Look for the elegant strategy
"Elegance" is a concept I have been thinking about. Some might call it style. Others might call it ease. I am attracted to the term "elegance" because it carries the connotation of rightness, of fit, of shape and cut, of a closer approach to perfection than most other things.
Why elegance? What does that have to do with strategy?
In a recent discussion among strategists the question was raised whether we believed that hard work would prevail and guarantee great results. On its face, of course, this assumes the hard work was properly directed to achieve the desired results. (I am reminded of the example given in my University of Chicago capstone business strategy class of a highly efficient bomber wing that flew in perfect formation, dropped the bombs exactly as directed - and bombed the wrong target.)
In any case, I find the idea that hard work will prevail wrong headed. If butting one's head against the wall will not move the wall - or even moves it some but not enough - or ultimately moves it but at the cost of great effort and a splitting headache - then I would suggest that the strategy being implemented by butting the wall is not elegant.
An elegant strategy is one that fits. That works with style and ease. It's a strategy one can look at and say, "Darn! That's good. It's just right." It's like a Rubik's Cube piece falling into place. Click. "Yes!"
Elegant strategies are not about effort or hard work. They are about rightness, about use of the minimum amount of effort required to achieve the desired result. Elegant strategies conserve resources and enable other strategies to be implemented and achieved.
An example would be Apple's strategy of personalizing the computer in highly intuitive devices. Now that's elegant. Another example would be 3M's application of Post It Note sticky technology to an ever expanding set of products to improve how we work. (How did we ever function before we had easel flip chart sticky sheets that we just stick on the wall?)
Apple could have taken on IBM, Dell, HP and others head-on with a non-elegant "me-to" strategy and through application of maximal resources perhaps could have carved out a share of the PC market. But instead, Steven Jobs and company found a unique, elegant, highly differentiated approach. 3M had plenty of opportunities to invest money and effort in other areas, but the elegance of the strategy of an expanding world of stickiness without residue was compelling.
I say, when crafting strategies, let's not just look at the target in front of us. It might be the wrong target to bomb. It might give us a splitting headache trying to reach it. Instead, let's invest our time and effort looking for the elegant strategy that gets us great results with style and ease.
