This is a thought provoking article, Shashank. I loved this. This was the key takeaway for me: “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.”
Strategy isn’t just a business discipline—it’s a survival skill in times of life chaos. In my work with leaders navigating legal and personal crisis, I’ve seen firsthand how delayed strategy becomes damage control.
I can’t pinpoint exactly when it hit me while reading your piece, but it took me straight back to our childhood soccer games. Back then, positions didn’t matter—we had seven kids per team, all chasing the ball wherever it went, like a swarm. The ball dictated our “strategy,” and the coaches usually gave up once they lost their voice—or their mind, whichever came first
You’re absolutely right about the urgency of strategy!
The problem I see is three-fold:
1) incentives doesn’t reward strategic behaviour
2) managers are not trained in strategic decision-making
3) strategy is not understood and interpreted the same way by decision-makers
Strategy is important, but not as a document only showing direct. To be successful it must incorporate every and all aspects of the business—culture, resources, org, people, process etc. unfortunately the need for a complete strategy is often overlooked.
That is true. Currently the rewards are all linked to short term operational targets. I think strategy also needs to be made a little less mythical. Sometimes it is made for such a long timeline that no one is there is execute or see if it did produce results. We need to bring back some realism there as well. As for training - massive need.
That’s a good point. Long-term vision married with strategy of a time-frame people can relate to, believe in, and be excited about.
I like the emergent and adaptive approach to strategy, even if it demands a lot of people. Combine that with strong communication and the empower of individuals to act independently and you’ll be in a very strong position.
Strategy as applied pressure is an interesting metaphor. In my experience in large organizations, FOMO is often a real reason why strategies aren’t followed through—and that’s when the whole concept losing it's meaning. Even when you think the strategy is chosen, once the initial results are reviewed with senior leaders, the floodgates open: “Have you thought about this?”, “That other team piloted something similar—should we test it too?” Before you know it, you’re back to doing everything in an attempt to please everyone. Unless there’s discipline, backbone, and sound judgment to decide when to persevere and when to pivot, strategy becomes just a buzzword.
Well diagnosed Elina. It is a bit counter intuitive right that when you choose you feel you are boxed now so at the first sign of trouble or if it takes even a bit longer for results you want to try new things already but one sure way of failing is trying everything at the same time. This is where leadership maturity and conviction comes in. You also need a mature board to support you here. Not easy but when done can produce brilliant turnarounds.
Interesting proof of the paralysis data can create is in the advertising world.
So much advertising is, speaking as someone who has done it for 35 years, crap.
So much creative work is 'tested' through terrible research methodologies, in service of certainty. The research often kills the creative idea, delivering creative with zero memorability - and lack of memorability is death in advertising.
Some of the most effective campaigns in history were either not researched (Apple 1984 and Think Different), or they were researched and the agency/client had a strong instinct that the research was misleading them so they ignored it (a lot of BBH's Levi's advertising in the 80s and 90s).
Data is powerful, but it is an input, and without a strategy to guide it, its like walking into the world's biggest library without any idea of what you want to read; you'll be there a long, long time and you will you never find what you seek because you don't have a clue about what you seek.
Agreed. But think of an org which is just reacting to everything and one that is more conscious in terms of where it is going - who has a higher chance of getting ahead? You need to understand what matters and what to react to. Agile strategy is used as an excuse for not having a strategy at times. Choosing what to not react to has risk but it’s worth taking this risk rather than trying to react to everything- because that for sure will not work.
Indeed. Sometimes a lot of leaders use the garb of agile to not make a choice at all and that does not play out well in the long term most of the times
Really interesting content once again, Shashank! It's interesting how you compare strategy with pressure. I too make comparisons to Physics to help understand large-scale customer value management (law of force and acceleration).
I see the haste a lot when it comes to M&A opportunities. Without a clear roadmap and strategy to execute, it becomes about the chase of a deal not “how does this fit within our plans?” A clearly defined strategy prevents you from making emotional decisions in these moments.
This is a thought provoking article, Shashank. I loved this. This was the key takeaway for me: “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.”
Thank you Chintan. I am glad you enjoyed it. I love this Peter Drucker quote.
Strategy isn’t just a business discipline—it’s a survival skill in times of life chaos. In my work with leaders navigating legal and personal crisis, I’ve seen firsthand how delayed strategy becomes damage control.
Thank you for the reminder Michelle. It is indeed a survival skill and people need to be more conscious about it.
I can’t pinpoint exactly when it hit me while reading your piece, but it took me straight back to our childhood soccer games. Back then, positions didn’t matter—we had seven kids per team, all chasing the ball wherever it went, like a swarm. The ball dictated our “strategy,” and the coaches usually gave up once they lost their voice—or their mind, whichever came first
Hahaha. Thank you for sharing your thought Moe. I think managers are often like kids as well. We need to get them a ball to chase :)
You’re absolutely right about the urgency of strategy!
