Select Page

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting

strategy
Term: Balanced Scorecard

Term: Balanced Scorecard

The Balanced Scorecard is a strategic planning and management system that provides organizations with a comprehensive framework to drive performance and implement strategy. Unlike traditional performance metrics that focus solely on financial outcomes, the Balanced Scorecard emphasizes a balanced view by integrating both financial and non-financial measures.

At its core, the Balanced Scorecard helps organizations:

  • Translate vision and strategy into clear objectives and actionable goals
  • Align day-to-day activities with strategic priorities
  • Measure and monitor progress across multiple dimensions
  • Connect projects, KPIs, objectives, and strategy into a coherent system

The framework divides performance measurement into four key perspectives:

  • Financial Perspective: Assesses financial performance indicators such as profitability and return on investment
  • Customer Perspective: Gauges customer satisfaction, retention, and market share
  • Internal Processes Perspective: Evaluates internal operational efficiency, quality, and innovation
  • Learning & Growth Perspective: Monitors employee development, organizational culture, and capacity for future improvement

Within each perspective, organizations define:

  • Objectives: Strategic goals derived from overall strategy
  • Measures: KPIs to monitor progress toward objectives
  • Initiatives: Action plans to achieve desired results

The Balanced Scorecard has become a widely adopted tool across sectors—including corporate, government, and non-profit—due to its ability to offer a holistic approach to performance management and strategic alignment.

Leading Theorists: Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton

The Balanced Scorecard concept was developed in the early 1990s by Dr. Robert S. Kaplan and Dr. David P. Norton. Their work stemmed from a Harvard Business Review article published in 1992, which addressed the limitations of relying solely on financial metrics for organizational performance.

Robert S. Kaplan:

Dr. Kaplan is an American academic, Emeritus Professor of Leadership Development at the Harvard Business School, and a leading authority on management accounting and performance measurement. After earning degrees from M.I.T. and Cornell, Kaplan spent much of his career researching managerial accounting innovations and co-introduced Activity-Based Costing before collaborating on the Balanced Scorecard.

David P. Norton:

Dr. Norton earned an engineering undergraduate degree from Worcester Polytechnic Institute and later an MBA from Florida Institute of Technology. He built his career as a business executive, management consultant, and co-founder of several performance management firms. Norton partnered with Kaplan to combine academic rigor and practical consultancy experience, shaping the Balanced Scorecard into a methodology that organizations worldwide could implement.

Kaplan and Norton’s joint research into strategy execution revealed that organizations often struggled to operationalize their strategies and link performance measures with long-term objectives. With the Balanced Scorecard, they provided a solution that bridges the gap between strategic planning and operational execution, establishing a system that empowers organizations to continually review and refine their path to success.

Their legacy includes not only the Balanced Scorecard but also later contributions on strategy maps and organizational alignment, setting global standards in performance management theory and practice.

read more
Quote: Peter Senge – The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization

Quote: Peter Senge – The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization

“Today’s problems come from yesterday’s ‘solutions.’” – Peter Senge – The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization

Senge’s law encapsulates a key insight from systems thinking: the unintended consequences of solutions, especially those that address only symptoms rather than root causes, can generate even greater problems over time.

Senge illustrates this principle with vivid examples and analogies. For instance, he recounts the story of a canoer trapped in a swirling backwash at the foot of a dam: the canoer’s instinctive but misguided efforts to fight the current only make matters worse. The only path to safety is a counterintuitive one—diving down, rather than struggling at the surface. This metaphor captures how intuitive, short-term problem-solving often intensifies the underlying, systemic issues.

The broader point Senge makes is that organizations (and people) often rely on quick fixes—what he calls “symptomatic solutions”—that deliver temporary relief but fail to address the deeper forces shaping outcomes. For example, a business struggling with declining sales might launch aggressive discounting or cut costs. While these measures may provide a short-term boost, they can erode brand value or employee morale, creating new problems down the line. Over time, organizations find themselves trapped in cycles where yesterday’s fixes become the root of today’s difficulties.

Senge’s insight is that “structures of which we are unaware hold us prisoner.” Without a systems perspective, leaders and teams repeatedly apply solutions that only reinforce problematic patterns, trapping organizations in cycles of recurring crises. Only by looking for underlying structures—feedback loops, delayed effects, and hidden interconnections—can organizations find lasting, transformative solutions.

Backstory on Peter Senge

Peter Senge is an American systems scientist, organizational theorist, and Senior Lecturer at MIT Sloan School of Management. He is internationally recognized for his pioneering work in organizational learning and systems thinking.

Senge’s reputation is founded on his landmark book, The Fifth Discipline (1990), where he introduced the concept of the “learning organization”—an entity capable not only of adapting to change but of continually transforming itself by learning at every level. He identifies five “disciplines” necessary for creating such organizations:

  • Personal Mastery: Commitment to individual learning and self-development.
  • Mental Models: Surfacing and challenging ingrained assumptions and beliefs.
  • Building Shared Vision: Creating collective commitment to a desired future.
  • Team Learning: Developing group capabilities for dialogue and collaborative problem-solving.
  • Systems Thinking: Understanding patterns, feedback loops, and the interconnectedness of organizational life.

Senge’s work synthesized insights from cybernetics, organizational development, and psychological research into a coherent framework for navigating complexity and change. His influence extends globally, shaping how leaders, organizations, and even educational institutions approach learning, adaptation, and long-term change.

Through his writing, teaching, and consulting, Senge has helped countless organizations recognize the pitfalls of linear thinking and reactive solutions, and guided them toward more holistic, systemic approaches to problem-solving and innovation.

read more
Term: Downward spiral

Term: Downward spiral

The “Downward Spiral” conveys the self-reinforcing nature of decline, where negative outcomes trigger further negative effects, creating a vicious cycle that accelerates organizational or business deterioration.

Description in Strategy Context:

A downward spiral (or death spiral) is a self-perpetuating cycle in which a series of negative events and poor decisions reinforce each other, leading a business or organization into deeper trouble with each iteration. Here’s how it typically unfolds:

  • Initial setback: An organization experiences a blow—such as declining sales, rising costs, or the loss of key talent.
  • Reactive cuts: In response, leadership may cut costs, reduce investment, or scale back innovation, hoping to stabilize the business.
  • Worsening performance: These moves often reduce morale, product quality, or customer satisfaction, causing results to worsen even further.
  • Accelerated decline: Negative outcomes compound: as performance drops, more resources are withdrawn, leading to further decline in capability and competitiveness.
  • Vicious feedback loop: Each round of negative results triggers even more severe responses, until the business can no longer recover—a classic vicious cycle.

