Book review: Playing to Win
I’m a sucker for a strategy framework. So when I heard about A.G. Lafley and Roger Martin's “Strategic Choice Cascade” I jumped at the chance to listen to the audio book of "Playing to Win: How Strategy Really Works."
If you’re thinking about the dos and don’ts of strategy development, here’s what you need to know from “Playing to Win.”
Before I dive in, let me give you some context. A.G. Lafley led American FMCG (fast moving consumer goods) giant P&G (aka Procter & Gamble) at the start of the twenty-first century. Roger Martin is a consultant turned academic. “Playing to Win” combines advice and methodology with real-world case studies. While the case studies, drawn heavily from P&G in the early 2000s, might feel a little dated in today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, the core principles of strategic thinking and execution remain relevant. The “Playing to Win” methodology offers a robust foundation for strategy development that can be applied to any sector.
What resonated with me most of all from Playing to Win are two specific elements: Lafley's "six strategy traps" and the powerful "what would have to be true?" question. These concepts provide both a diagnostic lens for identifying strategic weaknesses and a practical tool for crafting more effective choices.
Strategy as Choice: The Core Cascade
Lafley and Martin's central premise is that strategy is choice. It’s about making specific, coordinated and integrated decisions to win (aka be successful) in the marketplace – and crucially, choosing what not to do. This clarity helps create focus and avoids the common pitfalls of mistaking a broad vision, an operational plan or mere optimisation for genuine strategy. Strategy, in their view, is the deliberate act of making trade-offs, committing to a path and allocating resources. Without these explicit choices, an organisation risks dissipating its efforts and failing to establish a competitive advantage.
The book introduces the "Strategic Choice Cascade," a framework built around five interrelated questions that must be answered in sequence, with each answer informing the next:
What is your winning aspiration? This isn't just a mission statement; it defines what winning truly looks like for your organisation – a specific ambition to outperform competitors and achieve a desired future state. It sets the context for all subsequent decisions.
Where will you play? This involves precisely defining the playing field: which markets, customer segments, geographies and distribution channels will you focus on? Equally important is the discipline to explicitly choose where not to play, allowing for concentrated effort.
How will you win? This is the heart of competitive advantage. How will you create unique value (through cost leadership or differentiation) that is demonstrably superior to competitors and sustainable over time? This choice dictates the core activities that will drive success.
What capabilities must be in place? What distinctive activities, skills and systems are required to deliver on your 'how to win' choice? These are the integrated activities that, when combined, create a unique "activity system" that competitors find difficult to copy.
What management systems are required? How will you measure, manage and continuously improve your strategy? This includes the structures, processes and metrics needed to support the chosen capabilities and ensure effective execution.
The "Where to Play" and "How to Win" questions force organisations to define their specific actions and competitive advantage. It's a straightforward approach. “Playing to Win” gives reminders that a modest aspiration often leads to mediocrity, whereas focus, born from clear choices, is a crucial winning attribute. Attempting to serve everyone everywhere often results in underserving everyone, which is a good segue to the next topic..
Navigating the Minefield: The Six Strategy Traps
For me, the most insightful part of "Playing to Win" was the identification of the "six strategy traps." These are common pitfalls that lead to ineffective or non-existent strategies. Through my work I read many organisational strategies, Many of these strategies are superb and set up organisations for success, many fall into the six traps. I’m sure you’ll find these familiar too. Recognising the traps is the first step to avoiding them, saving valuable time and resources:
The Do-It-All Strategy: This trap occurs when an organisation tries to pursue every opportunity and be everything to everyone. The consequence is a dilution of resources, a lack of focus and ultimately, an inability to excel in any single area.
The Don Quixote Strategy: Here, a strategy is pursued that is divorced from realities like the market or competition. Like Don Quixote fighting windmills, the organisation expends effort on battles that are unwinnable or irrelevant, wasting resources on unrealistic endeavors.
The Waterloo Strategy: This trap involves committing to a strategy without adequately considering how competitors will respond. A winning strategy anticipates competitor reactions and builds in resilience, whereas a Waterloo strategy leads to a losing battle because competitive countermoves are ignored.
The Something-for-Everyone Strategy: Similar to the 'do-it-all,' but specifically trying to please all stakeholders (customers, employees, shareholders) without a clear, consistent competitive stance. This often results in a muddled value proposition and an inability to truly satisfy any group.
The Dreams-That-Never-Come-True Strategy: This refers to having lofty aspirations without the necessary capabilities or robust management systems to execute them. It's a strategy that looks good on paper but lacks the operational backbone to become a reality, leading to frustration and missed targets.
The Programme-of-the-Month Strategy: This trap is characterised by a lack of consistency, with the organisation constantly shifting strategic initiatives without deep commitment or follow-through. Sometimes this happens because an organisation is attempting to replicate another organisation’s success. It prevents any single effort from gaining traction and delivering results.
Understanding these traps provides a powerful diagnostic tool. If your strategy feels like one of these, it’s a clear signal to revisit your choices and make the tough decisions required for true strategic clarity.
The Power of "What Would Have to Be True?"
The second profoundly useful concept from “Playing to Win” is the "what would have to be true?" question. For anybody who has experienced coaching this question will be familiar. Asking “what would have to be true” is a strategic thinking tool designed to foster inquiry, surface assumptions and generate better, more robust options. It fundamentally shifts the conversation from simply advocating for a preferred option to collaboratively exploring the conditions for success.
Related to this Lafley suggests a more dynamic process for generating buy-in from internal stakeholders. In this process, the “what would have to be true?” question is fundamental:
Frame a strategic choice: Clearly define the decision that needs to be made.
Articulate two or more ways forward: Brainstorm distinct, viable options for that choice.
For each option, ask: "What would have to be true for this to be a fantastic, winning choice?" It forces a deep dive into the underlying assumptions about the market, customers, competition and internal capabilities that would make a particular option successful.
This process helps identify the underlying conditions and potential barriers for each option. By articulating these conditions, teams can pinpoint critical uncertainties and areas requiring further investigation.
By testing these barriers, the best strategic choice often becomes clear, expressed as a possibility or narrative rather than a rigid plan. This iterative testing and refinement lead to a more confident and aligned decision.
This process encourages open dialogue, challenges assumptions and helps teams collaboratively discover the most viable path forward. It aims to move beyond simply advocating for an idea to genuinely inquiring into its feasibility and potential, fostering a shared understanding and commitment among all stakeholders.
Lessons from “Playing to Win”
While "Playing to Win" is rooted in the FMCG world, its emphasis on clear choices, understanding competitive dynamics and building integrated capabilities is useful for whatever industry you are working in. The book reminds us that strategy is a continuous process, not a one-off result, and that while all strategy entails risk, working without one is far riskier. For leaders and teams grappling with complex decisions, Lafley and Martin's insights, particularly the strategy traps and the "what would have to be true?" question, offer an invaluable and practical guide to sharpening strategic thinking and ensuring your organisation is truly "playing to win."
