Sun Tzu, the author of the influential tome The Art of War, was a Chinese military strategist, general, and philosopher. He once stated that “Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” With this statement, Sun Tzu was essentially confirming that having a strategy without any associated tactics is akin to flying blind, and executing tactics without a strategy will prove pointless in attaining anything. Since tactics go together with strategy, many take the approach of combining both in a single article. However, I chose to separate them for two reasons:
To remain consistent in writing about each of the components of the “three-team tiers foundational business model,” and;
Each component of the model deserves full attention and understanding.
Tactics are the final component of the model, as presented in my earlier articles, and will bring closure to that line of discussion. In closing with tactics, it truly is an example of leaving the best for last. Tactics have significance and importance to businesses of any size. They are the specific actions or steps tacticians take to accomplish intended objectives. They are the doers, the worker bees who execute to achieve defined outcomes. Tactical execution should be based on delivering based on a plan or a roadmap. Tactics are about the method.
Across all the ‘three-team tiers’ articles, there is an underpinning message to know why you do things (the vision), what you do (the overseeing strategy and roadmap), and how things get done (the executable tactics). Author, Simon Sinek, stressed the importance of knowing all three, especially the why. In fact, Simon Sinek referred to the why, what, and how as a “three-piece puzzle” that can create an imbalance if any piece is missing. Specific to the why, Sinek further indicated the presence of an imbalance because it “…shows up in different ways — increased stress, loss of passion, obsession with what your competition is doing, being forced to play the price game, trouble differentiating.”
In last month’s strategy article, I called out that strategy-oriented individuals work on answering two questions: “What are we doing or trying to achieve?” and “Where are we headed or going with what we are doing?” The missing question required to ensure the defined tactics correlate back to Sinek’s “three-piece puzzle” is: “Why are we doing what we are doing?” Seeing all these questions answered within a strategy and its associated roadmap better supports the tacticians in formulating the right action steps to implement.
Chess players are trained a lot like athletes, and a critical part of that training includes the game tactics. Chess is played with a keen eye on the tactics unfolding with each move made. Applying this same focus to business creates a new perspective on possibilities in leadership. Can tactical patterns be seen within and across industries? Can new tactics be formulated to cause disruption or provide the distinct advantages business owners seek? These are interesting questions that could reframe the approach(es) a business takes. However, we cannot forget that whatever methods are used, they should connect back to a strategy and any associated roadmap. Tactics should not run standalone. After all, they are the specific sought-out actions or steps you will execute to accomplish your strategy.
Large-sized businesses may deal with multiple strategic documents that cover the various areas of their company. These business areas are typically finance, marketing, operations, product and services, and pricing. Of course, there are other areas (i.e., human resources), but the previously listed ones tend to be the most prominent. What is important is realizing that strategy can become complex with growth and that strategy may be directed at different departmental levels. In cases like that, companies may be impacted if departmental strategies do not connect to corporate-level strategies, and/or the strategic framework proves to be fragmented layers that result in disjointed execution and outcomes.
A financial tactic is different from a marketing tactic and certainly different from a pricing tactic. It is for this reason that the alignment of shared goals becomes paramount. A factoring financial strategy may not support low pricing tactics, but low pricing tactics may support donation marketing tactics. Within the same industries, different tactics can be used. For example, Apple runs with proprietary tactics, while others may utilize open-source tactics to achieve market dominance.
In contrast with larger businesses, the strategy of small business owners may consolidate all business areas into a single document. What becomes plausible is that small business owners can achieve the distinct advantage they wish for simply by structuring their business as early as possible. It is then simpler to instill certain “big business” disciplines such as strategy and tactics.
That “not straightforward” playbook is certainly the case for most small and medium-sized businesses. This suggests that being strategic and tactical is more crucial than most think.
There was a time when small businesses had the attention of the government and bankers. There was a time when society called out the importance of small businesses and the key economic role they played. All that importance was soon overshadowed by dot.coms, businesses getting bigger via mergers and acquisitions, new businesses emerging bigger than most, and large businesses growing even larger. Today, COVID-19 impacted all businesses, but greater pressure was on the small and medium-sized ones (SMBs). The ‘three-team tiers foundational business model’ that started this series of articles was about being nimble in your operational structure, guided by strategy and tactics. It presented an opportunity for smaller businesses to become bolder in running their company. Operating in a streamlined, flexible, strategic, and tactical manner can make any business badass, especially so for the SMBs.
Simon Sinek and many others have stated insightful messages over the years. One such insight is Sinek’s,
