Strategy in a world of overlapping disruptions
How leaders can make sharper choices on where to compete, where to invest and what to stop when multiple structural shifts hit at once.
Read articleWhat Has to Be True for This Business to Work?
A venture plan becomes useful when it stops describing the future as a single story. Most opportunities depend on a small set of load-bearing assumptions: a customer problem is urgent, acquisition is repeatable, the solution can be delivered at target cost, retention is sufficient and capital arrives before cash runs out. If one fails, improving the rest may not rescue the economics.
Build an assumption architecture from the financial outcome backwards. Decompose revenue into reachable customers, conversion, price, usage and retention; decompose contribution into service effort, variable cost, working capital and scale investment. Mark assumptions with high uncertainty and sensitivity. Those belong at the front of the learning agenda, not in an appendix to the forecast.
Evidence must match the risk. Interviews can establish language and context, but not willingness to pay; a paid pilot can test commitment, but not repeatability; early growth can reveal demand, but not long-run retention. The OECD�s 2025 work on scale-ups finds that 54%�73% maintain their new scale or keep growing three years later, underlining that reaching scale and sustaining it are different tests.
For each critical assumption, define a falsifiable claim, cheapest credible experiment, threshold and decision. Sequence tests by information value per unit of time and cash. Examine dependencies: acquisition economics measured before channel saturation or unit cost measured before service exceptions may improve only because the business has not yet encountered the conditions of scale.
The venture case should end with an assumption ledger, not a confident valuation alone. Show what is known, what is inferred, evidence age, remaining exposure and the action triggered by failure. Funding then buys the next reduction in existential uncertainty. The objective is not to prove the idea right, but to discover whether a viable business can exist.
Related macro
Articles
How leaders can make sharper choices on where to compete, where to invest and what to stop when multiple structural shifts hit at once.
Read articleHow companies can identify new value pools and build business models that combine differentiated customer value with scalable economics.
Read articleFocus
Ownership should have a strategic rationale beyond history, reported revenue or the cost and inconvenience of changing the portfolio.
Revenue, users and funding can all create confidence without demonstrating that demand, retention and economics are sufficiently repeatable to support scale.
Strategic challenges
A capability creates competitive advantage only when its value, scarcity and economics remain superior to the alternatives rivals can deploy.
The harder problem is concentrating enough talent and capital behind a limited number of opportunities to generate meaningful evidence.
POV
The real test of enterprise strategy is whether business units make different decisions because the common strategic direction exists.
Building what customers ask for can improve a product while gradually destroying the differentiation that gave them a reason to choose it.
Strategic impact
Milestones matter, but completed activity has limited meaning when the expected operational or economic outcome has not followed.
A shift in regulation, technology or bargaining power can move economic value between participants without changing total industry demand.
What we observe
We frequently see development capacity committed to accumulated requests without a current strategic rationale for why those priorities still matter.
We frequently see R&D continue through organisational momentum even after the assumptions that originally justified it have weakened.