Strategy
Strategy concerns the course of action adopted to pursue a purpose in particular circumstances. It connects an understanding of the situation with choices about what to pursue, how to proceed and where to commit effort and resources.
A strategy may take many forms. It can be expressed in a document, established through a series of decisions, or simply inferable from an observed pattern of action. In each case, it matters whether we are describing a stated direction, a declared commitment, or what people have actually been doing.
Who it is for
Plain Strategy is for anyone interested in understanding or improving strategy. It applies to individual and shared undertakings. In business, directors, executives, managers, advisers and those carrying out the work can use it to develop a strategy, examine a proposal or review what happened.
The examples on this website concern business strategy: choices about what to offer, whom to serve, how to proceed and where to commit resources. The concepts and principles apply more generally wherever people consider and pursue a course of action.
Purpose and objectives
Plain Strategy connects an account of what a course of action is intended to achieve with an assessment of whether that course is appropriate in the circumstances and how it operates or is likely to operate.
The approach aims to help users:
- Describe a strategy in terms that minimise ambiguities and misunderstandings.
- Examine its purposes, proposed actions and means, including what carrying it out would involve.
- Explain the reasons for preferring a course, taking its circumstances and expected consequences into account.
This examination can uncover unclear purposes, unsupported assumptions, conflicting objectives and differences between a stated strategy and what people do.
Method
Plain Strategy uses concepts as models for examining situations. The models help examine how a proposed course and its implementation depend on particular people, actions and circumstances. Its principles guide the questions asked and the grounds for judgement.
Sentence patterns are one way of representing the models. They make their elements explicit: someone intends to do something; someone uses particular means to pursue an objective; someone considers information in light of a principle. Models can be combined to examine what is proposed, why it is being proposed and what carrying it through would involve. Their sentence patterns can be combined to express those connections.
Models are simplified representations of how things are done. They bring particular aspects of a situation into view so that those aspects can be examined. The machinery of action, for example, distinguishes the work of receiving information, appreciating the situation, planning, deciding and carrying a decision through.
Users draw on these resources according to the question they are considering. Establish the relevant description, examine its connections and supporting evidence, and apply principles to the circumstances before reaching a judgement. A difficulty may require the account or the judgement to be reconsidered.
Principles
The principles are deliberately general. They guide how strategy is understood, explained and assessed. Applying them requires both description and judgement: a clear description provides the basis for a clear judgement. Each principle includes actions you can take and a business example.
Identify what is being examined and for what purpose
Identify the strategy, proposal, action or decision being examined and the question being asked about it. Developing a possible course, deciding whether to adopt it and reviewing what followed can require different inquiries.
- State what the inquiry is intended to establish.
- Identify the requirements, criteria and evidence relevant to that question.
Example. When considering a new maintenance service, distinguish whether customers want it, whether the business can provide it and whether it is worth pursuing. Each question needs its own grounds.
Make purposes and choices explicit
Establish what is intended and how it is to be achieved. Explain the choices that give the proposed course its direction and what carrying them through would involve.
- Identify the purposes, objectives, intended actions and proposed means.
- Explain how they connect, what has been settled and what remains open.
Example. A manufacturer proposes a paid maintenance service to earn income from supporting equipment already in use. Specify which customers it will serve and how it will provide the work alongside its existing commitments.
Use clear concepts and examine their relationships
Explain consequential terms in the particular situation. Examine the relationships between the concepts as well as their separate meanings.
- Distinguish what was intended, what was done, what followed and what was appropriate.
- Check that the grounds offered support the particular judgement being made.
Example. Introducing a service, earning income from it and covering its costs are different achievements. Calling the trial “successful” leaves the judgement unclear until the relevant achievement is specified.
Take circumstances and evidence into account
Establish who acts, what they do and the circumstances, including the information and means available. Consider that the same act may have more than one relevant description, each with different consequences for the assessment.
- Identify what is known, what is uncertain and which circumstances matter.
- Examine alternative descriptions and the evidence that would support each.
Example. Inviting customers to a maintenance trial can be part of recruiting participants and finding out who will take up the offer. Responses from those customers give information about that offer under those conditions.
Test the account against cases and failures
Use cases to examine whether a description or distinction captures what matters. Consider ordinary applications, uncertain cases and different ways a course of action can fail.
- Ask what changes when information, means, participants or circumstances change.
- Consider revising the account where the case reveals an ambiguity, omission or mistaken connection.
Example. If maintenance visits take longer than expected, examine whether the difficulty concerns the original estimate, the schedule, the work itself or a change in circumstances. What would address it depends on that description.
Give reasons and keep them in mind when changing the strategy
Explain the proposed actions, how they fit together and what they are intended to achieve. Give reasons for preferring the course and for the effort and resources it requires.
- Make the evidence, assumptions and unresolved questions clear.
- When revising the strategy, explain what changed and why this warrants a different course.
Example. Longer travel times may give the business a reason to restrict the service area. Explain how this change serves the objective and protects work already promised, and what remains uncertain about a wider offer.
Using the approach
Begin with a particular question and situation. Describe what is proposed or has happened, identify the relevant concepts and examine how they connect. Use the principles to question the account, compare possible courses and explain the judgement reached.
For a proposed maintenance service, this could mean specifying the customers to be served, the work promised and the means available. Examine why those means are expected to achieve the objective, what experience supports that expectation and what the business still needs to find out.
Keep a record of the description, evidence, reasons and unresolved matters. A clear account makes it easier to see where people disagree and what could settle the disagreement.
Benefits and limitations
Strategy directs effort and resources. Making it explicit allows people to examine its purposes, choices and consequences. A shared vocabulary and a methodical examination can support clearer explanations and better grounds for continuing or changing a course.
Simplification can miss distinctions on which a strategic judgement depends. Familiar terms can conceal different meanings. Apparently precise wording can make a crucial matter seem settled while leaving it unresolved. Applying a model mechanically can lead users to overlook relevant circumstances. The approach depends on suitable evidence, knowledge of the situation and informed judgement.