Concept-driven strategy

{{Section needs more citations|date=April 2025}}

The essential elements often cited in a Concept-Driven Strategy include:

• Priority on Understanding Concepts

Focus on concepts rather than isolated facts to enable a deeper comprehension and application of knowledge. This approach emphasizes understanding underlying principles and frameworks, allowing for the adaptation of ideas to varied contexts instead of simple memorization.

• Cultivating Analytical Thinking

Critical thinking is encouraged by fostering the ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information. This involves questioning assumptions, identifying biases, and making informed decisions, which can enhance problem-solving skills.

• Integration Across Disciplines

An interdisciplinary perspective is adopted to promote the integration of insights from multiple fields to address complex problems. This method encourages creativity, broadens understanding, and can lead to innovative solutions drawing from diverse areas of expertise.{{Cite web |title=What is Concept-Driven Learning? |url=https://cochins.org/what-is-concept-driven-learning |access-date=2025-01-18 |website=cochins.org}}

By incorporating these elements, organizations can foster innovation, differentiation, adaptability, and employee engagement, potentially leading to sustained competitive advantages. A Concept-Driven Strategy focuses on generating, developing, and implementing innovative concepts to create unique value propositions and competitive advantages. This approach encourages organizations to look beyond traditional market boundaries and explore new ideas and opportunities, thereby driving innovation, differentiation, adaptability, and employee involvement.

{{Multiple issues|section=yes|{{Original research|section|date=February 2013}}

{{COI|section|date=January 2013}}

{{Refimprove|section|date=January 2013}}

{{Technical|section|date=January 2013}}

{{Peacock|section|date=October 2013}}}}

Much of the strategic management literature builds upon Peter Drucker's suggestion{{When?|date=April 2025}} that corporations begin the strategic management process by articulating a statement of purpose, mission, and objectives.{{Why?|date=April 2025}} This evolved into a call to start with a vision, mission, and objectives statement. An alternative approach focuses on the statement of purpose or intent. Drucker's example for a commercial corporation's purpose was to state that the corporation's purpose was to create customers, meaning using the concept of 'customer creation' to coordinate the thinking and mindset of employees. This was seen as the reason for the corporation's existence. It is now suggested that a single concept may be insufficient{{fact|date=September 2022}}. Drawing on George Armitage Miller's modified The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two and dialectic, a small number of concepts under tension might be preferable.{{Original research inline|date=September 2022}}

The statement of purpose, statement of intent, or concept-driven approach to strategy formulation focuses on establishing and enacting a set of strategic concepts. In a participatory approach, these concepts are often developed through collaboration with stakeholders. Once agreed upon, the strategic concepts can be used to coordinate activities and serve as a set of decision making criteria. The set of concepts forming the Statement of Intent is then used to provide a coordinated framework for understanding an unpredictable future across an organization.Metcalfe M. A Pragmatic System of Decision Criteria Systems Research and Behavioral Science 2012 {{doi|10.1002/sres.2122}}{{cite journal |author=McKenna Allen, Metcalfe Mike |year=2013 |title=The linguistic turn in project conceptualization |journal=International Journal of Project Management |volume=31 |issue=8 |pages=1154–1162 |doi=10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.006}}

Linguistic and pragmatism suggest that prior conceptions interpret perception (sensory inputs). These conceptions are represented by concepts such as running, smiling, justice, reasoning, and agility. They are patterns of activity, experienced and remembered. They can be named using language and thus shared.Rorty, R. 1982. Consequences of Pragmatism. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Schon, D.A. 1963. Displacement of Concepts. Tavistock Publications, London.Shields, P. 2005. Classical Pragmatism does not need an Upgrade. Administration & Society 37(4) 504-518Brandom, R., B,. 2011. Perspectives On Pragmatism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsHaack, S. 2006. Pragmatism: Old and New. Prometheus Books, New York.Toulmin, S. 1972. Human Understanding: The Collective Use and Evolution of Concepts. Princeton University Press, Princeton New Jersey.

Baggini, J. 2005. Pragmatism History Of Ideas. BBC Radio 4, London. Baggini illustrates pragmatic concepts using the classic example of whether the Earth is flat or round.

