82 Harvard Business Review | April 2008 | hbr.org
CAN YOU SUMMARIZE YOUR COMPANY’S STRATEGY in 35 words or
less? If so, would your colleagues put it the same way?It is our experience that very few executives can honestly an-
swer these simple questions in the affi rmative. And the compa-
nies that those executives work for are often the most successful
in their industry. One is Edward Jones, a St. Louis–based bro-
kerage fi rm with which one of us has been involved for more
than 10 years. The fourth-largest brokerage in the United States,
Jones has quadrupled its market share during the past two de-
cades, has consistently outperformed its rivals in terms of ROI
through bull and bear markets, and has been a fi xture on Fortune’s
list of the top companies to work for. It’s a safe bet that just
by David J. Collis and Michael G. RukstadG
ett
y Im
age
s an
d I
PN
sto
ck
Can You SayWhat Your
Strategy Is?
1084 Collis.indd 821084 Collis.indd 82 3/4/08 10:14:03 PM3/4/08 10:14:03 PM
It’s a dirty little secret: Most executives cannot articulate the objective, scope, and advantage of their business in a simple statement. If they can’t, neither can anyone else.
1084 Collis.indd 831084 Collis.indd 83 3/4/08 10:14:09 PM3/4/08 10:14:09 PM
84 Harvard Business Review | April 2008 | hbr.org
about every one of its 37,000 employees could express the
company’s succinct strategy statement: Jones aims to “grow
to 17,000 fi nancial advisers by 2012 [from about 10,000 to-
day] by offering trusted and convenient face-to-face fi nan-
cial advice to conservative individual investors who delegate
their fi nancial decisions, through a national network of one-
fi nancial-adviser offi ces.”
Conversely, companies that don’t have a simple and clear
statement of strategy are likely to fall into the sorry category
of those that have failed to execute their strategy or, worse,
those that never even had one. In an astonishing number of
organizations, executives, frontline employees, and all those
in between are frustrated because no clear strategy exists for
the company or its lines of business. The kinds of complaints
that abound in such fi rms include:
“I try for months to get an initiative off the ground, and
then it is shut down because ‘it doesn’t fi t the strategy.’
Why didn’t anyone tell me that at the beginning?”
“I don’t know whether I should be pursuing this market
opportunity. I get mixed signals from the powers that be.”
“Why are we bidding on this customer’s business again?
We lost it last year, and I thought we agreed then not to
waste our time chasing the contract!”
“Should I cut the price for this customer? I don’t know if
we would be better off winning the deal at a lower price
or just losing the business.”
Leaders of fi rms are mystifi ed when what they thought
was a beautifully crafted strategy is never implemented.
They assume that the initiatives described in the volumi-
nous documentation that emerges from an annual budget or
a strategic-planning process will ensure competitive success.
They fail to appreciate the necessity of having a simple, clear,
succinct strategy statement that everyone can internalize
and use as a guiding light for making diffi cult choices.
Think of a major business as a mound of 10,000 iron
fi lings, each one representing an employee. If you scoop
up that many fi lings and drop them onto a piece of paper,
they’ll be pointing in every direction. It will be a big mess:
10,000 smart people working hard and making what they
think are the right decisions for the company – but with the
net result of confusion. Engineers in the R&D department
are creating a product with “must have” features for which
(as the marketing group could have told them) customers
will not pay; the sales force is selling customers on quick
•
•
•
•
turnaround times and customized offerings even though
the manufacturing group has just invested in equipment
designed for long production runs; and so on.
If you pass a magnet over those fi lings, what happens?
They line up. Similarly, a well-understood statement of strat-
egy aligns behavior within the business. It allows everyone
in the organization to make individual choices that reinforce
one another, rendering those 10,000 employees exponen-
tially more effective.
What goes into a good statement of strategy? Michael
Porter’s seminal article “What Is Strategy?” (HBR November–
December 1996) lays out the characteristics of strategy in
a conceptual fashion, conveying the essence of strategic
choices and distinguishing them from the relentless but com-
petitively fruitless search for operational effi ciency. However,
we have found in our work both with executives and with
students that Porter’s article does not answer the more basic
question of how to describe a particular fi rm’s strategy.
It is a dirty little secret that most executives don’t actually
know what all the elements of a strategy statement are, which
makes it impossible for them to develop one. With a clear defi –
nition, though, two things happen: First, formulation becomes
infi nitely easier because executives know what they are trying
to create. Second, implementation becomes much simpler be-
cause the strategy’s essence can be readily communicated and
easily internalized by everyone in the organization.
Elements of a Strategy StatementThe late Mike Rukstad, who contributed enormously to
this article, identifi ed three critical components of a good
strategy statement – objective, scope, and advantage – and
rightly believed that executives should be forced to be crys-
tal clear about them. These elements are a simple yet suffi –
cient list for any strategy (whether business or military) that
addresses competitive interaction over unbounded terrain. Any strategy statement must begin with a defi nition of
the ends that the strategy is designed to achieve. “If you
don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there”
is the appropriate maxim here. If a nation has an unclear
sense of what it seeks to achieve from a military campaign,
how can it have a hope of attaining its goal? The defi nition
of the objective should include not only an end point but
also a time frame for reaching it. A strategy to get U.S. troops
out of Iraq at some distant point in the future would be
very different from a strategy to bring them home within
two years.
Since most fi rms compete in a more or less unbounded
landscape, it is also crucial to defi ne the scope, or domain,
of the business: the part of the landscape in which the fi rm
will operate. What are the boundaries beyond which it will
not venture? If you are planning to enter the restaurant
business, will you provide sit-down or quick service? A casual
or an upscale atmosphere? What type of food will you offer –
David J. Collis ([email protected]) is an adjunct professor in the
strategy unit of Harvard Business School in Boston and the author of
several books on corporate strategy. He has studied and consulted
to Edward Jones, the brokerage that is the main example in this
article, and has taught in the fi rm’s management-development pro-
gram. Michael G. Rukstad was a senior research fellow at Harvard
Business School, where he taught for many years until his untimely
death in 2006.
Can You Say What Your Strategy Is?
1084 Collis.indd 841084 Collis.indd 84 3/4/08 10:14:25 PM3/4/08 10:14:25 PM
hbr.org | April 2008 | Harvard Business Review 85
French or Mexican? What geographic
area will you serve – the Midwest or the
East Coast?
Alone, these two aspects of strategy
are insuffi cient. You could go into busi-
ness tomorrow with the goal of be-
coming the world’s largest hamburger
chain within 10 years. But will anyone
invest in your company if you have not
explained how you are going to reach
your objective? Your competitive ad-
vantage is the essence of your strategy:
What your business will do differently
from or better than others defi nes the
all-important means by which you will
achieve your stated objective. That
advantage has complementary exter-
nal and internal components: a value
proposition that explains why the tar-
geted customer should buy your prod-
uct above all the alternatives, and a
description of how internal activities
must be aligned so that only your fi rm
can deliver that value proposition.
Defi ning the objective, scope, and
advantage requires trade-offs, which
Porter identifi ed as fundamental to
strategy. If a fi rm chooses to pursue
growth or size, it must accept that
profi tability will take a back seat. If it
chooses to serve institutional clients,
it may ignore retail customers. If the
value proposition is lower prices, the
company will not be able to compete
on, for example, fashion or fi t. Finally, if the advantage comes
from scale economies, the fi rm will not be able to accommo-
date idiosyncratic customer needs. Such trade-offs are what
distinguish individual companies strategically.
Defi ning the ObjectiveThe fi rst element of a strategy statement is the one that
most companies have in some form or other. Unfortunately,
the form is usually wrong. Companies tend to confuse their
statement of values or their mission with their strategic
objective. A strategic objective is not, for example, the
platitude of “maximizing shareholder
wealth by exceeding customer expec-
tations for _______ [insert product or
service here] and providing opportuni-
ties for our employees to lead fulfi ll-
ing lives while respecting the environ-
ment and the communities in which
we operate.” Rather, it is the single
precise objective that will drive the
business over the next fi ve years or so.
(See the exhibit “A Hierarchy of Com-
pany Statements.”) Many companies
do have – and all fi rms should have –
statements of their ultimate purpose
and the ethical values under which
they will operate, but neither of these
is the strategic objective.
The mission statement spells out
the underlying motivation for be-
ing in business in the fi rst place – the
contribution to society that the fi rm
aspires to make. (An
insurance company,
for example, might
defi ne its mission as
providing financial
security to consum-
ers.) Such statements,
how ever, are not use-
ful as strategic goals
to drive today’s busi-
ness decisions. Simi-
larly, it is good and
proper that fi rms be
clear with employees about ethical values. But principles
such as respecting individual differences and sustaining the
environment are not strategic. They govern how employees
should behave (“doing things right”); they do not guide what
the fi rm should do (“the right thing to do”).
Firms in the same business often have the same mission.
(Don’t all insurance companies aspire to provide fi nancial
security to their customers?) They may also have the same
values. They might even share a vision: an indeterminate
future goal such as being the “recognized leader in the insur-
ance fi eld.” However, it is unlikely that even two companies
The trade-offs companies makeare what distinguish them strategically from other fi rms.
A Hierarchy of Company Statements
Organizational direction comes in several forms. The mission state-ment is your loftiest guiding light – and your least specifi c. As you work your way down the hierarchy, the statements become more concrete, practical, and ultimately unique. No other company will have the same strategy statement, which defi nes your competitive advantage, or balanced scorecard, which tracks how you implement your particular strategy.
MISSIONWhy we exist
VALUESWhat we believe in and how we will behave
VISIONWhat we want to be
STRATEGYWhat our competitive game plan will be
BALANCED SCORECARDHow we will monitor and implement that plan
The BASIC ELEMENTS of a Strategy Statement
OBJECTIVE = Ends
SCOPE = Domain
ADVANTAGE = Means
1084 Collis.indd 851084 Collis.indd 85 3/4/08 10:14:34 PM3/4/08 10:14:34 PM
Can You Say What Your Strategy Is?
86 Harvard Business Review | April 2008 | hbr.org
in the same business will have the same strategic objective.
Indeed, if your fi rm’s strategy can be applied to any other
fi rm, you don’t have a very good one.
It is always easy to claim that maximizing shareholder
value is the company’s objective. In some sense all strategies
are designed to do this. However, the question to ask when
creating an actionable strategic statement is, Which objec-
tive is most likely to maximize shareholder value over the
next several years? (Growth? Achieving a certain market
share? Becoming the market leader?) The strategic objective
should be specifi c, measurable, and time bound. It should
also be a single goal. It is not suffi cient to say, “We seek to
grow profi tably.” Which matters more – growth or profi tabil-
ity? A salesperson needs to know the answer when she’s
deciding how aggressive to be on price. There could well
be a host of subordinate goals that follow from the strate-
gic objective, and these might serve as metrics on a bal-
anced scorecard that monitors progress for which individu-
als will be held accountable. Yet the ultimate objective that
will drive the operation of the business over the next several
years should always be clear.
The choice of objective has a profound impact on a fi rm.
When Boeing shifted its primary goal from being the largest
player in the aircraft industry to being the most profi table,
it had to restructure the entire organization, from sales to
manufacturing. For example, the company dropped its pol-
icy of competing with Airbus to the last cent on every deal
and abandoned its commitment to maintain a manufactur-
ing capacity that could deliver more than half a peak year’s
demand for planes.
Another company, after years of seeking to maximize prof-
its at the expense of growth, issued a corporate mandate to
generate at least 10% organic growth per year. The change in strategy forced the fi rm to switch its focus from shrinking to
serve only its profi table core customers and competing on
the basis of cost or effi ciency to differentiating its products,
which led to a host of new product features and services that
appealed to a wider set of customers.
At Edward Jones, discussion among the partners about
the fi rm’s objective ignited a passionate exchange. One
said, “Our ultimate objective has to be maximizing profi t
per partner.” Another responded, “Not all fi nancial advisers
are partners – so if we maximize revenue per partner, we are
ignoring the other 30,000-plus people who make the busi-
ness work!” Another added, “Our ultimate customer is the
client. We cannot just worry about partner profi ts. In fact, we
should start by maximizing value for the customer and let
the profi ts fl ow to us from there!” And so on. This intense de-
bate not only drove alignment with the objective of healthy
growth in the number of fi nancial advisers but also ensured
that every implication of that choice was fully explored. Set-
ting an ambitious growth target at each point in its 85-year
history, Edward Jones has continually increased its scale
and market presence. Striving to achieve such growth has
increased long-term profi t per adviser and led the fi rm to its
unique confi guration: Its only profi t center is the individual
fi nancial adviser. Other activities, even investment banking,
serve as support functions and are not held accountable for
generating profi t.
Defi ning the ScopeA fi rm’s scope encompasses three dimensions: customer or of-
fering, geographic location, and vertical integration. Clearly
defi ned boundaries in those areas should make it obvious to
managers which activities they should concentrate on and,
more important, which they should not do.
The three dimensions may vary in relevance. For Edward
Jones, the most important is the customer. The fi rm is confi g-
ured to meet the needs of one very specifi c type of client. Un-
like just about every other brokerage in the business, Jones
does not defi ne its archetypal customer by net worth or in-
come. Nor does it use demographics, profession, or spending
habits. Rather, the defi nition is psychographic: The compa-
ny’s customers are long-term investors who have a conserva-
tive investment philosophy and are uncomfortable making
serious fi nancial decisions without the support of a trusted
adviser. In the terminology of the business, Jones targets the
“delegator,” not the “validator” or the “do-it-yourselfer.”
The scope of an enterprise does not prescribe exactly what
should be done within the specifi ed bounds. In fact, it encour-
ages experimentation and initiative. But to ensure that the
borders are clear to all employees, the scope should specify
where the fi rm or business will not go. That will prevent man-
agers from spending long hours on projects that get turned
down by higher-ups because they do not fi t the strategy.
For example, clarity about who the customer is and who it
is not has kept Edward Jones from pursuing day traders. Even
at the height of the internet bubble, the company chose not
to introduce online trading (it is still not available to Jones
customers). Unlike the many brokerages that committed
hundreds of millions of dollars and endless executive hours
to debates over whether to introduce online trading (and
if so, how to price and position it in a way that did not can-
nibalize or confl ict with traditional offerings), Jones wasted
no money or time on that decision because it had set clear
boundaries.
Similarly, Jones is not vertically integrated into propri-
etary mutual funds, so as not to violate the independence
of its fi nancial advisers and undermine clients’ trust. Nor
will the company offer penny stocks, shares from IPOs, com-
modities, or options – investment products that it believes
are too risky for the conservative clients it chooses to serve.
And it does not have metropolitan offi ces in business dis-
tricts, because they would not allow for the convenient, face-
to-face interactions in casual settings that the fi rm seeks to
provide. Knowing not to extend its scope in these directions
1084 Collis.indd 861084 Collis.indd 86 3/4/08 10:14:40 PM3/4/08 10:14:40 PM
has allowed the fi rm to focus on doing what it does well and
reap the benefi ts of simplicity, standardization, and deep
experience.
Defi ning the AdvantageGiven that a sustainable competitive advantage is the es-
sence of strategy, it should be no surprise that advantage
is the most critical aspect of a strategy statement. Clarity
about what makes the fi rm distinctive is what most helps
employees understand how they can contribute to successful
execution of its strategy.
As mentioned above, the complete defi nition of a fi rm’s
competitive advantage consists of two parts. The fi rst is a
statement of the customer value proposition. Any strat-
egy statement that cannot explain why customers should
buy your product or service is doomed to failure. A simple
graphic that maps your value proposition against those of
rivals can be an extremely easy and useful way of identifying
what makes yours distinctive. (See the exhibit “Wal-Mart’s
Value Proposition.”)
The second part of the statement of advantage captures
the unique activities or the complex combination of activi-
ties allowing that fi rm alone to deliver the customer value
proposition. This is where the strategy statement draws
from Porter’s defi nition of strategy as making consistent
choices about the confi guration of the fi rm’s activities. It is
also where the activity-system map that Porter describes in
“What Is Strategy?” comes into play.
As the exhibit “Edward Jones’s Activity-System Map” shows,
the brokerage’s value proposition is to provide convenient,
trusted, personal service and advice. What is most distinctive
about Jones is that it has only one fi nancial adviser in an offi ce,
which allows it to have more offi ces (10,000 nationally) than
competitors do. Merrill Lynch has about 15,000 brokers but
only 1,000 offi ces. To make it easy for its targeted customers
to visit at their convenience – and to provide a relaxed, per-
sonable, nonthreatening environment – Jones puts its offi ces
in strip malls and the retail districts of rural areas and sub-
urbs rather than high-rise buildings in the central business
districts of big cities. These choices alone require Jones to
differ radically from other brokerages in the confi guration of
its activities. With no branch-offi ce management providing
direction or support, each fi nancial adviser must be an en-
trepreneur who delights in running his or her own operation.
Since such people are an exception in the industry, Jones has
to bring all its own fi nancial advisers in from other indus-
tries or backgrounds and train them, at great expense. Until
2007, when it switched to an internet-based service, the fi rm
had to have its own satellite network to provide its widely
dispersed offi ces with real-time quotes and allow them to
execute trades. Because the company has 10,000 separate
offi ces, its real estate and communication costs are about
50% higher than the industry average. However, all those
offi ces allow the fi nancial advisers who run them to deliver
convenient, trusted, personal service and advice.
Other successful players in this industry also have distinc-
tive value propositions and unique confi gurations of activi-
ties to support them.
Merrill Lynch. During the fi ve-year tenure of former CEO Stan O’Neal, who retired in October 2007, Merrill Lynch
Wal-Mart’s Value Proposition
Wal-Mart’s value proposition can be summed up as “everyday low prices for a broad range of goods that are always in stock in convenient geographic locations.” It is those aspects of the customer experience that the company overdelivers relative to competitors. Under-performance on other dimensions, such as ambience and sales help, is a strategic choice that generates cost savings, which fuel the company’s price advantage.
If the local mom-and-pop hardware store has survived, it also has a value proposition: convenience, proprietors who have known you for years, free coffee and doughnuts on Saturday mornings, and so on.
Sears falls in the middle on many criteria. As a result, customers lack a lot of compelling reasons to shop there, which goes a long way toward explaining why the company is struggling to remain profi table.
Low prices
Selection acrosscategories
Rural convenience
Reliable prices
In-stockmerchandise
Merchandise quality
Suburbanconvenience
Selection withincategories
Sales help
Ambience
Wal-MartSearsMom & popstores
Customer purchase criteria*
poor excellent
Delivery on criteria
Source: Jan Rivkin, Harvard Business School
* in approximate order of importance to Wal-Mart’s target customer group
hbr.org | April 2008 | Harvard Business Review 87
1084 Collis.indd 871084 Collis.indd 87 3/4/08 10:14:45 PM3/4/08 10:14:45 PM
Can You Say What Your Strategy Is?
developed an effective strategy that it called “Total Merrill.”
The company’s value proposition: to provide for all the fi –
nancial needs of its high-net-worth customers – those with
liquid fi nancial assets of more than $250,000 – through retire-ment. While a lot of brokerages cater to people with a high
net worth, they focus on asset accumulation before retire-
ment. Merrill’s view is that as baby boomers age and move
from the relatively simple phase of accumulating assets to
the much more complex, higher-risk phase of drawing cash
from their retirement accounts, their needs change. Dur-
ing this stage, they will want to consolidate their fi nancial
assets with a single trusted partner that can help them fi g-
ure out how to optimize income over their remaining years
by making the best decisions on everything from annuities
to payout ratios to long-term-care insurance. Merrill offers
coherent fi nancial plans for such customers and provides
access to a very wide range of sophisticated products based
on a Monte Carlo simulation of the probabilities of running
out of money according to different annual rates of return
on different categories of assets.
How does Merrill intend to deliver this value to its chosen
customers in a way that’s unique among large fi rms? First,
it is pushing brokers – especially new ones – to become cer-
tifi ed fi nancial planners and has raised internal training re-
PRICEone-timecommission
TARGET CUSTOMER
individual
conservative
delegates decisions
BRANCH SUPPORTbranch-office assistant
PRODUCT
blue chips
mutual funds
ONE FINANCIAL ADVISER PER OFFICEadvisers run their own offices
MARKETING
local mailings
knocking on doors
INVESTMENTPHILOSOPHYlong-termbuy and hold
BROKER TYPE
entrepreneur
member of community
HIRE & TRAINhire from outside industry
internally train all financial advisers
VALUES & CULTURE
volunteerism
mentoring
OWNERSHIPpartnership, not public
COMPENSATIONeach financial adviser is a profit center
TECHNOLOGY
satellite (historically)
HEADQUARTERSSt. Louis home office for all activities
REGIONAL STRUCTUREno regional management
LOCATION
rural
suburban
strip mall
CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP
face-to-face
convenient
trusted financialadviser
Edward Jones’s Activity-System Map
This map illustrates how activities at the brokerage Edward Jones connect to deliver competitive advantage. The fi rm’s customer value proposition appears near the center of the map – in the “customer relationship” bubble – and the supporting activities hang off it. Only the major connections are shown.
88 Harvard Business Review | April 2008 | hbr.org
1084 Collis.indd 881084 Collis.indd 88 3/4/08 10:14:51 PM3/4/08 10:14:51 PM
hbr.org | April 2008 | Harvard Business Review 89
CUSTOMERS’needs
COMPETITORS’offerings
COMPANY’Scapabilities
CONTEXT(technology, industry
demographics, regulation, and so on)
SWEETSPOT
quirements to put them on that road.
The certifi ed fi nancial planner license
is more diffi cult for brokers to obtain
than the standard Series 7 license, be-
cause it requires candidates to have a
college degree and to master nearly
100 integrated fi nancial-planning top-
ics. Second, Merrill offers all forms
of insurance, annuities, covered calls,
hedge funds, banking services, and so
on (unlike Edward Jones, which offers
a much more limited menu of invest-
ment products). Since several of these
products are technically complex,
Merrill needs product specialists to
support the client-facing broker. This
“Team Merrill” organization poses
very different HR and compensation
issues from those posed by Edward
Jones’s single-adviser offi ces. Merrill’s
compensation system has to share in-
come among the team members and
reward referrals.
Wells Fargo. This San Francisco bank competes in the brokerage busi-
ness as part of its tactic to cross-sell
services to its retail banking custom-
ers in order to boost profi t per customer. (It aims to sell each
customer at least eight different products.) Wells Fargo’s
objective for its brokerage arm, clearly stated in a recent an-
nual report, is to triple its share of customers’ fi nancial assets.
The brokerage’s means for achieving this goal is the parent
company’s database of 23 million customers, many of them
brought into the fi rm through one particular aspect of the
banking relationship: the mortgage. Wells Fargo differs from
Edward Jones and Merrill Lynch in its aim to offer personal-
ized, rather than personal, service. For example, the fi rm’s
IT system allows a bank clerk to know a limited amount of
information about a customer (name, birthday, and so on)
and appear to be familiar with him or her, which is quite dif-
ferent from the ongoing individual relationships that Jones
and Merrill brokers have with their clients.
LPL Financial. Different again is LPL Financial, with of-fi ces in Boston, San Diego, and Charlotte, North Carolina.
LPL sees its brokers (all of whom are independent fi nancial
advisers affi liated with the fi rm) rather than consumers as its
clients and has confi gured all of its activities to provide in-
dividualized solutions and the highest payouts to its brokers.
This means that the vast majority of the activities performed
by the corporate headquarters staff are services, such as train-
ing, that brokers choose and pay for on an à la carte basis. As
a result, LPL’s headquarters staff is very small (0.20 people
per broker) compared with that of Edward Jones (1.45 peo-
ple per broker). Low overhead allows
LPL to offer a higher payout to brokers
than Jones and Merrill do, which is its
distinctive value proposition to its cho-
sen customer: the broker.
By now it should be apparent how
a careful description of the unique ac-
tivities a fi rm performs to generate a
distinctive customer value proposition
effectively captures its strategy. A rela-
tively simple description in a strategy
statement provides an incisive charac-
terization that could not belong to any
other fi rm. This is the goal. When that
statement has been internalized by all
employees, they can easily understand
how their daily activities contribute to
the overall success of the fi rm and how
to correctly make the diffi cult choices
they confront in their jobs.
Developing a Strategy StatementHow, then, should a fi rm go about
crafting its strategy statement? Obvi-
ously, the fi rst step is to create a great
strategy, which requires careful evalu-
ation of the industry landscape. This
includes developing a detailed understanding of customer
needs, segmenting customers, and then identifying unique
ways of creating value for the ones the fi rm chooses to serve.
It also calls for an analysis of competitors’ current strategies
and a prediction of how they might change in the future.
The process must involve a rigorous, objective assessment
of the fi rm’s capabilities and resources and those of competi-
tors, as described in “Competing on Resources: Strategy in
the 1990s,” by David J. Collis and Cynthia A. Montgomery
(HBR July–August 1995) – not just a feel-good exercise of
identifying core competencies. The creative part of develop-
ing strategy is fi nding the sweet spot that aligns the fi rm’s
capabilities with customer needs in a way that competitors
cannot match given the changing external context – factors
such as technology, industry demographics, and regulation.
(See the exhibit “The Strategic Sweet Spot.”) We have found
that one of the best ways to do this is to develop two or three
plausible but very different strategic options.
For example, fl eshing out two dramatically different alter-
natives – becoming a cheap Red Lobster or a fi sh McDonald’s –
helped executives at the Long John Silver’s chain of restau-
rants understand the strategic choices that they had to make.
They had been trying to do a bit of everything, and this
exercise showed them that their initiatives – such as offer-
ing early-evening table service and expanding drive-through
service – were strategically inconsistent. (Competing on the
The Strategic Sweet Spot
The strategic sweet spot of a company is where it meets customers’ needs in a way that rivals can’t, given the context in which it competes.
1084 Collis.indd 891084 Collis.indd 89 3/4/08 10:14:58 PM3/4/08 10:14:58 PM
90 Harvard Business Review | April 2008 | hbr.org
basis of table service requires bigger restaurants and more
employees, while drive-through service requires high-traffi c
locations and smaller footprints.) As a result, they chose to
be a fi sh McDonald’s, building smaller restaurants with drive-
through service in high-traffi c locations.
The process of developing the strategy and then crafting
the statement that captures its essence in a readily communi-
cable manner should involve employees in all parts of the
company and at all levels of the hierarchy. The wording of
the strategy statement should be worked through in pains-
taking detail. In fact, that can be the most powerful part
of the strategy development process. It is usually in heated
discussions over the choice of a single word that a strat-
egy is crystallized and executives truly understand what it
will involve.
The end result should be a brief statement that refl ects
the three elements of an effective strategy. It should be ac-
companied by detailed annotations that elucidate the strate-
gy’s nuances (to preempt any possible misreading) and spell
out its implications. (See the exhibit “Leaving No Room for
Misinterpretation.”)
When the strategy statement is circulated throughout the
company, the value proposition chart and activity-system
map should be attached. They serve as simple reminders of
the twin aspects of competitive advantage that underpin the
strategy. Cascading the statement throughout the organiza-
tion, so that each level of management will be the teacher
for the level below, becomes the starting point for incorpo-
rating strategy into everyone’s behavior. The strategy will
really have traction only when executives can be confi dent
that the actions of empowered frontline employees will be
guided by the same principles that they themselves follow.
• • •
The value of rhetoric should not be underestimated. A 35-
word statement can have a substantial impact on a compa-
ny’s success. Words do lead to action. Spending the time to
develop the few words that truly capture your strategy and
that will energize and empower your people will raise the
long-term fi nancial performance of your organization.
Reprint R0804E
To order, see page 139.
Leaving No Room for Misinterpretation
Executives at Edward Jones have devel-oped a detailed understanding of every element of the fi rm’s strategy. Here is an example.
Edward Jones’s Strategy Statement
To grow to 17,000 fi nancial advis-
ers by 2012 by offering trusted and
convenient face-to-face fi nancial
advice to conservative individual
investors who delegate their
fi nancial decisions, through a
national network of one-fi nancial-
adviser offi ces.
”conservative“
Our investment philosophy is long-term buy and hold. We do not sell penny stocks, commodities, or other high-risk instruments.As a result we do not serve day traders and see no need to offer online trading.
We charge commissions on trades because this is the cheapest way to buy stocks (compared with a wrap fee, which charges an-nually as a percentage of assets) when the average length of time the investor holds the stock or mutual fund is over 10 years.
”individual“
We do not advise institutions or companies.
We do not segment according to wealth, age, or other demo-graphics. The company will serve all customers that fi t its conser-vative investment philosophy. Brokers will call on any and every potential customer. Stories abound within Jones of millionaires who live in trailers – people all the other brokerages would never think of approaching.
”investors“
Our basic service is investment. We do not seek to offer services such as checking accounts for their own sake, but only as part of the management of a client’s assets.
”who delegate their fi nancial decisions“
We do not target self-directed do-it-yourselfers, who are comfort-able making their own investment decisions. We are also unlikely to serve validators, who are merely looking for reassurance that their decisions are correct.
1084 Collis.indd 901084 Collis.indd 90 3/4/08 10:15:05 PM3/4/08 10:15:05 PM
