Quotes About Implementation

Those who hold power and influence in government either have limited interest in implementation or, in particular in the case of the prime minister and his most senior advisors, cannot find time in their busy agenda to think about implementation. They all too often assume that the machinery of government will do as it is told.

In real life, strategy is actually very straightforward. You pick a general direction and implement like hell.

The value of an idea lies in the using of it.

It almost doesn't matter what you know…it's execution that matters most.

Much confusion exists between what is strategy and what is tactics. Although the distinction is rarely of practical significance, here's one that might be useful. As you formulate in words what you plan to do, the most abstract and general summary of those actions meaningful to you is your strategy. What you'll do to implement the strategy is your tactics. Frequently, a strategy at one managerial level is the tactical concern of the next higher level.

In other words, the output of the planning process is the decisions made and the actions taken as a result of the process.

In politics there is nothing simpler than simply talking, and nothing more complicated than simply acting.

Some early approaches were deeply principled, but the associated programs made assumptions about hardware that were no longer valid a few years later; readers, looking first at the details of implementation, said "Oh, this is old stuff - it's not relevant to us at all", and missed the still important ideas of the research. All too frequently, too, researchers have simply reinvented things known in other disciplines for years.

With a tracer bullet approach, you can implement very small bits of functionality very quickly, and get immediate feedback on how well your team communicates and delivers.

I believe without exception that theory follows practice. Whenever there is a conflict between theory and practice, theory is wrong. As far as I'm concerned, we make theories for what people have done.

While technology is important, it's what we do with it that truly matters.

Positioning one leader against another is not necessarily how our democracy functions. We do not directly elect the president or the prime minister. We choose parties based on their policies, and their efficacy depends on how well they implement their policies.

Business principles are only as good as the practices that back them up.

If I can help create an environment where the principles that I believe in can be implemented - to me, that's fulfilling.

First of all, you've got to have a vision of 'What kind of program do I want to have?' Then you've got to have a plan to implement it. Then you've got to set the example that you want, develop the principles and values that are important, and get people to buy into it.

The U.N. is capable of endless process and mindless psychobabble, but as far as getting the job done on the ground, I just don't see them doing it.

The basic architecture of Dodd-Frank makes sense. At the same time, as a number of regulators and legislators have observed, the act was a complex effort that produced thousands of pages of rules.

When you say we're bringing a product to market, you make sure you execute.

I think people with open minds will observe the way we do things and realize that our goal is to have successful, happy, productive adults, and they will take our ideas and implement them elsewhere for their own children.

I have no problem with technological solutions to social problems. The key question for me is, 'Who gets to implement them?' and, 'What kinds of politics of reform do technological solutions smuggle through the back door?'

The biggest problem for governments with new technologies is that the limiting factor on applying new technologies is not the technology but management and operational ideas which are extremely hard to change fast.

Only this morning I heard a radio speaker make the observation that, in most matters, we move in either of two directions: from words to things, or from things to words. That is to say, if we do not make the journey from theories and ideals to concrete situations, then the concrete situations will be lost under a smog of words.

if we do not make the journey from theories and ideals to concrete situations, then the concrete situations will be lost under a smog of words.

Acting on a good idea is better than just having a good idea.