Live data from Hacker News

Why don’t we have a strategy?

cutlefish.substack.com

31–40 of 122 posts

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#31
The author makes a good point that there are not enough incentives to think long and ponder - which can lead to better, more "thoughtful" ideas.

I have found the following to be great incentives for quiet thinking:

- No electronics in early morning and at night (~1hr before sleep)

- Go on long runs without listening to music or podcasts

- Write things down on a notebook

- Do hobbies instead of scrolling through social media (i.e drawing, playing an instrument, exercising).

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#32
post #25

I realize that this is a minor nitpick and I'm taking it out of context, but: > The theory goes that ideas are cheap, and execution is everything. This isn't wrong. In fact, it seems more right than wrong. All people, all the time, think they have ideas, some even novel. Not many can carry them out in practice. I do agree with the article that the culture of celebrating mindless productivity is mistaken.

Mostly agree, but this position creates a sense of helplessness. If all ideas are bad, then the idea doesn't matter, and I shouldn't waste time evaluating ideas.

As an example, people w/ decades of experience in the domain of your idea can sometimes quickly invalidate it. Years of life can be saved by seeking that feedback, particularly when that knowledge is difficult to obtain.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#33

Are there some historical examples of good strategies out there? I'm having trouble understanding the definition of a strategy and how it differs from a plan.

My take on strategic thinking is that it’s a small set of very high level and related goals and constraints that, if achieved, are likely to lead to the success of a project. A good strategy IMO is relatively simple (a short set of bullet points), widely known, and actively used to guide decision making at all levels. Most importantly, a good strategy helps you to say “no”, because most of us have very limited resources at our disposal and we simply can’t do everything.

Here’s a simple example. Let’s say we have some SaaS product; we naturally want to maximise its revenue. There are many potential strategies. Strategy “A” might be to sell a small number of subs at a high monthly price. Strategy “B” might be to sell many subs at a low monthly price. Strategy “C” might be to fund the product through advertising. There are other strategies, too. You will pick the strategy you believe has the greatest chance of achieving your goals in your specific circumstances. (Typically the strategy would also involve conscious decisions about how the product works and where it fits in the market)

Choosing a specific strategy helps you allocate scarce resources and build the right product. Adopting a strategy “A” above could maybe let you manage without a complex self-onboarding flow, but it might also require a (potentially expensive) direct sales team. Strategy “B” and “C” might require self-onboarding, which can be tricky, but requires a less expensive marketing team. Strategy “C” doesn’t require a payment gateway or billing platform, but probably needs to be able to operate at greater scale.

> Are there some historical examples of good strategies out there?

Most strategies play out in stages over time. IIRC, Tesla had a pretty simple strategy of selling super expensive Roadsters to learn about building cars and to fund the manufacture of expensive models S and X, which in turn funded the less expensive models 3 and Y. The beauty of their strategy was that they knew why they were building a Roadster, and they weren’t distracted by wondering if they should add certain features like (I’m making this up) child restraints. The risk of this strategy was that there might not be enough rich people to buy enough roadsters to get to second base. (History suggests they made the right call)

The thing is, if you don’t have a strategy then you end up wasting resources building every little brain fart someone comes up with in the hope that your numbers will improve. But the weight of all these conflicting ideas, and the time wasted on things that don’t work out, is every bit as risky as choosing a single coherent strategy. A strategy is like a great feature filter where you can throw out half the ideas because “it doesn’t fit with our strategy”, which makes you heaps more efficient.

As long as you don’t change strategies too often.

> I'm having trouble understanding the definition of a strategy and how it differs from a plan.

In truth, a strategy is just a kind of plan, but one without much detail. It’s the high level stuff that kind of lays out the game plan. First, you need to decide that you need to build a Roadster - that’s the strategy. Then, you need to build it. That requires planning. The strategy is important because it tells you why you’re building it. The planning is important because it makes the strategy happen.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#34
> The problem is that there are disincentives to thinking strategically.

To me the problem was that nobody around could even explain what does it mean. It's such a vague word nowadays, and even when you really want to craft a strategy for your organization, you end up watching videos telling you to outline your values, write a mission statement and set SMART goals.

