Readers of Good Governance will know that we are Martin fans. In a world redolent with poorly thought-through strategy, Martin’s pragmatism is refreshingly sensible.
Cascading strategy and governance
His concept of cascading strategy aligns perfectly with our views on policy-driven governance. The strategy needs to be clearly set such that hundreds of decisions at each level remain consistent with its intent.
Therefore, we read with interest in one of his recent posts that a reader had challenged him to outline how he personally approaches a strategy challenge. It is well worth relaying and also reminding ourselves of some of Martin’s key concepts on the way.
How Martin approaches strategy
Firstly, get the right mindset. This involves looking at the current path and understanding what will happen if we do more of the same. Equally, copying others will likely not solve the issue.
Next, it is a fair and just world. A weak strategy and a mediocre offering will not result in customer loyalty and will allow competitors to attack you. A good offering and respect for your customers, employees and suppliers will be repaid with loyalty and support. In this sense, the economic system is just and fair.
Next is one of Martin’s central themes: strategy is about problem-solving. Problems are a result of your previous choices interacting with the competitive environment.
To make the problem go away, different choices are needed. So, spend a lot of time defining the problem. A desired outcome is needed. Without objectivity, alternatives cannot be weighed. Time is not wasted on possibilities that won’t achieve the outcome. Importantly, be very realistic about what you don’t control. You can control and pull a limited number of levers, hopefully in a coordinated and compelling way. But you can’t make people do things they do not want to do.
Next Martin talks about ‘possibility portraits’. Here he reminds us that there is no one right answer in any strategy situation. The strategy process is a heuristic one, not driven by an algorithm. If that were the case, every organisation would have a perfect strategy. The strategy heuristic takes practice, and the best strategists have years of experience.
He suggests viewing the desired output as a portrait. This forces the strategist to consider how the individual choices fit together and helps others understand it. The set of choices must pass the ‘can’t/won’t’ test. Envious competitors can’t or won’t replicate your strategy.
In searching for strategic choices, Martin looks along three vectors. Powerful analogies can help solve problems. Dyson used the sawmill cyclone to solve vacuum design issues. Rather than accepting the inevitability of trade-offs, attack the prevailing view. As Dean of the Rotman School, he didn’t accept that it was either research or teaching. Professors had to teach their research. Finally, in this group, look for anomalies—something currently hidden that others have missed.
Once the most compelling ‘strategy possibility portrait’ has been chosen, then be bold: make sure it is enforced, starting in the boardroom and down through layers of management. As Martin notes, if you are not willing to enforce your strategy, then get out of the way and let someone else do it.
And lastly, be prepared to adjust. If the strategy no longer matches the competitive environment, then a purposeful and considered shift is needed.
Not specifically mentioned in these two articles, but worth remembering, is that strategy is about valid choice. Choosing ‘excellence’ is fatuous because the opposite is ‘stupid on its face’. No one achieves success by deliberately eschewing excellence.The two full Roger Martin pieces on how he does strategy can be found here, Part One and Part Two
