Once you get your head around [[What is a Strategy]], you might ask what makes one *good* or *bad*. A well articulated strategy contains 3 things: 1. A **Diagnosis** stating the challenge - what are the *crucial* things holding you back from your goals? Metaphors are useful here. 2. A **Guiding Policy** which *constrains* (but doesn't detail) the specific actions you'll take to address the diagnosis. 3. **Coherent Actions** that work *[[Synergize|synergistically]]* and act within the guiding policy to address the diagnosis. You should treat strategy like a **hypothesis**, that can be tested and adjusted over time based on [[Empirical|empirical evidence]]/results. ## Good Strategies - are simple & simply stated - addresses the challenges directly through actions - don't recommend competing or conflicting actions - are [[Focus]]ed - which means [[A Firm & Polite “No”|saying no]] to things - leverage some form an advantage you have - can be easily applied to smaller, day-by-day decisions - ^ my own inclusion ## Bad Strategies - are vague and full of [[Avoid Jargon|jargon]] and business-speak - fluff-filled - are not related to the articulated challenge to overcome - full of every goal everyone wants to do - universal buy-in is actually *bad*, it's a signal of a lack of [[Make the Decision that Informs all Subsequent Decisions|the decision to drive decisions]] - "blue sky" objectives - where you say the thing you want despite the fact you have no idea how to get there - reliant on templates and use bland, inarguable but uninspiring sentences - "We will be the best at serving our customers through a commitment to excellence & integrity" - ok cool. **** ### Source - https://jlzych.com/2018/06/27/notes-from-good-strategy-bad-strategy/ ### Related - [[What is a Strategy]] - [[Design vs Engineering]]