The death spiral is not only a business phenomenon; it also appears in organizational health, team dynamics, and even sectors facing structural disruption. Examples include companies that fail to adapt to market changes, cut back on innovation, or repeatedly lose top talent—each bad outcome sets up the next.

Systems thinking frames this as a “cycle of disinvestment or deterioration,” where short-term fixes and narrow thinking deplete the core strengths of the organization, making it ever harder to recover.

Related Strategic Thinker: Peter Senge

Senge, through his influential book The Fifth Discipline, pioneered the use of systems thinking in organizations, identifying and describing “reinforcing feedback loops”—the underlying structure of both virtuous and vicious (downward) cycles. He showed how, left unchecked, these loops could create powerful forces driving either sustained growth or relentless decline.

read more
Quote: Jim Collins – Turning the Flywheel: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great

Quote: Jim Collins – Turning the Flywheel: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great

“Each turn builds upon previous work as you make a series of good decisions, supremely well executed, that compound one upon another. This is how you build greatness.” – Jim Collins – Turning the Flywheel: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great

The flywheel effect is central to Jim Collins’ research into organizational excellence, first articulated in his book Good to Great. Collins uses the metaphor of a massive, heavy flywheel that requires enormous effort to start turning, but with consistent, patient pushes in the same direction, it incrementally gains speed and momentum. Eventually, the flywheel’s own weight works for you—it spins faster with each push, each rotation building on the last. At a certain point, momentum takes over, and what was once slow-going becomes a force of near-uncontrollable acceleration.

“Each turn of the flywheel builds upon work done earlier, compounding your investment of effort.”

The logic of momentum underpins Collins’ flywheel: each action drives the next in a reinforcing loop, creating an inevitable-seeming sequence of growth and progress. The flywheel is not a single dramatic breakthrough or magic moment, but the result of persistent, disciplined effort and focus. In company transformations Collins studied, there was never a single defining action, no grand program, no solitary lucky break. Instead, it was turning the flywheel—consistent efforts, smart decisions, and well-executed plans compounding over time—that led to greatness.

This principle is nearly synonymous with what strategists call a virtuous circle (or cycle): a self-reinforcing loop where positive effects breed more positive effects, creating sustainable competitive advantages. In Collins’ version, the flywheel’s logic is customized for each organization; the key is to rigorously define what specific actions drive momentum in your context. Amazon’s flywheel, for instance, links lower prices to increased customer visits, which lead to more sellers, greater selection, and further efficiency gains.

Other Strategy Thinkers on Virtuous Cycles

The flywheel/virtuous cycle concept, while popularized by Collins, has echoes in earlier and parallel strategic thinking:

  • W. Edwards Deming described improvement “cycles” (Plan-Do-Check-Act) for quality and productivity—a precursor to the idea of reinforcing loops.
  • Peter Senge’s Fifth Discipline (1990) explores “reinforcing feedback loops” in systems thinking, where actions create conditions that reinforce even more powerful actions.
  • Clayton Christensen discussed “resource allocation processes” and how success can generate more resources for innovation and reinvestment, fueling further competitive advantage.
  • Michael Porter’s value chain analysis similarly identifies how interlinking activities can reinforce and sustain competitive advantage.
  • Chris Zook describes how companies that focus on their core, and then repeat and scale what works, create feedback loops where each cycle of success builds and strengthens the business, making future growth even easier and more likely.

Despite these similarities, Jim Collins is most directly associated with the flywheel metaphor and its systematic application to corporate strategy and transformation.

The Backstory of Jim Collins

Jim Collins is an American researcher, author, consultant, and lecturer focused on business management and company sustainability and growth. Born in 1958, Collins began his career as a faculty member at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, where he received the Distinguished Teaching Award. He later established a management laboratory in Boulder, Colorado, to conduct research into what makes companies thrive over the long term.

Collins is best known for his books:

  • Built to Last (with Jerry I. Porras), which explores what makes visionary companies endure
  • Good to Great, his most influential work, where he identifies the characteristics and behavioral patterns that distinguish truly great companies from merely good ones.
  • Turning the Flywheel, a monograph expanding on the flywheel concept.

His research is marked by rigorous empirical study. Collins and his teams comb through vast amounts of data, conducting years-long studies that compare companies that outperform their peers. His approach is analytical and data-driven, using matched-pair comparisons and case studies to extract patterns and frameworks.

Collins’ impact on the field of strategy and management is significant. His concepts—the flywheel effect, the hedgehog concept, Level 5 leadership—have become part of the modern management lexicon. His frameworks are valued for their clarity, broad applicability, and deep empirical grounding, making him one of the most respected thought leaders in business strategy and organizational development today.

read more
Term: Virtuous cycle

Term: Virtuous cycle

A virtuous cycle is a self-reinforcing loop in which a series of positive actions and outcomes continually strengthen each other, leading to sustained growth and improvement over time. In business, this means one beneficial event—such as improved performance or cost savings—leads to additional positive effects, such as increased customer acquisition or higher profits. The momentum generated by these reinforcing outcomes creates an upward spiral where each gain fuels the next, resulting in exponential growth and long-term success.

A classic example is Amazon’s business model: lower operating costs enable reduced prices, which attract more customers. Increased sales generate higher profits, which can then be reinvested in further efficiencies—perpetuating the cycle. Similarly, when a company reinvests profits from top-line growth into innovation or market expansion, it triggers a renewed cycle of revenue increases and competitive advantage.

Key characteristics of a virtuous cycle:

  • Positive feedback loop where each success amplifies future successes
  • Sustainable and exponential business growth
  • Contrasts with a “vicious cycle”, where negative outcomes reinforce decline

The best-related strategy theorist for the virtuous cycle is Jim Collins. His influential work, particularly in the book Good to Great, describes how companies create “flywheels”—a metaphor for virtuous cycles—where small, consistent efforts build momentum and translate into extraordinary, sustained results. Collins’ articulation of the flywheel effect precisely captures the mechanics of building and maintaining a virtuous cycle within organizations.

read more
Term: AI Inference

Term: AI Inference

AI inference refers to the process in which a trained artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning model analyzes new, unseen data to make predictions or decisions. After a model undergoes training—learning patterns, relationships, or rules from labeled datasets—it enters the inference phase, where it applies that learned knowledge to real-world situations or fresh inputs.

This process typically involves the following steps:

  • Training phase: The model is exposed to large, labeled datasets (for example, images with known categories), learning to recognize key patterns and features.
  • Inference phase: The trained model receives new data (such as an unlabeled image) and applies its knowledge to generate a prediction or decision (like identifying objects within the image).

AI inference is fundamental because it operationalizes AI, enabling it to be embedded into real-time applications such as voice assistants, autonomous vehicles, medical diagnosis tools, and fraud detection systems. Unlike the resource-intensive training phase, inference is generally optimized for speed and efficiency—especially important for tasks on edge devices or in situations requiring immediate results.

As generative and agent-based AI applications mature, the demand for faster and more scalable inference is rapidly increasing, driving innovation in both software and hardware to support these real-time or high-volume use cases.

A major shift in AI inference is occurring as new elements—such as test time compute (TTC), chain-of-thought reasoning, and adaptive inference—reshape how and where computational resources are allocated in AI systems.

Expanded Elements in AI Inference

  • Test-Time Compute (TTC): This refers to the computational effort expended during inference rather than during initial model training. Traditionally, inference consisted of a single, fast forward pass through the model, regardless of the complexity of the question. Recent advances, particularly in generative AI and large language models, involve dynamically increasing compute at inference time for more challenging problems. This allows the model to “think harder” by performing additional passes, iterative refinement, or evaluating multiple candidate responses before selecting the best answer

  • Chain-of-Thought Reasoning: Modern inference can include step-by-step reasoning, where models break complex problems into sub-tasks and generate intermediate steps before arriving at a final answer. This process may require significantly more computation during inference, as the model deliberates and evaluates alternative solutions—mimicking human-like problem solving rather than instant pattern recognition.

  • Adaptive Compute Allocation: With TTC, AI systems can allocate more resources dynamically based on the difficulty or novelty of the input. Simple questions might still get an immediate, low-latency response, while complex or ambiguous tasks prompt the model to use additional compute cycles for deeper reasoning and improved accuracy.

Impact: Shift in Compute from Training to Inference

  • From Heavy Training to Intelligent Inference: The traditional paradigm put most of the computational burden and cost on the training phase, after which inference was light and static. With TTC and chain-of-thought reasoning, more computation shifts into the inference phase. This makes inference more powerful and flexible, allowing for real-time adaptation and better performance on complex, real-world tasks without the need for ever-larger model sizes.

  • Strategic and Operational Implications: This shift enables organizations to optimize resources by focusing on smarter, context-aware inference rather than continually scaling up training infrastructure. It also allows for more responsive AI systems that can improve decision-making and user experiences in dynamic environments.

  • Industry Adoption: Modern models from leading labs (such as OpenAI and Google’s Gemini) now support iterative, compute-intensified inference modes, yielding substantial gains on benchmarks and real-world applications, especially where deep reasoning or nuanced analysis is required.

These advancements in test time compute and reasoned inference mark a pivotal transformation in AI, moving from static, single-pass prediction to dynamic, adaptive, and resource-efficient problem-solving at the moment of inference.

Related strategy theorist: Yann LeCun

Yann LeCun is widely recognized as a pioneering theorist in neural networks and deep learning—the foundational technologies underlying modern AI inference. His contributions to convolutional neural networks and strategies for scalable, robust AI learning have shaped the current landscape of AI deployment and inference capabilities.

“AI inference is the core mechanism by which machine learning models transform training into actionable intelligence, supporting everything from real-time analysis to agent-based automation.”

Yann LeCun is a French-American computer scientist and a foundational figure in artificial intelligence, especially in the areas of deep learning, computer vision, and neural networks. Born on July 8, 1960, in Soisy-sous-Montmorency, France, he received his Diplôme d’Ingénieur from ESIEE Paris in 1983 and earned his PhD in Computer Science from Sorbonne University (then Université Pierre et Marie Curie) in 1987. His doctoral research introduced early methods for back-propagation in neural networks, foreshadowing the architectures that would later revolutionize AI.

LeCun began his research career at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) in France, focusing on computer vision and image recognition. His expertise led him to postdoctoral work at the University of Toronto, where he collaborated with other leading minds in neural networks. In 1988, he joined AT&T Bell Laboratories in New Jersey, eventually becoming head of the Image Processing Research Department. There, LeCun led the development of convolutional neural networks (CNNs), which became the backbone for modern image and speech recognition systems. His technology for handwriting and character recognition was widely adopted in banking, reading a significant share of checks in the U.S. in the early 2000s.

LeCun also contributed to the creation of DjVu, a high-efficiency image compression technology, and the Lush programming language. In 2003, he became a professor at New York University (NYU), where he founded the NYU Center for Data Science, advancing interdisciplinary AI research.

In 2013, LeCun became Director of AI Research at Facebook (now Meta), where he leads the Facebook AI Research (FAIR) division, focusing on both theoretical and applied AI at scale. His leadership at Meta has pushed forward advancements in self-supervised learning, agent-based systems, and the practical deployment of deep learning technologies.

LeCun, along with Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, received the 2018 Turing Award—the highest honor in computer science—for his pioneering work in deep learning. The trio is often referred to as the “Godfathers of AI” for their collective influence on the field.

 

Yann LeCun’s Thinking and Approach

LeCun’s intellectual focus is on building intelligent systems that can learn from data efficiently and with minimal human supervision. He strongly advocates for self-supervised and unsupervised learning as the future of AI, arguing that these approaches best mimic how humans and animals learn. He believes that for AI to reach higher forms of reasoning and perception, systems must be able to learn from raw, unlabeled data and develop internal models of the world.

LeCun is also known for his practical orientation—developing architectures (like CNNs) that move beyond theory to solve real-world problems efficiently. His thinking consistently emphasizes the importance of scaling AI not just through bigger models, but through more robust, data-efficient, and energy-efficient algorithms.

He has expressed skepticism about narrow, brittle AI systems that rely heavily on supervised learning and excessive human labeling. Instead, he envisions a future where AI agents can learn, reason, and plan with broader autonomy, similar to biological intelligence. This vision guides his research and strategic leadership in both academia and industry.