{{quote|"...if we treat the world as if these concepts do exist then we find we can manipulate the world and make things work much better. The point about this is that you cannot just choose any concept. What is useful is not just on our whim to choose. [A concept is] a better concept for looking at the world because it works much better than others. You don't have to worry, as some British philosophers have thought that if you go down the pragmatic route that you might believe the world is flat because [that fits best with our sensory input]. Ultimately it isn't useful to believe that the world is flat. All sorts of things won't work if you construct your view in that way. These concepts are tools for helping us manipulate the world and some work better than others."|Julian Baggini, (aired 2005) Editor of The Philosophers' Magazine.}}

{{Section needs more citations|date=April 2025}}

The steps for formulating a participatory concept-driven strategy may include:

1. Select the target audience for the strategy and define their specific problem.
2. Reflect on significant past events that have impacted the organization.
3. Identify all stakeholders, including suppliers, competitors, staff, alliances, government, environmental groups, industry experts, etc.
4. Solicit stakeholder concerns regarding the future relevant to the organization, drawing on their experiences and industry expertise.
5. Use idea networking to cluster these stakeholder concerns into approximately five groups.
6. Name these clusters as strategic concepts (e.g., priorities, organizing principles). For instance, a cluster of statements might relate to innovation, another to becoming more international.
7. Consider the potential paradoxical consequences of enacting these strategic concepts.
8. Draft a one-page 'Statement of Intent' indicating the organization's aim to align with the identified strategic concepts.
9. Draft implementation action plans for each strategic concept, including both organizational change actions and investment projects, with goals and milestones.
10. Communicate the 'Statement of Intent' and 'Action Plans' to stakeholders as appropriate.
11. Ensure senior staff input, performance measures, selection criteria, and decision criteria reflect the 'Statement of Intent'.
12. In the long term, review and reflect on the strategic concepts in the Statement of Intent.Blog on Concept Driven Strategy http://mudmap.wordpress.com/tag/concept-driven-strategy/

Concept-driven strategy is a term applied to several similar strategic thinking approaches.

Generally, 'concept-driven' encourages a focus on the specific 'concepts' being utilized.Mareschal, D., P. Quinn, S. Lea. 2010. The Making of Human Concepts. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Shaw, M.L.G., B.R. Gaines. 1989. Comparing Conceptual Structures: Consensus, Conflict, Correspondence and Contrast. Knowledge Acquisition 1 341-363. See Concept learning or Management Concepts.Management Concepts Wikibooks http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Management_Concepts_and_Applications/Management

Some organizations may produce a 'statement of intent' without extensive consideration of the concepts it contains.Hamel, G., C.K. Prahalad. 2005. Strategic Intent. Harvard Business Review 83(7/8) 148-161.Katada, T. 1994. Strategic Intent to Corporate Purpose: The Remaking of Komatsu. Harvard Business Review 72(6) 83-.{{cite journal | author = Saku M., Sillance J.A.A. | year = 2007 | title = Strategic Intent as a Rhetorical Device | journal = Scandinavian Journal of Management | volume = 23 | issue = 4 | pages = 406–423 | doi = 10.1016/j.scaman.2007.03.002 }} However, if it presents a concise list of concepts, high-level objectives, principles, priorities, or frames, then concept-driven strategy offers a philosophical basis for these statements.

Some organizations create a 'strategic principles'{{cite web|title = Difference between Strategic Principle and Mission Statement|url = http://disruptit.wordpress.com/2007/12/01/difference-between-strategic-principle-and-mission-statement/|date = 1 December 2007|website = Disrupt it!}}How to Turn a Great Strategic Principle into Great Results http://www.strategydriven.com/2011/06/27/how-to-turn-a-great-strategic-principle-into-great-results/ statement, which is comparable to a statement of intent. A concepts approach can also provide a philosophical basis for this. The terms 'strategic priorities' or 'strategic values' are often used synonymously with strategic principles.

