Some Definitions of Strategy and Tactics

Introduction

The terms "Strategy" and "Tactics" are widely used in books and articles about management. Sometimes they seem to mean the same thing and sometimes they seem to have completely different meanings. The goal of this page is to provide some clear definitions of the terms "Strategy" and "Tactics" from management theorists such as George Steiner,Henry Mintzberg, Michael Porter and Peter Drucker as well as some complementary views from other writers on the subject such as B. H. Liddell Hart and Thomas Schelling.
Strategy and Tactics as Military terms

Although "Strategy" and "Tactics" are defined in many different ways, there are some points on which all of the definitions agree: both terms were first used in the military and both are concerned with deciding the means used to achieve a specific goal. For a soldier, strategy is about deciding under which terms and conditions an army will fight a battle, where as tactics are about how best to organize an army during that battle. The military historian Liddell Hart defines strategy as, "... the art of distributing and applying military means to fulfil the ends of policy" As Fred Nickols observes, delete the word "military" from this definition and you have your first insight into how the concept of strategy is used the business world.
Strategy, Tactics and Decision Making

Both strategy and tactics are about deciding the means by which a goal is reached. The next step to finding a definition for tactics and strategy comes with knowing at what level strategic and tactical decisions are taken. Decision making happens at all levels in an organization. Typically the grand overarching decisions about the future direction of the business are made right at the top of the organization, at board level; major decisions about what is needed to make that vision reality are taken at the next level down, and so on down the hierarchy with those at the very bottom of the pyramid taking decisions about how to best deal with their day to day tasks.

As with all attempts at categorization, the definitions can be somewhat arbitrary; however a typical split might be decisions related to Mission, Policy, Strategy, Tactics and Operations.

Mission The mission is a vision, a statement of aim or purpose, for the business. It is the raison d'tre, the reason the business is the way it is. Some typical questions one might ask at this level are: "Who are we?" "Why are we here?" "What do we do?" Policy A policy is a broad framework that shapes thinking and guides long term decision-making. Some typical questions one might ask at this level are: "What is happening in the wider social / business environment?" "What kind of company do we want to become / what kind of company must we become?" Strategy A strategy is concerned with the actions and resources needed to achieve specific long-term objectives. Some typical questions one might ask at this level are: "What conditions need to hold for our business to be viable?" "What products and services will we offer and to what customers?" "What capabilities and capacities will we require?" Tactics Tactics are concerned with the short to medium term co-ordination of activities and the deployment of resources needed to reach a particular strategic goal. Some typical questions one might ask at this level are: "What do we need to do to reach our growth / size / profitability goals?" "What are our competitors doing?" "What machines should we use?" Operations Operational activities are concerned with the immediate details of how a specific result will be achieved. Some typical questions one might ask at this level are: "What are the buying and selling criteria?" "How will we distribute our products / services?" "How do we collect data on our daily transactions?"

Looking at this classification, we can see that both strategy and tactics are about the means by which a goal is reached, not its specification. They are concerned with how one's aims are achieved, not with what those aims should be. Thus, both strategy and tactics are defined in relation to some wider goal. They are the bridge between the corporate mission and policy

and concrete operational outcomes. However, the two are also closely related; one man's tactics is another strategy. To return to the military analogy, what is called strategy and what is described as tactics depends largely on where you are and what view you have of the battlefield.
Management Definitions of Strategy and Tactics

So far, we have been able to make broad and general statements about the meaning of the terms strategy and tactics. However, once we begin to look at specific definitions of strategy and tactics, this is no longer the case. Consequently we will restrict ourselves to some of the more important distinctions. Similarly, as tactics and strategy are closely related, we will refer mainly to definitions of strategy rather than tactics.
Corporate Strategy and Business Strategy

The first, and one of the most important, is the distinction between "Corporate Strategy", which determines the businesses in which a company will compete, and "Business Strategy", which defines the basis of competition for a given business. Thus, Corporate Strategy is concerned with decisions at the level of the whole corporation: about which industry sector and markets to compete in; about growth, diversification or retrenchment; about acquisitions, new ventures and divestments. Business Strategy on the other hand focuses on how a firm competes within a particular industry or market and is concerned with how to achieve a competitive advantage over rivals in that sector. It is about things such as cost leadership, differentiation and added value.
Some more management definitions of strategy

