3 ms·
I'm a bit confused, the strategy reads more like tactics to me. I had expected something a bit more high level, with "values" and "philosophy" and so on.
by valenterry 4y ago
I'm a bit confused, the strategy reads more like tactics to me. I had expected something a bit more high level, with "values" and "philosophy" and so on.
- sorokod 4y agoTaxonomy is tricky but I agree that this is a level in between strategic and tactical. In the military this level is called operational.
- underwater 4y agoIn my opinion values and philosophy would fit with a vision document. That said, the actions section does feel too tactical to me. Strategy would be more about the goals and targets.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Msurrow 4y agoThe author bases his Strategy on the book Good Strategy, Bad Strategy and in that respect he hits the correct abstraction level imo. I can really recommend the book. It basically boils down to how to take Strategy documents from the classic high-flying, bla bla visions, values etc that employees (incl midlevel mgmt) read and forget about again because its too far removed from their actual work, and instead write a Strategy that is both based on what actual problems/threats are, and that communicates in a concrete but not too specific way how to execute the Strategy. Writing Strategy documents that are actionable are important, I think, to try and deal with the old but very true “culture eats Strategy for breakfeast”
- shsbdncudx 4y agoStrategy and tactics are layered.