Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ellen F. Goldman
Strategic Thinking
At the Top
Please note that gray areas reflect artwork that has been
intentionally removed. The substantive content of the
article appears as originally published. REPRINT NUMBER 48418
Leadership
Strategic Thinking
At the Top
S trategic thinking is generally considered important to a company’s per-
formance.1 Indeed, some have advocated for companies to develop the
strategic thinking of their executives as a core competency. But how exactly
should organizations accomplish this? Past studies on the subject have been
limited, typically focusing on singular teaching methods, experiences or plan-
ning processes.2 As such, the research has yielded little insight into the broader
picture of how individuals tend to acquire expertise in strategic thinking.
What types of work experiences, for example, are more important than others,
and do they need to follow any specific chronology?
To answer these and other questions, I conducted a study that identified
executives who were considered the top strategic thinkers in their industry.3
(See “About the Research,” p.76.) The study then investigated the totality of
experiences (educational, job related or other) that contributed to the high
ability of those individuals. In addition, the research investigated the different
ways in which the executives acquired their expertise in strategic thinking — a
process that typically took more than a decade.
The data showed that strategic thinking arises from 10 specific types of
experiences — for instance, spearheading a major growth initiative or dealing
with a threat to organizational survival. Moreover, executives appear to gain
their expertise in strategic thinking through one of three developmental pat-
terns. These findings help demystify the process by which strategic thinking is
learned, offering important implications for management development and
the practice of strategy. Expertise in strategic
thinking is not the
Defining Strategic Thinking
First, though, what exactly is “strategic thinking”? Although numerous books
product of innate
and articles purport to cover the subject, they typically deal more with strategic ability and pure
planning and strategic management. According to Henry Mintzberg, the man- serendipity. It arises
agement guru, “Many practitioners and theorists have wrongly assumed that
strategic planning, strategic thinking and strategy making are all synonymous,
from specific experiences
at least in best practice.”4 To avoid any confusion, my study used the following (personal, interpersonal,
definition: Strategic thinking is a distinctive management activity whose pur- organizational and
pose is “to discover novel, imaginative strategies which can rewrite the rules of
external) which occur
over 10 or more years.
Ellen F. Goldman is a visiting assistant professor of human and organizational learning
in the Graduate School of Education and Human Development at George Washington
University. She is also the principal of Growth Partners, a Reston, Virginia-based consul- Ellen F. Goldman
tancy that specializes in strategic thinking. Comment on this article or contact the author
through smrfeedback@mit.edu.
the competitive game; and to envision potential futures signifi- most falling somewhere in the middle. It should be noted, how-
cantly different from the present.”5 Furthermore, strategic thinking ever, that even the individual with the strongest pronature view
was specified as being conceptual, systems-oriented, directional felt that experiences were still necessary to develop a person’s
(linking the future with the past) and opportunistic.6 strategic thinking ability. And most participants felt that without
A related question is whether strategic thinking is an innate some “hard-wiring,” learning to think strategically would be
skill or one that can be acquired. This question is at the heart of more difficult but not impossible.
every discussion of individual abilities. But even those leadership
theorists who believe in inherent mental processing capabilities7 Ten Contributing Experiences
note that such abilities must be enhanced as part of management The study identified 10 experiences that contributed to the devel-
development. My study was concerned with identifying the ex- opment of a person’s ability to think strategically, and those
periences that contributed to the development of expertise in experiences represented four levels of interaction: personal, in-
strategic thinking, not with measuring any levels of cognitive terpersonal, organizational and external. (See “Ten Experiences
functioning. As such, the nature-versus-nurture argument was That Contribute to the Ability to Think Strategically.”) Every ex-
moot to this research. Interestingly, the study participants volun- ecutive did not benefit from all 10 experiences, and no two
teered views that spanned the nature/nurture spectrum, with executives had the same set of experiences. But each individual
i. J. Shanteau, “Psychological Characteristics and Strategies of Expert Decision Makers,” Acta Psychologica 68 (September 1988): 203-215; and R.J. Sternberg, “Cognitive Conceptions of
Expertise,“ International Journal of Expert Systems 7, no. 1 (1994): 1-12.
ii. I. Seidman, “Interviewing As Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences,” 2nd ed. (New York: Teachers College Press, 1998).
iii. C.M. Fiol and A.S. Huff, “Maps For Managers: Where Are We? Where Do We Go From Here?” Journal of Management Studies 29, no. 3 (May 1992): 267-285.
iv. C. Moustakas, “Phenomenological Research Methods” (Thousand Oak, California: Sage Publications, 1994).
v. Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, “Naturalistic Inquiry” (Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, 1985).
Family Upbringing/Education “Family up- Expertise in strategic thinking arises from the contributions of 10 experiences that
bringing” and “education” are grouped can be grouped into four levels of interaction: personal, interpersonal, organiza-
together because the study participants tional and external. Every executive in the research study did not benefit from all
discussed them interchangeably; the 10 experiences, but each individual reported at least one experience at each of the
four levels of interaction.
two types of experiences typically oc-
curred simultaneously, reinforcing one
another. One aspect noted was the Level of Interaction Experience
value of exploring different perspec-
Personal Family Upbringing/Education
tives, for example, through travel and
General Work Experiences
exposure to different cultures as well as
Becoming a CEO
through debate training and practice of
Interpersonal Being Mentored
the Socratic method.