The problem I see is three-fold:
1) incentives doesn’t reward strategic behaviour
2) managers are not trained in strategic decision-making
3) strategy is not understood and interpreted the same way by decision-makers
Strategy is important, but not as a document only showing direct. To be successful it must incorporate every and all aspects of the business—culture, resources, org, people, process etc. unfortunately the need for a complete strategy is often overlooked.
That is true. Currently the rewards are all linked to short term operational targets. I think strategy also needs to be made a little less mythical. Sometimes it is made for such a long timeline that no one is there is execute or see if it did produce results. We need to bring back some realism there as well. As for training - massive need.
That’s a good point. Long-term vision married with strategy of a time-frame people can relate to, believe in, and be excited about.
I like the emergent and adaptive approach to strategy, even if it demands a lot of people. Combine that with strong communication and the empower of individuals to act independently and you’ll be in a very strong position.
Hey all! For me the biggest threat isn’t the absence of strategy. Although I experienced that more than once.
I go crazy with several strategies running in parallel. In large orgs that‘s not unusual.
True indeed. Rogue managers trying to build their own kingdoms can often lead to this.
Strategy as applied pressure is an interesting metaphor. In my experience in large organizations, FOMO is often a real reason why strategies aren’t followed through—and that’s when the whole concept losing it's meaning. Even when you think the strategy is chosen, once the initial results are reviewed with senior leaders, the floodgates open: “Have you thought about this?”, “That other team piloted something similar—should we test it too?” Before you know it, you’re back to doing everything in an attempt to please everyone. Unless there’s discipline, backbone, and sound judgment to decide when to persevere and when to pivot, strategy becomes just a buzzword.
Well diagnosed Elina. It is a bit counter intuitive right that when you choose you feel you are boxed now so at the first sign of trouble or if it takes even a bit longer for results you want to try new things already but one sure way of failing is trying everything at the same time. This is where leadership maturity and conviction comes in. You also need a mature board to support you here. Not easy but when done can produce brilliant turnarounds.
Interesting proof of the paralysis data can create is in the advertising world.
So much advertising is, speaking as someone who has done it for 35 years, crap.
So much creative work is 'tested' through terrible research methodologies, in service of certainty. The research often kills the creative idea, delivering creative with zero memorability - and lack of memorability is death in advertising.
Some of the most effective campaigns in history were either not researched (Apple 1984 and Think Different), or they were researched and the agency/client had a strong instinct that the research was misleading them so they ignored it (a lot of BBH's Levi's advertising in the 80s and 90s).
Data is powerful, but it is an input, and without a strategy to guide it, its like walking into the world's biggest library without any idea of what you want to read; you'll be there a long, long time and you will you never find what you seek because you don't have a clue about what you seek.
I hear you on this one and share your frustration, but to be honest the pressure to move fast is here to stay.
Especially in the AI "gold rush" era we're in now.
How do you move fast but not react to everything / chase trends?
How do you do strategy in a deliberate way? Not easy at all.
Looking forward to learning this from you ;)
Agreed. But think of an org which is just reacting to everything and one that is more conscious in terms of where it is going - who has a higher chance of getting ahead? You need to understand what matters and what to react to. Agile strategy is used as an excuse for not having a strategy at times. Choosing what to not react to has risk but it’s worth taking this risk rather than trying to react to everything- because that for sure will not work.
Agree that the pressure to move fast is here to stay, but I also think that has always been the case.
You have to make some hard choices and choose what not to chase.
Its definitely not easy, but it never was.
It is the story of the hare and the tortoise.
Be the tortoise and have the strength (and you need lots of strength) to be the one resisting the crazies trying to solve everything overnight.
Ultimately, there is fast, world class and cheap.
Pick two because having all three is impossible.
Indeed. Sometimes a lot of leaders use the garb of agile to not make a choice at all and that does not play out well in the long term most of the times
100%.
Never making a choice, actively avoiding making a choice.
Its a straight road to nowhere good.
Love this! I relate to all of these points.
Even when you rant your voice remains upbeat and friendly. Your personality really shines through.
Thank you Alex :)
Really interesting content once again, Shashank! It's interesting how you compare strategy with pressure. I too make comparisons to Physics to help understand large-scale customer value management (law of force and acceleration).
Thank you Jens. It is just intensity right and I thought pressure helped express it in a simple manner.
I see the haste a lot when it comes to M&A opportunities. Without a clear roadmap and strategy to execute, it becomes about the chase of a deal not “how does this fit within our plans?” A clearly defined strategy prevents you from making emotional decisions in these moments.
Well said Kevin. M&A are so tricky and therefore haste is the last thing I would expect but I know it to be true.