Where-to-play and how-to-win choices do not function independently; a strong where-to- play choice is only valuable if it is supported by a robust and actionable how-to-win choice. The two choices should reinforce one another to create a distinctive combination.
Related Quotes
Where to play selects the playing field; how to win defines the choices for winning on that field. It is the recipe for success in the chosen segments, categories, channels, geographies, and so on. The how-to-win choice is intimately tied to the where-to-play choice. Remember, it is not how to win generally, but how to win within the chosen where- to-play domains.
In great strategies, the where-to-play and how-to-win choices fit together to make the
company stronger.
One final consideration for where to play is the competitive set. Just as it does when it defines winning aspirations, a company should make its where-to-play choices with the competition firmly in mind. Choosing a playing field identical to a strong competitorâs can be a less attractive proposition than tacking away to compete in a different way, for
different customers, or in different product lines. But strategy isnât simply a matter of finding a distinctive path. A company may choose to play in a crowded field or in one with a dominant competitor if the company can bring new and distinctive value. In such a case, winning may mean targeting the lead competitor right away or going after weaker competitors first.
The Heart of Strategy:
Where to play is about understanding the possible playing fields and choosing between them. It is about selecting regions, customers, products, channels, and stages of production that fit well togetherâthat are mutually reinforcing and that marry well with real consumer needs. Rather than attempt to serve everyone or simply buy a new playing field or accept your current choices as inevitable, find a strong set of where-to-play choices.â
(Lafley and Martin, âPlaying to Winâ, p.72) âWHERE-TO-PLAY DOS AND DONâTS:
⢠Do choose where you will play and where you will not play. Explicitly choose and prioritize choices across all relevant where dimensions (i.e., geographies, industry segments, consumers, customers, products, etc.).
⢠Do think long and hard before dismissing an entire industry as structurally unattractive; look for attractive segments in which you can compete and win.
⢠Donât embark on a strategy without specific where choices. If everything is a priority, nothing is. There is no point in trying to capture all segments. You canât. Donât try.
⢠Do look for places to play that will enable you to attack from unexpected directions, along the lines of least resistance. Donât attack walled cities or take on your strongest competitors head-to-head if you can help it.
⢠Donât start wars on multiple fronts at once. Plan for your competitorsâ reactions to your initial choices, and think multiple steps ahead. No single choice needs to last forever, but it should last long enough to confer the advantage you seek.
⢠Do be honest about the allure of white space. It is tempting to be the first mover into unoccupied white space. Unfortunately, there is only one true first mover (as there is only one low-cost player), and all too often, the imagined white space is already occupied by a formidable competitor you just donât see or understand.
An activity system is of no value unless it supports a particular where-to-play and how-to- win choice. Again, the various choices along the cascade must be considered iteratively.
You need to go back and forth between the choices. You can think through a tentative where-to-play and how-to-win choice. Then you can ask, what activities system would effectively underpin this choice? Once you lay out such a system map, you can ask a sequential set of questions about feasibility, distinctiveness, and defensibility.