Strategic governance management is concerned with the fundamental direction of the organization’s activity, i.e., the businesses that the organization intends to pursue and desired levels of achievement in those lines of business. Such governance decisions, by their very natures, must be made at the highest policy making level of the organization or by a SharePoint governance steering committee. The time frame is from the present to as far into the future as the organization’s CMS time horizon. The organization’s CMS time horizon is limited to that of its least visionary policy maker who constrains the enthusiasm of its would-be innovators.  By virtue of the fact that such directional SharePoint decision making covers the long run and is laden with risk, it should be understood to be entrepreneurial rather than managerial in nature. Although the language of the business administration literature stresses strategic governance management, it should be more properly understood to be strategic governance entrepreneurship. In the late twentieth century, the term “entrepreneurship” has come to be associated with new, small, “start-up” business ventures that are highly risky. Entrepreneurship often is not perceived to occur in established or “going” concerns, especially if they have attained large size in terms of assets, employment, market share, or volume of sales.  

There is some confusion over the meanings of the terms “goals” and “objectives.” I shall take the term goal to refer to an ultimate SharePoint end that the organization at its highest policy making level determines to try to achieve. The term objective is taken to refer to desirable intermediate situations or levels of performance to be achieved in pursuit of the ultimate goals of the organization. By their nature then, SharePoint goals are long-term and strategic in orientation, whereas objectives are more short-term, immediate, and partial in nature. In military parlance, the term “tactic” is usually juxtaposed to “strategy” in referring to an action that is taken “in the field” by a specific unit to accomplish a limited objective in pursuit of a strategic goal of the organization. The term “tactic” and its various derivative forms are rarely used in discussions of strategic management. However, decisions taken at various levels in the administrative organization to implement an approved strategic change are oriented toward specific objectives (such as a target volume of sales or share of the market) rather than ultimate goals (such as a required return on investment in a particular line of business), and are thus essentially tactical in nature. In a new venture, goals and objectives may coincide, and strategic and tactical decision making may converge in the mind of the founding entrepreneur.  

In the established enterprise, tactical SharePoint decision making at various administrative levels must confront choices that involve risks. A modicum of entrepreneurship may therefore be exercised by the mid-level manager in the tactical decisions that must be made. However, tactical SharePoint decisions that involve simply deciding upon increases or decreases in activities already in progress belong to the realm of managerial decision making. It is possible that nearly all of the decisions that must be made in a new business venture are strategic and entrepreneurial rather than tactical and managerial.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *