Strategy Chess Board (Article)
Strategy Chess Board (Article)
Strategy Chess Board (Article)
Hiring a consulting rm often means access to the hottest and most innovative strategies in the marketplace. Improving a companys performance, however, means using approaches targeted to the companys situation rather than applying the strategy theory du jour. The Strategy Chessboard gives structure to the different schools of thought on strategy, by providing a toolbox of approaches.
A.T. Kearney
EXECUTIVE AGENDA
SINCE THE 1970S, weve witnessed a bewildering array of strategic schools of thought and frameworks. The 1980s were dominated by Michael Porters positioning for competitive advantage. The 1990s had multiple contributors, with Prahalad and Hamels Competing for the Future standing out. Kim and Mauborgnes Blue Ocean Strategy and Deans, Krger and Zeisels Winning the Merger Endgame were noteworthy contributions in the early 2000s. Throughout these decades, the Santa Fe Institute has painted the economy as an Evolving Complex System, which has significant strategic implications as the institute suggests that managers often assume certainty where there is none. Dozens of schools of thought claim to have the most widely applicable and useful framework for strategy development, yet most strategists are biased toward the theories and frameworks with which they are most comfortable. At A.T. Kearney, we believe that a single strategy school is not universally applicable; strategies and their frameworks are complementary. Based on our research and work in this area, weve developed a Strategy Chessboard that enables us
to articulate clear choices in strategic approaches and pick the right starting point for developing and applying a particular strategy. This approach is critical for dealing with two assumptions that are often flawed but accepted: (1) that an industry is predictable and (2) that a companys strategic focus is always concerned with adapting its positioning within this presumably predictable industry.
FIGURE 1