Bringing science to the art of strategy.

IF 9.1 4区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Harvard business review Pub Date : 2012-09-01
A G Lafley, Roger L Martin, Jan W Rivkin, Nicolaj Siggelkow
{"title":"Bringing science to the art of strategy.","authors":"A G Lafley,&nbsp;Roger L Martin,&nbsp;Jan W Rivkin,&nbsp;Nicolaj Siggelkow","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many managers feel doomed to trade off the futile rigor of ordinary strategic planning for the hit-or-miss creativity of the alternatives. In fact, the two can be reconciled to produce novel but realistic strategies. The key is to recognize that conventional strategic planning, for all its analysis, is not actually scientific-it lacks the careful generation and testing of hypotheses that are at the heart of the scientific method. The authors outline a strategy-making process that combines rigor and creativity. A team begins by formulating options, or possibilities, and asks what must be true for each to succeed. Once it has listed all the conditions, it assesses their likelihood and thereby identifies the barriers to each choice. The team then tests the key barrier conditions to see which hold true. From here, choosing a strategy is simple: The group need only review the test results and choose the possibility with the fewest serious barriers. This is the path P&G took in the late 1990s, when it was looking to become a major global player in skin care. After testing the barrier conditions for several possibilities, it opted for a bold strategy that might never have surfaced in the traditional process: reinventing Olay as a prestigelike product also sold to mass consumers. The new Olay succeeded beyond expectations-showing what can happen when teams shift from asking \"What is the right answer\" and focus instead on figuring out \"What are the right questions?\".</p>","PeriodicalId":12874,"journal":{"name":"Harvard business review","volume":"90 9","pages":"56-66, 136"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard business review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many managers feel doomed to trade off the futile rigor of ordinary strategic planning for the hit-or-miss creativity of the alternatives. In fact, the two can be reconciled to produce novel but realistic strategies. The key is to recognize that conventional strategic planning, for all its analysis, is not actually scientific-it lacks the careful generation and testing of hypotheses that are at the heart of the scientific method. The authors outline a strategy-making process that combines rigor and creativity. A team begins by formulating options, or possibilities, and asks what must be true for each to succeed. Once it has listed all the conditions, it assesses their likelihood and thereby identifies the barriers to each choice. The team then tests the key barrier conditions to see which hold true. From here, choosing a strategy is simple: The group need only review the test results and choose the possibility with the fewest serious barriers. This is the path P&G took in the late 1990s, when it was looking to become a major global player in skin care. After testing the barrier conditions for several possibilities, it opted for a bold strategy that might never have surfaced in the traditional process: reinventing Olay as a prestigelike product also sold to mass consumers. The new Olay succeeded beyond expectations-showing what can happen when teams shift from asking "What is the right answer" and focus instead on figuring out "What are the right questions?".

将科学引入战略艺术。
许多管理者觉得,他们注定要放弃普通战略规划中毫无意义的严谨性,转而选择那些无懈可击的创造性替代方案。事实上,这两者可以调和,从而产生新颖而现实的策略。关键是要认识到,传统的战略规划,尽管进行了所有的分析,实际上并不科学——它缺乏对假设的仔细生成和检验,而假设是科学方法的核心。作者概述了一种结合了严谨性和创造性的战略制定过程。一个团队从制定选项或可能性开始,并询问每个选项必须符合哪些条件才能成功。一旦它列出了所有的条件,它就会评估它们的可能性,从而确定每个选择的障碍。然后,研究小组测试了关键的障碍条件,看看哪个是正确的。从这里开始,选择策略就很简单了:团队只需要回顾测试结果并选择具有最少严重障碍的可能性。这是宝洁在上世纪90年代末所走的道路,当时它希望成为全球护肤品领域的主要参与者。在测试了几种可能性的障碍条件后,它选择了一个在传统流程中可能永远不会出现的大胆策略:将玉兰油重塑为一种同样面向大众消费者的名牌产品。新玉兰油的成功超出了人们的预期——它展示了当团队不再问“什么是正确的答案”,而是专注于找出“什么是正确的问题”时,会发生什么。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: HBR covers a wide range of topics, including strategy, leadership, organizational change, negotiations, operations, innovation, decision making, marketing, finance, work-life balance, and managing teams. We publish articles of many lengths (some in both print and digital forms, and some in digital only), graphics, podcasts, videos, slide presentations, and just about any other media that might help us share an idea effectively.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信