I’ve lost count of the number of business strategy explainers I’ve shared through this newsletter.
Is there a more ambiguous, misunderstood and often intimidating aspect of business for designers to try and get our heads around?
Just as we're grasping strategy, things can become muddled again when our business counterparts unknowingly misuse the term. A common culprit is the concept of Strategic Planning, an activity whose name combines terms that are conceptually poles apart.
It’s easy to see how this happens. The best strategies usually embrace a high element of risk. Grand strategies are big bets; they outline why and how an organisation will tap into a fresh market, create a new customer segment, and potentially play to win in a unique competitive arena.
Promising, well-formed business strategy can make managers and executives nervous.
Plans? They're comforting and controllable.
Any business implementing a strategy will ultimately need to take tactical steps to achieve it, and those actions usually benefit from a plan. But combining the terms strategy and planning can create the impression that great strategy consists of a to-do list we can take comfort from and control.
One of the best explanations of why strategic planning is such a misleading term recently popped into my Twitter feed via Scott Colfer. In under 10 minutes, this Harvard Business Review video features Roger Martin (former dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto) unpicking the key differences between strategy and planning.
Roger uses a fantastic air travel example of Blue Ocean Strategy to explain how the bravery involved in a game-changing strategy is far removed from the comforting guide rails of a controllable plan.
If you enjoy this explainer, I recommend checking out more of Harvard Business Review’s content. It’s easy to assume that an established publication like HBR might specialise in impenetrable, hefty business content. The truth is, the HBR team produce some of the most accessible content around.