Literature on 'corporate purpose'Basu, S. 1999. Corporate Purpose: Why it Matters More than Strategy. Garland Publishing, Inc, New York & London.Ellsworth, R., R. 2002. Leading with Purpose. Stanford University Press, California. is also related to strategic intent. Sometimes, purpose refers to current actions and intent to future ones. If purpose is expressed as a set of concepts, the concepts approach can offer a philosophical basis.

There is a connection between 'systems thinking'{{cite journal | author = Ackoff R | year = 1971 | title = Towards A System Of System Concepts | journal = Management Science | volume = 17 | issue = 11| pages = 661–671 | doi=10.1287/mnsc.17.11.661}} and concept-driven strategy. The Churchman/Ackoff stream of systems thinking focused on developing a generic system of concepts for problem-solving. Rather than a generic set, the concept-driven approach typically uses concepts deemed most relevant by stakeholders for the organization's future.

A military planning approach known as 'concept-led' exists.The Role of OR and Analysis in Concept-led Long Range Planning http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/2535/DSTO-CR-0282.pdf{{Dead link|date=October 2016}}On the implementation of 'Concept-led and Participative' planning in the development of the Defence Logistics Transformation Plan http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/4367990The Headline Experiment a concept-led team effort http://adamdonovan.net/pdf/adam%20defence%20mag.pdf There appear to be few significant differences between the two.

In turbulent environments, concepts are considered potentially "more flexible than objectives" (goals, targets) as they provide the rationale (why) behind certain actions. The literature on purpose and intent often distinguishes itself from objectives by stating that purpose and intent provide the reasons or drivers for change, while objectives represent the desired end state. In complex, dynamic situations, multiple acceptable outcomes may exist, many of which cannot be anticipated by planners. Survival can be considered a fundamental objective, with the statement of intent outlining the approach to achieving it.

There is a connection between 'metaphor', metaphoric criticism, or conceptual metaphor and concept-driven strategy. While pragmatic concepts are not necessarily images, many relate to metaphors. For example, describing an organization as being like a machine with cogs or like an adaptive organism uses the concepts of machine and organism to reflect on organizations. Much of the discussion on the usefulness of metaphors in planning is relevant to concepts.Schon, D.A. 1963. Displacement of Concepts. Tavistock Publications, London.

The term 'strategic frames' is less common despite extensive literature on frame analysis; however, frames and pragmatic concepts appear quite similar. Amos Tversky defined a frame as a conception of outcomes.

The system of strategic concepts listed in a statement of intent, purpose, principles, frames, or conceptual metaphor can function as organizing principle(s).Vnuk-Balan, E. 2010. Concept Driven Strategy, American Academy of Management Conference, Toronto.

Furthermore, as Karl Weick describes sensemaking as the process of conceptualizing problems, concept-driven strategy can be viewed as a pragmatic means of sensemaking a strategy. {{Cite book |last=Weick |first=Karl E. |title=Sensemaking in organizations |date=2010 |publisher=Sage Publ |isbn=978-0-8039-7177-6 |edition=Nachdr. |series=Foundations for organizational science |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif.}}

• Bounded rationality
• Framing (social sciences)
• Institutional logic
• Interactive planning
• Letter of intent
• Sensemaking
• Strategic planning
• Wicked problem

{{Reflist}}

• Ackoff, R.L. 1970. A concept of corporate planning Wiley., New York:.
• {{cite journal|author=Bartlett, C.A., S. Ghoshal|date=November 1994|url=http://hbr.org/product/changing-the-role-of-top-management-beyond-strategy-to-purpose/an/94601-PDF-ENG|title=Changing the role of top management: Beyond strategy to purpose|journal=Harvard Business Review|pages=79–88}}
• Carter, P.D. 2002. Building Purposeful Action: Action Methods and Action Research. Educational Action Research 10(2) 207-232.
• Gustavsen, B., B. Hofmaier, M. Ekman Philips, A. Wikman. 1996. A Concept-Driven Development and the Organization of the Process of Change. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
• Margolis, E.L., Stephen. 2010. Concepts Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concepts/. Stanford University, California.

Category:Planning

Category:Pragmatics

Category:Pragmatism

Category:Concepts

Category:Strategy

Category:Cognition