This document discusses strategies for organizations. It begins by summarizing a story about two lost project managers and their failed strategy. It then discusses the importance of having a strong strategy and defines what a strategy is, noting it is not the same as goals or tactics. It outlines several frameworks for developing strategies, including Porter's 5 Forces model and focusing on products, processes, or customer intimacy. It argues that to maintain success, an organization must continually evolve its strategy to adapt to changes and disruptions. It provides an example of how a systems integrator could implement all three strategic focuses to gain competitive advantages.

1. uxcredrock.com 1
Resilient Strategy
Two project managers were out hunting deep in the forest. After walking around in circles for a while they realised they
were lost, and knowing night would soon be upon them, they began to panic. They continued searching for the way back
until finally, getting exhausted, the first project manager turned to the second and said, "I’ve got a brilliant strategy that’ll
get us out of this situation in no time; let’s stop searching for a way out, we’ll just alert people to our location and make
them come to us instead! All we need to do is shoot in the air three times, stay right where we are, and soon someone will
find us." The second project manager thought it was a terrific idea, so he shot into the air three times, and they waited…
and waited, but no one came. Tired of waiting, the second project manager shot in the air again and waited… but still no
one came.
Night was upon them, and the forest filled with the terrifying noises of wild animals. With no rescue party in sight and
concerned for their safety, the first project manager muttered to his colleague in a trembling voice, "I suppose we can try
again, but it better work this time, we're down to our last arrow!"
TRUE STORY!
STRATEGY AND WHAT IT’S NOT
Michael Porter, an authority on the topic found that a significant percentage of corporate leaders fail to have a good
strategy in place for the organisations they lead. He argues that this condition is the outcome of misunderstanding or
having an insufficient understanding of what strategy means.
Evidently, this dearth of knowledge is not limited just to corporate leaders - unfortunately, to our detriment, many of us
are dismally equipped when it comes to understanding strategy and the critical role it plays in the life of an organisation.
There are many possible reasons for this impoverished intellectual state. One of the most prevalent reason is that many of
us have an inadequate appreciation as to what a superior strategy can do for an organisation, i.e. in the way of ensuring its
success.
If corporate leaders and employees alike understood and valued the strong correlation that exists between a good
strategy and the success of an organisation, and by extension, success at an individual level, then the appeal and
participation in formulating a good strategy would certainly increase.
The significance of a robust strategy in a dynamic era of disruptions
 Bad strategy is worse than no strategy
The story goes to show, one can be naively optimistic about the outcome of an ineffective strategy. For any organisation,
not having a strategy in place, or worse still, thinking that one has a winning strategy when one has none, can result in
disastrous consequences.

2. uxcredrock.com 2
Many in the corporate world commonly conflate tactics and goals to mean strategy. Often one hears unrealistic
organisational goals flippantly thrown around as though they were the best strategies and with a conviction that merely
stating quixotic organisational goals will somehow magically bring about its reality.
It is important for an organisation to have vision
and goals; however, these are not strategies, and
they will not guarantee the survival of the
organisation, much less ensure its success in a
competitive market.
Goal orientated statements such as “our strategy is to be
the best company” or “our strategy is to deliver a low-cost
solution while maintaining extraordinary quality” does
very little in the way of ensuring an organisation’s success,
specifically if there is no proper execution plan in place.
Undoubtedly, it is important for an organisation to have
vision and goals; however, these are not strategies, and
they will not guarantee the survival of the organisation,
much less ensure its success in a competitive market.
The historical connotation and use of the term ‘strategy’ is rooted in the Greek word “stratēgia” meaning the art and
science that the Leader or General of an army employs to win a battle, particularly under uncertain circumstances. In the
context of war, ‘strategy’ is the art of drawing out the (hidden) strengths of one’s army, making the most of the terrain,
while taking advantage of the opponent’s weaknesses to gain a competitive edge to win the battle.
A substantial portion of the revolutionary thinking in strategy was forged under the leadership of great military leaders
such as Napoleon and Alexander in the context of war. These battle settings and conditions of wars, to a large extent, are
similar to how the corporate world operates. Military strategies, therefore, can be translated and used in the business
world to give any organisation a competitive advantage over its rivals.
ENOUGH SAID! SO, WHAT IS ‘STRATEGY’?
FORMULATING STRATEGY
Over the years, many tools and frameworks have emerged, serving as vehicles to deliver features of an organisation’s
strategy. Whilst these tools are useful, they work on the premise that a sound strategy is already in place.
An organisation formulating a competitive strategy either creates or identifies a need in the market. It then fills the gaps
with superior product or service and preserves industry leadership by continuing to offer unique value to its customers in
a manner that none other can. This unique value can come in the way of cost differentiation, a high-quality product or
service, ease of use, or even a convenient supply chain. The best companies offer several of these ‘value offerings’ and
thereby maintain a strong competitive edge over their challengers.
According to Michael Porter, “Competitive strategy is about being different. It means deliberately choosing a different set
of activities to deliver a unique mix of value.” Having a good strategy in place does not guarantee success – execution is
equally important; however, the best execution of the wrong strategy is still a recipe for disaster. It is important to note
that even the greatest strategy, may not be 'the panacea' for all of an organisation’s ailments – especially if the
organisation is in an “unhealthy” state, but it will, at the very least, serve as a diagnosis, enabling the organisation to get
on a path to recovery.
Formulating a relevant and powerful strategy requires an
understanding of all the players who pose a threat to the
survival of the company. Michael Porter points out that
“The ability on how to think about the competition will
assist in formulating a good strategy”. Undeniably, in the
heart of a winning strategy is a deep understanding of all
the participants in the arena.
In corporate terms, this awareness needs to include not
just the competitors, but also an deep appreciation of
one’s troops i.e.- the employees. Sun Tzu, the ancient
Chinese General, to whom much of the early and original
body of knowledge in (war) strategy is credited, states that
“a loyal army will fight every battle with vigour and an
unwavering commitment to winning.”
Sun Tzu (also known as Sun Zi) was a Chinese general,
military strategist, and philosopher who lived in ancient
China between 544–496 BC. Sun Tzu is credited to be
the author of ‘The Art of War’, an extensively influential
work on military strategy.
Michael Porter is the founder of the modern strategy
field and one of the “world’s most influential thinkers on
management and competitiveness.” He is the Bishop
William Lawrence University Professor at Harvard
Business School and the director of the school’s Institute
for Strategy and Competitiveness.

