Continuous Issues-Focused Strategic Decision-Making

Definition

Most organizations conduct strategic planning on an annual calendar, with each business unit presenting a multi-year plan to the executive committee. This approach is fundamentally misaligned with how executives actually make strategic decisions, which occur continuously throughout the year, often in response to market changes, and typically span multiple units. By replacing annual, unit-focused planning with continuous, issues-focused strategic decision-making, organizations can increase the number and quality of major strategic decisions made each year and eliminate the gap between planning and actual strategic execution.

In the Book

Michael Mankins and Richard Steele describe how the traditional planning model creates two problems. The first is the "time problem": With only nine weeks per year devoted to strategy, executives cannot adequately address complex issues that span multiple businesses, cross geographies, or involve entire value chains. These issues get put in the "too-hard bucket" and decisions are deferred. Second is the "timing problem": Strategic decisions needed to respond to market changes (a new competitor entering, an acquisition opportunity, a regulatory shift) often can't wait until the annual planning cycle. Executives make these decisions outside the planning process, in ad hoc fashion, without rigorous analysis or productive debate.

The result is a massive disconnect: Planning becomes a bureaucratic exercise unmoored from actual strategic decision-making. Executives routinely sidestep the planning process for decisions that truly shape strategy. Companies that follow the traditional annual, unit-focused planning model make only 2.5 major strategic decisions per year. Companies that shift to continuous, issues-focused strategic decision-making make 6.1 major decisions per year—more than twice as many.

The mechanism is straightforward: Identify the cross-unit strategic issues that most affect performance (e.g., "Should we enter the Asian market?" "How should we organize to improve product innovation?"). For each issue, convene the relevant leaders in a series of decision sessions, not one-time reviews. In the first session, debate and agree on the facts (customer preferences, market profitability, competitive positions). In a second session, generate multiple viable alternatives. In a third session, evaluate alternatives against strategic and financial criteria and make a choice. Once the issue is resolved, move to the next one on the agenda. This discipline of "facts → alternatives → choices" ensures rigorous debate at each stage.

Textron, a multi-industry conglomerate, implemented this approach and saw dramatic improvement: It shifted from being an also-ran among peers to a top-quartile performer during 2004–2005. Boeing Commercial Airplanes uses continuous issues-focused planning to identify long-term strategic issues like "evolving product strategy" and "fueling growth in services," then resolves them through disciplined strategic dialogue rather than waiting for an annual planning cycle.

Why It Matters

Most organizations treat planning as a forecasting exercise separate from decision-making. But planning is only valuable if it drives better decisions. By aligning the planning process with how decisions actually get made—continuously, across units, in response to issues—organizations create a mechanism that both generates better strategic thinking and turns that thinking into action. The difference between 2.5 and 6.1 major decisions per year compounds over time: It means the organization is actually shaping its future, rather than planning for it and then deciding around the plan.