LeCun remains a prolific scientist, educator, and spokesperson for responsible and open AI research, championing collaboration and the broad dissemination of AI knowledge.

read more
Term: AI Agents

Term: AI Agents

AI Agents are autonomous software systems that interact with their environment, perceive data, and independently make decisions and take actions to achieve specific, user-defined goals. Unlike traditional software, which follows static, explicit instructions, AI agents are guided by objective functions and have the ability to reason, learn, plan, adapt, and optimize responses based on real-time feedback and changing circumstances.

Key characteristics of AI agents include:

  • Autonomy: They can initiate and execute actions without constant human direction, adapting as new data or situations arise.
  • Rational decision-making: AI agents use data and perceptions of their environment to select actions that maximize predefined goals or rewards (their “objective function”), much like rational agents in economics.
  • Learning and Adaptation: Through techniques like machine learning, agents improve their performance over time by learning from experience.
  • Multimodal abilities: Advanced agents process various types of input/output—text, audio, video, code, and more—and often collaborate with humans or other agents to complete complex workflows or transactions.
  • Versatility: They range from simple (like thermostats) to highly complex systems (like conversational AI assistants or autonomous vehicles).

Examples include virtual assistants that manage calendars or customer support, code-review bots in software development, self-driving cars navigating traffic, and collaborative agents that orchestrate business processes.

Related Strategy Theorist – Stuart Russell

As a renowned AI researcher and co-author of the seminal textbook “Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach,” Russell has shaped foundational thinking on agent-based systems and rational decision-making. He has also been at the forefront of advocating for the alignment of agent objectives with human values, providing strategic frameworks for deploying autonomous agents safely and effectively across industries.

read more
Term: Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)

Term: Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is defined as a form of artificial intelligence that can understand, learn, and apply knowledge across the full spectrum of human cognitive tasks—matching or even exceeding human capabilities in any intellectual endeavor. Unlike current artificial intelligence systems, which are typically specialized (known as narrow AI) and excel only in specific domains such as language translation or image recognition, AGI would possess the versatility and adaptability of the human mind.

AGI enables machines to perform essentially all human cognitive tasks at or above top human expert level, acquire new skills, and transfer its capabilities to entirely new domains, embodying a level of intelligence no single human possesses—rather, it would represent the combined expertise of top minds across all fields.

Alternative Name – Superintelligence:
The term superintelligence or Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) refers to an intelligence that not only matches but vastly surpasses human abilities in virtually every aspect. While AGI is about equaling human-level intelligence, superintelligence describes systems that can independently solve problems, create knowledge, and innovate far beyond even the best collective human intellect.

 
Level
Description
Narrow AI
Specialized systems that perform limited tasks (e.g., playing chess, image recognition)
AGI
Systems with human-level cognitive abilities across all domains, adaptable and versatile
Superintelligence
Intelligence that exceeds human capabilities in all domains, potentially by wide margins

Key contrasts between AGI and (narrow) AI:

  • Scope: AGI can generalize across different tasks and domains; narrow AI is limited to narrowly defined problems.
  • Learning and Adaptation: AGI learns and adapts to new situations much as humans do, while narrow AI cannot easily transfer skills to new, unfamiliar domains.
  • Cognitive Sophistication: AGI mimics the full range of human intelligence; narrow AI does not.
 

Strategy Theorist — Ilya Sutskever:
Ilya Sutskever is a leading figure in the pursuit of AGI, known for his foundational contributions to deep learning and as a co-founder of OpenAI. Sutskever’s work focuses on developing models that move beyond narrow applications toward truly general intelligence, shaping both the technical roadmap and ethical debate around AGI’s future.

Ilya Sutskever’s views on the impact of superintelligence are characterized by a blend of optimism for its transformative potential and deep caution regarding its unpredictability and risks. Sutskever believes superintelligence could revolutionize industries, particularly healthcare, and deliver unprecedented economic, social, and scientific breakthroughs within the next decade. He foresees AI as a force that can solve complex problems and dramatically extend human capabilities. For business, this implies radical shifts: automating sophisticated tasks, generating new industries, and redefining competitive advantages as organizations adapt to a new intelligence landscape.

However, Sutskever consistently stresses that the rise of superintelligent AI is “extremely unpredictable and unimaginable,” warning that its self-improving nature could quickly move beyond human comprehension and control. He argues that while the rewards are immense, the risks—including loss of human oversight and the potential for misuse or harm—demand proactive, ethical, and strategic guidance. Sutskever champions the need for holistic thinking and interdisciplinary engagement, urging leaders and society to prepare for AI’s integration not with fear, but with ethical foresight, adaptation, and resilience.

He has prioritized AI safety and “superalignment” as central to his strategies, both at OpenAI and through his new Safe Superintelligence venture, actively seeking mechanisms to ensure that the economic and societal gains from superintelligence do not come at unacceptable risks. Sutskever’s message for corporate leaders and policymakers is to engage deeply with AI’s trajectory, innovate responsibly, and remain vigilant about both its promise and its perils.

In summary, AGI is the milestone where machines achieve general, human-equivalent intelligence, while superintelligence describes a level of machine intelligence that greatly surpasses human performance. The pursuit of AGI, championed by theorists like Ilya Sutskever, represents a profound shift in both the potential and challenges of AI in society.

read more
Quote: Alexander Osterwalder – Author

Quote: Alexander Osterwalder – Author

“The Value Proposition is the reason why customers turn to one company over another. It solves a customer problem or satisfies a customer need. Each Value Proposition consists of a selected bundle of products and/or services that caters to the requirements of a specific Customer Segment. In this sense, the Value Proposition is an aggregation, or bundle, of benefits that a company offers customers.”
– Alexander Osterwalder, Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers

Alexander Osterwalder is recognized as one of the most influential voices in modern business strategy and innovation. Born in Switzerland in 1974, Osterwalder began his academic journey with an MA in Political Science from the University of Lausanne and went on to earn a PhD in Management Information Systems. His doctoral thesis, “The Business Model Ontology,” laid the groundwork for what would become his most celebrated contribution: the Business Model Canvas—a visual framework now used worldwide to clarify, communicate, and innovate business models.