Thanks to some coments on HN I've read "Good strategy/bad strategy" book, and a lot of things finally clicked. It gave a solid framework how to approach and how to think about strategy. Can't praise this book enough. I wish I was given this book at school.

Back to the original thought – I think the problem is that we rarely see or hear what strategy really is about, let alone have a chance to learn how to "think strategically" for real. It's purely an education issue from my point of view.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#35
post #34

> The problem is that there are disincentives to thinking strategically. To me the problem was that nobody around could even explain what does it mean. It's such a vague word nowadays, and even when you really want to craft a strategy for your organization, you end up watching videos telling you to outline your values, write a mission statement and set SMART goals. Thanks to some coments on HN I've read "Good strateg…

The question is around scope, if you are building a strategy for yourself or your team - set smart goals. If you are building a strategy for an organization, then set KPIs. If you are building a strategy for a 100+ person organization, then you talk about vision.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#36
Any sufficiently useful strategy to handle complexity needs to have some amount of ambiguity, which needs to be filled in by people with a minimum of life experience and good intentions.

I've become more convinced in recent years that even a well thought out strategy can't be implemented by the average post-modernist cynical office workers, and the secret right now is identifying how you can have a highly robust strategy.

Laws and incentives are not enough to build a society, they're just necessary. A culture with good values that also punishes bullshit/imorality seems to be required.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#37

Are there some historical examples of good strategies out there? I'm having trouble understanding the definition of a strategy and how it differs from a plan.

There's huge overlap, but if you want to differentiate them, then you can do it like so:

A strategy is high level stuff. Typically vague and open to interpretation. It's about general approach and big decisions, core principles and goals.

Tactics/operations is the details given a particular situation or project. They can be grounded in specific steps to take.

A plan can be understood as formulating tactics and bridging the gap between strategy and tactics. You may have multiple plans that you pull out given some events and circumstances. I think there's overlap with the term 'protocol' as well.

As for good historical examples you may look at military strategy. The most consistent and successful ones are often the most boring: robust logistics and well-provisioned forces, cultural assimilation, high discipline/training, mass produced equipment, specialized roles, competent officers etc. Those are broad strokes and not necessarily specific implementations (even though they matter too). Look at the Romans or Ottomans for good examples.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#38
post #14

The overwhelming majority of “strategies” are just rigid sequences of time bound outputs/shit you want to build, that always end up being wrong and needing to change because of new information coming in. Strategy needs to be: - We’ve identified this deep problem in the world that needs to be fixed - We want to bring the Vision to life where that problem is gone (a big bold future state of the world). - We believe bri…

I think the problem is that strategy is hard and frequently requires divestment. Your head of inbound marketing isn't going to tell you the company strategy should switch to outbound marketing so let's cut my team in half and throw away everything I've built. My company is suffering this right now. We're doing annual roadmapping and it's entirely a program plan. Our business has shifted over the past 5 years and now there's a lot of initiatives being pitched to justify their department's existence.

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#39
post #20

Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly) will produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure. — Melvin E. Conway The exact same thing applies to any (effective realization of) a company strategy. Conway's law applies both during strategic planning and execution.

The illustration of Conway's law at the top of that page always gives me a chuckle.

http://scrumbook.org/product-organization-pattern-language/c...

Re: Why don’t we have a strategy?

#40
post #25

I realize that this is a minor nitpick and I'm taking it out of context, but: > The theory goes that ideas are cheap, and execution is everything. This isn't wrong. In fact, it seems more right than wrong. All people, all the time, think they have ideas, some even novel. Not many can carry them out in practice. I do agree with the article that the culture of celebrating mindless productivity is mistaken.

>> The theory goes that ideas are cheap, and execution is everything.

> This isn't wrong. In fact, it seems more right than wrong.

I think the articles point is that somewhere between the "cheap" ideas and execution there is a place for strategy that is being neglected. Lots of people have ideas for social media platforms and lots of people execute on them. Only a few of the, often adhoc, strategies paid off and most have died.

Post reply on HN