Being Challenged By a Key Colleague
which provided exposure to numerous External Dealing With a Threat to Organizational Survival
strategic issues and familiarity with a Vicarious Experiences
breadth of strategies. The most impor-
tant factor here was the responsibility
for significant projects (for example, implementing the merger of tion’s vice president of planning. In general, the interactions
two organizations, evaluating a business for sale or turning around were private and spontaneous, with a wide range in tone from
an organization that was facing bankruptcy) and the freedom to relaxed, informal conversations to highly aggressive, confronta-
make most, if not all, of the decisions related to those initiatives. tional exchanges.
Becoming a CEO This experience is somewhat paradoxical. Many Monitoring Results/Benchmarking The participants cited the im-
boards want individuals who already have expertise in strategic portance of their involvement in monitoring the operational and
thinking as their CEOs. But many of the study participants cited market performance of their organizations. Such efforts were
becoming a CEO as important to the development of their stra- usually extensive and fairly sophisticated. Market data, for ex-
tegic thinking because, with that promotion, they gained access ample, were often segmented by geography and demographics,
to important information (for instance, the views of important with information on purchaser preferences and use, and views of
external parties) which enabled a “big picture” view of their busi- competitors detailed by the various market segments. Other key
ness. [Note: All the individuals that the study identified as experts data tracked each market segment’s stated preferences in relation
in strategic thinking were CEOs, even though this attribute was to the actual behavior of those customers.
not a criterion in the selection process.]
Doing Strategic Planning The development of strategic thinking
Being Mentored Many executives have mentors, but not all men- ability is enhanced by participation in strategic planning proc-
tors help others to develop their strategic thinking. Those who do esses with three characteristics. The first is having planning
are individuals who are in frequent contact with the executive (at sessions with management teams on a regular basis, often monthly
least once daily), providing immediate feedback. Moreover, their or quarterly. The second is preparation for these sessions, such as
influence starts early in an executive’s career, within a few years of the required reading of materials that help focus people’s think-
that individual’s first job, perhaps as a first boss. ing and provide a sense of the meeting’s purpose. The third is the
formal output of the planning process: often an overall plan fol-
Being Challenged By a Key Colleague Colleagues played an impor- lowed by business-unit goals and tactical plans. But even less
tant role by challenging the thinking of the executives. structured output — establishing a general direction and im-
Individuals performing this role worked very closely with the mediate next steps, for example — can help develop an executive’s
executive, for example, as his boss, board chairman or organiza- strategic thinking.
Spearheading a Major Growth Initiative These projects must in- years with a wide range of frequency: The interaction could occur
volve significant complexity, be both capital and labor intensive monthly for a few hours, quarterly for one day or three days twice
and require at least a year to complete. Examples include estab- annually. In many cases, the regular contact is enhanced by small
lishing a new program (developing the business case, obtaining group interactions and social time, for example, a monthly pro-
regulatory approval, overseeing facility construction and re- fessional meeting of CEOs that includes sessions in which people
cruiting staff), acquiring an organization (identifying, negotiating break into smaller groups (perhaps geared toward specific topics)
with and acclimating the new group) and building a new facility followed by dinner with ample time for networking opportuni-
(that is, overseeing its construction). As with the category of ties. The study participants also noted the benefit of vicarious
general work experiences, the freedom to make important deci- experiences gained through indirect means, such as by reading
sions makes these projects valuable to the development of business publications.
strategic thinking ability. Generally speaking, each of the 10 experiences took place over
a significant period of time, often in excess of one year, and re-
Dealing With a Threat to Organizational Survival The types of threats quired considerable responsibility on the part of the executive
that most contribute to the development of strategic thinking are — usually the individual had to perform tasks that were materi-
those that involve attempts at control by another entity, which ally new to him. Some of the experiences catalyzed others, but
occur repeatedly and that could have a severe impact on the ex- they did not occur in any specific order (except for the obvious
ecutive’s organization. Such experiences typically force a major categories of “family upbringing/education,” “being mentored,”
rethinking of issues that strike at the core of the individuals in- and “becoming a CEO”).
volved, substantially sharpening their focus. In addition to the 10 experiences, the study identified two
other important factors. The first was personal characteristics,
Vicarious Experiences This category includes interactions with specifically, being methodical, balanced, goal-oriented, curious,
others in similar roles, with the frequency of contact being an receptive to criticism, detail-oriented, a perfectionist and a mav-
important factor. Usually, the contact is maintained for several erick. The second was a supportive work environment, including
the presence of a strong management team that
frees up the CEO’s time to focus on strategic issues
Pattern 1: The Development of Understanding and contributes to his thinking. Also of impor-
tance was the attitude of the board, particularly
regarding failure. As one executive explained,
In this developmental pattern, expertise in strategic thinking arises from
“When you do … make a mistake, they’re worried
the culmination of various experiences (small ovals) which provide new
and different perspectives. The experiences occur over years, and each
about fixing the problem, not fixing the blame.”
is fueled by the individual’s natural curiosity (large oval). This figure is a Neither of these factors is sufficient to develop
reproduction of the actual map created during interactions with one strategic thinking ability without the requisite ex-
executive in the study who best exemplified this particular pattern of periences described earlier, but they may amplify
development. the value of those experiences.
