However, the relationship between top management decision-sharing and adherence to plans may be affected by a firm’s strategic mission (its fundamental approach to increasing sales revenue and market share, and generating cash flow and short-term profits).
At one end of the strategic mission continuum, “build” strategies are pursued when a firm desires to increase its market share and is willing to sacrifice short-term profits to do so. At the other end, “harvest” strategies are used when a firm is willing to sacrifice marked share for short-term profitability and cash-flow maximization.
                Research and theory suggest that top management decision-sharing may have a more positive relationship with adherence to plans among firms with harvest strategies than among firms with build strategies.
In a study of strategic practices in several large firms, managers in harvest strategy scenarios were more able to adhere to their business plans.
As one of the managers in the study explained it, this is partly because “Typically all a manager has to do [when implementing a harvest strategy] is that which was done last year.”
Additionally, managers under harvest strategies may have fewer strategic options than do those under build strategies; it may therefore be easier to reach agreement on a particular course of action through decision-sharing, which will in turn tend to promote adherence to plans.
Conversely, in a “build” strategy scenario, individual leadership, rather than decision-sharing, may promote adherence to plans. Build strategies—which typically require leaders with strong personal visions for a firm’s future, rather than the negotiated compromise of the team-based decision—may be most closely adhered to when implemented in the context of a clear strategic vision of an individual leader, rather than through the practice of decision-sharing.