CHAPTER EIGHT: Shorten Your Odds
âIn strategy, there are no absolute answers or sure things, and nothing lasts forever. Having a clear definition of winning, a robust analytical framework such as the logic flow, and a thoughtful review process can help organize thinking and improve analysis, but even still, a successful outcome is not guaranteed. In the end, building a strategy isnât about achieving perfection; itâs about shortening your odds.
Related Quotes
It isnât entirely easy to make your way through the full choice cascade. Doing so isnât a one-way, linear process. There is no checklist, whereby you create and articulate aspirations, then move on to where-to-play and how-to-win choices, then consider capabilities. Rather, strategy is an iterative process in which all of the moving parts influence one another and must be taken into account together.
CHAPTER SEVEN: Think Through Strategy
âAs you begin articulating your strategic choice cascade, the obvious place to start is at the top. Weâve argued that it is essential to define a winning aspiration up front, and it does make sense to begin thinking about strategy by defining the purpose of your enterprise; without having an initial definition of winning, it is difficult to assess the value of any subsequent choice. You need a winning aspiration against which you can weigh differentchoices. But remember that strategy is an iterative process, and youâll need to return to refine your winning aspiration in the context of the subsequent choices. So, rather than dwell on crafting the perfect definition of winning, sketch a prototype, with the understanding that you will return to it later with the rest of the cascade in mind. Then consider the real work of strategy as beginning with where to play and how to winâthe very heart of strategy. These are the choices that actually define what you will do, and where
you will do it, so as to generate competitive advantage.â (Lafley and Martin, âPlaying to
Winâ, p.159-160)
âUltimately, there are four dimensions you need to think about to choose where to play
and how to win:
⢠The industry. What is the structure of your industry and the attractiveness of its segments?
⢠Customers. What do your channel and end customers value?
⢠Relative position. How does your company fare, and how could it fare, relative to the competition?
⢠Competition. What will your competition do in reaction to your chosen course of action? These four dimensions can be understood through a framework we call the strategy logic
flow, which poses seven questions across the four dimensions.
The strategy logic flow:
This is the fourth and final element of the logic flow. The question to address is this: is there some competitive response that could undermine or trump the where-to-play and how-to-win choices?
Inevitably, this is guesswork to some degree; you canât know for sure what a competitor will or wonât do in the face of your actions. But forming a thoughtful hypothesis is important. It is far better to ask what your competitors will likely do before you proceed than to simply wait and see what happens. Only strategies that provide a sustainable advantageâor a significant lead in developing future advantagesâare worth investing in. You donât want to design and build a strategy that a competitor can copy in a heartbeat, or one that will prove ineffective against a simple defensive maneuver on a competitorâs part.
A strategy that only works if competitors continue to do exactly what they are already doing
is a dangerous strategy indeed.
That, in sum, is the process for choosing between possibilities for where to play and how to win. First, frame a choice. Second, explore possibilities to broaden the set of mutually exclusive possibilities. Third, for each possibility, ask, what would have to be true for this to be a great idea, using the logic flow framework to structure your thinking. Fourth, determine which of the conditions is the least likely to actually hold true. Fifth, design tests against those crucial barriers to choice. Six, conduct tests. Finally, in light of the outcome of the tests and how those outcomes stack up against predetermined standards of proof, select the best strategic choice possibility. This process broadens the possibilities up front and then systematically narrows the field. It leverages different perspectives to enrich the discussion, rather than bogging it down.