A world-beating competitive advantage doesn’t make you smart, it makes you lucky; so don’t try to emulate people who have one.
Perusing my “clutter” folder today, I came across a post on the Harvard Business Review that highlights how “The Best Companies Know How to Balance Strategy and Purpose.”
It’s not a bad read, other than the fact that it introduced me to the jargon-ized notion of “corporate plasticity.” Seriously, folks, we very well might need another term for the overused and tired notion of “agility” at this point, but…plasticity? Good grief.
However, I digress.
In developing the thesis that purpose has to be dominant over strategy, the authors–a couple of A.T. Kearney partners and a Senior Advisor–choose a set of companies to serve as exemplars. The names?
You notice anything interesting about these companies? I do. They are the 800-pound gorillas of the markets they serve.
And there is the rub. Management thinking that is guided by what the best companies do is fine…to a point. That point is that such thinking has to be careful about what “best” really is. If the company you aspire to be really derives all of its value creation mojo from a competitive advantage that is singular, then you might want to look elsewhere. Or you might want to at least acknowledge that to be the next Apple, you have to build the brand- and customer experience-driven loyalty that Apple has built over the past couple of decades, rather than trying to “innovate like Apple” as so many misguided management teams have tried.
Once you recognize that the companies you compare your own company to have competitive advantages that you simply don’t have, you will have identified a really big elephant in the strategic planning room. Then, you can get busy building your own competitive advantage vs. trying to be someone you are not.
What do you think?