Explicit Strategy Pattern

Strategy is one of the slipperiest of concepts!

While you can attach it to anything, it keeps bumping into this hierarchy we carry of Vision->Strategy->Tactics and ends up producing seemingly absurd compound terms like: "Strategic Vision" or "Tactical Strategies".

However, in a blinding flash of enlightenment (or late 60’s chemical residue), seeing Strategy cast as Pattern let it all make sense!

This way one can enter strategic workspace at any level of task abstraction-even when considering strategic-strategies (meta-phobics beware!).

The Vision->Strategy->Tactics construct now becomes a hierarchy of linked patterns-useful if you are into alignment.

Context:

You are trying to solve a problem or manage a set of problems alone or as a group member.

You wonder if there are generalities that can be brought to bear on the problem(s) that would help you reach your goal.

Problem:

How do you manage the n number of possible ways to attack your problem domain?

Forces:

Just Do It! mentality seems to want to ignore larger issues or manage them in an ad hoc fashion.
Developing and communicating a coherent explicit strategy can take a lot of hard work.
A group with an agreed strategy can better check its alignment with de forces.
A group with an agreed strategy can better act as a unified team (check its alignment with internal forces).
There must be more...

Therefore:

Spend some time in strategic workspace. Look at the larger issues; look at the smaller issues. Check alignment. Check cost/benefit of developing an explicit strategy. Is having no explicit strategy the best strategy? If it is, don't tell anyone!

Rationale:

Abstracting what you are doing can be a powerful tool or a waste of time. The trick is to sense when it is appropriate.

Examples:

Our strategy on this project is to use a formal problem solving process.

Our strategy on this project is to bank on the creative genius and dedication of our peers to get this thing out the door.

Again, there must be more...