Osterwalder’s thinking centers on providing systematic, accessible tools for organizations to navigate increasingly complex markets. With the Business Model Canvas, co-created with Professor Yves Pigneur, Osterwalder offered a practical, visual language to identify key elements of any business—including the crucial “Value Proposition.” This component addresses the heart of why customers choose one company over another by aggregating products and services to solve specific customer problems or fulfill unique needs.

The quote featured in “Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers” encapsulates Osterwalder’s belief that a company’s success is rooted not just in what it sells, but in its ability to deliver real, distinctive value to a specific customer segment. This insight was formed through years of collaboration with hundreds of practitioners and scholars, resulting in a global bestseller that has shaped how industries—from startups to Fortune 500 giants—develop and articulate their strategies.

As founder and CEO of Strategyzer, Osterwalder continues to play a pivotal role in equipping businesses with methodologies and tools for growth and transformation. His influence extends through his writing, keynote addresses at global conferences, and as a visiting professor at IMD. Osterwalder’s work remains a north star for organizations seeking clarity and competitive advantage in a world defined by rapid change.

read more
Term: Value Proposition

Term: Value Proposition

Value Proposition is a foundational concept in business strategy and marketing, defined as a clear, concise statement that explains how a product or service solves customers’ problems or improves their situation, highlights the specific benefits delivered, and articulates why customers should choose it over competitors’ offerings. It communicates the unique value a company promises to deliver to its target customer segment, combining both tangible and intangible benefits, and serves as a primary differentiator in the marketplace.

Related Strategy Theorist:
The most influential theorist associated with the value proposition is Alexander Osterwalder, co-author with Yves Pigneur of Business Model Generation and Value Proposition Design. Osterwalder’s Value Proposition Canvas is a globally adopted method for designing, testing, and refining value propositions and is a crucial component of the broader Business Model Canvas framework. His work provides widely used practical tools for aligning offerings with customer needs in both startups and established organizations.

A strong value proposition is:

  • Easy to understand
  • Specific to customer needs
  • Focused on genuine benefits
  • Differentiated from competitors

It typically answers four key questions:

  • What do you offer?
  • Who is it for?
  • How does it help them?
  • Why is it better than other options?

Developing a value proposition is central to a company’s overall business strategy, influencing marketing, product development, and customer experience. Unlike mere slogans or catchphrases, a true value proposition clearly delivers the company’s core offer and competitive advantage.

read more
Term: Strategic Due Diligence

Term: Strategic Due Diligence

Strategic due diligence is the comprehensive investigation and analysis of a company or asset before engaging in a major business transaction, such as a merger, acquisition, investment, or partnership. Unlike financial or legal due diligence—which focus on verifying facts and liabilities—strategic due diligence evaluates whether the target is a good strategic fit and if the transaction will create sustainable value.

Key components of strategic due diligence include:

  • Assessing strategic fit: Analysis of how well the target aligns with the acquirer’s long-term business strategy and objectives, including cultural and operational compatibility.
  • Market and competitive analysis: Evaluation of the industry’s trends, the target’s position within the market, growth opportunities, and threats, as well as potential synergies and competitive advantages.
  • Value creation and deal thesis validation: Examination of whether the underlying assumptions for the deal’s value are realistic and attainable, including whether the deal’s objectives can be met in practice.
  • Risk identification: Uncovering potential risks, liabilities, and integration challenges that could impede the realization of expected benefits.

The process is critical for:

  • Avoiding unforeseen risks and liabilities (such as undisclosed debts or contracts).
  • Informing negotiation strategies and post-deal integration plans.
  • Ensuring that the transaction enhances—not detracts from—the buyer’s strategic goals and competitive position.

In summary, strategic due diligence is an essential, holistic process that gives decision makers clarity on whether a business opportunity or transaction supports their overarching strategic ambitions, and what risks or synergies they must manage to achieve post-deal success.

Related Strategy Theorist: David Howson

A leading theorist associated with the concept of strategic due diligence is David Howson. He is frequently cited for his work on due diligence processes in mergers and acquisitions (M&A), particularly for emphasizing the multidisciplinary and strategic aspects of due diligence beyond just financials. However, it is important to note that the field draws from a broad base of strategic management literature, including concepts from Michael Porter (competitive advantage, industry analysis) and practitioners who bridge strategy with corporate finance in transactions.

read more
Quote: Alexander Osterwalder – Author

Quote: Alexander Osterwalder – Author

“Companies should focus on one of three value disciplines: operational excellence, product leadership, or customer intimacy.”
– Alexander Osterwalder, Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers

The quote, “Companies should focus on one of three value disciplines: operational excellence, product leadership, or customer intimacy,” comes from Alexander Osterwalder’s influential work, Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. This book, co-authored with Yves Pigneur and supported by hundreds of business practitioners worldwide, fundamentally reshaped how organizations approach designing, innovating, and understanding their business models.

Backstory and Context of the Quote

Osterwalder draws on the concept of value disciplines to guide organizations in carving out a distinct market position. The three value disciplines—operational excellence, product leadership, and customer intimacy—were popularized in strategic management as core focuses that companies should excel in to achieve competitive advantage. In Business Model Generation, Osterwalder emphasizes that sustainable success often requires unwavering commitment to one of these disciplines, rather than trying to excel in all three simultaneously. This focus enables an organization to align internal processes, culture, and strategy, thereby delivering superior value to customers in a way that competitors find difficult to replicate.

When Osterwalder speaks about value disciplines, he situates them within the broader context of the Business Model Canvas—a visual framework he developed to help organizations systematically map out how they create, deliver, and capture value. By identifying a primary value discipline, companies can design their business model to deliver on what matters most to their chosen customer segments—whether that’s unbeatable efficiency and low cost (operational excellence), cutting-edge and innovative products (product leadership), or deep, personalized relationships (customer intimacy).

This principle has resonated with business leaders, startups, and innovators globally, highlighting the importance of clear strategic focus as a foundation for building compelling customer value propositions and robust business models.

About Alexander Osterwalder

Alexander Osterwalder is a Swiss business theorist, author, and entrepreneur best known for developing the Business Model Canvas, a strategic tool used by millions of organizations worldwide. With a background in management information systems and a PhD from the University of Lausanne, Osterwalder has dedicated his career to making strategy and innovation tangible, practical, and accessible.

He co-authored Business Model Generation with Professor Yves Pigneur, a book that has been translated into over 30 languages and used as a standard reference in business schools and boardrooms alike. Osterwalder’s follow-up frameworks—such as the Value Proposition Canvas—further help organizations deeply align their offerings with customer needs, focusing on “jobs, pains, and gains” to design products and services that truly resonate.