3. uxcredrock.com 3
 "A rising tide lifts all boats"
Corporate leaders often get the credit when the organisation they lead does well in any market cycle; however, frequently
these “good organisational performances” are incidental benefits that companies reap as a consequence of a healthy
economy or lack of competition in a particular space.
It is when an organisation withstands or thrives
under the harshest market conditions that its
strategies are recognised to be superior to its rivals.
 An unexamined strategy is not worth executing!
If the conditions of the marketplace were as Peter Drucker
described, i.e. one dominated by “accelerating change,
increasing complexity, and ever-multiplying competition,”
then the standard for companies to succeed gets raised
significantly.
This competitive setting results in the demise of organisa-
tions without a robust strategy in place to counter the ‘ever-
constricting market forces’. It is when an organisation
withstands or thrives under the harshest market conditions
that its strategies are recognised to be superior to its rivals.
Peter Ferdinand Drucker was a professor, management
consultant, educator, author and considered to be the
founder and the most influential thinker of modern
management and management practice.
The risk of depending on outdated strategies is particularly real and all too common in this age of disruptive innovations.
Many disruptive ideas and technologies have turned traditional models of operation, and some industries, on their heads.
Developments in Communications and Media, Medical industry, Biotechnology, Artificial Intelligence, Analytics, Cloud,
IoT, Big Bata, 3D Printing, Cryptocurrency and breakthroughs in Robotics have had a far-reaching impact on almost every
organisation.
Keeping up with these disruptions often demands not just a tweaking of an organisation’s strategy, but at times,
completely changing it. Also, in an era where imitation comes easy, every organisation needs to constantly monitor its
value offerings or risk being made obsolete.
Keeping up with disruptions often demands not just a
tweaking of an organisation’s strategy, but at times,
completely changing it.
As a consequence of needing to perpetually change its
strategy, many organisations undergo ‘strategy formulation
fatigue,’ and to their detriment, eventually give up on fine-
tuning their strategy to counter the changes in the
organisation or the industry. The upshot of which is an
organisation operating with an out-of-date strategy, which
no longer provides the competitive edge it once did.
Paul Leinwand and Vinay Couto in their research found that
“Most organisations wait to act [on their strategy] until they
have a problem, at which point they don’t have the time to
make the right trade-offs for the long term.” In contrast,
they found that “They [the flourishing companies] put their
money where their strategy is and continually cut bad costs
and redirect resources toward good costs.”
It goes to show that even strategies that were once
considered great become irrelevant over time. Organisa-
tions need to regularly ‘evolve’ their strategy to keep up
with the changing times.
While corporate leaders are acutely aware that formulating
a relevant competitive strategy will be the deciding factor of
the company’s performance – especially in the long run,
many still fail to develop a strategy that is current to the
space they operate. Cynthia Montgomery states that “The
very notion that there is a strategic holy grail—a strategy
brilliantly conceived, carefully implemented, and valiantly
defended through time—is dangerous.”
Cynthia Montgomery is the Timken Professor of
Business Administration at Harvard Business School.
Professor Montgomery's research centres on strategy
and corporate governance.
Paul Leinwand is a thought leader on strategy, growth,
and capability building for Strategy&, PwC's strategy
consulting group. He specialises on the topic of strategy,
growth, and capability building, with a focus on the
consumer product and retail sectors.
Vinay Couto is a recognised thought leader with PwC’s
Strategy& in the people and organisation strategy
practice. He is a principal with PwC US and a leader of
the global Fit for Growth platform.

