𖣯Strategic Management: Strategic Perspectives (Part II: The Elephant in the Room)

Strategic Management Perspectives

There’s an ancient parable about several blind people who touch a shape they had never met before, an elephant, and try to identify what it is. The elephant is big, more than each person can sense through direct experience, and people’s experiences don’t correlate to the degree that they don’t trust each other, the situation escalating upon case. The moral of the parable is that we tend to claim (absolute) truths based on limited, subjective experience [1], and this can easily happen in business scenarios in which each of us has a limited view of the challenges we are facing individually and as a collective. 

The situation from the parable can be met in business scenarios, when we try to make sense of the challenges we are faced with, and we get only a limited perspective from the whole picture. Only open dialog and working together can get us closer to the solution! Even then, the accurate depiction might not be in sight, and we need to extrapolate the unknown further.  

A third-party consultant with experience might be the right answer, at least in theory, though experience and solutions are relative. The consultant might lead us in a direction, though from this to finding the answer can be a long way that requires experimentation, a mix of tactics and strategies that change over time, more sense-making and more challenges lying ahead. 

We would like a clear answer and a set of steps that lead us to the solution, though the answer is as usual, it depends! It depends on the various forces/drivers that have the biggest impact on the organization, on the context, on the organization’s goals, on the resources available directly or indirectly, on people’s capabilities, the occurrences of external factors, etc. 

In many situations the smartest thing to do is to gather information, respectively perspectives from all the parties. Tools like brainstorming, SWOT/PESTLE analysis or scenario planning can help in sense-making to identify the overall picture and where the gravity point lies. For some organizations the solution will be probably a new ERP system, or the redesign of some processes, introduction of additional systems to track quality, flow of material, etc. 

A new ERP system will not necessarily solve all the issues (even if that’s the expectation), and some organizations just try to design the old processes into a new context. Process redesign in some areas can be upon case a better approach, at least as primary measure. Otherwise, general initiatives focused on quality, data/information management, customer/vendor management, integrations, and the list remains open, can provide the binder/vehicle an organization needs to overcome the current challenges.

Conversely, if the ERP or other strategical systems are 10-20 years old, then there’s indeed an elephant in the room! Moreover, the elephant might be bigger than we can chew, and other challenges might lurk in its shadow(s). Everything is a matter of perspective with no apparent unique answer. Thus, finding an acceptable solution might lurk in the shadow of the broader perspective, in the cumulated knowledge of the people experiencing the issues, respectively in some external guidance. Unfortunately, the guides can be as blind as we are, making limited or no important impact. 

Sometimes, all it’s needed is a leap of faith corroborated with a set of tactics or strategies kept continuously in check, redirected as they seem fit based on the knowledge accumulated and the challenges ahead. It helps to be aware of how others approached the same issues. Unfortunately, there’s no answer that works for all! In this lies the challenge, in identifying what works and makes sense for us!

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

Resources:
[1] Wikipedia (2024) Blind men and an elephant [link]

🗄️Data Management: Data Governance (Part II: Heroes Die Young)

Data Management Series

In the call for action there are tendencies in some organizations to idealize and overcharge main actors' purpose and image when talking about data governance by calling them heroes. Heroes are those people who fight for a goal they believe in with all their being and occasionally they pay the supreme tribute. Of course, the image of heroes is idealized and many other aspects are ignored, though such images sell ideas and ideals. Organizations might need heroes and heroic deeds to change the status quo, but the heroism doesn't necessarily payoff for the "heroes"! 

Sometimes, organizations need a considerable effort to change the status quo. It can be people's resistance to new, to the demands, to the ideas propagated, especially when they are not clearly explained and executed. It can be the incommensurable distance between the "AS IS" and the "TO BE" perspectives, especially when clear paths aren't in sight. It can be the lack of resources (e.g., time, money, people, tools), knowledge, understanding or skillset that makes the effort difficult. 

Unfortunately, such initiatives favor action over adequate strategies, planning and understanding of the overall context. The call do to something creates waves of actions and reactions which in the organizational context can lead to storms and even extreme behavior that ranges from resistance to the new to heroic deeds. Finding a few messages that support the call for action can help, though they can't replace the various critical for success factors.

Leading organizations on a new path requires a well-defined realistic strategy, respectively adequate tactical and operational planning that reflects organizations' specific needs, knowledge and capabilities. Just demanding from people to do their best is not enough, and heroism has chances to appear especially in this context. Unfortunately, the whole weight falls on the shoulders of the people chosen as actors in the fight. Ideally, it should be possible to spread the whole weight on a broader basis which should be considered the foundation for the new. 

The "heroes" metaphor is idealized and the negative outcome probably exaggerated, though extreme situations do occur in organizations when decisions, planning, execution and expectations are far from ideal. Ideal situations are met only in books and less in practice!

The management demands and the people execute, much like in the army, though by contrast people need to understand the reasoning behind what they are doing. Proper execution requires skillset, understanding, training, support, tools and the right resources for the right job. Just relying on people's professionalism and effort is not enough and is suboptimal, but this is what many organizations seem to do!

Organizations tend to respond to the various barriers or challenges with more resources or pressure instead of analyzing and depicting the situation adequately, and eventually change the strategy, tactics or operations accordingly. It's also difficult to do this as long an organization doesn't have the capabilities and practices of self-check, self-introspection, self-reflection, etc. Even if it sounds a bit exaggerated, an organization must know itself to overcome the various challenges. Regular meetings, KPIs and other metrics give the illusion of control when self-control is needed. 

