Comments on: Strategic Thinker

By: bobcorrigan

bobcorrigan — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:59:00 +0000

"Facts" are slippery things, like statistics. Show the same set of them to someone with one year of experience and you'll get a different take than you'd get from a scarred veteran. Who is right? Who knows.

But I do know that if you've got a process for gathering subjective and objective market evidence, you're better positioned to make solid strategic choices than an organization that relies primarily on the gut. Whaddya know, I've written an article on how to do this, and why it's hard: http://tinyurl.com/yjq966l

By: markallenroberts

markallenroberts — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:45:44 +0000

The key to strategic thought is using facts not opinion, intuition, and my personal favorite…”years in this industry”. Find market truth, determine your internal truths as I discuss in my blog http://nosmokeandmirrors.wordpress.com/2009/11/... , and you have one more step…I will be blogging about the last truth this week.

Once you have the truths, you can develop a strategy that is market driven and leverages your capabilities.

Mark Allen Roberts
http://www.outbsolutions.com

By: bobcorrigan

bobcorrigan — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:59:00 +0000

By: markallenroberts

markallenroberts — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:45:44 +0000

Once you have the truths, you can develop a strategy that is market driven and leverages your capabilities.

Mark Allen Roberts
http://www.outbsolutions.com

By: Stewart Rogers

Stewart Rogers — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:40:47 +0000

I still like the connection though. The distinctive competence sort of sits as an umbrella over your strategy and if the two are not aligned then you have a issue to be resolved.

By: Stewart Rogers

Stewart Rogers — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:14:40 +0000

Interesting term Larry, but I am not sure I understand the difference.

By: Chris Boothe

Chris Boothe — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:09:14 +0000

Great question Stewart! I think it really depends on your planning horizon. That is to say is the objective to build on your past success or to move away from an earlier strategy.

I think you could argue a lot of companies have built their product to be an industry leader. And then tried to diversify only to fail. Sometimes not being able to reproduce that initial success.

What I am saying is that often times you have the strengths needed to build out or on your existing strategy to take on even more verticals or competitors. Due to your distinctive competence which gives you the advantage over your peers.

If you think of it from a tactical strategy perspective sometimes it is always best to lead from a position of strength.

By: Larry McKeogh

Larry McKeogh — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:03:54 +0000

I'd actually take a step back and consider a Systems Thinker as opposed to a strategic thinker. A strategic thinker can envision a future. I would contend that even a tactical thinker can create such a picture. A systems thinker though is going to be able to turn thoughts into reality.
From wikipedia -
Systems thinking is any process of estimating or inferring how local policies, actions, or changes influence the state of the neighboring universe. It also can be defined, as an approach to problem solving, as viewing "problems" as parts of an overall system, rather than reacting to present outcomes or events and potentially contributing to further development of the undesired issue or problem.

"Using facts, working with boundaries, consequence and risk analysis" all define the system your working within. Understanding this you can chart a course and make the necessary decisions.

By: Stewart Rogers

Stewart Rogers — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:27:16 +0000

It truly is a complicated and political role.

By: Stewart Rogers

Stewart Rogers — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:25:38 +0000

Yes.