In Support of Strategy
By Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth

What’s with all the “strategy bashing” of late? How could sound strategic planning possibly be a bad thing? Things have spun so far out of control that I recently had a CEO ask: “Is strategy still relevant in today’s business world, and if so, what role does strategy play in the overall make-up of a CEO’s duties and responsibilities? Let me begin by stating that strategy has never been more relevant than it is today. With all of the current emphasis on tactical execution I guess I understand how a question like this could be posed, but wow, what a sad commentary on the state of executive leadership when a CEO asks whether or not strategy is relevant. In today’s post I’ll examine the role of strategy in business, as well as the CEO’s responsibilities therein…
Let me be as blunt as I can – The issue should not be strategy vs tactics, but strategy and tactics. While separate functions and disciplines, one cannot prosper without the other. Strategy is what provides the tactical road-map, and it is tactical execution that validates and delivers strategy. The noise attempting to lift one up above the other is simply more unneeded rhetoric. The best strategy cannot succeed without tactical execution, and tactical execution is much easier to achieve with the clarity provided by a sound strategy.
With all of today’s emphasis on pleasing investors by meeting short-term financial expectations, it is not at all uncommon for many executives to press for better execution when what they really need is a better strategy. Conversely, other executives change strategic direction when what they should do is demand better execution. The truth of the matter is that a sound strategic plan can be executed with a high probability of success, whereas a flawed strategy is almost impossible to execute profitably.
The emphasis for CEOs needs to be on creating long-term sustainable value for shareholders without sacrificing short-term tactical interests. While in most cases a sound strategy will allow a CEO to have his/her cake and eat it too, if you must sacrifice one over the other, you would be well served to place long-term interests above short-term objectives. History has shown us on many occasions that it is quite possible to win the battle and lose the war. CEOs must learn to fight the battles that need to be won, and not just the ones that are easy to win.
Please read the following statements very carefully…The CEO is often times the chief architect of corporate strategy, and has the ultimate responsibility for assuring the delivery of a strategy, which is consistent with the corporate values and vision. One of the primary duties of the CEO is to communicate, evangelize, and lead the company in the implementation of the corporate strategy. Absent an over abundance of blind luck, a company’s strategic planning process will be critical in the eventual success or failure of the enterprise. CEOs must view themselves as being completely accountable and responsible for the corporate strategy, regardless of whether they were the original architect.
While executives must learn to view strategy and execution as being inextricably linked, they also must come to understand that strategy should always drive tactics. The tendency for some CEOs to let tactics determine the strategy is the classic example of reactive vs. proactive leadership. It also represents a great illustration of letting the tail wag the dog. A lack of strategic focus in dictating tactical initiatives is a ready-fire-aim approach to leadership and will result in higher costs, a perpetual state of chaos, and places a higher emphasis on activity vs. productivity.
There is so much focus on execution these days that it is not uncommon for me to receive a few e-mails each week with headlines that read: “Screw Strategy” or “Tactics before Strategy.” While I’m all for exploiting trends, and I appreciate a good marketing hook as much as the next person, these e-mails from so-called business experts can be both misleading and dangerous to those readers who don’t possess the savvy to understand that they are just being pitched on a product and not being given sound counsel.
As much as some of my direct marketing friends wish it weren’t so, there are certain inevitable truths that do exist in business. Listen, I have no problem with creating velocity and leverage, but as fluid as business is today, most of the “short-cuts to success” being marketed today constitute form over substance. You see business is much like an algebraic formula, in that while there are certainly formulaic short-cuts that can be taken to solve an equation more quickly, the one thing that will provide an incorrect solution 11 times out of 10 is when the order of operation is skewed.
The following visual is one I developed more than 20 years ago, and the interesting thing is that it’s applicationally as sound today as it was back in 1988. The orange horizontal line that cuts the image in half is what I refer to as the leadership line. When working above the leadership line you are working “on“ the business in a true leadership capacity, and when working below the line you are working “in” the business in more of a management capacity. While all good leaders spend time on both sides of the line, the most effective leaders spend as much time working above the line as possible. Follow this methodology and the ambiguity surrounding the “why” and “where” to spend your time will start to clear itself up.

For those of you familiar with my work, you’ll see that I have consistently espoused that a bias toward action and tactical precision are essential to achieving sustainable success. However, I am also clear in my belief that misguided and ill-timed/advised tactics can also create huge problems for any business. The bottom line is that strategy matters, and that as a CEO, strategy is your responsibility. The challenges associated with leading corporate strategy initiatives are not easy, but neither is the burden of leadership. If you’re not up to task at hand you don’t deserve the title of CEO…it is harsh but true.
You deliver a very important message here, Mike. Strategy AND tactics are essential to getting the right things done. If you have tactics without strategy it is entirely possible to get caught up in DOING a lot of stuff while having no idea where you are going with it, or even if it's the right stuff. Strategy, without tactics to ensure it is DOABLE, becomes more of a dream than anything else.
It reminds me of the ongoing discussion about the difference between leaders and managers, when to me, leadership and management are both necessary functions for bosses at all levels.
Great post. Thanks!
But Mike, it should be strategy before tactics. In fact, it should be clarity of objectives before determination of strategies.
Hi J.F.
I agree that Strategy should come before tactics. If you refer to the graphic above, you'll find strategy comes far before tactics in the order of operation. However, the strategy sets the objectives, not the other way around.
Hi Gwyn:
Thanks for the comment and the kind words. Thanks for stopping by…
Hi Mike,
Just found your blog off of an RT. I appreciate your bringing this issue back up to the surface and cogent case has been made. Far to little is written about the importance of strategy. Now that you have highlighted it, it would be great to hear your thoughts on strategy development in future posts. This is on del.ic.ious for me.
Thanks Marc –
I'm glad you enjoyed the post and I greatly appreciate the topical request for future posts. I'll definitely add strategy development to the calendar. Thanks also for the recognition on del.ic.ious
Have a great day Marc…
[...] typical, standard and expected and what isn’t is not thin but as wide as … 3 Tweets In Support of Strategy | N2Growth Blog By Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth What's with all the strategy bashing of late? [...]
Great post Mike, I'm still astounded that you were asked about the significance of strategy in the modern business world, especially by a CEO! You raise some very interesting points here, however you do not touch upon the key metrics that define a successful strategy, a topic that I am particularly interested in at the moment. Would love to hear your thoughts, I've posted a discussion on LinkedIn if your interested http://bit.ly/aF04C1
Thanks again for the post, great read!
Tobias
Thanks for your comment and the link to your discussion group. You raise an interesting question about how to measure the success of a strategy. Look for a post in the coming days on that subject as I've had more than a few requests…Thanks again Tobias…
Thank you for your post, Mike. I too have been astounded by the number of organizations that have gone into crisis mode during the past 18 months, turning to analytical/reactionary leadership models and mistaking decisiveness for smart, strategic action. All is not lost for strategy, though. In our recent study on leadership, the Bloomberg BusinessWeek.com/Hay Group Best Companies for Leadership study (http://bit.ly/9nKDzo), we found that, for the first time, the “Best” companies actually value strategic thinking more than execution in leaders. While the Best Companies for Leadership may take short-term measures, they do not compromise the organization’s long-term strategy in doing so. In fact, the “Best” leaders are able to think conceptually about what the future might look like – and then act today, to position their companies for tomorrow.
Hi John:
Thanks for sharing your thoughts in support of strategy. I had the chance to review your study and found your work to be top drawer. Thanks for stopping by John.