Things don't have to be that complex even if managing data governance is a complex endeavor. Small or midsized organizations are in theory more capable to handle complexity because they can be more agile, have a robust structure and the flow of information and knowledge has less barriers, respectively a shorter distance to overcome, at least in theory. One can probably appeal to the laws and characteristics of networks to understand more about the deeper implications, of how solutions can be implemented in more complex setups.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

📦Data Migrations (DM): Conceptualization I (Goals, Objectives & Requirements)

Data Migrations Series

One of the nowadays’ challenges is finding the right mix of technologies that allows building a solution for a business need. There are so many choices and the responsible person is easily tempted to use one of the trending technologies just because he wants to learn something new or the technologies seem to fit into the bigger picture, which probably in many cases it would be acceptable. Unfortunately, there’s also the tendency of picking a technology without looking at what functionality it provides, respectively whether the functionality meets intended solutions’ requirements. Moreover, the requirements are sometimes barely defined at the appropriate level of detail, fact that makes from the implementation project a candidate for failure. Sometimes even the goals and objectives aren’t clearly stated, fact that can make a project’s success easily questionable from the beginning. 

A goal is a general statement that reflects the desired result toward which an organization’s effort needs to be directed. For example, a Data Migration (DM)’s primary goal can be formulated as 'to make available all the master and transactional data needed by the business from the legacy systems to the target system(s) within expected timeline and quality with a minimal disruption for the business'. 

An objective is a break down of the goal into several components that should foster a clear understanding on how the goal will be achieved. Ideally the objectives should be SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time-bound), even if measurable objectives are sometimes hard to define properly. One can consider them as the tactics used in achieving the goal. For example, the above formulated goal can be broken down into the following objectives:

• Build a DM concept/strategy
• Build a flexible and performant infrastructure for DM that can be adapted to further requirements
• Provide a basis for further DMs
• Align DM and main project’s requirements and activities
• Provide an interface and support for the Data Management areas
• Foster trust, transparency and awareness 
• Address internal/external compliance requirements
• Document and communicate accountability for the various activities
• Cleanse and enrich the data needed by the target system 
• Archive the DM and project data 

One can attempt defining the objectives directly from the goal(s), though unless one is aware of all the implication a DM has, more likely one will be forced to define and evaluate the individual functional and nonfunctional requirements for the DM first, and attempt consolidating the requirements into a set of objectives. In the end it can be a combination of both, in which some objectives are first formulated, the requirements are defined and evaluated, respectively the objectives are refined to accommodate the requirements. 

ISO 9126, an international standard for the evaluation of software quality, defines about 45-50 attributes that can be used for addressing the requirements of software solutions, attributes that reflect functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, and maintainability characteristics. One can start with such a list and identify how important are the respective attributes for the solution.  The next step would be to document the requirements into a consolidated list by providing a short argumentation for their use, respectively how they will be addressed as part of the solution. The process can prove to be time-consuming, however it is a useful exercise that usually needs to be done only once and be reviewed occasionally.

The list can be created independently of any other documentation or be included directly into a concept or strategy. The latter will assure in theory that the document provides a unitary view of the migration, considering that each new or obsolete requirement can impact the concept. 

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

💼Project Management: Planning Correctly Misunderstood - Part I

It is sometimes helpful to take a step back, observe, and then logically generalize the extremes of the observed facts; if possible, without judging people’s behavior as there’s more to it as the eyes can perceive. In some cases however one can feel that the observed situations are really close to extreme. It’s the case of some tendencies met in project planning - not planning, planning for the sake of planning, expecting a plan to be perfect, setting a plan as fix, without the possibility of changing it in utile time, respectively changing the plan too often.

There are situations in which it’s better to be spontaneous and go with the flow. Managing a project isn’t one of these situations. As Lakein’s Law formulates it succinctly: “failing to plan is planning to fail”, or paraphrasing Eisenhower (1) and Clausewitz (2) - plans are useless as no plan ever survived contact with the enemy (reality), but planning is indispensable - as a plan increases awareness about project’s scope, actions, challenges, risks and opportunities, and allows devising the tactics and logistics needed to reach the set goals. Even if the plan doesn’t reflect anymore the reality, it can still be adapted to fit the new requirements. The more planning experience one has the more natural it becomes to close the gap between the initial plan and reality, and of adapting the plan as needed.

There’s an important difference between doing something because one is forced to do it and doing it because one sees and understands the value of planning. There's the tendency to plan for the sake of planning, because there's the compel to do it. Besides the fact that it documents the what, when, why and who, and that is used as a basis for action, the plan must reflect project’s current status and the activities planed for the next reporting cycle. As soon a plan is not able to reflect these aspects it becomes thus in time unusable.

The enemy of a good plan can prove to be the dream of a perfect plan (3). Some may think that the holy grail of planning is the perfect plan, that the project can’t start until all the activities were listed to the lowest detail and the effort thoroughly assigned. Few plans actually survive the contact with the reality and there can be lot of energy lost by working on the perfect plan.

Another similar behavior,  rooted mainly in the methodologies used, is that of not allowing a plan to be changed for a part or whole duration of the project. Publilius Syrus recognized more than two millennia ago that a plan that admits no modification is a bad plan (4) per se. Methodologies and practices that don’t allow a flexible way of changing the plan make no service to projects. Often changes need to occur immediately and not at an ideal point in time, when maybe the effect is lost.

Modern Project Management tools allow building the dependencies between the various activities and it’s inevitable that a change in one place will cause a chain reaction and lead to a contraction or dilatation of the plan, and this can happen with each planning iteration. In extremis the end date will alternate as the lines of a seismograph during an earthquake. It’s natural for this to happen in projects in a first phase, however it’s in Project Manager’s attribution to mitigate such variations.

The project plan is a reflection of the project and how it’s managed, therefore, one needs to give it the proper focus, how often and how detailed required.

Referenced quotes:
(1) “In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable” (Eisenhower quoted by Nixon)
(2) “No plan ever survived contact with the enemy. ” (Carl von Clausewitz)
(3) “The enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.” (Carl von Clausewitz)
(4) "It's a bad plan that admits of no modification." (Publilius Syrus)

♟️Strategic Management: The Art of War (Just the Quotes)

Disclaimer: The following quotes were consider only in respect to people's understanding about strategy and tactics over time, as best exemplification for understanding the difference between the two concepts.

