🚩Tactical Memo 072: You don't need permission to think strategically

Welcome to Tactical Memo: field-tested frameworks for managers and operators who want to lead like the tier above them, with AI and humans in the loop.

Every month, I run live webinars, workshops, and cohorts to go deeper.

I learned to think strategically by accident.

I was tired of being surprised.

Three years into my first management role, I walked into a meeting confident we'd get approval for a project my team had spent months building. The business case was solid. The ROI was clear. We'd done everything right.

The VP killed it in four minutes.

It didn't fit the portfolio strategy I didn't know existed. I hadn't mapped the stakeholders who actually mattered. I'd optimized for what I could see, without thinking about what would happen next.

I left that meeting and decided to figure it out myself.

Over the next two years, I collected every strategic thinking framework I could find. The ones actual operators use when they're deciding what to build, what to kill, and what to bet on.

Here's what I learned.

𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻.

The 3-Horizon Portfolio Model changed how I think about resource allocation. I used to spread my team's time evenly across everything. Every project got equal attention. Every request felt equally urgent.

Then I learned to split resources differently: 70% on core business that pays the bills today, 20% on growth initiatives that will pay off in 12 to 24 months, and 10% on future bets that might matter in three years.

This sounds simple. It's not.

Saying no to good ideas that don't fit the portfolio is difficult. So is defending why you're spending 10% of your budget on something with no short-term return. And explaining to your boss why every dollar shouldn't go to Q4 revenue.

But this is what VPs do. They protect the portfolio mix even when it's uncomfortable.

𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱-𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀.

Most people stop at "what happens if we do this?"

Strategic thinkers ask "and then what happens?"

I learned this the expensive way. We launched a pricing change that increased revenue by 18% in the first quarter. I looked like a hero. Then customer churn spiked. Then our best customers started negotiating harder because they didn't trust us. Then our sales team lost deals because prospects had heard we changed prices without warning.

I'd optimized for first-order effects. I hadn't asked what would happen after that.

Now I run every decision through a three-step test: What happens immediately? What happens after that? What will our competitors do in response?

This takes 10 minutes. It's saved me from at least a dozen mistakes in the last year alone.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗹𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗽 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗻𝗼 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂.

Convince the people who influence the people who decide.

I map the decision architecture before I build anything.

Who actually decides? Who do they ask before they decide? What does each person care about? Who has veto power? Who can delay until the opportunity dies?

Then I build the coalition before I need it.

This is how decisions actually get made in organizations with more than 50 people.

𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗼𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝘀.

Early in my career, I'd build one plan and defend it to the death. If it failed, I had nothing.

Then I learned to create multiple paths to the same goal. I preserve optionality until real data emerges. I kill weak options early, before I've spent six months on them.

This is what chess players do. This is what you should do if you want to operate at the next level.

𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺.

Most teams optimize the wrong thing. They make the sales process 10% faster while product quality remains the bottleneck. They hire more engineers while decision speed stays the real constraint.

I ask three questions now: What's our biggest bottleneck? What if we removed it completely? Where will the next constraint appear?

This framework changed how I run projects. We fix the one thing that's blocking everything else.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴.

Before I present a plan, I write three scenarios:

Best case: what could go perfectly if every assumption proves true?

Worst case: what would kill this project or damage the business?

Most likely: the 80% probability scenario where some things work and some don't.

Then I plan for the most likely case and build guardrails against the worst case.

This is how you earn trust with executives. You show you've thought through what could go wrong and what you'll do when it does.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸𝗹𝘆 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗯𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝘀.

Every Friday I spend 30 minutes asking three questions:

What assumptions did we test this week?

What did we learn about customers or competitors?

How do we adjust next week based on what we learned?

This habit is worth more than any framework on this list. It turns strategic thinking from an annual planning exercise into a weekly practice.

𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗶𝘁.

The leader you want to become didn't wait for permission to think this way. They started thinking like owners before anyone asked. They practiced these frameworks when they were managers. They built the muscle before they had the role.

You can do the same thing.

Today.

Start with one framework. Map your stakeholders before your next big meeting. Run your next decision through second-order thinking. Split your team's resources across three horizons instead of spreading everything evenly.

Do this for six months and you'll operate differently than 90% of managers at your level.

Do this for two years and you'll be ready for the role before it's open.

That's how you get there.

(P.S. I’m moving to a more personal story style like this one to share my real experience. Reply back and let me know A) you like it or B) you don’t like it)….Just A or B.

Until next time,

Justin Bateh, PhD
Founder and Editor, Tactical Memo
Explore my webinars and courses here