4. uxcredrock.com 4
MAINTAINING A COMPETITIVE EDGE
Attaining a thorough understanding of the competition that exists in the market should serve as the foundation for an
organisation that is formulating its strategy. ‘Porter’s 5 Forces’ is an invaluable framework that can be used to identify the
competitive forces that shape the market. The framework enables discerning leaders to formulate strategies to counter
and overcome these forces. These five forces are:
1: Threat of New Entrants
2: Threat of Substitute Products
3: Bargaining power of Suppliers (Vendors)
4: Bargaining power of Customers (Clients)
5: Rivalry among existing Competitors.
These competitive forces that shape the market remain relatively the same today as they did when Michael Porter wrote
about them 38 years ago. Organisations that are unable to withstand these forces are constricted and crushed out of
existence.
 May the Forces be resisted by you!
Michael Treacy and Fred Wiersema in their book “The Discipline of Market Leaders” suggest how different organisations
withstand ‘Porter’s Market Forces’. They categorised competitive strategy formulation and application into three main
categories. With their research findings, the authors argue that organisations attain industry dominance with strategies
that focuses on superior products, unique or highly standardised processes, or customer intimacy.
 Process Focus: Organisations that have a ‘process
focus’ strategy are the front-runners in operational
excellence. The processes of these organisations are
highly standardised and repeatable, but at the same
time kept sufficiently complex to discourage imitation.
As a result, these organisations market products or
deliver services that are similar to their competitor’s,
but with the advantage of their streamlined processes,
they are in a position to offer lower prices and greater
convenience at minimal cost and remain profitable.
 Product Focus: Organisations with a ‘product focus’
strategy deliver unique and superior products to the
market. Their products tend to have better features
compared to their competitors. These companies are
the ones to set new industry standards. They invest
heavily on research and development, hiring the best
innovative minds. For a ‘product focused’ strategy to
be successful, the organisation need to rapidly adapt
to new product initiatives and have an organisational
structure that is highly flexible.
Michael Treacy is one of the world's leading experts on
corporate strategies for growth, and product innovation
in growth strategies. Dr. Treacy was a professor of
management at the MIT Sloan School of Management.
Fred Wiersema is an authority on the topic of customer
strategy and market leadership in B2B settings. Dr.
Wiersema is a distinguished ISBM Fellow - in recognition
of accomplishments and thought leadership in the
business-to-business domain.
 Customer Intimacy: While cost leadership through streamlined processes and product differentiation are great
strategies to attain a competitive advantage, having an intimate knowledge of the customer is another avenue to
formulating a winning strategy – primarily for organisations whose staff are regularly ‘customer facing’. These
organisations may not have the best processes or the best products but are equipped with an intimate knowledge of
their customer. This knowledge is used to tailor unique solutions and create extraordinary experiences which often
exceed the customer’s expectations, thereby generating repeat business. These organisations have an objective of
creating a memorable and pleasant customer experience and this mission shapes the nucleus of their strategy. For
‘customer intimacy’ strategy to work, the organisation must operate with an extreme level of delegation and
decentralisation.

5. uxcredrock.com 5
Figure 1. Systems Integrator’s Strategy Vs The Market Forces
 Sales Team - Customer Intimacy
Evidence that sales personnel genuinely care for their customers is demonstrated by how intimately they understand the
business of their clients. This knowledge can then be leveraged to identify the business needs and then collaborate with
the 'product team' to find the best solution to improve the client's business. When sales personnel put the betterment of
their customer above all else, then both SI and the Customer benefits in the long run.
A ‘socialistic mindset’, which encourages collaboration and sharing of the information held by a salesperson in their ‘black
book,’ enables customer primacy. One such means of empowering this mindset is to guarantee that timely incentives and
recognitions are in place for each contributing member.
ALL TOGETHER NOW: SINGLE ORGANISATION - THREE STRATEGIES!
The three types of strategies are unique to particular industries; however, some organisations are in a position to
execute all of the three categories. In the context of a Systems Integrator (SI), all three focuses are applicable and can be
implemented to give the SI an edge over its competitors.
While SI’s do not typically develop products, they do resell and implement software and provide services. An SI has
repeating processes and a sales team, who works closely with their customers. The sales teams, with its intimate
customer knowledge, identifies gaps in the customer's business, while the 'product focus' team implement the ‘best of
breed’ products that fill the identified gaps and improve the business of the customer. Management then ensures
successful delivery through streamlined processes.