"What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy." (Sun Tzu, "The Art of War", 5th century BC)

"Thus those skilled in war subdue the enemy's army without battle. [...] They conquer by strategy." (Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 5th century BC)

"The peak efficiency of knowledge and strategy is to make conflict unnecessary."(Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 5th century BC)

"In warfare, there are no constant conditions. He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent will succeed and win." (Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 5th century BC)

"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved." (Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 5th century BC)

"When conventional tactics are altered unexpectedly according to the situation, they take on the element of surprise and increase in strategic value." (Sun Bin, Art of War, cca 4th century BC)

"Everything can collapse. Houses, bodies, and enemies collapse when their rhythm becomes deranged. [...] In large-scale strategy, when the enemy starts to collapse you must pursue him without letting the chance go. If you fail to take advantage of your enemies' collapse, they may recover." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things. It is important in strategy to know the enemy's sword and not to be distracted by insignificant movements of his sword. You must study this. The gaze is the same for single combat and for large-scale combat." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"In all forms of strategy, it is necessary to maintain the combat stance in everyday life and to make your everyday stance your combat stance. You must research this well." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"In contests of strategy it is bad to be led about by the enemy. You must always be able to lead the enemy about." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"In strategy your spiritual bearing must not be any different from normal. Both in fighting and in everyday life you should be determined though calm. Meet the situation without tenseness yet not recklessly, your spirit settled yet unbiased. Even when your spirit is calm do not let your body relax, and when your body is relaxed do not let your spirit slacken." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"In large-scale strategy, it is beneficial to strike at the corners of the enemy's force, If the corners are overthrown, the spirit of the whole body will be overthrown." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"Many things can cause a loss of balance. One cause is danger, another is hardship, and another is surprise. You must research this.

In large-scale strategy it is important to cause loss of balance. Attack without warning where the enemy is not expecting it, and while his spirit is undecided follow up your advantage and, having the lead, defeat him." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"Speed is not part of the true Way of strategy. Speed implies that things seem fast or slow, according to whether or not they are in rhythm. Whatever the Way, the master of strategy does not appear fast." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"Strategy is different from other things in that if you mistake the Way even a little you will become bewildered and fall into bad ways." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"There is timing in everything. Timing in strategy cannot be mastered without a great deal of practice." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"The important thing in strategy is to suppress the enemy's useful actions but allow his useless actions." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"The principles of strategy are written down here in terms of single combat, but you must think broadly so that you attain an understanding for ten-thousand-a-side battles." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"The wisdom of strategy is different from other things. On the battlefield, even when you are hard-pressed, you should ceaselessly research the principles of strategy so that you can develop a steady spirit." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"There is timing in the whole life of the warrior, in his thriving and declining, in his harmony and discord. Similarly, there is timing in the Way of the merchant, in the rise and fall of capital. All things entail rising and falling timing. You must be able to discern this. In strategy there are various timing considerations. From the outset you must know the applicable timing and the inapplicable timing, and from among the large and small things and the fast and slow timings find the relevant timing, first seeing the distance timing and the background timing. This is the main thing in strategy. It is especially important to know the background timing, otherwise your strategy will become uncertain." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"To attain the Way of strategy as a warrior you must study fully other martial arts and not deviate even a little from the Way of the warrior. With your spirit settled, accumulate practice day by day, and hour by hour. Polish the twofold spirit heart and mind, and sharpen the twofold gaze perception and sight. When your spirit is not in the least clouded, when the clouds of bewilderment clear away, there is the true void." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"'To move the shade' is used when you cannot see the enemy's spirit.

In large-scale strategy, when you cannot see the enemy's position, indicate that you are about to attack strongly, to discover his resources. It is easy then to defeat hin with a different method once you see his resources." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"When you have attained the way of strategy there will be nothing that you cannot understand. You will see the way in everything." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"With your spirit open and unconstricted, look at things from a high point of view. You must cultivate your wisdom and spirit. Polish your wisdom: learn public justice, distinguish between good and evil, study the Ways of different arts one by one. When you cannot be deceived by men you will have realised the wisdom of strategy." (Miyamoto Musashi, "Go Rin No Sho" ["The Book of Five Rings"], 1645)