In this developmental pattern, expertise in strategic thinking is the result of the executive continually asking the same three
questions (large ovals): Where are we going? How are we getting there? Are we executing efficiently? The arrows denote the flow
of knowledge from the various experiences (small ovals) to the three questions. Note that an experience can provide value to
more than one of the questions. This figure is a reproduction of the actual map created during interactions with one executive in
the study who best exemplified this particular pattern of development.
Boss
Mentors
Data Benchmarks
Monitoring Question
Best
of Legacy Logical
Practices
Evaluation of
Desired Alternatives
Metrics Time
Use
Where Dialogue
Problems/ Going? with Team How Getting
Complaints (Vision) Past
Successes There?
(Models) (Strategies)
Community
Views Sense of Methodical
Ownership Thinker Mistakes
General
Business
Knowledge Beta After-the-Fact
(Standards) Groups Critique
Is Execution
Efficient?
(Implementation)
Pattern 1 The first pattern reflects a repetitive process of using and the repeated application of the three steps, no matter how big
past experiences to consider alternative perspectives. (See “Pat- or small the issue, with expertise in strategic thinking acquired
tern 1: The Development of Understanding.”) One executive after years of honing the practice.
described the process this way: There’s a solution to every prob-
lem, and if you can’t come up with it, you need to look at the Pattern 3 The final developmental pattern is portrayed as the
problem from a different angle. The key ingredient here is a natu- tackling of bigger and bigger business challenges, with the execu-
ral curiosity that fuels the executive’s search for greater tive’s ability to think strategically growing continuously over
understanding, thus expanding his ability to think strategically. time. (See “Pattern 3: The Completion of a Hierarchy of Chal-
The result: The executive learns to see all sides of an issue and is lenges,” p. 80.) Key features include modest initial activity followed
able to alter the angle from which he views a problem to search by a step-like progression. The catalysts to movement can be ei-
for a better solution. In this manner — through the exploration ther positive or negative: opportunities to build new services as
of different perspectives repeatedly over time — the executive well as pressures from financial losses, takeover attempts and
develops expertise in strategic thinking. other challenges to survival. Expertise in thinking strategically is
acquired by meeting and effectively dealing with the challenges,
Pattern 2 This pattern includes the three major steps of a logical with each experience improving the executive’s ability.
planning process — understanding where you are, determining The three patterns reflect how executives described the ways
where you want to be and detailing how to get there — with each in which they learned to think strategically. They illustrate both
step informed by information, experience (both actual and vi- what occurred (specifically, the 10 experiences) and how the ex-
carious) and discussion. (See “Pattern 2: The Practice of Rational ecutives approached those experiences (namely, by considering
Planning.”) Key features include the use of data to fuel thinking different perspectives, by using a planning model or by just div-
Scenario
Evaluation
Executive
Education
Payment
Change
Dialogue with
Doing a External Parties
Master Plan Trade
Organizations
Evaluating an Board
Acquisition Interactions
General
Being Experience Consultants’
Mentored Team and Questions
Observation Community
Dialogue
ing in and doing what was needed). The salient point here is that Include Strategic Thinking As a Formal Component of Management
all the executives in the study described their development in a Development Programs One of the most remarkable findings of the
manner that was consistent with one of the three patterns. study was the tacit expectation that an executive would, all of a
sudden, think strategically upon becoming a CEO. But, clearly, if
Improving Strategic Thinking companies want expertise in strategic thinking they must take the
The study results have a number of implications for companies necessary steps to nurture this ability. Management development
in their efforts to improve the strategic thinking of their execu- programs should identify specific experiences (spearheading a
tives. The important thing to remember, though, is that any growth initiative, for instance) and target their inclusion in the
development program must be highly individual because no careers of high-potential executives. Although individual in na-
two people will absorb the same experience in exactly the same ture, such experiences should, taken together, cross all four levels
way. Nevertheless, some general guidelines do apply. Experi- of interaction: personal, interpersonal, organizational and envi-
ences that contribute most to the development of strategic ronmental. Moreover, each experience should contain the
thinking tend to take place over a year or more and require necessary attributes (being mentored, for example, must include
significant responsibility on the part of the individual — usu- frequent contact and immediate feedback). Finally, the experi-
ally the performance of a task that is materially new to that ences should be preceded by a briefing on strategy theory and
person. Moreover, it’s crucial to remember that the develop- vocabulary (if needed) to ensure that the executive understands
ment of expertise in strategic thinking takes at least a decade, key concepts that will help him obtain the maximum benefits
during which time many of those experiences must be continu- from those experiences.
ally repeated. With all this in mind, the following approaches
should benefit companies in their efforts to develop the stra- Require Executives to Develop the Strategic Thinking of Their Sub-
tegic thinking of their managers. ordinates Because strategic thinking develops gradually over a