What is a good strategy?

Some years ago, Richard Rumelt wrote about good and bad strategy. A bad strategy is coming in different shapes and sizes. Examples he provides are:

• fluff: A superficial abstraction of strategy often hides mediocrity. Mission/vision statements without additional explanations are not very helpful. I remember a long time ago I had an idea that would fit into one of the application areas of the new strategies. Although the fit was obvious, no one was interested in the idea. I had the impression that the application areas were just a communication tool to redesign the existing products into a modern style for external stakeholders.
• bad strategic objectives: If the objectives are fuzzy or just a long to do list, than there is no focus and hence no results.
• blue sky thinking: If the strategy is not based on realistic capabilities, it will overwhelm the organization and prevent positive results. Think of the GE example where employee performance was graded. If someone felt that an employee was not performing in relation to the lofty goal, they were out. The downfall was inevitable.

A good strategy, on the other hand, is based on a sound diagnosis, a general guiding policy and a coherent package of measures.

He does not say what these look like and for how long the strategy is a good and valid strategy. Certainly this is something that needs to be adapted to the concrete context.

When I look at these points, they are solid, well-founded and based on good arguments. The situation is not overly complicated by academic frameworks or models that only cover a limited number of aspects. Frameworks or models such as Porter's 5 Forces, SWOT and Business Model Canvas can help to reach a conclusion, but they are no substitute for the diagnosis, the formulation of the guideline and the package of measures.

The way to the result is to ask questions. Questions about your value proposition, your stakeholders, your unique insights and the inner logic of your arguments. The questions capture the essence of the playing field and lead to the conclusion of how you will win, what capabilities and processes you need to win.

So why not ask more good questions?