"According to our classification, then, tactics teaches the use of armed forces in the engagement; strategy, the use of engagements for the object of the war." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"But when one comes to the effect of the engagement, where material successes turn into motives for further action, the intellect alone is decisive. In brief, tactics will present far fewer difficulties to the theorist than will strategy." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"In a tactical situation one is able to see at least half the problem with the naked eye, whereas in strategy everything has to be guessed at and presumed." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"Many readers no doubt will consider it superfluous to make such a careful distinction between two things so closely related as tactics and strategy, because they do not directly affect the conduct of operations. Admittedly only the rankest pedant would expect theoretical distinctions to show direct results on the battlefield." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"Tactics and strategy are two activities that permeate one another in time and space but are nevertheless essentially different. Their inherent laws and mutual relationship cannot be understood without a total comprehension of both." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"The art of war in the narrower sense must now in its turn be broken down into tactics and strategy. The first is concerned with the form of the individual engagement, the second with its use. Both affect the conduct of marches, camps, and billets only through the engagement; they become tactical or strategic questions insofar as they concern either the engagement’s form or its significance. (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"The conduct of war, then, consists in the planning and conduct of fighting. If fighting consisted of a single act, no further subdivision would be needed. However, it consists of a greater or lesser number of single acts, each complete in itself, which [...] are called ‘engagements’ and which form new entities. This gives rise to the completely different activity of planning and executing these engagements themselves, and of coordinating each of them with the others in order to further the object of the war. One has been called tactics, and the other strategy." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"The distinction between tactics and strategy is now almost universal, and everyone knows fairly well where each particular factor belongs without clearly understanding why. Whenever such categories are blindly used, there must be a deep-seated reason for it. We have tried to discover the distinction, and have to say that it was just this common usage that led to it. We reject, on the other hand, the artificial definitions of certain writers, since they find no reflection in general usage." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"The theory of major operations (strategy, as it is called) presents extraordinary difficulties, and it is fair to say that very few people have clear ideas about its details - that is, ideas which logically derive from basic necessities." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"We have divided the conduct of war into the two fields of tactics and strategy. The theory of the latter, as we have already stated, will unquestionably encounter the greater problems since the former is virtually limited to material factors, whereas for strategic theory, dealing as it does with ends which bear directly on the restoration of peace, the range of possibilities is unlimited. As these ends will have to be considered primarily by the commander-in-chief, the problems mainly arise in those fields that lie within his competence. In the field of strategy, therefore, even more than in tactics, theory will be content with the simple consideration of material and psychological factors, especially where it embraces the highest of achievements." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"Such cases also occur in strategy, since strategy is directly linked to tactical action. In strategy too decisions must often be based on direct observation, on uncertain reports arriving hour by hour and day by day, and finally on the actual outcome of battles. It is thus an essential condition of strategic leadership that forces should be held in reserve according to the degree of strategic uncertainty." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"Thus, while a tactical reserve is a means not only of meeting any unforeseen manoeuvre by the enemy but also of reversing the unpredictable outcome of combat when this becomes necessary, strategy must renounce this means, at least so far as the overall decision is concerned. Setbacks in one area can, as a rule, be offset only by achieving gains elsewhere, and in a few cases by transferring troops from one area to another. Never must it occur to a strategist to deal with such a setback by holding forces in reserve." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"As regards tactics, the principal thing to be attended to is the choice of the most suitable order of battle for the object in view. When we come to consider the action of masses on the field, the means to be used may be an opportune charge of cavalry, a strong battery put in position and unmasked at the proper moment, a column of infantry making a headlong charge, or a deployed division coolly and steadily pouring upon the enemy a fire, or they may consist of tactical maneuvers intended to threaten the enemy’s flanks or rear, or any other maneuver calculated to diminish the confidence of the adversary. Each of these things may, in a particular case, be the cause of victory. To define the cases in which each should be preferred is simply impossible." (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"Every strategic line of defense should always possess a tactical point upon which to rally for defense should the enemy cross the strategic front. (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"Grand tactics is the art of making good combinations preliminary to battles, as well as during their progress. The guiding principle in tactical combinations, as in those of strategy, is to bring the mass of the force in hand against a part of the opposing army, and upon that point the possession of which promises the most important results. (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"Strategy, or the art of properly directing masses upon the theater of war, either for defense or for invasion. […] Strategy is the art of making war upon the map, and comprehends the whole theater of operations. Grand Tactics is the art of posting troops upon the battle-field according to the accidents of the ground, of bringing them into action, and the art of fighting upon the ground, in contradistinction to planning upon a map. Its operations may extend over a field of ten or twelve miles in extent. Logistics comprises the means and arrangements which work out the plans of strategy and tactics. Strategy decides where to act; logistics brings the troops to this point; grand tactics decides the manner of execution and the employment of the troops." (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"Strategy embraces the following points, viz.:– 

1. The selection of the theater of war, and the discussion of the different combinations of which it admits.

2. The determination of the decisive points in these combinations, and the most favorable direction for operations.

3. The selection and establishment of the fixed base and of the zone of operations.

4. The selection of the objective point, whether offensive or defensive.

5. The strategic fronts, lines of defense, and fronts of operations.

6. The choice of lines of operations leading to the objective point or strategic front.

7. For a given operation, the best strategic line, and the different maneuvers necessary to embrace all possible cases.

8. The eventual bases of operations and the strategic reserves.

9. The marches of armies, considered as maneuvers.

10. The relation between the position of depots and the marches of the army.

11. Fortresses regarded as strategical means, as a refuge for an army, as an obstacle to its progress: the sieges to be made and to be covered.

12. Points for intrenched camps, tétes de pont, &c.

13. The diversions to be made, and the large detachments necessary.

The maneuvering of an army upon the battle-field, and the different formations of troops for attack, constitute Grand Tactics. Logistics is the art of moving armies. It comprises the order and details of marches and camps, and of quartering and supplying troops; in a word, it is the execution of strategical and tactical enterprises." (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"[…] the art of war consists of six distinct parts:– 

1. Statesmanship in its relation to war.

2. Strategy, or the art of properly directing masses upon the theater of×war, either for defense or for invasion.

3. Grand Tactics.

4. Logistics, or the art of moving armies.

5. Engineering,–the attack and defense of fortifications.

6. Minor Tactics." (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"The science of strategy consists, in the first place, in knowing how to choose well a theater of war and to estimate correctly that of the enemy. To do this, a general must accustom himself to decide as to the importance of decisive points […]." (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"The study of the principles of strategy can produce no valuable practical results if we do nothing more than keep them in remembrance, never trying to apply them, with map in hand, to hypothetical wars, or to the brilliant operations of great captains. By such exercises may be procured a rapid and certain strategic coup-d’oeil,–the most valuable characteristic of a good general, without which he can never put in practice the finest theories in the world." (Antoine-Henri Jomini, "The Art of War", 1838)

"Strategy is the most important department of the art of war, and strategical skill is the highest and rarest function of military genius. (George S Hillard, "Life and Campaigns of George B. McClellan, Major-general U. S. Army", 1864)

"The tactical result of an engagement forms the base for new strategic decisions because victory or defeat in a battle changes the situation to such a degree that no human acumen is able to see beyond the first battle." (Helmuth von Moltke, "Über Strategie" ["On Strategy"], 1871)