6. uxcredrock.com 6
 Delivery Team – Product Expertise
In order to have a strong brand name and succeed, it is imperative that the SI identifies with and implements only the
‘best of breed’ products. From an SI's perspective, “product” has a dual meaning. The ‘product focus’ strategy is
applicable to both the human resources and the software which the SI delivers - the key asset being the human resources.
Human resource is at the heart of everything an SI does. While that can be said about every organisation, i.e. until the
maturity of Artificial Intelligence and machines perform most jobs better than humans, companies with a product focus
will need to have superior products. But for an SI, if the employees are not in the “best state”, then the company is most
likely to fail. There are many things that could contribute to this dreadful state, but that’s a whole different write-up!
THE LAST WORD
This idea of applying the three types of strategies in an SI is like picking the winning horse on a racetrack. One needs a
good jockey, a fast horse, and a favourable track. The product and service delivered by the 'product team' represent the
jockey, the fast horse being the streamlined processes which management enables, and the favourable track being the
sales team who facilitate good relationships with the customers.
 Management (and Support Staff) - Streamlined Processes
While an SI delivers unique and tailored solutions for each of their customers in varied industries, a considerable portion
of what an SI does is repeatable. Depending on the nature of the Project, reusable intellectual property (IP) can range from
20% to 60%. Even if the percentage of reusable IP were on the lower spectrum, not having to reinvent the wheel for that
portion can amount to sizable savings in cost and resource utilisation. Top SI’s consistently build and maintain their IP and
foster a culture of sharing and collaboration within the organisation.
There are also many 'process related' tasks that the front-liners of an SI perform, which can be time-consuming and eats
into productivity. When management and support staff of an SI recognise these tasks, which are often unnecessary
hurdles and put measures in place to alleviate the burden of the delivery team, the product team can then be freed up to
do what it does best, and the organisation will operate like a well-oiled machine.
In the eyes of the leadership, the destination in an
organisation's journey to success should be to attain
'operational excellence.' This Nirvana-like state, where
everyone in the organisation is acutely aware of their role
and performs it to perfection has many barriers. This is
because organisations often operate in environments
made up of influential and highly interlocked stakeholders,
making it extremely resistant to change. Creating a
common goal that harbours good outcomes for all players
is possibly the only way to usher in the necessary cultural
changes.
Systems Integrators attain industry dominance when the
three strategies work together harmoniously and when
enabling cohesion between the three working groups
becomes a "mission critical" aspect of the leadership’s
vision.
Nick Bostrom is a Philosopher and Professor of Applied
Ethics at University of Oxford. He is the Director of ‘Future
of Humanity Institute’ and ‘Martin Programme on the
Impacts of Future Technology.’ He is known for his work
on existential risk, the anthropic principle, human
enhancement ethics, superintelligence risks, the reversal
test, and consequentialism.
All that said, Nick Bostrom could be right, and there is a possibility that we are living in an artificially simulated “reality.” In
which case the “puppet masters” control every outcome and each perceived good result could have nothing to do with any
planning or strategy in place, making this entire endeavour a pointless one
——————————————————————————————————————————————

7. uxcredrock.com 7
AUTHOR
Edwin Mathai is a Senior Business Intelligence Consultant and a Project Manager at Red Rock – A DXC Technology
Company. With a decade of experience in implementing Business Intelligence and ERP solutions, he continues to assist
customers through their transformational journey and realise their business potential.
For more information on how Red Rock can assist your organisation with Business Intelligence or Project Management
solutions,
please call us on +61 (02) 8270 5500
email: enquiries@uxcredrock.com
or visit our website: www.uxcredrock.com
——————————————————————————————————————————————
Leinwand, P. and Couto, V (2017). How to Cut Costs More Strategically. HBR. Available at: https://hbr.org/2017/03/how-
to-cut-costs-more-strategically [15 March 2017].
Porter, M. E. (1979). How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy. HBR. Available at: https://hbr.org/1979/03/how-
competitive-forces-shape-strategy/ar/1 [10 March 2017].
Bostrom, N. (2003). Are you living in a computer simulation? Philosophical Quarterly (2003) Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255.
Available at: http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html [1 February 2017].
Montgomery, Cynthia A. (2008) Putting Leadership Back into Strategy (Harvard business review, January 2008).
Porter, M. E. (1980) Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. New York: Free Press,
(Republished with a new introduction, 1998).
Sunzi, & Griffith, S. (1963). Sun Tzŭ The Art of War. Oxford University Press.
Treacy, M. and Wiersema, F.D. (1995). The discipline of market leaders: choose your customers, narrow your focus,
dominate your market. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
REFERENCES & FURTHER READING: