Range of strategy, denial of its necessity and passive option
Thanks to my activities with the Hypothesis Map, I look at 1-2 strategies a day. People who write these strategies are usually interested in what period is it correct to write a strategy for? Is it necessary to write a strategy for 10, 20, 30 years, as experts say? Or is the next period sufficient? Or maybe it’s not worth formalizing it at all?
How far should you cast your fishing rod?
To answer this question, you need to understand the place of strategy in the overall control flow:
Before you create a strategy, you need to do forecasting and analysis. See the entire field of alternative scenarios. Then pass them through your sieveAnddenomination, values, worldview. And then describe the strategy for achieving the goal in the chosen direction.
From here it becomes obvious that the range to which you work out your strategy should not depend on your ambitions or fantasies, but on your ability to predict and analyze.
Can you give a forecast and do an analysis for 30 years? Then make a strategy for 30 years. Can you give a forecast for only 1 year? Then it will be madness to make a strategy for 30 years.
Now is not the time to make predictions!
At meetings with businesses, training participants, and lectures with students, I hear the following thought: now is SUCH a time that nothing can be predicted! If so, it seems that there is no point in strategizing.
First, I'll go back to my article. BANI is unexpected news for five-year-olds.
The main idea of this article is that the world has always been fragile, disturbing, non-linear and incomprehensible. If it seemed to you that at some point everything around you was linear, comprehensible, and so on, then this means that somewhere someone was organizing this world for you and struggling with complexity. And you were like a five-year-old child who, due to his abilities, cannot see even the nearest supersystem.
In other words, now, and before, and in the future, we need to engage in forecasting, analysis and strategizing. Nothing in the world has changed for thousands of years, history goes in circles. And since you can predict and analyze, then you can and should strategize.
Why formalities when you can dream?
I have been practicing yoga for many years and communicating with participants from this environment. They have the belief that you just need to want, breathe in something, materialize the goal in your imagination, and then it will happen on its own. Is the strategy superfluous in this case?
In this case, you also have a strategy that goes like this: I hope dreams come true. This is a variant of the passive strategy. Unfortunately, this approach is unmanageable. Sports convincingly show that without a strategy, you always lose to the one who thinks through the strategy.
An extreme version of the passive strategy is formulated by Chinese wisdom:
If you sit on the river bank for a long time, you can see the corpse of your enemy floating past
You need to understand that if the enemy has an active strategy, then his chances of seeing your corpse are much higher.
Therefore, even if you are a convinced esotericist, still think about forecasting and analysis, and then, as a result, describe the strategy. This will not give you a guarantee of victory, but will significantly increase your chances.
What to take with you
As a result, I recommend that you take with you:
The range of the strategy depends only on your ability to forecast and analyze.
The world is always structured in such a way that with the development of a strategy, you are in a more advantageous position.
If your strategy is to just dream, then you reduce your chances of winning, because a passive strategy will lose to an active one.
You can see an example of what a strategy might look like in the knowledge base Hypothesis cards or read in book.
