Being Strategic = ?
I have a Google alert on the phrase "being strategic," partly to see what's happening with my book, but partly because I find so fascinating all the disparate (and sometimes contradictory) ways people use those words. Here's one I got this morning:
"InterActiveCorp’s dating website company Match.com has acquired Singlesnet. Singlesnet offers similar services as Match.com. Match.com sees the acquisition has having value rather than being strategic. SinglesNet will continue to operate as an independent company."
What? Strategic is the opposite of valuable? If I dig down through this, it implies the writer is defining being strategic as "doing something solely to take out a competitor, vs. rather than as a direct benefit to your business." This is an implied definition I've seen more and more lately: being strategic = being manipulative or aggressive…or even deceptive or inauthentic. To that point, here's another of my Google alerts this morning, from someone's Tweet:
"Being strategic is too exhausting. If I love or hate you it will show. Wish more ppl were like that. I don't have the patience to fake it."
I find it irritating when perfectly good and useable words or phrases start being defined in limiting ways – like "feedback," which has come to mean "telling you something bad about yourself" (vs. "providing input") or "buxom," which has come to mean "fat" (vs. "curvy and voluptuous").
I'm sticking to my much more useful and actionable definition of being strategic:
Consistently focusing on those core directional choices that will best move you toward your hoped-for future.
“Strategic” is an interesting word. On the one hand, it’s suffered from the same “grade inflation” as “leadership.” Strategy is seen as the higher-order function, moreso than tactics or operations. As if you can make do without them.
And strategy is also seen as “strategic planning,” a function of deep thinking and complex calculation. This is tied to the idea of the annual strategy off-site, where executives eat well, play a little golf and re-work last year’s strategy.
Now we can add the meanings you outline in your post. Sheesh.
What I loved about your book was that you defined strategy as a process of asking questions and making choices that move you forward. A good example is Jeff Bezos considering the name for his company. He wanted something big and he wanted a name that didn’t restrict the company to being perceived as only a bookseller.
That’s one of the examples in the book I wrote with Tom Hall that will be out later this Spring. Our core message is that companies who are successful for a long time (one for almost 200 years) decide on a simple core strategy and then focus ruthlessly on making it work. Hence the title: Ruthless Focus.
Re: [The Simplest Thing That Works] Wally Bock submitted a comment to Being Strategic = ?
Hi Wally -
Thanks as always for your comments. Sorry for the time lag in my response Im on vacation in Jamaica, and checking email only sporadically.
Your new book sounds fascinating I look forward to reading it!
Warmly,
erika