Osterwalder’s work is characterized by its clarity, practicality, and visual approach to strategy. His tools bridge the gap between theoretical insight and hands-on application, enabling leaders to navigate business innovation with confidence and precision. Through his contributions, Osterwalder has empowered a new generation of visionaries and changemakers to reinvent how value is created in the modern economy

read more
Quote: Warren Buffet – investor

Quote: Warren Buffet – investor

“Investors should be skeptical of history-based models… Too often, though, investors forget to examine the assumptions behind the models. Beware of geeks bearing formulas.”
– Warren Buffet, Investor

The quote reflects Warren Buffett’s deeply pragmatic and experience-driven approach to investing. Buffett, widely regarded as one of the most successful investors of all time, has built his reputation on a disciplined method that values understanding businesses fundamentally over relying on complex quantitative models.

Buffett’s skepticism toward “history-based models” stems from his belief that numerical formulas—no matter how sophisticated—are only as good as the assumptions underlying them. These models often use statistical terms like beta, gamma, and sigma, which sound impressive but can obscure critical factors affecting a company’s future performance. He warns investors not to be seduced by formulas crafted by what he calls a “nerdy-sounding priesthood,” emphasizing the importance of knowing the meaning and context behind every symbol or number in an equation rather than blindly trusting them.

This perspective is rooted in Buffett’s longstanding investment philosophy: that success comes from investing in businesses with durable competitive advantages, competent management, and predictable long-term prospects—not from placing faith in past data or overengineered predictive tools. He advocates for disciplined fundamental analysis and warns against overreliance on models that assume the future will closely mirror the past—a dangerous assumption in markets characterized by uncertainty and change.

Buffett’s approach also embodies patience and common sense. His advice to “buy into a company because you want to own it, not because you want the stock to go up,” and to “draw a circle around businesses you understand,” reiterates his preference for simplicity and clarity over complexity and guesswork. By highlighting the risk of blindly trusting “geeks bearing formulas,” Buffett cautions investors to balance quantitative analysis with qualitative insight and critical thinking.

In essence, this quote is a timeless reminder that investing is as much an art as it is a science. While quantitative tools can provide useful information, they should never replace thorough, skeptical evaluation of a company’s true business fundamentals. Buffett’s wisdom encourages investors to question assumptions, understand what lies beneath the numbers, and prioritize sound judgment over flashy formulas.

Warren Buffett’s career and success amplify this message. As chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, he has famously rejected fads and complex financial engineering in favor of straightforward value investing principles. His practical, grounded approach has guided generations of investors to see beyond surface metrics and embrace a thoughtful, long-term view of investing.

read more
Term: Business Model

Term: Business Model

A business model is a comprehensive framework that explains how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value within a market environment. It serves as the structural backbone for organizing the company’s relationships, resources, processes, and value propositions, tying together various elements such as:

  • Target customer segments
  • Value proposition (the unique value offered to these customers)
  • Channels (how value is delivered)
  • Customer relationships
  • Revenue streams
  • Key resources and activities
  • Key partnerships
  • Cost structure

Unlike a business strategy, which is a dynamic plan of action for achieving competitive objectives and responding to market conditions, the business model is more static and foundational: it is the platform on which strategies are executed. The business model articulates the logic of the business, while the strategy outlines how to compete and succeed using that model.

Related theorist: Alexander Osterwalder

Osterwalder is widely recognized for developing the Business Model Canvas, a strategic management tool that systematically lays out how a company creates, delivers, and captures value. His work, together with Yves Pigneur, has been foundational in both academic and practical discussions about business models, making him the leading authority in this area.

“A business model describes the coherence in the strategic choices which facilitates the handling of the processes and relations which create value on both the operational, tactical and strategic levels in the organization. The business model is therefore the platform which connects resources, processes and the supply of a service which results in the fact that the company is profitable in the long term.”

From a strategic perspective, the business model defines how the business system fits together—what markets to serve, what offerings to provide, and how to earn profits. Business models can evolve rapidly and require regular innovation to adapt to changing environments, emerging technologies, and shifting customer needs.

In summary, the business model is a structural representation of how a company operates profitably, sustains itself, and interacts within its ecosystem, enabling effective strategy execution.

read more
Quote: Richard Koch Author, investor, strategist

Quote: Richard Koch Author, investor, strategist

“Why is growth important? Because the power of compound arithmetic is such that, in a high-growth venture, sales – and profits, when they appear – will multiply quickly. It is quite different from the great majority of firms, which grow only slowly, and where profit growth is difficult and far from automatic.” – Richard Koch – Author, investor, strategist

Richard Koch is a highly regarded British management consultant, entrepreneur, and author best known for his work on business strategy and the principle of exponential growth. Educated at Oxford University and the Wharton School, Koch began his career at the Boston Consulting Group and later became a partner at Bain & Company before co-founding the influential consultancy L.E.K. Consulting. As an investor, he has played a significant role in the success of several well-known companies, including Filofax, Plymouth Gin, Betfair, FanDuel, and Auto1. Koch is also celebrated for his bestselling book, The 80/20 Principle, which has sold over a million copies worldwide and introduced a broader audience to the idea that a small proportion of efforts often lead to the majority of results.

The quote—“Why is growth important? Because the power of compound arithmetic is such that, in a high-growth venture, sales – and profits, when they appear – will multiply quickly. It is quite different from the great majority of firms, which grow only slowly, and where profit growth is difficult and far from automatic.”—captures the essence of Koch’s philosophy and expertise in business strategy.

Context and Backstory

Koch has spent his career examining what propels some ventures to achieve extraordinary results while others stagnate. His work consistently points to the transformational power of rapid, compounded growth—a concept drawn from mathematics but observed powerfully in business. The principle of compound growth, as illustrated by both Koch and other thought leaders, describes exponential progress where gains in one period build upon the previous, leading to an accelerating trajectory rather than linear development. Koch contrasts this with the more common fate of most businesses: slow, incremental growth where every small gain must be arduously earned, and profitability is never a guarantee.