"The world is a multiplicity, a harvest-field, a battle-ground; and thence arises through human contact ways of numbering, or mathematics, ways of tillage, or agriculture, ways of fighting, or military tactics and strategy, and these are incorporated in individuals as habits of life." (George Edward Woodberry, "The Torch, and Other Lectures and Addresses", 1920)

"Nine-tenths of tactics are certain, and taught in books: but the irrational tenth is like the kingfisher flashing across the pool, and that is the test of generals. It can only be ensured by instinct, sharpened by thought practicing the stroke so often that at the crisis it is as natural as a reflex." (Thomas E Lawrence, "The Evolution of A Revolt", 1920)

"In a physical contest on the field of battle it is allowable to use tactics and strategy, to retreat as well as advance, to have recourse to a ruse as well as open attack; but in matters of principle there can be no tactics, there is one straight forward course to follow and that course must be found and followed without swerving to the end." (Terence MacSwiney, "Principles of Freedom", 1921)

"The field of consciousness is tiny. It accepts only one problem at a time. Get into a fist fight, put your mind on the strategy of the fight, and you will not feel the other fellow's punches." (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, "Flight to Arras", 1942)

"Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose." (Saul Alinsky, "Thirteen Tactics for Realistic Radicals: from Rules for Radicals", 1971)

"As in war, strategic success depends on tactical effectiveness, and no degree of planning can lessen management's tactical imperatives. The first responsibility of the executive, anyway, is to the here and now. If he makes a shambles of the present, there may be no future; and the real purpose of planning - the one whose neglect is common, but poisonous - is to safeguard and sustain the company in subsequent short-run periods." (Robert Heller, "The Naked Manager: Games Executives Play", 1972)

"It is necessary to develop a strategy that utilizes all the physical conditions and elements that are directly at hand. The best strategy relies upon an unlimited set of responses." (Morihei Ueshiba, "The Art of Peace", 1991)

"Grand strategy is the art of looking beyond the present battle and calculating ahead. Focus on your ultimate goal and plot to reach it." (Robert Greene, "The 33 Strategies of War", 2006)

♟️Strategic Management: Strategy & Tactics in Chess (Just the Quotes)

"If we assume that strategy consists in defining the object and making plans accordingly, and tactics in executing these plans, then we must look upon combination as the culmination of tactics. By combination we mean a short part of the game, within which a certain purpose is attained by force. Its sequence of moves forms a logical chain and cannot be divided up. When looked at one by one, they may seem to be purposeless or even mistakes, yet together they form an exceedingly beautiful unit. After a series of moves incomprehensible by themselves, the solution suddenly follows and their real purpose comes clearly to light. From this it follows that the aim must have already been conceived .from the first move of the combination. This is the difference between combinative and straightforward play. For a short space of time special and not general rules apply; as it were an exceptional state of things prevails." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"In chess we distinguish between Strategy and Tactics. Strategy is concerned with the setting of an aim and the forming of schemes. Tactics are concerned with the execution of the schemes. Strategy is abstract, tactics are concrete. Expressing it in a popular way: Strategy requires thought, tactics require observation." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"Notwithstanding the obviously great importance of tactics, nearly all existing manuals give greater prominence to strategica1 problems. This is principally due to two reasons: Firstly: the development of tactical capabilities is for the greater part a matter of practice and a question of routine. Secondly: the problems of tactics are so numerous and so varied in nature, that it seems an almost impossible undertaking to treat this domain systematically." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"We call games such as the preceeding one, in which strategy plays such an important part, positional games, in contrast to combinative games, in which the strategy is of secondary importance. One must not, however, identify strategy with positional play, for strategy is an aim and positional play represents a certain method of playing. The study of positional play teaches us the strategic lines." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"We have stated that strategy forms an indispensable element in the proper treatment of a game of chess; the same can be said, perhaps even with greater reason, about tactics. The chess-player who can judge a position very clearly and who can adapt his schemes to this position, will not be able to make use of these capabilities, if at the same time he is not well practised in tactics. As a rule a tactical mistake involves a much heavier punishment than a strategical one.
Nor are the conceptions of tactics and combinative play identical. One might say that tactics comprise all the moves in a game, and thus include also the combinations which occur in it." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"We make a difference between general and special principles of strategy. The general principles originate directly from the aim and the nature of Chess, and therefore they are constantly in force. It is, for instance, a general principle which goes without saying, that one has to procure the greatest possible freedom of action for one's men. The special principles apply only if the position shows certain peculiarities on account of which a special line of strategy has to be followed." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"Strategy means abstract thinking and planning, as opposed to tactics, which are the individual operations used to implement strategy. Tactics are specific; strategy is general. Tactics tend to be immediate, strategy long-term." (Bruce Pandolfini, "Weapons of Chess: An omnibus of chess strategy", 1989)

"Castling may even be unnecessary. In some cases it might be prudent to keep the king in the center, possibly not castling at all. The center is often safer than the flank in closed positions. Strategy and long-term planning assume great importance . You usually have time to maneuver against your opponent's weaknesses, something hard to do when the center is open." (Bruce Pandolfini, "Weapons of Chess: An omnibus of chess strategy", 1989)

"A weakness can be tactical or positional. A tactical weakness is one based on immediate or temporary circumstances. Given time, a tactical weakness can be defended or eliminated: protection can be added, or the threatened man moved to safety. [...] When people talk about weakness, they usually mean positional, not tactical weakness. Positional weaknesses tend to have long-term ramifications. They are not subject to the shifting situation from move to move as are tactical weaknesses. It takes more than a few moves to correct a positional weakness, if it can be done at all." (Bruce Pandolfini, "Weapons of Chess: An omnibus of chess strategy", 1989)

"The strengths, often concealed below the surface, depend on the activity and interrelationship of the pieces, and on the tactical possibilities and threats that can be generated. Bringing these latent resources to the surface requires a deep and penetrating analysis and accurate calculation." (Bruce Pandolfini, "Weapons of Chess: An omnibus of chess strategy", 1989)

