Competition is a constant.

My son competes in basketball. His team has many challenges. Perhaps the biggest challenge is that they are a new team (formed this year) competing against established teams that have played together for multiple seasons. Moreover, the other teams have “serious” coaches that teach sophisticated offenses and defenses. Those teams execute plays with coordination, skill and timing that give them decided advantages against less prepared teams.

Here is an interesting point. My son’s team has talented athletes. In fact, they have enough talent to win any game (even against the best teams in the league). Talent alone, however, is not enough. They need to have better offensive and defensive plays. They need to make better adjustments during the game to react to what the other team is doing. They need to learn more from their opponents to make their team better.

Is business any different?

The survey was unscientific. Nevertheless, the results were a bit surprising (and valuable) to me. Perhaps they might reflect your situation as well. Maybe you are facing similar challenges in 2010 to improve your strategy effectiveness. You can download the survey here and view the complete set of results here.

The respondents answered five basic questions about strategy facing their organization or work group in the year ahead. The fourteen organizations mostly represented high technology companies ranging in annual revenues from $30M to greater than $10B. However, there were also startups and nonprofits included.

Here were the questions that I asked.

1. What is your relationship to strategy decision makers in your company or work group?
2. What types of strategy do you influence or decide in your company or work group?
3. How would you assess your company’s or work group’s strategy effectiveness?
4. What critical strategy challenges does your company or work group face in 2010?
5. What types of strategy help would help you most?

From the (admittedly) small sample, several interesting responses jump out.

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.