Testar a estratégia (parte I)

Excelente artigo do The McKinsey Quarterly "Have you tested your strategy lately?"
.
"Ultimately, strategy is a way of thinking, not a procedural exercise or a set of frameworks.
...
First, companies develop strategy in many different ways, often (Moi ici: Often? I believe is always) idiosyncratic to their organizations, people, and markets. Second, many strategies emerge over time rather than from a process of deliberate formulation. (Moi ici: Pena é que muitas vezes não se tome consciência dessa formula para a aperfeiçoar, para a melhor utilizar, para a forçar)
...
All companies operate in markets surrounded by customers, suppliers, competitors, substitutes, and potential entrants, all seeking to advance their own positions. That process, unimpeded, inexorably drives economic surplus—the gap between the return a company earns and its cost of capital—toward zero. (Moi ici: Isto aconteceria num universo fechado... Aprendi com Drucker que qualquer posição de liderança é transitória e com tendência a ser de curta duração. Aprendi com Schumpeter que os lucros só resultam da vantagem do inovador e desaparecem assim que aquilo que era inovador se torna rotina)
.
For a company to beat the market by capturing and retaining an economic surplus, there must be an imperfection that stops or at least slows the working of the market. An imperfection controlled by a company is a competitive advantage. These are by definition scarce and fleeting because markets drive reversion to mean performance. The best companies are emulated by those in the middle of the pack, and the worst exit or undergo significant reform. As each player responds to and learns from the actions of others, best practice becomes commonplace rather than a market-beating strategy. Good strategies emphasize difference—versus your direct competitors, versus potential substitutes, and versus potential entrants. (Moi ici: Diferenciação. Recordar este trecho e este outro só de ontem)
.
Market participants play out the drama of competition on a stage beset by randomness. Because the evolution of markets is path dependent—that is, its current state at any one time is the sum product of all previous events (Moi ici: O espaço de Minkowski), including a great many random ones—the winners of today are often the accidents of history.
...
To beat the market, therefore, advantages have to be robust and responsive in the face of onrushing market forces. Few companies, in our experience, ask themselves if they are beating the market—the pressures of “just playing along” seem intense enough. But playing along can feel safer than it is. Weaker contenders win surprisingly often in war when they deploy a divergent strategy, and the same is true in business"
.
Faz lembrar a primeira encarnação de Michael Schumacher... are you playing to playing or playing to win? Jogar por jogar, ou jogar a feijões?

Continua.