[maffyoo]

execute what though?

by far the best content on strategy I have read is Peter Compo, a point he repeatedly makes is that the whole execution argument is meaningless without a strategy (and its many tactics, plans, compromises) to execute. So, what are you executing?

[andrewflnr]

Execute basics like making a good product, answering your customer emails, keeping up on the utilities, etc. Basics you know you'll have to do regardless of strategy.

[heymijo]

There's an old Drucker quote "there's nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all."

If you're in the wrong market or building for the wrong customers you can execute brilliantly on everything you mentioned and it won't matter. The only thing that matters is product market fit or finding it if you don't have it. That's what I see as unsaid in your parent's comment about "execute what though?"

[andrewflnr]

... yes. One of us is missing the point. It's probably me, but even if you're running a lawn care company there will be annoying details you have to get right. That's execution.

[heymijo]

Perhaps it's more that we are looking at it from different levels. A contrived example to illuminate:

If I'm running a lawn care company in the desert I can get all those annoying details right and still be unsuccessful. So strategy is not opening a lawn care company in the desert.

If you think I'm missing something you are saying, please let me know!

[andrewflnr]

Haha sure, that works. Or tailor your services for xeriscaping. The thing is, that's sufficiently obvious that it's not the kind of thing we're usually looking for when we talk about "strategy". Important, yes, but probably not what I was asking about.

So maybe there's "strategy" on the level of "sell something that non-zero people want", then there's execution on the details, and then a higher level of strategy that's maybe related to fine tuning product market fit, etc. But that feels like a weird discontinuity in "strategy" along the priority axis, and definitely doesn't fit with the conventional tone of "strategic thinking", which is definitely more on the "higher" level end of that spectrum.

[rglynn]

I've typically heard the term "tactics" used to describe the lower level execution as opposed to the higher level "strategy".

[maffyoo]

How do you decide what the basics are? maybe you should outsource answering customer emails instead of spending time doing them yourself? The basics is not a differentiator; strategy is. At best the basics is just a fitness measure of strategy. "Can I still do all the essential non-functional stuff, I must do, whilst pursuing my most valued goals?"

Strategy is about choosing how to achieve a goal, all the tactics, fitness measures/metrics, compromises, challenges to overcome but it's also the goal itself. Strategy should guide you, your tactics at play to deliver your ultimate goal. Execution is just doing that stuff hopefully focussing on the stuff that matters most.