"[...] events on the chessboard are by no means accidental, on the contrary: everything is linked with everything and the dynamics involved in selecting a correct strategic plan reflects, delicately but also accurately, your dynamic thinking abilities!" (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"Every player appreciating the aesthetics of chess dreams about games where a single main strategical plan is carried through without distraction to a successful conclusion; these should go hand in hand with the competitive aspects of chess. Such a course is very difficult because our opponent usually has his own plan, his own strategy and intentions - which are very different from ours. A flawless game won by somebody probably does not exist, a mistake must creep into the game somewhere." (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"However, the dynamic changes and laws should be understood, not only from the point of view of strategy and tactics but also from that of the time of the development of ideas." (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"Opening presents opportunities for the most complicated but also the most fantastic strategic and tactical manoeuvres. In both cases the prerequisite is an accurate rhythm, first, a slow, wait-and-see type, then, at the right moment, a rapid one with surprising turns [...] An average dancer does not have the gusto for it - nor does a chess player without a sufficient sense of dynamics!" (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"Strategy and tactics often work hand in glove." (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"The ability to think dynamically in opening strategy may also be illustrated by a mastery of transferring experience and ideas from one opening to another. Seemingly incoherent courses of the game may sometimes have much in common. And sometimes a simple comparison brings new experience, surprising findings and thoughts!" (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"A tactician feels at home reacting to threats and seizing opportunities on the battlefield. When your opponent has blundered, a winning tactic can suddenly appear and serve as both means and end. […] Every time you make a move, you must consider your opponent’s response, your answer to that response, and so on. A tactic ignites an explosive chain reaction, a forceful sequence of moves that carries the players along on a wild ride. You analyze the position as deeply as you can, compute the dozens of variations, the hundreds of positions. If you don’t immediately exploit a tactical opportunity, the game will almost certainly turn against you; one slip and you are wiped out. But if you seize the opportunities that your strategy creates, you’ll play your game like a Grandmaster." (Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess", 2007)

"Against solid strategy, diversionary tactics will either be insufficient, or flawed. If they are insufficient, you can and should ignore them, continuing along your path. If they are radical enough to force you from your path, they are likely flawed in some way - unless you have blundered. Often an opponent is so eager to get you to change your course that he fatally weakens his own position in the attempt." (Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess", 2007)

"Effective tactics result from alertness and speed, this is obvious, but they also require an understanding of all the possibilities at hand. Experience allows us to instantly apply the patterns we have successfully used in the past." (Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess", 2007)

"In chess we see many cases of good strategy failing due to bad tactics and vice versa. A single oversight can undo the most brilliant concepts. Even more dangerous in the long run are cases of bad strategy succeeding due to good tactics, or due to sheer good fortune. This may work once, but rarely twice. This is why it is so important to question success as vigorously as you question failure." (Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess", 2007)

"Tactics involve calculations that can tax the human brain, but when you boil them down, they are actually the simplest part of chess and are almost trivial compared to strategy." (Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess: Making the Right Moves, from the Board to the Boardroom", 2007)

"Whereas strategy is abstract and based on long-term goals, tactics are concrete and based on finding the best move right now. Tactics are conditional and opportunistic, all about threat and defense. No matter what pursuit you’re engaged in - chess, business, the military, managing a sports team - it takes both good tactics and wise strategy to be successful." (Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess", 2007)

"A chess hypothesis is basically the equivalent to drawing up a strategic plan. Experimentation in chess is equivalent to the moves that are found to carry out each plan. Throughout the history of chess, both the plans (the hypotheses) as well as the moves (the experiments) have been evolving (thanks to results from the practice of the game and from analyses), and this knowledge is the patrimony of professional players." (Diego Rasskin-Gutman, "Chess Metaphors: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Mind", 2009)

"Finally, chess has a science - like special attraction since it lets the player first propose hypotheses of different strategic plans that are based on the game rules and possible moves of the pieces and then refute those hypotheses after careful investigation of the different lines of play. This process is analogous to the everyday work of a scientist." (Diego Rasskin-Gutman, "Chess Metaphors: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Mind", 2009)

"Still, it is good to realize how the synthesis between strategy and tactics is established. Therefore, we must always consider the activity of the pieces on both sides. A player may have a fantastic pawn formation, control a beautiful open file and possess a strong square, but if he goes down to a direct mating attack on the other side of the board, all his strategic advantages come to naught." (Herman Grooten, "Chess Strategy for Club Players: The Road to Positional Advantage", 2009)

"tactics and strategy hold together, as it were. With tactics, a combination is a 'random picture' in the game. For example, a piece is unprotected and this can immediately be exploited. Strategy means longer-term thinking." (Herman Grooten, "Chess Strategy for Club Players: The Road to Positional Advantage", 2009)

"The problem of identifying the subset of good moves is much more complicated than simply counting the total number of possibilities and falls completely into the domain of strategy and tactics of chess as a game." (Diego Rasskin-Gutman, "Chess Metaphors: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Mind", 2009)

"Vision is a capacity to understand a position and to generate solid strategic plans. And a good base of chess knowledge is needed to understand what it means to play with brilliance or elegance." (Diego Rasskin-Gutman, "Chess Metaphors: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Mind", 2009)

"[...] we can gather that strategy and tactics are in constant conflict with each other. For example, a strategically beautiful set-up can be spoilt by an 'accidental combination' at any moment. But it is also true that a well-built-up game in most cases needs to be crowned with a tactical turn. In practice it has turned out that many players find it difficult to combine long-term play with a timely discovery of tactical finesses. Only the strongest players manage to find a kind of balance between these two components of the game." (Herman Grooten, "Chess Strategy for Club Players: The Road to Positional Advantage", 2009)

