Rethinking aspirations, planning cycles, and the complexity we're actually in.

We must move on from the idea that strategy is a five—or ten–year plan—a fixed vision we march toward. It's comforting fiction: plot the course, cascade the goals, align the incentives. But strategy doesn't live in Gantt charts or glossy roadmaps. It lives in relationships, tensions, and how we continually navigate change.

We've long been sold an orthodoxy of strategy that treats the organisation as an independent organism, competing in a market arena with fixed boundaries and clear rules. It's the image of chess boards, war games, or analytical grids. It is neat, discrete, and ultimately misleading. But organisations don't operate in arenas. They operate in ecosystems.

The traditional approach assumes stability.

Traditional execution models assume stability. They rely on linear processes, predictable cause-and-effect relationships, and the assumption that organisations can control their external environment.

This may have worked at some point, but with increasing uncertainty and unpredictability, traditional approaches to execution don't just fail; they actively increase fragility.

Every year, organisations gather for the ritual of crafting "strategies" and refining "cultures."

But beneath the glossy presentations and corporate slogans lies a harsh reality: these terms are often placeholders for vague aspirations rather than actionable or systemic concepts. "Strategy" has become shorthand for lists of initiatives far from strategic, while "culture" is reduced to inspirational posters and HR buzzwords to embolden the status quo.

Strategic thinking isn't just about setting a direction, it's about choosing paths that allow us to adapt and gain advantage amidst uncertainty. As Heinz von Foerster advises, "I shall act always to increase the total number of choices." This philosophy is invaluable today when resilience and flexibility are essential.

Increasing options offers flexibility and builds a more adaptive and resilient organisation. Expanding the range of possibilities avoids locking ourselves into rigid structures and fixed outcomes. Instead, we foster an environment where options evolve alongside circumstances.

In the rapidly shifting terrain of organisational management, debates around structure have become increasingly prominent. On one side, there are proponents of trendy frameworks like Holacracy, which advocate for flat, self-organising teams with distributed authority.

On the other hand, traditional hierarchical structures still hold sway, promising clarity and stability in decision-making. Yet, the real challenge facing organisations today isn't about choosing between hierarchy and flat structures.

I propose a holistic approach to enabling organisations to operate in increasing complexity and uncertainty, allowing them to be self-organising, self-regulating, and adaptable. This holistic approach looks to develop a synergy between the Viable Systems Model (VSM), the principles of Misson Command and a culture of decentralised decision-making.

It's no secret (unfortunately, some leaders haven't cottoned on). Still, the environment we operate in and navigate is complex and dynamic, with organisations continually evolving and responding to their context and environment. This environment is far from stable and requires the capability to support a certain degree of stability and coherence while being adaptable and ready to shift.