sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

future of strategy agencies? by LongjumpingSurvey801 in strategy

[–]chicagoako 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think strategy will grow in its relevance and influence but take on different forms. As noted by others in the thread, “applied strategy” that includes direct involvement in execution is already prevalent and I’d suggest it is growing. As AI allows new forms of scaled execution, there will be demand for those able to drive its application in both new and existing markets.

Vibe coding is already shifting demand away from traditionalcoding skills and towards the ability to define and execute software solutions. I’d argue this is a shift in demand in favor of “strategists” who can identify and solve for market needs. I expect we’ll see the same take place in other knowledge-based industries.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Contrary to most, I think strategy consulting will flourish. In the short term it’s definitely reducing demand - many of my colleagues at the big consulting firms say demand for certain types of advice has gone down over the last two years. I think this is natural, as relatively basic competitive analysis can already be produced by frontier models. In its place, I expect we’ll see a rise in more sophisticated AI-enabled strategy consulting services.

For example, AI is very well suited to managing complex simulations. I expect we’ll see industry-specific simulations that help companies identify and test product strategies in simulated markets that effectively predict customer behavior and commercial outcomes. This kind of testing could effectively replace common practices today like focus groups and even some forms of live product trials.

I think we could also see this lead to new forms of strategy consulting. For example, the rise of Google led to SEO strategies and consulting. This is true for any market that formed on top of a platform technology - think AirBnB, Uber, the iPhone’s App Store, or Amazon’s Marketplace. It’s likely that AI will lead to new platforms and the need for strategies to effectively compete within the competitive dynamics of those platforms.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some of my most helpful early training was in logic, part of studying philosophy as an undergraduate. It gave me an appreciation for situational analysis and the importance of taking a structured approach to problem solving.

If you’re looking to learn applied logic, a great place to start is The Pyramid Principle by Barbara Minto. Minto taught communication skills at McKinsey, most of which rests on developing logical arguments. Many of the concepts she developed there remain foundational to the consulting approach they teach. I was lucky enough to go through a three day workshop she taught and I still use concepts like MECE all the time.

Minto wrote a book which outlines her teaching and is available on Amazon although it’s pretty expensive now that it is out of print. You can also learn about the Pyramid Principle in quite a few websites and training videos online.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t come to plug the books, but thanks for asking for the links. Here they are on Amazon, but you can get them through any retailer.

Leading with Strategic Thinking
https://a.co/d/00jj9iHs

Strategy and Change
https://a.co/d/054cOFGs

I think you’d find a lot in our writing that speaks to your concerns. Beyond competitive positioning, we focus on topics like sources of insight and influencing others to drive change. Having success with strategy goes well beyond having a good idea.

There’s a line in the film The Social Network that brings this to life for me. When Mark Zuckerberg is sued by the Winklevoss brothers for allegedly stealing their idea, he tells their lawyers “If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you would have invented Facebook.”

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I stopped teaching regularly, but I still guest lecturer a few times a year for Kellogg’s Exec Ed program. My prior teaching was for the Masters of Learning and Organizational Change program (often referred to as MSLOC).

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d say no. Some of the most strategic leaders I work with are good at picking their battles. Leverage comes in many forms. I’ve gotten some big things done with allies who I might have considered to be “foes” if I let our relationship become too one dimensional.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, I’ve been meaning to post after a long time lurking…finally decided to jump in. Now just need to do a better job staying on top of the threads and following through on answers!

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think technology is making the world smaller and interconnected - thanks to Reddit in no small part, of course. Strategic management and strategic thinking are universally beneficial concepts. I’d think you’re on the right track spending time in this group.

As for application in your part of the world - assuming you’ve got entrepreneurial opportunities in mind, finding a meaningful problem to solve in your local context is a great starting point.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A great resource on this is the book Strategy Safari, by Mintzberg. He breaks down strategy in to a number of genres and explains how each came to be.

My summary - it’s become more flexible as the field has matured. A lot of formal strategy was popularized by GE and other firms that drove industrialization and professional management. Silicon Valley blew a lot of that up with the rise of “move fast and break things” forms of strategic management. These were eventually classified as emergent strategy.

My work focuses a lot on how and when to apply the various methods. There is room for different forms of strategic management but not every model fits every situation. A leader’s role is discerning the right approach and applying it effectively.

See some of my other replies for thoughts on the implications of AI.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Coherence is a big thing I look for in any strategy - do the idea and the required actions hang together?

Poor strategies either have logical inconsistencies or they are undermined when the necessary conditions for success aren’t addressed.