"Strategy must show us how to fight against players of our own strength and how to make progress. It must help us play a bit better this week than last week, not just by studying opening variations because, as Petrosian pointed out: 'to study opening variations without reference to the strategic concepts that develop from them in the middlegame is, in effect, to separate the head from the body." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"A good strategy is one that takes into account not only the requirements of the position, but also the opponent's strategy and tactics. Strategy lies between science and art. It supports the ability to evaluate positions, recognize patterns and imagine adequate plans. Modern chess both offers and requires more 'move-to-move' combat." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Chess strategy must lose some of its grandness, some of its sentential character, must come back to earth and become practical, so that we can make it work for us move by move." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Discovering the truth about a specific variation is a trial-and-error process. A complete strategy must consider human reactions as part of it." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Dynamic strategy is not only a reconciliation of classical strategy with the new problems raised in competitive chess, but also an escape from the circle of slow manoeuvres which rarely produce more than half points. It aims to promote fighting and uncompromising chess. The history of chess shows clearly that players who are afraid of losing rarely obtain outstanding results. Dynamic strategy is an attempt to revise the standard, static, conservative opinion on what strategy should be (a collection of rules about the centre, fixed pawn structure, open files, minority attack, queen- or kingside majority, two bishops, weak pawns and squares, and the standard plans to cope with these occurrences) and highlight strategy as a continuous process dealing with the present, the near future, and the distant future of modern chess positions." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Some theoreticians define tactics as combinations with sacrifices." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Strategy places an arsenal of efficient weapons in our conscious as well as (hopefully) our subconscious mind; the better this arsenal, the less superficial the assessment of the actual and emergent set-ups. By associating the general aspects of a position with some concepts, our strategic knowledge builds the foundations for suitable plans." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Strategy should neither be imparted nor perceived as a surrogate for ultimate truth, but as an organizer which turns an amorphous mass of perceptual concepts into a collection." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Strategy shouldn't set rules to be followed blindly; nonetheless, any theory can declare its stepping-stone concepts." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"The main goal of dynamic strategy is to develop the personality of a player, to discover everyone's uniqueness and turn it to good account. Social dynamism and the human personality are two assets of our day, and this is reflected in chess. Tactics and dynamics are becoming predominant in chess. (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"The true task of strategy is to help evaluate chess positions, their present state and their future possibilities. The ability to evaluate correctly is at least as important as tactical skill. Evaluation is, to an extent, subjective (it depends on which side of the board Tal is on!) and a strategy which claims 100% objectivity is utopian. A player must be flexible enough to adapt himself to the strategy, the strategy must be flexible enough to adapt itself to the player and both, in turn, must be flexible enough to adapt themselves to the position." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"The basic functions of strategy are to help the player: to reach a superficial evaluation of the position; to understand and/ or anticipate the opponent's plan; to understand and/ or anticipate the opponent's other weapons, especially when his play doesn't seem to obey a logical plan; to establish his own plan." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"In chess we use the term strategy as opposed to tactics and we assimilate it with positional play. I must show from the beginning that the use of these terms can be confusing. Strategy is not the opposite of tactics; it is the theory of tactics. It tries to clarify the general lines of tactics as well as its directions. In other words, it gives pointers for discovering plans, and plans, in their turn, direct the moves in given positions." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Appreciation of both strategy and tactics are the 'Ying and Yang' of a strong chess player. They sit side by side, in harmony with each other and you cannot hope to improve your play without working on both aspects of the game." (Adam Hunt, "Chess Strategy: Move by move", 2013)

"Chess strategy is concerned with the correct evaluation of a position and the formulation of an effective plan based upon its characteristic features. When the word 'strategy' is mentioned, people tend to jump to the conclusion that we are talking about long-term middlegame planning, and that you have to be some sort of psychic who can see the future, but that is rarely the case. Many features of a given position which are strategically important will evolve out of the opening and finish in the endgame, so it would be foolish to completely ignore these phases of the game. Plans can be short or long term, depending on how the landscape in front of you is changing as the game progresses. This is why the subject is so complex and so much material is available on it." (Adam Hunt, "Chess Strategy: Move by move", 2013)

♟️Strategic Management: Tactics (Just the Quotes)

"But when one comes to the effect of the engagement, where material successes turn into motives for further action, the intellect alone is decisive. In brief, tactics will present far fewer difficulties to the theorist than will strategy." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"In a tactical situation one is able to see at least half the problem with the naked eye, whereas in strategy everything has to be guessed at and presumed." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"Strategy is concerned with the setting of an aim and the forming of schemes. Tactics are concerned with the execution of the schemes. Strategy is abstract, tactics are concrete. Expressing it in a popular way: Strategy requires thought, tactics require observation." (Dr. Max Euwe, "Strategy & Tactices in chess", 1937)

"A policy therefore might be likened to strategy, the broad, overall, long term conception which gives direction and purpose to the tactics of immediately daily operations and decisions." (Lawrence K. Frank, "National Policy for the Family", 1948)

"All organizations engage in the three basic activities of strategy, tactics, and logistics. Strategy defines the job. Tactics does the job. Logistics provides the resources to get the job done - not only material resources, but also manpower, funds, and data." (Robert L Siegel, 1987)

"Strategy means abstract thinking and planning, as opposed to tactics, which are the individual operations used to implement strategy. Tactics are specific; strategy is general. Tactics tend to be immediate, strategy long-term." (Bruce Pandolfini, "Weapons of Chess: An omnibus of chess strategy", 1989)

"But business fosters a particular fondness for tactics. That emphasis can lead to an imbalance that reduces the opportunities for success. We get so wrapped up in tactics - doing things to meet a quota or deadline, executing someone else's orders - that we miss the reason behind the tactics. Eventually the purpose of the tactic fades away, but the rules, quotas, deadlines, forms, and frustration remain." (Terry Richey, "The Marketer's Visual Tool Kit", 1994)

