My business motto is simple.

“Helping Smart People to Think Clearly About Their Business and Competitive Strategy”

I chose that phrase because it captures what fascinates me about people and challenges that they face. There are a lot of smart people in the business. Experts at technology, manufacturing processes, financial models and so much more inhabit the corporate world. Yet, these smart people sometimes get “stuck” when they work outside their expertise.

In the high technology industries that I am most used to it is a merit badge of sorts to be considered “smart.”  Knowing facts, solving problems that others struggle with, completing tasks faster are things that separate smart people from the crowd. Over time this helps increase the confidence that the same smart people feel about their capabilities.

With so many smart people, we might expect strategies that are well considered and implemented. Many people that I speak with tell me that this is not the case for their companies.

So why aren’t business and competitive strategies better?

There are two reasons that I have observed in nearly thirty years of work.

There was a time when I was younger that I believed certain things to be true. For a while, there was evidence that I was right. My life proceeded along a path that adhered to those “truths” more or less predictably. For instance, here were 10 things that I thought were true.

1. I would live forever (or at least for a very long time).
2. Good health was a given.
3. My income would always increase.
4. All important relationships would endure.
5. People at work would come to care about me like a family member.
6. All decisions would be between something good and something better.
7. Power would come through my “rank” at work.
8. People would naturally respect me more as I got older.
9. Nothing good could come from bad situations or experiences.
10. The best years in life would be when I was young (think 25).

Depending on your age and experiences, you might be chuckling right now. Maybe you recognize that the wisdom or hopes of a youth don’t always turn out to be true. The fact is that every single truth I held back then has been challenged. I have come to realize that the experiences of life refine and clarify what we hold dearest. My responses (e.g., learning, coping, re-thinking, accepting) to those challenges has led me to new wisdom that is less starry eyed yet richer and more satisfying.

Strategy work is similar for me. There was a time when I thought certain things about doing business strategy. For example, my firmly held “truths” about strategy included the following.

1. The best ideas (i.e. mine) will win.
2. Leaders want and will commonly accept great strategy ideas from subordinates.
3. All important factors affecting strategy would be obvious to me.
4. Peers would be naturally attracted to and supportive of my ideas.
5. Well crafted presentations would ensure that my strategy inputs would be accepted.
6. Everyone would understand what I was saying when I said it.
7. The organization would change to adapt to a new strategy.
8. Someone else would worry about and manage the strategy implementation.
9. Silence in meetings meant agreement.
10. Decisions would always be made in open discussions that I was invited to attend.

Ah, but the years have passed and I have painfully discovered that my understandings needed to change. This is all good (after the pain lessened) because a strategist must have a reflective and learning disposition. Without such a personality, one is doomed to marginalization (and probably a new career in another field). So, we experience, we reflect and we learn. The benefit is that we are disabused of simple notions when they are insufficient and we are enriched with understandings that are powerful.

I am both more humble these days and much better equipped to solve difficult strategy problems with people.

What about you? Are you learning new things as you live life and work on strategy?

In Star Trek, The Prime Directive dictates “that there can be no interference with the internal affairs of other civilizations, consistent with the historical real world concept of Westphalian sovereignty.”

In medicine, the most well known part of the Hippocratic Oath says, “I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.”

In the legal world, the rule of law is a general legal maxim according to which “decisions should be made by applying known principles or laws, without the intervention of discretion in their application”.

It is time for there to be a prime directive for competitive intelligence. The directive is specifically aimed at those that profess to practice competitive intelligence in service of others. The directive is meant to be helpful by defining a standard or goal against which one’s activities can be compared. Indeed, sometimes we will fall short but that should not obviate the directive.

THE COMPETITIVE INTELLIGENCE PRIME DIRECTIVE

In all that I do I will deliver valuable answers and insights in a timely manner to strategy leaders to help them make better decisions about the competitive environment.

It is possible to miss the nuances in the prime directive.

For instance, the directive does not say to deliver unfiltered masses of information. It does imply that the value in the answers and insights is determined by the strategy leaders – not the competitive intelligence person. Timeliness is also a key since this requires synchronization (i.e., relationship) between the strategy leaders and the CI people. Finally, competitive intelligence must be useful in making or supporting decisions. “Interesting but unuseful” competitive intelligence is distracting. Finally, the ultimate measure of competitive intelligence in business is that it leads to winning strategies. Fantastic insight at a failing enterprise is no victory.

What is your own prime directive for competitive intelligence?

In meeting with leaders from multiple companies, there is a common thread that I observe about the need for and lack of competitive intelligence in their businesses. Given the dearth of competitive intelligence insight, why don’t companies spend more time and money getting better at this function? There are five common reasons that I hear from companies.

1. We already do competitive intelligence (but it is not helping us).
2. We can’t afford it (but we can accept the costs of not doing it).
3. We don’t believe it can help (because we think we are already are doing everything we need to do).
4. We tried it before (and it didn’t deliver valuable information).
5. We need certainty (and there is some risk in the answers).