Strategic Intent Analysis Software 2

In 1989, an article called Strategic Intent by Gary Hamel and C.K. Prahalad created somewhat of an upheaval when it was published in the Harvard Business Review. Hamel and Prahalad argue that in order to achieve success, a company must reconcile its end to its means through Strategic Intent. In their book, Competing for the future () Hamel and Prahalad define strategic intent as an ambitious and compelling ... dream that energizes ... that provides the emotional and intellectual energy for the journey ... to the future. If strategic architecture (a high-level blueprint for the deployment of new functionalities, the acquisition of new competencies or the migration of existing competencies, and the reconfiguring of the interface with customers) is the brain, strategic intent is the heart. It should convey a sense of stretch ? current resources and capabilities are not sufficient for the task. Hamel and Prahalad provided the following three attributes of strategic intent: direction, discovery, and destiny. a) Sense of Direction. Strategic intent (...) implies a particular point of view about the long-term market or competitive position that a firm hopes to build over the coming decade or so . It should be a view of the future ? conveying a unifying and personalizing sense of direction. b) Sense of Discovery. A strategic intent is differentiated; it implies a competitively unique point of view about the future. It holds out to employees the promise of exploring new competitive territory. c) Sense of Destiny. Strategic intent has an emotional edge to it; it is a goal that employees perceive as inherently worthwhile. The background of this approach to corporate strategy and strategic thinking in general was the dramatic post-war ascent of Japanese companies, in which the Japanese economy rose to dominate world markets by having initial ambitions that in the West would have been considered highly unre