"One of the issues involved in moving strategy making down into the business organization concerns common understanding or focus. To carry out tactics, we do not need to share common objectives. But with strategy, we must interpret conditions, events, and actions in a similar manner to have any hope of creating a successful plan." (Terry Richey, "The Marketer's Visual Tool Kit", 1994)

"Strategy and tactics. Thinking and doing. Vision and execution. Whatever you call it, finding a balance between these two powerful forces of success remains a lifelong search for the best in any field: military leader, artist, baseball coach, or marketing manager." (Terry Richey, "The Marketer's Visual Tool Kit", 1994)

"The difference between strategy and tactics is that tactics get you down to the 'nitty-gritty' details of exactly how you are going to do the work." (James P Lewis, "Project Planning, Scheduling, and Control" 3rd Ed., 2001)

"However, the dynamic changes and laws should be understood, not only from the point of view of strategy and tactics but also from that of the time of the development of ideas." (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"Strategy and tactics often work hand in glove." (Vlastimil Jansa, "Dynamics of Chess Strategy", 2003)

"Tactical modeling identifies necessary operational systems, functional areas, or general project areas. Priorities for development are set at the tactical level." (Alan Chmura & J Mark Heumann, "Logical Data Modeling: What it is and How to do it", 2005)

"A good strategy is one that takes into account not only the requirements of the position, but also the opponent's strategy and tactics. Strategy lies between science and art. It supports the ability to evaluate positions, recognize patterns and imagine adequate plans." (Mihai Suba, "Dynamic Chess Strategy", 2010)

"Strategy requires thought, tactics require observation." (Max Euwe)

♜Strategic Management: Strategic Planning (Definition)

"[…] strategic planning […] is the continuous process of making present entrepreneurial (risk-taking) decisions systematically and with the greatest knowledge of their futurity; organizing systematically the efforts needed to carry out these decisions; and measuring the results of these decisions against the expectations through organized, systematic feedback." (Peter F Drucker, "Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices", 1973)

"The process of determining how a problem or opportunity may be responded to. Involves identifying problems or opportunities, analyzing relevant characteristics of the circumstances, organizing the formal response, deputizing a leader to head the response effort, and supervising the person(s) selected." (Robert McCrie, "Security Operations Management" 2nd Ed., 2006)

"Written record of a strategic plan, usually consisting of an overview, strategy charter, description of the current environment, research findings, tactics, roles and accountabilities, key performance indicators, and recommended next steps." (Teri Lund & Susan Barksdale, "10 Steps to Successful Strategic Planning", 2006)

"The implementation of an organization's objectives. Strategic planning decisions will have long-term impacts on the organization while operational decisions are day-to-day in nature." (Jae K Shim & Joel G Siegel, "Budgeting Basics and Beyond", 2008)

"The selection of short- and long-term objectives and the drawing up of tactical and strategic plans to achieve those objectives. After deciding on a set of strategies to be followed, the organization needs more specific plans, such as locations, methods of financing, and hours of operation. As these plans are made, they will be communicated throughout the organization. When implemented, the plans will serve to coordinate the efforts of all parts of the organization toward the company's objectives." (Jae K Shim & Joel G Siegel, "Budgeting Basics and Beyond", 2008)

"A deliberative, disciplined approach to producing fundamental decisions and actions that shape and guide what an organization (or other entity) is, what it does, and why it does it.” (John M Bryson, 2011)

"A long-range plan that serves as a business’s road map for the future. It includes the product lines and services, the number of employees, technology requirements, industry trends, competitor analysis, revenue and profitability goals, types of customers, and long-range marketing plans." (Gina Abudi & Brandon Toropov, "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Best Practices for Small Business", 2011)

"A series of processes in which an organization selects and arranges its businesses or services to keep the organization viable even when unexpected events distrupt one or more of its business's markets, products, or services." (Linda Volonino & Efraim Turban, "Information Technology for Management" 8th Ed., 2011)

"A high-level document that explains the organization's vision and mission, plus the approach that will be adopted to achieve this mission and vision, including the specific goals and objectives to be achieved during the period covered by the document." (Project Management Institute, "The Standard for Portfolio Management" 3rd Ed., 2012)

"The process by which an organization envisions its future and develops the necessary goals and procedures to achieve that vision." (Joan C Dessinger, "Fundamentals of Performance Improvement" 3rd Ed., 2012)

"A systematic process of envisioning a desired future and translating this vision into broadly defined goals or objectives and a sequence of steps to achieve them." (Robert F Smallwood, "Information Governance: Concepts, Strategies, and Best Practices", 2014)

"The process by which organizations identify a desired outcome, the resources required to support that outcome, and the plan to achieve the outcome. Typically, strategic planning is an important step in identifying the creation of new competitive advantages." (Evan Stubbs, "Big Data, Big Innovation", 2014)

"A process of selecting from alternative courses of action, matching that with the available resources, and combining these in a way that will most effectively achieve the objective; Intended action toward an organizational goal or objective." (Ken Sylvester, "Negotiating in the Leadership Zone", 2015)

"A formalised step-by-step set of procedures for coordinating the strategy process." (Duncan Angwin & Stephen Cummings, "The Strategy Pathfinder" 3rd Ed., 2017)

"A document used to communicate with the organization the organization’s goals, the actions needed to achieve those goals, and all the other critical elements developed during the planning exercise." (William Stallings, "Effective Cybersecurity: A Guide to Using Best Practices and Standards", 2018)

♜Strategic Management: Tactics (definitions)

"Actions that will lead to specific desired results or outcomes." (Teri Lund & Susan Barksdale, "10 Steps to Successful Strategic Planning", 2006)

"A course of action that represents one or more details of a strategy. A strategy, then, may be implemented by one or more tactics. In general, strategies address goals, and tactics address objectives." (David C Hay, "Data Model Patterns: A Metadata Map", 2010)

"Tools for how to achieve one’s objective." (Ken Sylvester, "Negotiating in the Leadership Zone", 2015)