Three Forms of Strategy: General, Corporate & Competitive
Three Forms of Strategy: General, Corporate & Competitive
Three Forms of Strategy: General, Corporate & Competitive
This paper examines three forms of strategy based on the different ways in which that term is
used in the business world: (1) strategy in a general sense; (2) corporate strategy; and (3) com-
petitive strategy.
Three Forms of Strategy: General, Corporate & Competitive
Objectives
Keep one ear open in almost any business environment and the term "strategy" is sure to crop up
on a regular basis. Unfortunately, those using the term frequently fail to define the way in which
they are using it. Nor do those hearing it bother to check to see how it is being used. As a result,
conversations about strategy can become confusing.
As a practical matter, strategy evolves over time as intentions accommodate reality. Thus, one
starts with a given perspective, concludes that it calls for a certain position, and sets about achiev-
ing it by way of a carefully crafted plan. Over time, things change. A pattern of decisions and ac-
tions marks movement from starting point to goal. This pattern of decisions and actions is called
"realized" or "emergent" strategy.
Strategy in General
Strategy, in general, refers to how a given objective will be achieved. Consequently, strategy in
general is concerned with the relationships between ends and means, that is, between the results
we seek and the resources at our disposal. Strategy and tactics are both concerned with formulat-
ing and then carrying out courses of action intended to attain particular objectives. For the most
part, strategy is concerned with deploying the resources at your disposal whereas tactics is con-
cerned with employing them. Together, strategy and tactics bridge the gap between ends and
means (see Figure 2).
Means Ends
Although it is not my aim to draw definitive distinctions between strategy and tactics, it is next to
impossible to say something about one without also saying something about the other. The table
below summarizes some of the more important differences I’ve noted in my studies and observa-
tions of strategy and tactics.
Strategy Tactics
Strategy and tactics are both terms that come to us from the military. Their use in business and
other civilian enterprises has required little adaptation as far as strategy in general is concerned,
however, corporate strategy and competitive strategy do represent significant departures from the
military meaning of strategy.
Porter also indicates that, in response to these five factors, competitive strategy can take one of
three generic forms: (1) focus, (2) differentiation, and (3) cost leadership.
Recently, "value disciplines" have been suggested as the basis for settling on strategy (corporate
or competitive). The three basic "value disciplines" are:
Related to Strategy in General What is our objective? What are the ends we seek?
What is our current strategy, implicit or explicit?
What courses of action might lead to the ends we seek?
What are the means at our disposal?
How are our actions restrained and constrained by the
means at our disposal?
What risks are involved and which ones are serious
enough that we should plan for them?
Summary
The preceding discussion asserts that strategy in general is concerned with how particular objec-
tives are achieved, with courses of action. Corporate strategy is concerned with choices and
commitments regarding markets, business and the very nature of the company itself. Competitive
strategy is concerned with competitors and the basis of competition. These basic points are illu-
strated in Figure 3.
Corporate Competitive
Strategy
Strategy Strategy
Recommended Reading
Much of the preceding discussion is drawn from many well-known sources. To list them
all would entail inserting an extensive bibliography right about here. Instead, I’ve chosen
to list what I consider some "essential" readings.