In his book Strategy Safari, Henry Mintzberg identified five different types of strategy:

Strategy as a Plan Here strategy is defined as being a guide for a particular course of action. However, because the future is unknowable, it can only ever be an expression of intention, a proposal for a path between the current state and a desired future state. This view, pioneered by George Steiner, is one of the oldest and most common descriptions of strategy. Strategy as a Pattern Here the focus shifts away from original intention towards what

actually happened. Strategies need to be modified as goals are adjusted to accommodate a changing reality. Consequently, strategy can only be understood in retrospect through an analysis of the patterns of past decisions and actions. This view is reflected in much of Mintzberg's other work.

Strategy as Position Strategy is defined as a reflection of a decision to offer particular products or services in particular markets. Taking this view, strategy is determined primarily by what happens outside the firm among customers, suppliers and competitors; the role of the decision maker is to analyze and adjust to the competitive environment. This view is seen in the works of Michael Porter. Strategy as Perspective Here strategy is defined as a system of values and beliefs, generated and perpetuated by strategy makers; individuals or groups whose ideas shape the whole direction of the organization. It is their assumptions on which a business is built and which define what is considered to be meaningful and relevant. This view can be found within the works ofPeter Drucker. Strategy as a Ploy Here strategy is seen as behavioural rather than perceptual. Strategy and tactics overlap and are defined as a manoeuvre to discourage or confuse a competitor. In this case, the intention is to change or prevent some supposed future outcome rather than to achieve it, plan for it or adapt to it. This view can be found in the works of Thomas Schelling.

Summary

Strategy and tactics are about means and ends: they bridge the gap between our vision of the future and our day to day decisions. They are not about deciding the vision but about how to achieve it; they have no existence beyond the ends that are sought by that vision. Tactics and strategy are also relative terms. What is seen as strategic from one viewpoint can be seen as tactical from another; they change to adapt to changing circumstances and with changes in the view of what means are required to reach a desired outcome. However, although there are many definitions of strategy and the term itself is relative, the decisions are always the same: about resources and how to deploy them. Thus, ultimately the goal of strategy as a concept is to find a rigorous and systematic way of making these decisions.

Drawing on Grant and Mintzberg & Quinn, consider different definitions of strategy and argue a case for the definition you feel most comfortable with. Business is never so healthy as when, like a chicken, it must do a c ertain amount of scratching for what it gets. - Henry Ford The term strategy has found a limited definition arising, principally, from military origins. This definition has been expanded into the business context where many authors have argued strategy in terms of quantitative and qualitative processes. However, it continues to defy a singular, definitive definition. In order to understand strategy, we must look beyond its military antecedents and identify strategy as a life process. It is from this premise that this paper will argue in support of defining strategy in terms of a qualitative (descriptive) process. Strategy is about survival in business, on the battleground, during a game or through life in general. Quinn defines strategy as a pattern or plan that aligns goals, policies and actions into a cohesive whole. A good strategy enhances outcomes through marshalling of resources, unique posturing, leverage off competencies, an awareness of environment and cognizance of intelligent opponents (Mintzberg & Quinn: 1996, p.3). In an analysis of three distinct case studies, Grant contends that success requires a strategy which provides a consistency of direction based on a clear understanding of the game being played and an acute awareness of how to m aneuver into a position of advantage (Grant: 2002 P10). However, Mintzberg contends that the term strategy is implicit and, as such, can be defined under five broad headings as plan, ploy, pattern position or perspective. (Mintzberg & Quinn: 1996, pp10-13). According to Mintzberg, strategy is not just a notion of how to deal with an enemy or set of competitors or a marketIt draws us into some of the most fundamental issues about organizations as instruments for collective perception and action (Mintzberg & Quinn: 1996, p16).

Strategy is perspective, position, plan, and pattern. Strategy is the bridge between policy or high-order goals on the one hand and tactics or concrete actions on the other. Strategy and tactics together straddle the gap between ends and means. In short, strategy is a term that refers to a complex web of thoughts, ideas, insights, experiences, goals, expertise, memories, perceptions, and expectations that provides general guidance for specific actions in pursuit of particular ends. Strategy is at once the course we chart, the journey we imagine and, at the same time, it is the course we steer, the trip we actually make. Even when we are embarking on a voyage of discovery, with no particular destination in mind, the voyage has a purpose, an outcome, an end to be kept in view.

Strategy According to Michael Porter In a 1996 Harvard Business Review article [5] and in an earlier book [6], Porter argues that competitive strategy is "about being different." He adds, "It means deliberately choosing a different set of activities to deliver a unique mix of value." In short, Porter argues that

strategy is about competitive position, about differentiating yourself in the eyes of the customer, about adding value through a mix of activities different from those used by competitors. In his earlier book, Porter defines competitive strategy as "a combination of the ends (goals) for which the firm is striving and the means (policies) by which it is seeking to get there." Thus, Porter seems to embrace strategy as both plan and position. (It should be noted that Porter writes about competitive strategy, not about strategy in general.) Strategy According to George Steiner George Steiner, a professor of management and one of the founders of The California Management Review, is generally considered a key figure in the origins and development of strategic planning. His book, Strategic Planning [2], is close to being a bible on the subject. Yet, Steiner does not bother to define strategy except in the notes at the end of his book. There, he notes that strategy entered the management literature as a way of referring to what one did to counter a competitor's actual or predicted moves. Steiner also points out in his notes that there is very little agreement as to the meaning of strategy in the business world. Some of the definitions in use to which Steiner pointed include the following:

Strategy is that which top management does that is of great importance to the organization. Strategy refers to basic directional decisions, that is, to purposes and missions. Strategy consists of the important actions necessary to realize these directions. Strategy answers the question: What should the organization be doing? Strategy answers the question: What are the ends we seek and how should we achieve them?

Strategy According to Henry Mintzberg Henry Mintzberg, in his 1994 book, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning [3], points out that people use "strategy" in several different ways, the most common being these four: 1. Strategy is a plan, a "how," a means of getting from here to there. 2. Strategy is a pattern in actions over time; for example, a company that regularly markets very expensive products is using a "high end" strategy. 3. Strategy is position; that is, it reflects decisions to offer particular products or services in particular markets. 4. Strategy is perspective, that is, vision and direction.

Strategy According to Kenneth Andrews Kenneth Andrews presents this lengthy definition of strategy in his book, The Concept of Corporate Strategy [4]:

"Corporate strategy is the pattern [italics added] of decisions in a company that determines and reveals its objectives, purposes, or goals, produces the principal policies and plans for achieving those goals, and defines the range of business the company is to pursue, the kind of economic and human organization it is or intends to be, and the nature of the economic and non-economic contribution it intends to make to its shareholders, employees, customers, and communities. (pp.18-19)."

Andrew's definition obviously anticipates Mintzberg's attention to pattern, plan, and perspective. Andrews also draws a distinction between "corporate strategy," which determines the businesses in which a company will compete, and "business strategy," which defines the basis of competition for a given business. Thus, he also anticipated "position" as a form of strategy. Strategy as the basis for competition brings us to another HarvardBusiness School professor, Michael Porter, the undisputed guru of competitive strategy

Strategy and Tactics

It is beneficial to make distinction between strategy and tactics so that managers can concentrate themselves on strategic functions rather than engaging in tactical functions. Organizational decisions range across a spectrum, having a broad master strategy at one end and minute tactics at the other. The major difference between strategy and tactics is that strategy determines what major plans are to be undertaken and allocates resources to them, while tactics, in contrast, is means by which previously determined plans are executed. Beyond this major difference, there may be some other differences, which can be understood better by analyzing military use of strategy and tactics. Carl von Clausewitz, a Prussian army general and military scientist, defines military strategy as making use of battles in the furtherance of the war and the tactics as the use of armed forces in battle. A successor to Clausewitz, Count von Moltke is more lucid in making distinction between strategy and tactics. He states that: Strategy is a system of makeshifts. It is carried through an originally conceived plan under a constantly shifting set of circumstances. Strategy furnishes tactics with the opportunity to