This distinction is critical for entrepreneurs and strategists. High-growth ventures harness the “snowball effect” of compounding, where early momentum can quickly escalate into market dominance and substantial profit, often outstripping competitors who rely on traditional, slower-growth models. Koch’s decades of investing and consulting—backed by his direct involvement in rapidly scaling businesses—provide real-world evidence of this principle’s power. His insights encourage business leaders to view growth not merely as an aim, but as an essential, multiplying force that can radically alter outcomes if strategically pursued.

In summary, Koch’s quote encapsulates the difference between ordinary and extraordinary business outcomes, emphasizing the necessity for leaders to understand and harness compound growth in their strategies. His career and writings offer both a theoretical foundation and practical guidance for those seeking to leverage this “hidden magic” in their own ventures.

read more
Term: Business Unit Strategy

Term: Business Unit Strategy

Business Unit Strategy, as described by Richard Koch, focuses on how a single business or division within a larger corporation achieves and sustains competitive advantage within a specific, well-defined market or “arena” (a product-market segment). This level of strategy is about winning in one particular space, rather than deciding which spaces to play in.

Key Elements of Business Unit Strategy (per Koch):

  • Arena-Specific: Business unit strategy operates within the boundaries of a particular product, service, or customer group—what Koch calls an “arena”.
  • Competitive Advantage Focus: It is centrally concerned with how a business beats competitors. Koch identifies two principal sources:
    • Cost Leadership: Supplying a comparable product at a lower price and cost than rivals.
    • Differentiation: Offering a product that is more useful, easier to use, or more aesthetically pleasing than competitors’ products.
  • Simplicity and Scale: Koch emphasizes that both cost and differentiation advantages are often achieved by having a product that is simpler and produced at a larger scale than rivals.
  • Market Share in Context: The value of market share is only meaningful when assessed in the context of the specific arena relative to competition, often within highly specialized or niche markets.
  • Resource Deployment: At the business unit level, strategy dictates how to deploy resources and capabilities to maximize success in the chosen arena.
 

Business Unit vs. Corporate Strategy (per Koch):

 
Business Unit Strategy
Corporate Strategy
Scope
Single market or arena (product-market segment)
Multi-business, deciding “where to play” as an organization
Key Question
How do we win here?
Which arenas/markets should we be in?
Focus
Achieving and sustaining competitive advantage against rivals
Portfolio management; value creation across businesses
Basis
Cost leadership or differentiation within the market
Allocation of resources and synergies across units

Richard Koch asserts that the heart of any firm is the product-market segment(s) where it holds or can hold a distinctive edge, whether through cost or uniqueness, and that “strategy” at this level is about defending and growing that advantage.

In summary, business unit strategy is about how to compete and win within a chosen market, whereas corporate strategy is about deciding which markets or businesses to be in and optimizing the whole portfolio for maximum value. Koch’s work draws on the importance of focusing efforts—guided by the 80/20 principle—on those few arenas where success is most likely and most valuable.

read more
Quote: Richard Koch Author, investor, strategist

Quote: Richard Koch Author, investor, strategist

“The 80/20 Principle asserts that a minority of causes, inputs, or effort usually lead to a majority of the results, outputs, or rewards.” – Richard Koch – Author, investor, strategist

The quote, “The 80/20 Principle asserts that a minority of causes, inputs, or effort usually lead to a majority of the results, outputs, or rewards,” originates from the acclaimed British author, entrepreneur, and strategist Richard Koch. This principle, also widely known as the Pareto Principle, suggests that in many aspects of business and life, a focused minority is responsible for producing the majority of results. In practical terms, Koch observed that 20% of activities typically lead to 80% of the value or outcomes—whether those are profits, happiness, or productivity.

Koch’s sharp insight into this pattern did not emerge in isolation. He built his career in environments where optimizing results and leveraging limited resources was essential. After earning an M.A. from Oxford University and an M.B.A. from The Wharton School, Koch launched his professional journey with the Boston Consulting Group, before becoming a partner at Bain & Company. There, consulting for leading global organizations, he recognized that the most significant outcomes often stemmed from a narrow selection of strategic moves or high-leverage initiatives.

Leaving Bain in 1983, Koch co-founded L.E.K. Consulting and became a serial investor and entrepreneur, with ownership in businesses such as Filofax, Plymouth Gin, Betfair, and FanDuel. Across these varied ventures, Koch repeatedly saw the 80/20 rule in action—whether identifying the most profitable customers, streamlining operations, or focusing on the few core products that drove sales.

About Richard Koch

Richard Koch (born July 28, 1950) has become a globally recognized voice on strategy, entrepreneurship, and the science of effectiveness. Beyond his consulting work and private equity investments, Koch has authored several influential books, most notably The 80/20 Principle, which has sold over a million copies and been translated into 35 languages. His writing popularized the application of the Pareto Principle beyond economics, demonstrating its practical relevance for business, personal development, and lifestyle choices.

Koch’s personal journey reflects the core lesson of his message: by identifying the vital few factors that matter most, and minimizing time on the trivial many, individuals and organizations can multiply their effectiveness and reward. He has credited his mastery of this principle as the key to amassing significant wealth and achieving a form of early retirement, allowing him the freedom to invest, write, and speak across the world.

Today, Koch’s 80/20 Principle stands not just as a tool for efficiency but as a transformative lens for reimagining how we approach challenges, prioritize resources, and strive for lasting success.

read more
Term: Corporate Strategy

Term: Corporate Strategy

Corporate strategy, as outlined by Richard Koch, refers to the overarching plan and direction for a multi-business organization, focusing on where the firm should compete and what kinds of businesses it should own or enter. This type of strategy is concerned with the selection and management of a portfolio of business units, industries, or product-market segments, and the allocation of resources among them. Koch emphasizes that corporate strategy is about understanding and choosing the arenas in which a firm operates, especially in cases where multiple distinct business areas are involved.

Related theorist: Richard Koch

Corporate strategy asks questions such as:

  • In which markets or industries should the company operate?
  • How should resources be allocated among business units?
  • How should the businesses be structured to maximize overall value and competitiveness?

It focuses on creating value through synergies, developing core competencies shared across units, and ensuring that the whole organization delivers more value than the sum of its parts.

