My Boycott on Strategy (Part 2)

‘Strategy’ has become a buzz word. As I concluded in my last post…

There are two primary abuses of the word ‘strategy’ in marketing which have eroded its value and promoted it to buzz word status:

1. Referring to tactics as though they’re strategies
2. Ignoring the foundational philosophy on which a strategy must be built

First, let’s address problem #1.

1. Referring to tactics as though they’re strategies
Strategies and tactics have an interesting relationship. They behave a little bit like Russian nesting dolls.

Marketing strategy, for example, starts at the highest level by defining a target market and a revenue model. “Who needs what I’m selling, and what will they pay for it?” Crack open that doll and you’ll find a layer of tactics one might use to define and reach the target market, like prospecting for members of the market, communicating value to them and delivering that value.

The problem is that each of these tactics contain their own Russian doll of sub-tactics to implement. For example, communicating value to target prospects isn’t just a tactic of the overall go-to-market strategy, it’s a strategy all its own, with its own tactics to carry out.

One tactic of a communication strategy is social media, but it too is a strategy in itself. Will you deliver 3rd party content via your twitter account? Will you automate a zombie account or use your own time? Will you reject an investment in Twitter altogether and focus on Facebook instead? Is there an industry specific forum that will yield a higher return? What tone of voice will you employ?

And the rabbit hole continues.

Each tactic is actually an umbrella strategy for the tactics beneath it. Each strategy is really just a tactic of the strategy above it.

This means there’s only one meaningful difference between strategies and tactics: context.

Marketers — hell, business people of every kind — treat ‘strategy’ like the holy grail of professional achievement. Just sit through a few job interviews and you’ll hear, “I’m a strategic thinker.” “I consider myself more strategic than tactical.” “I’m looking for a more strategic role.”

Because context is required to give the word meaning, ‘strategy’ is most often used in a meaningless way.

Buzz.

2. Ignoring the foundational philosophy on which a strategy must be built
Strategy is treated like a holy grail because marketers — and again, business people in general — fail to recognize that there is an even greater factor influencing business success:

Philosophy.

Philosophy is the foundation upon which every strategy is built. Whether you know it or not, you have a foundational philosophy. Your philosophy defines the goals toward which you strive, and everything you do is directed by it. Your philosophy is your reason for being. Your philosophy is your basic belief system about yourself, your organization, your employees, your customers, your community, and your relationship to all of them.

If you’ve never identified, defined and stated your philosophy, you may have no idea why your organization is so dysfunctional.

If you have defined and stated your philosophy but it doesn’t inform the decisions you make every day, its a lie. Take a long hard look at the way you and your organization behave. You cannot afford a fluff philosophy. You need a foundational philosophy.

Here’s why:

Philosophy + Strategy + Tactics = spinning wheels

Philosophy + Strategy + Tactics = inefficient progress

Philosophy + Strategy + Tactics = talk

Philosophy + Strategy + Tactics = organized progress

When philosophy is removed from your business equation, so are purpose and progress. When the word ‘strategy’ is used like a surrogate for philosophy, everyone’s time and efforts are wasted.

Buzz.

It’s leadership’s job to develop, communicate and live by the organization’s philosophy. More on that to come…