strike with the prospect of success. It does this through its conduct of the armies and their concentration on the field of battle. On the other hand, however, strategy concept accepts the results of every single engagement and builds on them. Strategy retires when a tactical victory is in the making in order later to exploit the newly created situation. The basic goal of strategy accordingly is to break the will pf the army, deprive him of the means to fight, occupy his territory, destroy or obtain control of his resources or otherwise make him submit. The goal of tactics is success in a given action which is only one part in a group of related military actions. A further distinction between strategy and tactics as used in Military Science is made on the basis of delegation of decision-making authority. Strategic decisions are not delegated too low in the organization. Normally the authority is not delegated below the levels than those, which possess the perspective required for the most effective decisions. Such a distinction between strategy and tactics is quite sharp. However, business is different from war in its true perspective not only in terms of its objectives vis-a-vis its competitors but also in terms of process of achievement of objectives. In business, there is seldom a winlose situation as is the case with the war. Therefore, the distinction should be made between strategy and tactics in business terms. Distinction between Strategy and Tactics Level of Conduct - As discussed earlier, strategy is developed at the highest level of management either at the headquarter or at major divisional offices and related exclusively to decisions in the province of these levels. Tactics is employed at and relates to lower levels of management. Periodicity - The formulation of strategy is both continuous and irregular. The process is continuous but the timing of decision is irregular as it depends on the appearance of opportunities, new ideas, crisis, management initiative, and other non-routine stimuli. Tactics is determined on a periodic basis by various organizations. A fixed timetable may be followed for this purpose, for example, preparation of budgets at regular intervals. Time Horizon - Strategy has a long-term perspective; especially the successful strategies are followed for quite long periods. In occasional cases, it may have short-term duration. Thus, depending on the nature and requirement, its time horizon is flexible, however, emphasis is put on long-term. On the other hand, time horizon of tactics is short-run and definite. The duration is uniform, for example budget preparation. Uncertainty - Element of uncertainty is higher in the case of strategy formulation and its implementation. In fact, strategic decisions are taken under the conditions of partial ignorance. Tactical decisions are more certain as these are taken within the framework set by the strategy. Thus, evaluation of tactics is easier as compared to evaluation of a strategy. Information Needs - The total possible range of alternatives from which a man-ager can choose his strategic action is greater than tactics. A manager requires more information for arriving at strategic decision. Since an attempt is made to relate the organization to its environment, this requires information about the various aspects of environment. Naturally the collection of such information will be different. Tactical information is generated within the organization particularly from accounting procedures and statistical sources.

Subjective Values - The formulation of strategy is affected considerably by the personal values of the person involved in the process. For example, what should be the goals of an organization is affected considerably by the personal values of the persons concerned. On the other hand, tactics is normally free from such values because this is to .be taken within the context of strategic decisions. Importance - Strategies are most important factors of organization because they decide the future course of action for the organization as a whole. On the other hand, tactics are of less importance because they are concerned with specific part of the organization. This difference, though seems to be simple, becomes important from managerial action point of view. Type of Personnel Involved in Formulation - Generally separate group of managerial personnel are involved m strategy and tactics formulation and their implementation. As discussed earlier, strategic decisions are never delegated below a certain level m the managerial hierarchy. The basic principle m this context is not to delegate below the levels than those possess the perspective required for most effective strategic decisions. Personnel at lower levels can take tactical decisions because these involve minute implementation of strategic decisions. Though these differences between strategy and tactics are there, often the lines of demarcation between these two are blurred both conceptually and operationally. At the one extreme end, the differences are crystal clear, as discussed above. But these differences may not always hold true because tactics is generated by strategy and may rightly be called substrategy. What is one managers strategy is another managers tactics and vice versa. For example, strategies are developed at the head-quarters m the strategic planning process. Various divisions of the company may then pursue sub strategies within this strategic planning. Thus, what might be considered tactical plans at the headquarters may be termed as strategy at the divisional levels. Thus, depending on the level of the organization, an action may be strategic or tactical.