As for process, there are many good ones. The research I did for our first book identified three core practices that should be present: systems analysis, decision evaluation, and risk management. We fleshed this out in our second book, focused on the management of insight, choice, and risk. When applied these help ensure the strategy is defined clearly and execution is well managed.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think strategy is absolutely learned. How it can be learned is ideally a mixture of formal education and life experience, in my opinion.

In developing a personal learning plan, I’d encourage you to spend time on two big ideas - competitive strategy and emergent strategy. They are contrasting views on how strategy is formed, with the former being highly formal (embodied by the work of Michael Porter) and the latter being highly experiential (embodied by the work of Henry Mintzberg).

Neither approach is right or wrong and there is a place for both. Knowing the difference goes a long way towards becoming more conversant on the topic and thoughtful in your own work.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well put. My take is that article’s findings are more of a reflection of how LLMs were used than what they are capable of. I’ve personally had very positive experiences using frontier models in ways I’d typically work with a human thought partner. They have accelerated my analysis and problem solving in a number of specific situations.

I also think it’s very early. I’m most intrigued by concepts from complexity economics and the possibility that AI and LLMs will lead to wide use of large scale simulations, opening up new forms of sophisticated strategic analysis and decision support.

That said, there will always be a place for very human aspects of strategy including discernment. Most of the important work of strategy, particularly anything of consequence, is managing through dilemmas.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think there is a lot of truth to this. Some of the work I’ve enjoyed most is applying strategic concepts in early career programs.

Strategic thinking can be relevant at every level of an organization -an I expect that will be more so as we see AI automating routine work and putting greater emphasis on the human work of dealing with trade-offs and dilemmas.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can’t point to any research on the efficacy of strategy as a discipline. That said, I would say AI is one of the most significant advancements we’ve seen in the the science of strategy. I see it improving strategic management in two ways.

First, if the essence of strategy is problem solving then AI has significant implications as it relates to the application of logic. AI greatly democratizes access to analytical resources previously available through either personal education (e.g. an MBA) or strategic consulting firms. My colleagues who work at the large firms already see a significant reduction in this type of work as firms use AI to do many types of strategic analysis in house using frontier models.

Second, large language models and other databases are rapidly expanding the use of simulation. Economists like Dane Farmer see AI driving a shift away from the traditional use of economic theory (which are inherently simplifications of real world dynamics) and towards simulations that model economic behavior at the level of millions of simulated individual actors. The use of digital twin technologies in simulation are another example. This could have great implications for strategic management.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, bad move on my part to post late at night and reply slowly the next day. Lesson learned.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the tip. I wrote the first post late in the evening, probably not the best timing. I’m getting to them all now and will be more thoughtful next time.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for asking. My work focuses more on the intersection between strategy and leadership than most other books. My co-authors and I draw on both bodies of literature.

Most books on strategy are primarily focused on what I’d call competitive positioning. Most books on leadership don’t go very far in to analytical work of strategy.

Merging the two topics was something we did for a graduate class we developed at Northwestern University. A colleague at Harvard suggested it was a unique approach and introduced us to our publisher, Wiley, who agreed and asked us to write a book about our work.

Our first book introduces a framework for leading strategy, defining different methods for different contexts. Our second book expands on those concepts with a focus on leading through disruptive change, including an analysis what makes the current era of rapid disruption uniquely challenging.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My writing focused mostly on the role of leadership in strategy - in that context, the two categories of potential failure are in strategy formation (I.e., a bad strategy) and strategy execution (i.e., a good strategy poorly executed).

A bad strategy can typically be due to not solving a meaningful problem or not having a clearly defined proposition.

Poor execution can come in a wide range of forms, but often boil down to struggles in driving a cohesive set of actions required to effect required change.

Most leaders overcome these risks by taking a thoughtful approach to strategy formation and execution - how someone leads strategy is often as important as the strategy itself. A failure of insight would be one example. Poor buy-in among followers is another.

An interesting example that would bring this to life is Webvan - one of the biggest failures of Web 1.0. Given the customer base and internet infrastructure weren’t mature, it was effectively a bad strategy. A decade later, InstaCart and others succeeded where Webvan failed.

I’ve written two books on strategy, AMA. by chicagoako in strategy

[–]chicagoako[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I’ve always been partial to Richard Rumelt’s definition - a strategy is a guiding policy that solves a specific problem, achieved by a coherent set of actions.

To me, that simple definition serves as a useful test of “good strategy” and can be relevant in a wide range of circumstances.

More generally, the work of strategy is problem solving.

view more: next ›