Makes the right points that strategy is hard, but that simple structures (open debate and strategy maps) can help bring clarity, logic, and testability to any strategic concept. This is not unlike the structural processes for creative ideation (see Systematic Inventive Thinking).

In both cases, folks tend to think these processes have a mystical or magical quality to them. In neither case is that true, and believing in magic is just an excuse for failure.

In my own experience, I find that I get very angry and frustrated when strategies lack the if-then linkage, and I don’t handle this well (my personal challenge), but this doesn’t mean we should abandon logic, and this article reinforces the point.

https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/why-good-arguments-make-better-strategy/?og=Home+Editors+Picks