The Difference between Strategy and Tactics

Posted on January 14th, 2013 in: Matrix, Web Strategy

The purpose of this post is to clearly delineate the distinct differences between strategy and tactics, and show how they work in tandem for your organization. Often, we use the terms strategy and tactics interchangeably and in a haphazard manner. When probing at online definitions and dictionaries, they often share many of the same characteristics, making them difficult to differentiate. Rather than debate Greek military etymology, Sun Tzu philosophy, or latest publications from the Harvard Business Press, heres a simple way to look at strategy and tactics by their associatedactions:

[The difference between strategy and tactics: strategy is done above the shoulders, tactics are done below the shoulders] While a tweet-worthy catch phrase, this metaphor risks glib over-simplification. To explore deeper, lets dissect strategy vs tactics in the following breakdown: Breakdown: The Difference between Strategy and Tactics Strategy Tactics

To identify clear broader goals that advance To utilize specific resources to the Purpose overall organization and organize achieve sub-goals that support the defined mission. Specific domain experts

resources.

Individuals who influence resources in the that maneuver limited organization. They understand how a set of resources Roles tactics work together to achieve goals. Held accountable to overall into actions to

achieve a set of goals. health Held accountable to specific resources assigned.

Accountability of organization. Scope

All the resources within the organizations, A subset of resources used in a

as well as broader market conditions plan or process. Tactics are including economy. competitors, customers, and often specific tactics with Yet dont over think it, to limited resources to achieve

paraphrase my business partner Charlene Li, broader goals. Strategy is often what you dont do. Shorter Duration Long Term, changes infrequently. Term, flexible to

specific market conditions. Uses experiences, best

Uses Methods

experience,

research,

analysis, practices, plans, processes, and teams. clear deliverables using people,

thinking, then communication.

Produces clear organizational goals, plans, Produces maps, guideposts, and key performance and Outputs measurements. outputs

tools, time.

Strategy

and

Tactics

Must

Work

in

Tandem

These two must work in tandem, without it your organization cannot efficiently achieve goals. If you have strategy without tactics you have big thinkers and no action. If you have tactics without strategy, you have disorder. To quote my former business partner, Lora Cecere, she reminds me that organizations need big wings (strategic thinking) and feet (capability to achieve).

What are Business Tactics?

by Ben M. Bartlett In my article "What is Business Strategy?" you received the most concise definition and explanation of strategy you will ever come across. As I explained in that article, strategy is one of the most misused and misunderstood business terms, and that most people don't really know what a business strategy is. Then, using a sports metaphor, I explained the concept of strategy in greater detail. What I didn't outline was the relationship between strategy and tactics, and how the two are intertwined. So that's the topic of today. In reality, no discussion on strategy is ever complete without linking it to tactics. Why? Well, one famous quote, which has been attributed to Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, highlights the importance of the link between the two: "Strategy without tactics is the long road to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."

Fact is, strategy and tactics go hand in hand and you cannot have one without the other. And this is perfectly illustrated with the following matrix:

What are tactics? So what are tactics? Tactics are ploys, patterns or maneuvers you develop and implement to drive and support your strategy, and to get you closer to your objective. In the military, tactics are defined as "the techniques for using weapons or military units in combination for engaging and defeating an enemy in battle." (source: Wikipedia Military tactics). The operative word in this definition is "techniques". So in a military context, tactics are the specific techniques that combat units/soldiers will learn and use, such as hand-to-hand combat tactics, use of weapons and so on. In sport we refer to tactics as our "plays" or "moves". These moves and plays are the techniques used to engage and beat a competitor. Indeed, if you analyze any top sporting contest or game closely you will note that it is no more than an accumulated sequence of plays and counter-plays. In other words, tactics.

In sports such as rugby we have attacking moves which are designed to advance our team towards the opposition goal line. And we also have defensive moves which are designed to halt opposition attacks. Top sports teams have play books, which are compilations of team plays. (Some NFL teams have 300+ page play books). And a favorite coaching tool of many coaches is the mini-whiteboard, which helps them to illustrate tactics to their team. The moves we use are dependent on conditions such as the opposition, the weather, our team skill set and how well our team has practiced. The key point is this. In order to be competitive, a sports team must have carefully selected and wellrehearsed tactics. Otherwise it will play like a ship without a rudder, or a headless chicken. What are tactics in a business? So in sport a tactic is a move or play that gets you closer to the opposition goal line. And business tactics? In business, tactics are maneuvers and techniques that help you to reach your target market and get a customer. Or to stop customers from going to a competitor. In business, getting a customer can be likened to scoring points against the opposition in a sporting contest. The more points you score, the better it is for you. The way in which you score points is through your tactics. Specifically, business tactics include product, marketing, promotional, branding, channel/distribution and pricing initiatives and campaigns you create and then execute in the marketplace. These initiatives are the specific plays or moves you develop and execute to help you build brand awareness, and convert that brand awareness into customers. To be most effective your tactics must align with your strategy, as per the grid illustrated above. When your strategy is good and your tactics sound, you have a much better chance of getting into the high performance green zone. The tactical arm of your business and your most important business function As suggested above, in your business there is one function that drives your tactics. And that function is marketing. Put another way, your marketing function and everyone involved in it is the business equivalent of a championship-winning sports team or a Navy Seals unit.

