The archetypical strategy story goes something like this …

“A small gathering of senior leaders is convened at a secluded site. The atmosphere is serious. An important decision is needed. Everyone there knows the competitors. They are attacking. Some of their attacks have been beaten back. As for the others, well, that is why the meeting is so urgent. The leader stands to speak. We must counterattack. Our stockholders and employees depend on our decisions. The organization must be aligned around a common strategy. What is that strategy to be? So many actions, priorities and resources must be congruent with it. It is time to act. Here is what we are going to do.”

When this scenario (or one like it) occurs, some days or weeks later various parts of the organization get their new assignments. Sales must target new customers. Perhaps their incentive programs are adjusted to reflect the new priorities. Marketing must adapt the product line messages to feature new attributes of the augmented product. Engineering must invest in different technologies to support new product features. Meanwhile, competitive intelligence gets new marching orders to track and report on new competitors and markets.

This is top-down strategy development. Sometimes this works spectacularly well.

I was reading through the news the other day and came across the Time Magazine website. Time has posted an exhaustive set of Top 10 lists covering the past year (The Top 10 Everything of 2009). For instance, there is a list for the top 10 songs, a list for the top 10 movies and a list for the top 10 new species (glad someone is counting and ranking them!).

There are also lists about negative things. For example, there are the top 10 political gaffes, the top 10 worst business deals and the top 10 awkward moments. It is fun to read such things because  mistakes often standout as much or more than accomplishments. The mistakes are sometimes funny, occasionally painful and almost always useful for learning (even when we did not make them ourselves).

It has taken me a long time to value mistakes in my professional life appropriately. Although they can still make me feel bad and they are never my goal, I finally have accepted that they are the inevitable but needed fuel for improvement. Why not embrace them, learn from them and move on? Thus, my new motto has become:

Try many things, fail fast, learn quickly and succeed sooner.

In that spirit, here are my top 10 competitive intelligence mistakes. (Perhaps I will write my top 10 successes later.)

A CEO faces a decision about whether to make an investment in a new product line that requires significant capital. Does he need any competitive intelligence?

A General Manager must decide the complete range of activities to implement to enter a new market segment. Does she need competitive intelligence?

The Marketing vice president struggles to clarify the winning proposition for the key brand of the company. Does his organization need competitive intelligence?

It is easy to answer “yes” to these scenarios. Each decision-maker faces choices that affect their organizations and, ultimately, influence their chances for success. However, the choices are rarely simple. For example, favoring one approach means that another must be deemphasized leading to disruptions in the organizational roles and responsibilities. Changes often imply new investments, processes and skills. These things cost precious money, time and energy that must be deducted from a finite “bank” within the company. Moreover, other stakeholders assert their importance along vectors independent of competition. For instance, owners, regulatory agencies, communities and others regularly inject their priorities into the mix considered by senior managers.

Since competitive intelligence is only one of the voices in the mix, how can it be effective (and not be unwisely drowned out)?

Here are three ideas to consider.

I would like to lose a few pounds. It would make me feel better, my pants would not be so snug and my blood pressure would go down. You would probably agree that these are laudable goals. So, a remarkably bad idea for me is to go somewhere that they serve chips and salsa. Or pizza. (Or a few other things.) It is just that certain things attract me so strongly that consuming them in moderation is difficult. Thus, because I cannot avoid these temptations, my weight loss goal is especially hard to reach (but I do enjoy mealtimes).

Of course, these foods are not completely bad. Maybe if I ate a few chips or only one slice of cheese pizza, I would do better. Perhaps I could eat other healthier foods more often and combine them with better exercise habits. I need the whole package to reach and maintain the correct weight. Whatever else I do, I especially need to be aware of the common pitfalls to avoid (goodbye to deep dish pizza).

In competitive intelligence, it is my experience and observation that we have pitfalls that inhibit us from reaching the desired goal. That goal, in my opinion, is to help strategy leaders make better decisions. Nevertheless, the pitfalls distract the competitive intelligence professional from usefully satisfying the needs of strategy decision-makers.

Here are my five (least) favorite pitfalls that should be avoided. I wonder if you agree with me.

1. Read the rest of this entry