Business Unit Strategy vs. Corporate Strategy (as per Koch)

 
Corporate Strategy
Business Unit Strategy
Scope
Multi-business, multi-industry; whole corporation
Single business or product-market segment
Focus
Where to compete (which arenas/businesses)
How to compete (within a chosen arena/business)
Key Questions
What businesses should we own? How do we manage the portfolio? What is the right mix for overall advantage?
How do we win in our chosen market/industry? What is our source of competitive advantage?
Resource Allocation
Allocates capital and resources across business units and functions
Deploys resources to maximize advantage within a specific unit or market
Value Creation
Pursues synergies, portfolio optimization, and leveraging core capabilities across units
Pursues cost leadership, differentiation, or focus strategies for competitive edge in a defined arena

Koch stresses that, at the business unit level, strategy centers on achieving competitive advantage within a specific product-market segment or arena—by either being the lowest-cost producer or by offering a product that is markedly more attractive to customers than competitors’ offerings. In contrast, corporate strategy is about identifying and managing the “few arenas” (businesses) that generate the most value, and ensuring they work together to deliver superior results for the corporation as a whole.

“At the heart of a firm is one or more product-market segments or arenas in which it operates. If the firm operates in several arenas, one of them, or a few, will supply most or all the cash and profit the firm generates… In these few arenas, which are the intersection of the product and a similar group of customers, the firm has competitive advantage.”
— Richard Koch.

In summary, corporate strategy is about the selection and management of a portfolio of businesses to create overall value, whereas business unit strategy is about achieving and sustaining competitive advantage in a chosen market or segment. Koch’s distinction makes it clear: corporate strategy sets the direction for the whole enterprise; business unit strategy wins the battle in each chosen arena.

read more
Quote: John P. Kotter – Professor, author

Quote: John P. Kotter – Professor, author

“A useful rule of thumb: Whenever you cannot describe the vision driving a change initiative in five minutes or less and get a reaction that signifies both understanding and interest, you are in for trouble.” – John P. Kotter – Professor, author

John P. Kotter’s observation—“A useful rule of thumb: Whenever you cannot describe the vision driving a change initiative in five minutes or less and get a reaction that signifies both understanding and interest, you are in for trouble.”—emerges from decades of rigorous research into the mechanics of organizational transformation and leadership.

The quote distills a critical insight at the heart of Kotter’s renowned work on change management: successful change initiatives hinge on the clarity and communicability of their vision. Drawing upon his extensive study of over 100 organizations undergoing transformation, Kotter discovered that even the most technically sound change efforts falter when the vision behind them is vague, convoluted, or fails to energize those involved. This realization became a cornerstone of his influential framework, emphasizing that a vision must not only provide direction but must also be articulated succinctly—capturing both understanding and enthusiasm from stakeholders in minutes, not hours.

The context for this rule of thumb is rooted in Kotter’s widely adopted “8-Step Process for Leading Change,” first introduced in his 1996 book, Leading Change. In this step-by-step model, the third and fourth steps—form a strategic vision and communicate the vision—underscore the necessity of crafting a compelling narrative for change and ensuring that it resonates organization-wide. Kotter’s research established that if people cannot quickly grasp and feel inspired by the vision, skepticism and resistance are likely to follow, undermining the entire transformation effort.

 

About John P. Kotter

John P. Kotter is a distinguished professor, author, and pioneer in the field of organizational change. As a long-standing Harvard Business School professor, Kotter has spent his career analyzing what distinguishes successful transformation from failure. His groundbreaking 8-step change model, developed in the mid-1990s, remains one of the most influential frameworks in business strategy and leadership circles worldwide. Kotter’s work emphasizes that enduring change is as much about human dynamics and communication as it is about strategic planning. He is recognized for distilling complex organizational theories into actionable advice, with a particular focus on the importance of urgency, coalition-building, and the communicability of vision.

Contextual Insights

Kotter’s insight is especially relevant in today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, where organizations face constant social, technological, and economic pressures to adapt. His rule serves as both a warning and a guide: If leaders cannot convey the purpose and promise of change in a way that is easily understood and genuinely exciting, it is likely that confusion and inertia will hinder progress.

This quote encapsulates the wisdom that visionary leadership demands not just an inspiring destination, but a message so clear that it can be shared, understood, and embraced across every level of an organization—swiftly and memorably.

read more
Term: Change Leadership

Term: Change Leadership

Change leadership is the process of driving transformational change by setting direction, building momentum, and inspiring people to achieve a shared vision. In Kotter’s framework, change leadership focuses on the emotional and behavioral aspects of change: motivating people, creating a compelling sense of urgency, aligning stakeholders around a strategic vision, and building the commitment necessary for long-term organizational transformation. Change leadership is proactive and visionary, seeking to shape organizational culture and inspire people to move beyond the status quo.

Related theorist: John P. Kotter

Kotter’s 8-Step Process for Leading Change embodies this approach, emphasizing steps such as:

  • Creating a sense of urgency
  • Building a guiding coalition
  • Forming a strategic vision
  • Communicating the vision
  • Empowering broad-based action
  • Creating short-term wins
  • Consolidating gains
  • Anchoring new approaches in the culture

This process requires leaders to guide, motivate, and equip people to embrace and realize the change, making it a leadership-driven, holistic journey.

Change Management (in contrast):

Change management, by comparison, involves the systematic planning, implementation, and monitoring of specific change initiatives within an organization. It is more operational, focusing on process, procedures, and minimizing disruption. Change management covers the coordination of tasks, resource allocation, risk mitigation, and communication to ensure the smooth technical execution of change.

Key Differences Summarized:

Aspect
Change Leadership (Kotter)
Change Management
Focus
Vision, motivation, inspiration, culture
Planning, controlling, executing change projects
Approach
Proactive, people-centered, strategic
Reactive or structured, task-oriented, operational
Key Activities
Creating urgency, coalition-building, vision-casting, empowering people
Scheduling, resource allocation, process control
Outcome Emphasis
Long-term transformation, embedded cultural change
Effective completion of projects/initiatives
Leadership Role
Guide and inspire, remove barriers, anchor change in culture
Plan, organize, monitor

Kotter’s Perspective: Kotter stresses that change leadership is the engine for lasting change—without it, organizations often struggle to move beyond incremental improvements or sustain change over the long term. Strong change leadership is necessary to win hearts and minds, align actions with a bold vision, and anchor new behaviors in the organization’s culture. In Kotter’s view, while change management is necessary for handling logistics, only change leadership can transform an organization for the future.

read more

Download brochure

Introduction brochure

What we do, case studies and profiles of some of our amazing team.

Download

Our latest podcasts on Spotify

Sign up for our newsletters - free

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting