Strategy ≠ shopping list

And why the right kind of "growth" matters

"What do you think?"

My work-friend's question was genuine. It felt awful to say what I really thought.

"It's a shopping list, not a strategy."

I've read a lot of strategies and strategic ideas by this point in my life. I've seen everything from stupendous to stupid-squared. But the one variant of bad that bothers me to no end is to mistake buying stuff for strategy-making.

If your strategy is dependent on the purchase of some new gadget or whizz-bang, then you have no strategy.

Put it the other way. If you could buy your way out of a problem on Amazon, then you wouldn't need strategy at all, would you?

Nevertheless, so many strategies and strategic-documents are wish-lists for Santa Claus to drop magic strategic problem-solving presents down chimneys in late December.

How can we spot the difference? How can we tell if our strategy is about the stuff or really about our strategy?

It can hinge on the word "growth." I want to step back a minute and imagine you're looking down on a brand new, crisp strategy that someone's just punched out on a laptop. First draft. They sent it over to you. For feedback.

At its core, in its guts, is it seeking "more" or "better"?

Here's the distinction. Kevin Kelly, among other things a founder of Wired magazine, recently gave an interview in which he discussed the word "growth." His discussion is so fascinating I've pasted it below in its entirety.

KK: "In English there is a curious and unhelpful conflation of the two meanings of the word 'growth.' The most immediate meaning is to increase in size, or increase in girth, to gain in weight, to add numbers, to get bigger. In short, growth means 'more.' More dollars, more people, more land, more stuff. More is fundamentally what biological, economic, and technological systems want to do: dandelions and parking lots tend to fill all available empty places...

"But there is another equally valid and common use of the word 'growth' to mean develop, as in to mature, to ripen, to evolve. We talk about growing up, or our own personal growth. This kind of growth is not about added pounds, but about betterment. It is what we might call evolutionary or developmental, or type 2 growth. It’s about using the same ingredients in better ways. Over time evolution arranges the same number of atoms in more complex patterns to yield more complex organisms, for instance producing an agile lemur the same size and weight as a jelly fish. We seek the same shift in the technium [*his term for the sum total of all the world's technology]. Standard economic growth aims to get consumers to drink more wine. Type 2 growth aims to get them to not drink more wine, but better wine." 

The same distinction can apply to evaluating a strategy’s merits. If you’re reading paragraph upon paragraph or bullet upon bullet or sentence upon sentence about acquiring more and more of Super-weapon A, then that’s the first kind of growth (i.e., about “more”). (Also, if the aim of your strategy is simply to build or generate more of something, then you’re likely really working on a plan…see “Strategy versus Strategies versus Plans.”)

If you’re reading something more nuanced, about blending a bit of something new with real difficult adjustments and changes to a culture or organization—then you’re in the neighborhood of the second kind of growth (i.e., likely about “better”).

I recognize I haven’t delved into specifics here. I don’t think it’s necessary. You can use a few simple rules of thumb to get by. Strategy ≠ shopping list is one. What kind of growth is on the menu is another. And finally, how easy does this seem? If someone ever attempts to convince you a strategic dilemma can be resolved with a credit card, that’s your signal to walk away.