Strategies are essential in business. They provide both a goal and a plan to achieve it. Choosing the right framework was not always a challenge, but today there are over a hundred to choose from. Fortunately, three experts from the Boston Consulting Group—Martin Reeves, Knut Haanaes, and Janmejaya Sinha—have addressed this issue in their book, Your Strategy Needs a Strategy: How to Choose and Execute the Right Approach.
To understand how we ended up in this situation, we need a brief history of strategy frameworks. In 1958, Igor Ansoff proposed the Matrix for Growth. His four quadrants demonstrated how a company could focus on existing markets and customers, target new customers with existing products, sell new products to existing customers, or pursue the bold objective of selling new products to new customers. In 1962, Everett Rogers followed with his theory on The Diffusion of Innovations, proposing that any new product would be adopted at different rates by innovators, early adopters, the early majority, the late majority, and, eventually, laggards.
The 1960s saw a surge of strategy frameworks. Gap Analysis was introduced in 1965, the Product Lifecycle in 1966, the PEST framework in 1967, and SWOT analysis in 1969. The 1970s brought us the Boston Matrix, while Michael Porter introduced his 5 Forces model.
By 1980, these groundbreaking frameworks had covered almost every opportunity for business growth. However, the market environment began to shift. The advent of the internet and rapid technological advancements ushered in an era of accelerated change. New frameworks emerged to address this fast-paced environment, including Total Quality Management, Six Sigma, and First-Mover Advantage. Over the next two decades, businesses adopted tools such as Mass Customization, Disruptive Innovation, Value Chain Analysis, and Blue Ocean Strategy. For pricing strategies, they turned to Conjoint Analysis, while branding needs were addressed by the Customer Value Proposition and the Brand Positioning Bullseye.
As in many areas of modern life, we now face an overwhelming array of choices—perhaps too many. A business leader cannot afford to dip into the strategy “bran tub” every month to select a new framework. While these tools may be valuable in a business school setting, running a business requires a focus on fundamentals: understanding customer needs, meeting those needs, and turning a profit. The classical and early frameworks addressed these core goals effectively. Most subsequent frameworks have been designed to adapt to and shape emerging challenges, focusing more on short-term problem-solving than long-term goal-setting. While modern tools can address specific challenges, their overabundance risks distracting leaders from core priorities. Ultimately, businesses must strike a balance between leveraging innovative approaches and adhering to timeless principles of strategy: focusing on customers, solving their problems, and generating sustainable profits.