In business the term 'strategy' is revered as the glue that unites organisational resources in a common goal. 'Strategy' evokes images of carefully crafted plans that unlock organisational success and growth. Yet not all that is labelled 'strategy' deserves the name. The distinction between a true strategy and a hollow statement of optimism that offers little real guidance is subtle and profound. When managers and teams get it right, latent potential is unlocked—it can even be a market mover.
Sadly, what should provide a North Star for employees and stakeholders does nothing but deliver superficial statements that offer little real guidance. Yet by bringing to bear critical thinking, some classical wisdom, and a soupçon of contemporary scholarship, we can better understand when a strategy is a strategy, and when a strategy is an empty platitude.
Understanding Strategy: Insights from Classical and Contemporary Thought
The Art of War (孫子兵法) by Sun Tzu (孫子), ca. 5th century BC, is one of the earliest treatises to establish a causal link between strategy and success. While focused on military problems, Sun Tzu's wisdom provides many parallels for businesses due to its emphasis on the importance of clear objectives, understanding the terrain, and the critical value to knowing your enemy.
In business we tend to talk less of enemies than competition, but the principle applies equally to knowing your customer. While customers can be an organisations greatest source of strength and a brands greatest advocate, social media has put in their possession the power to decimate organisations and lay waste to strategic plans.
One of the most well known works of organisational literature to synthesise military concepts into a cohesive business model was Michael Porter's 1996 article What is Strategy? which underscored the criticality of making deliberate choices, understanding that choice almost always involves trade-offs, and that broad, vague goals are not strategies.
the essence of strategy is in the activities—choosing to perform activities differently or to perform different activities than rivals. Otherwise, a strategy is nothing more than a marketing slogan that will not withstand competition.
Porter 1996.
At its core, an organisational strategy is a set of guiding principles and actions designed to achieve a specific objective. It requires a deep understanding of the competitive environment, organisational capabilities, and the challenges at hand. A robust strategy is actionable, measurable, and aligned with the organisation's goals.
For the practice of management, strategy requires the integration of historical insights—yes, reading the classics has real world applications—with more recent theories of organisational behaviour and market dynamics. Strategy is not a one-size-fits-all approach but a complex, multifaceted practice that requires clarity, specificity, and adaptability. The tendency to reduce strategy to mere slogans or high-level goals that lack substantive content is highly problematic.
In short, a strategy is not a vision or mission statement. Much less is it a single high-level goal. Which begs the question, "what do all of these statements have in common?"
"Our strategy is to be the low-cost provider."
"We're pursuing a global strategy."
"The company's strategy is to integrate a set of regional acquisitions."
"Our strategy is to provide unrivaled customer service."
"Our strategic intent is to always be the first-mover."
"Our strategy is to move from defense to industrial applications."
Hambrick & Fredrickson 2001.
None of them is a strategy.
Platitudes: The Achilles' Heel of Strategic Thinking
A platitude, by definition, is a statement that is so vague or obvious that it lacks any substantive meaning. In the context of organisational strategy, a platitude is a declaration that sounds profound but lacks actionable substance. It is the Achilles' heel of strategic thinking, offering the illusion of direction without the rigor necessary for actual progress.
When managers mistake these for strategies, they risk setting themselves and the organisation adrift on an ocean with no clear direction. A real strategy, by contrast, should answer fundamental questions such as "Where will we be active?" and "How will we win?" Platitudes fail to provide this clarity.
For example, a company might declare that its strategy is to "become more innovative" or "focus on customer satisfaction." While these are admirable goals, they are not strategies in themselves. They lack specificity, actionable steps, and measurable outcomes. To reiterate Michael Porter's earlier injunction: real strategy involves making trade-offs and choosing what not to do, which is often overlooked in such superficial statements.
This is not to say that a golden sentence that is used to sum up a strategy has no place or value. On the contrary:
It's a dirty little secret: Most executives cannot articulate the objective, scope, and advantage of their business in a simple statement. If they can't, neither can anyone else.
Collis & Rukstad 2008.
For this reason, managers must avoid falling into the trap of confusing lofty aspirations with strategic direction, while also providing a clear, concise statement that defines the competitive playing field, the value proposition, and the key activities that will enable success.
The Consequences of Platitudinous Strategies
Platitudes in strategy can lead to a misallocation of resources, as they fail to provide a clear roadmap for decision-making. Effective strategy requires an alignment of resources, capabilities, and market opportunities. When a strategy is vague, it offers no guidance on how to allocate resources effectively, leading to wasted efforts and missed opportunities.
The reliance on platitudes can erode trust within the organisation. Employees who see that the strategy does not translate into actions may become disengaged, leading to lower morale and productivity. This is consistent with the findings of John Kotter in Leading Change, who argued that successful strategy implementation requires not just clarity of vision, but also the engagement and commitment of the entire organisation.
Additionally, platitudes can lead to complacency. Believing that they have a strategy in place, managers may fail to respond adequately to external threats or changes in the competitive landscape.
How to Avoid the Pitfalls of Platitudes
To avoid the pitfalls of platitudes, it is essential to understand what constitutes a true strategy. Drawing from both classical and contemporary literature, the following characteristics are critical:
- Specificity: A real strategy provides clear, concrete objectives. Sun Tzu's emphasis on knowing the battlefield translates into today's need for understanding the competitive landscape and defining specific targets.
- Actionability: Strategies must outline the steps necessary to achieve the desired outcomes. Porter's work on strategy underscores the importance of defining the activities that differentiate an organisation from its competitors.
- Measurability: Success must be quantifiable. As Drucker famously stated, 'What gets measured gets managed.' A strategy without metrics is like a ship without a compass.
- Coherence: Strategies must align with the organisation's overall goals and capabilities. A strategy should be a pattern in a stream of decisions, meaning it should consistently guide actions across the organisation.
- Adaptability: Strategies must be flexible enough to respond to changing circumstances. This is reminiscent of Darwin's theory of evolution, where survival is not about strength, but adaptability. In business, this translates to the ability to pivot strategies as the market evolves.
While not specifically an element of a strategy, an environment of debate and divergent thinking is essential in the formation of a good strategy. Healthy debate can help surface potential weaknesses in a strategy. Encouraging diverse perspectives can also prevent group think and the adoption of platitudes.
Why Platitudes Persist
Despite the dangers of relying on platitudes, they persist in organisational discourse for several reasons. Firstly, they are easy to generate and communicate. In a world where managers are often pressed for time and need to quickly convey direction, platitudes are an attractive shortcut.
Secondly, they offer a false sense of security. By framing a strategy in broad, uncontroversial terms, managers can avoid for the moment the difficult trade-offs and decisions that true strategy requires. Platitudes can also shield them in the short term from accountability, as vagueness makes it difficult to measure success or failure.
Finally, the allure of consensus can lead to the adoption of platitudes. In an effort to align diverse stakeholders, managers often gravitate towards statements that are universally agreeable but ultimately meaningless.
In my next column I will continue this theme and explore why moving beyond platitudes is a strategic imperative.
Good night, and good luck.
Takiyasha the Witch and the Skeleton Spectre by Utagawa Kuniyoshi (1798–1861) is is licensed under Public Domain.
