Question
Asked 26 November 2013

At what point in the strategy development process does strategic "thinking" evolve into strategic "planning?"

My strategy development techniques are based on both Michael Porter, who provides practical planning processes, and Michel Robert, who argues for "thinking" ahead of "planning."

Most recent answer

Alberto Camporesi
Centro Studi , Buccino (SA), Italy
I would like to add a further consideration related to the suggestion of  having the planning process sequential to a proper and creative (allow me to define in this way a lateral thinking approach) strategic thinking step.
If you ask to yourself "why?",  your thinking process is tending to a closed and conclusive mental approach. The Planning process  step, that has usually  a well defined  technical structure, in my opinion,  might  be a leading  factor to this "why trap"!
In the other hand, if you approach the Strategic Thinking utilizing an "how ?" problem solving tendency , you set a  basically open mental process, in  the initial step, usually the critical one, remaining ready to explore also lateral thinking alternatives!

All Answers (4)

Satish Modh
Somaiya Vidyavihar University
Strategic thinking is the ability to come up with effective plans in line with an organization's objectives within a particular economic situation. 
The traditional strategic planning model is the fit model of strategy-making. It aims to attain a fit between internal resources and capabilities and external opportunities and threats. This mindset can lead to overemphasis on existing resources and present opportunities.
Therefore, strategic thinking helps business managers review policy issues, perform long term planning, set goals and determine priorities, and identify potential risks and opportunities. 
1 Recommendation
John Kaegi
Southern Oregon University
Excellent perspective Satish.  Thank you.
Alberto Camporesi
Centro Studi , Buccino (SA), Italy
I would like to separate two factors in Strategy: the methodology and the thinking content (strategic thinking). If you look to the warfare principles  they look more or less the same in western countries but they may differ consistently if you consider them basing  the decision process on the oriental approach (see Sun Tzu principles).  I had in my organization  about twenty years ago an Army General and we were sometimes talking of the basic principles to define a strategy in the battlefield. He was always recalling a repetend : "ma-ma-ri-sor- si" , that in Italian stands for  massa, manovra, riserva, sorpresa, sicurezza . Similar simple war principles are declined in all the languages and you have to take care of them, of course. You must anyhow consider that by adding some "lateral thinking"  you may come out with many different strategies to be evaluated, and apparently responding to the above principles in comparable way.
Usually, by the book strategists , are very good in the technical part of the game (e.g. logistics , in Army General cases) but in today Management and competitive environment complexity, It is becoming more and more important  the capability of generating potentially winning strategies expressed  and generated via an interdisciplinary management approach, culture and experience.
A preminent technical approach to Planning might prove to be weak in the competitive practice and operation, if forgetting that  effective Strategic "Thinking" is to be considered a prime factor regarding the strategic process.The subsidiary importance of proper Technical Planning, should be then considered, in my opinion , as  an added value factor.
I have significant case histories in my mind  to outline that, Strategy Wise,  If you have good Planning and poor Thinking, the final result you should expect, is a poor one!
Kind regards
Alberto
1 Recommendation
Alberto Camporesi
Centro Studi , Buccino (SA), Italy
I would like to add a further consideration related to the suggestion of  having the planning process sequential to a proper and creative (allow me to define in this way a lateral thinking approach) strategic thinking step.
If you ask to yourself "why?",  your thinking process is tending to a closed and conclusive mental approach. The Planning process  step, that has usually  a well defined  technical structure, in my opinion,  might  be a leading  factor to this "why trap"!
In the other hand, if you approach the Strategic Thinking utilizing an "how ?" problem solving tendency , you set a  basically open mental process, in  the initial step, usually the critical one, remaining ready to explore also lateral thinking alternatives!

Similar questions and discussions

..go for it.. or not..?
Question
Be the first to answer
  • Eero HollmingEero Hollming
..during recent years, and even over decades, since about 1986, quite a number of discussions have reached a point where a question is raised "..a Doctor/..have a PhD..", and the curious discussions delving into further abysses, and heights, and beyond the envelopes, continue with some encouragement to make an intervention..
..rather recently, again, across attending some events at the intersections of academic, consulting/headhunting/politics, and top-tier enterprises' CEOs and top-management, etc., _The Shift_ raised discussions of the potential paradigm-ceilings of the extant even state-of-the-art strategic thinking and action, across various realms, scales, and scopes, ranging from the range of firms and their ecologies, national-strategic-political strategic-futures-responsing [..over the extant/emerging Long-Wave-Shift into, and beyond, The Cognitive Society [Paradigm]..], to global geopolitical higher-orders-intensive choreographies across and over the nature-shifting geopolitical strategic-futures' co-morphing-dominance over the emerging planetary-scale [strategic-]viable-feasigble-affordable-developments-wide novel compression-spaces' 'dynamic capabilities' (in broad sense of the futures, crucibles, theatres, envelope-shifts, compression-spaces, strategic-responsing[-spaces-co-morphing], and co-*-intensive 'multiply-ambidextrous immersions into novel foaming futures)...
..and again the question was raised, go for it, or not, with some encouragements, so hereby for Your reflections, submitted a maybe an unorthodox research question for audiences potentially reached herefrom..
..In Response To The Nature-Shifting Cascades of
The Extant and Emerging-Futures of The Long-Wave-Shifts[‘ Foaming-Compressions],
To and Beyond The Cognitive Society, and
The Nature-Shifting Higher-Orders-Strategic Morphing-Dominance Co-Opetition
Over The Envelopes-Shifting Dynamic Capabilities’ Emergence..
..go for it, or not..?
Your reflections appreciated..

Related Publications

Article
This article addresses the question of how companies can use scenarios in formulating their business strategies. A general overview of the business strategy system leads to an identification of where scenarios can be best used. Six insights from scenarios are discussed and it is concluded that the scenario process has value beyond the results for s...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.