Key Differences between Business Strategy and Tactics

Most of you know the differences between business strategy and business tactics. But when you are asked to state the differences you generally fumble for suitable words and phrases. Maybe phrases such as long and short term and high and low stuff are often muttered. But not much is followed thereafter. In this blog I elaborate key differences between business strategy and business tactics for your benefit. Business Strategy 1. Business strategy is defined as a well thought out long term plan incorporating chosen methods, moves or a series of maneuverers chalked out by senior managers for obtaining a set of specific

objectives of a business. This definition characterises strategy as long-term, multi-dimensional, complex, and high-flown and having huge impact on business performance 2. Analysts consider strategy as the thinking part of the business process driven by the vision of the stakeholders 3. Although static in nature, strategy gives direction and sense of purpose in movement towards achieving business objectives 4. Value optimization is the anchor on which strategy is fastened; by this, business seeks best possible benefits in a sustainable manner and over a long-term span 5. Integration is the means whereby strategy connects various competing and complementary elements within a business. Like an alchemist, corporate management tries to drive the best mix, blend or configuration of resources and capabilities of business. In sum, strategy fuses many parts together to form a meaningful whole with a view to achieve set goals. For example, a business that has trained human resource and has identified a niche market could use a perfect configuration to get optimum results from an opportunity 6. As I said earlier strategy is for long term and by nature static. This theme can be further laboured to see a nuance in terms of how a business responds to changes. You cannot easily adjust strategy to changes that are taking place in the market on a day-to-day basis. Nether strategy allows you to re-act to each change in a short time. Factoring market movements, alteration in consumer preferences and shift of business cycle into strategy takes quite some time. This part is better left to be handled by tactics as explained below. Business Tactics 1. Business tactics are defined as specific moves, manoeuvres and actions taken in isolation or as in a series by line managers in order to move from one milepost to another in the pursuit of operational zing strategy. By this definition it is clear that tactics are short-term, linear, and single, with localised focus and having fairly limited impact on business performance 2. It is the action part of the business plan process and driven by mission related to a particular set of circumstances 3. Tactics are in a state of constant of flux keeping in line with changes taking place in the environment; these symbolise movement towards goals and mileposts within business objectives 4. Value maximization is the anchor on which tactics are knotted, by this, business seeks best possible benefits in the short-term, and so that trend curve of business success never falters

5. Decomposition is the means whereby tactics dissect a single part from the whole strategy that needs correction or adjustment. In other words, tactics allow you to excise a part from the whole plan, work on it and re-fix without upsetting the overall gist of the strategy. An apt example is the pricing policy adopted in a business. When an existing old customer comes with a special order for a large quantity of a popular product tactics allow you to consider a special discount in addition to the usual ones 6. Tactics are by nature short-term affairs that function in consonance with all-inclusive strategic policy, but tweak it each time a business faces an issue or snag. Nobody can keep a treasure trove of tactics that could be applied to, each time an unforeseen consequence slaps on the face of business. Each time you face a crisis situation you come out with a tactic that takes care of it adequately. Admittedly, tactics are developed on the spur of the moment. It does not mean planning tactics is not necessary in a business though. If you envisage how a situation could unfold, you can develop the wherewithal to meet it. What is in essence is that you have to quickly adjust to changing business environment and the consequences that arise in its wake? For this purpose a line manager who has an uncanny ability to use a blend of planned and ad-hoc measures with a view to tide over a difficult and perhaps desperate situation is an excellent tactician.