Concept-driven strategy

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages) This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This article may need to be rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. You can help. The talk page may contain suggestions. (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

A concept-driven strategy is a methodology for formulating business strategies that prioritizes the creation, refinement, and execution of concepts. This approach aims to establish distinctive value propositions and competitive advantages. The framework is intended to help organizations move beyond conventional market limits, challenge established norms, and identify new ideas and possibilities.^[1]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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.^[2]

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.^[2]

This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages) This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (February 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) A major contributor to this section appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Concept-driven strategy" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This section may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please help improve it to make it understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical details. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This section contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. Please remove or replace such wording and instead of making proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate that importance. (October 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Much of the strategic management literature builds upon Peter Drucker's suggestion^[when?] that corporations begin the strategic management process by articulating a statement of purpose, mission, and objectives.^[why?] 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^{[citation needed]}. 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?]}

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.^[3][4]

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.^{[5][6][7][8][9][10]}

^[11] Baggini illustrates pragmatic concepts using the classic example of whether the Earth is flat or round.

"...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.

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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.^[12]

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.^[13][14] See Concept learning or Management Concepts.^[15]

Some organizations may produce a 'statement of intent' without extensive consideration of the concepts it contains.^[16][17][18] 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'^[19][20] 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'^[21][22] 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'^[23] 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.^[24][25][26] 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.^[27]

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).^[28]

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. ^[29]

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

• Ackoff, R.L. 1970. A concept of corporate planning Wiley., New York:.
• Bartlett, C.A., S. Ghoshal (November 1994). "Changing the role of top management: Beyond strategy to purpose". Harvard Business Review: 79–88.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• 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.