Strategy development: Weighing
strategic
Strategy development enables informed choices among relevant options. It clarifies priorities, identifies less desirable alternatives, and outlines the underlying assumptions.
To achieve this, we connect market, customer, and competitive developments with your organization’s capabilities, experience, and resources. Diverse perspectives help to validate assumptions, develop alternatives, and identify consequences early on.
We support you in developing a strategic direction that facilitates decision-making and provides sufficient clarity for implementation.
Discover how strategy development can impact your current role.
When everything takes priority, strategic choice is lacking.
Tell us in a no-obligation consultation about the strategic decision you’re currently facing. We’ll work with you to identify initial questions that might be relevant for further consideration.
When is Strategy Development Useful
Not every change requires a new strategy. Strategy development becomes relevant when existing priorities are no longer sufficient or when a decision is pending for which several plausible paths are open.
Develop a new strategic direction
Market conditions, customer needs, and competition are changing. New opportunities arise, and previous assumptions become less valid.
We help you assess relevant developments, develop different options, and derive well-founded priorities.
Review an existing strategy
A strategy can still provide guidance, yet in certain areas it may no longer be suitable for the current situation.
We will work with you to examine which assumptions and priorities remain valid, where new developments necessitate a reassessment, and what actually needs to be adjusted.
Strategically align a division or business unit
A corporate strategy provides the framework, but it doesn’t automatically answer all the strategic questions of individual departments or business units.
We connect the overarching direction with the specific customers, market conditions, capabilities, and tasks of each department and develop its own strategic priorities from this.
Responding strategically to new developments
AI, regulation, new competitors, or changing customer expectations can challenge existing strategies.
Before this creates a new strategic area of action, we clarify which assumptions and priorities are actually affected. This way, a current impulse doesn’t automatically become a new strategic agenda.
How a strategy process leads to robust priorities
A good strategy process begins with a clear decision question. Only then can it be determined what knowledge is needed, which options should be developed, and what considerations are necessary.
Clarify the strategic question and decision-making space
What decisions actually need to be made? Which decisions have already been made, which are still pending, and what are the established parameters?
A clearly defined decision-making framework prevents strategic work from becoming a discussion about every challenge facing the organization.
Bringing together relevant information and perspectives
We examine what knowledge is needed for the strategic decision. This can include market and customer data, competitive developments, technological changes, as well as experience and skills within the organization.
We incorporate additional perspectives where they make a difference to the upcoming assessment.
Develop strategic options
Strategy needs real alternatives.
We develop possible directions and specify what each one entails. What opportunities do they offer? What prerequisites do they require? What risks arise? What other options would be sidelined as a result?
Weighing up consequences and conflicting objectives
Strategic options bring with them various advantages and disadvantages.
We make visible what resources they require, what dependencies arise, and which goals compete with each other. This way, the decision is not only based on the most attractive idea, but also on its consequences.
Focus on direction and priorities
This careful consideration leads to a clear strategic direction.
We consolidate the decisions into comprehensible priorities and document key assumptions. This ensures that the basis for each decision remains clear and identifies when a review is advisable.
A good strategy makes considerations, assumptions, and decision-making roles visible.
Strategic decisions are made under uncertainty. Therefore, it’s not about predicting every development. What’s crucial is combining relevant knowledge, seriously examining alternatives, and making transparent decisions.
More analysis doesn't solve unclear strategic questions.
Market data, competitive analyses, and customer insights can improve strategic decisions. However, without a clear question, the analysis quickly grows in all directions.
This generates a lot of information without clarifying which decision needs to be made.
Therefore, we first determine the knowledge required: What do we need to understand better so that a concrete strategic decision can be made more informed?
Only then do we derive which data, discussions, or further analyses are actually necessary.
Holistic thinking means connecting relevant perspectives.
Strategic questions can rarely be answered from just one perspective.
An attractive market opportunity, for example, might require skills that are lacking within the organization. A customer need might be economically compelling while simultaneously competing with other strategic priorities.
For us, a holistic perspective therefore doesn’t mean analyzing everything. It means bringing together the external and internal perspectives relevant to a decision in such a way that interactions, tensions, and consequences become visible.
This, for us, is the value of “Integrating Perspectives” : Different pieces of knowledge are not simply collected, but rather related to one another for a better strategic assessment.
Strategic options must be genuine alternatives.
Several differently worded versions of the same basic idea do not constitute a strategic choice.
Real options differ in their relevant consequences. They set different priorities, require different resources, or lead to different effects on customers, market position, or the organization.
A strategic option should therefore not only describe what would be possible , but also reveal what this choice entails and which other possibilities are thereby eliminated.
Conflicting objectives require conscious weighting.
Growth and profitability, speed and quality, or standardization and customer specificity can all be important simultaneously. However, these goals cannot be maximized equally in every situation.
Strategy development makes such tensions visible and creates a framework for consciously prioritizing them.
Not every conflict of objectives needs to be definitively resolved. The crucial point is to clarify which goal takes precedence under the current conditions and which tensions remain.
This leads to fewer conflicting expectations for departments and teams.
Participation and decision-making responsibility are two different things.
People from different parts of an organization possess knowledge that can be relevant to the strategy.
Customer proximity, technological expertise, or operational experience can complement or challenge assumptions. This knowledge should be incorporated into the process if it is relevant to the decision.
At the same time, strategy requires clear decision-making responsibility.
We therefore distinguish between contributing knowledge, co-developing options, providing feedback, and making the decision. Participation broadens the basis for decision-making. It does not automatically mean that strategic decisions are made by consensus.
Strategic assumptions should remain verifiable.
Every strategy is based on assumptions, for example, about how customer needs, competition, or technologies will develop.
If these assumptions are not made visible, it becomes difficult to later assess why a strategic decision is no longer viable.
Therefore, we document key assumptions where they are relevant to the chosen direction. New information can then be systematically examined to determine whether it actually calls a strategic priority into question.
An adaptable strategy does not mean constantly changing direction. It means examining relevant changes to the assumptions on which previous decisions were based.
The strategy process must be appropriate to the strategic task.
A corporate strategy, a departmental strategy, and the review of a single strategic priority each require different processes.
Size, decision-making processes, available data, and the number of departments involved also alter the requirements.
Therefore, we don’t work with a rigid, standardized process. We utilize proven elements and design a process that fits the specific strategic question and the organization.
Rethinking strategy development
Rethinking Strategy Development -
First
Four steps to a sustainable business strategy
OKR vs. Strategy
Strategy topics at a glance
Frequently Asked Questions
What is strategy development?
Strategy development creates a reasoned choice between relevant options.
An organization categorizes relevant developments, develops possible strategic directions, and decides which priorities to pursue and which alternatives to set aside.
Therefore, strategy development also includes making the consequences, conflicting objectives, and key assumptions of the chosen direction visible.
When is strategy development useful?
Strategy development becomes relevant when existing priorities no longer provide sufficient guidance or a new strategic decision is pending.
Triggers can include changing customer needs, new competitors, technological developments, regulation, growth, or changes within the company itself.
However, not every new influence necessitates a new strategy. The first step should be to clarify which existing assumptions and priorities are actually affected.
How does a strategy development process work?
A strategy process begins with the strategic question and the decision-making space.
Relevant information and perspectives are then gathered, strategic options are developed, and their consequences and conflicting objectives are assessed. This evaluation leads to a strategic direction and clear priorities.
The specific design of the process depends on the strategic task and the organization.
What analyses does strategy development require?
That depends on the strategic question.
Relevant information can include details about the market, customers, competitors, technological developments, as well as the organization’s own capabilities, resources, and other prerequisites.
Therefore, a good strategy analysis doesn’t begin with a standard list of analyses, but rather with identifying what knowledge is missing for the specific strategic decision.
What are strategic options
Strategic options are different possible directions from which an organization can actually choose.
They should be concrete enough that their opportunities, prerequisites, risks, and consequences can be compared.
If several options have the same priorities and essentially lead to the same consequences, they are hardly genuine strategic alternatives.
? How are strategic priorities set?
Strategic prioritization means weighing options against each other based on their relevance, prerequisites, and consequences.
This involves considering not only opportunities but also resource requirements, risks, conflicting objectives, and the potential foregoing other possibilities.
A priority only becomes strategically relevant when it’s clear what will receive less attention or resources as a result of that priority.
How much participation is needed in strategy development?
It depends on what knowledge is needed for the strategic decision.
Managers, employees, customers, or external experts can contribute different relevant information.
At the same time, it should be clear from the outset who contributes knowledge, who develops options, who provides feedback, and who makes the decision.
Participation improves the basis for decision-making. It does not replace clear decision-making responsibility.
Must strategy development be top-down?
Strategic decisions often fall under the responsibility of top management. However, the necessary knowledge is not exclusively located there.
A meaningful strategy process therefore combines clear decision-making responsibility with the targeted involvement of those whose knowledge is relevant to the decision.
This very combination of perspective integration and clear accountability is one of the strategic issues that the project context places particular emphasis on.
How are conflicting objectives handled in strategy development?
Conflicting objectives should be identified and consciously prioritized.
For example, if growth, profitability, and speed are all important, it must be clarified which objective takes precedence under the current circumstances and which tension remains.
Strategy does not necessarily create harmony between all objectives. It creates clarity on how to deal with competing goals.
What does holistic strategy development mean?
Holistic strategy development considers a strategic question from multiple relevant perspectives.
These can include the market, customers, competition, technology, as well as the capabilities and resources of the organization itself.
Holistic does not mean analyzing everything simultaneously. The crucial point is to connect the perspectives relevant to a strategic decision and understand their interrelationships.
This gives concrete meaning to the existing cid claim of a “holistic perspective.” The current website already lists a holistic perspective, collective intelligence, and iterative approaches as characteristics of strategy work.
Does a strategy need to be regularly redesigned?
No.
A strategy should be reviewed to determine whether its core assumptions remain valid. This may lead to adjustments in individual priorities, further development, or, in certain situations, a more fundamental realignment.
Adaptability does not mean constant reorientation.
What is a departmental strategy?
A departmental strategy specifies the strategic direction for a part of the organization.
It connects the overarching corporate framework with the specific tasks, customers, market conditions, and opportunities of the respective department.
This clarifies the department’s own priorities and its contribution to the overall strategy.
What is the difference between strategy development and strategy implementation?
Strategy development defines the direction and priorities to be pursued.
Strategy implementation deals with how these decisions are translated into concrete actions within the organization.
Insights gained from implementation can, in turn, provide grounds for reviewing the strategy’s assumptions or priorities.
What is the difference between strategy development and target systems?
Strategy development involves making strategic choices and setting priorities.
Goal-setting systems like OKRs or OGSM then help translate these priorities into concrete goals, link contributions, and regularly monitor progress.
Therefore, a goal-setting system does not replace strategic decision-making.
What role do purpose, vision, and guiding principles play in strategy development?
Purpose, vision, and guiding principles can provide a long-term framework for strategic decisions.
However, they do not need to be developed anew for every strategy process.
Strategy development also considers the specific conditions, opportunities, and conflicting objectives, and uses this as a basis for determining direction and priorities.