The fundamental differences between an effective strategy and an ineffective one are thoroughly discussed. Strategies that are coordinated, focused, and unexpected are commonly fruitful. They directly confront core issues, utilizing strengths against weaknesses. Conversely, ineffective strategies shy away from problem analysis. They set ambiguous goals that often conflict and they try to appeal to a wide variety of interests.

Historical examples spotlight the triumphant execution of these strategies. For instance, during the 90s, Apple was facing a crisis with a declining market share. Steve Jobs tackled the issue by steering the company back to its core strengths and reducing the number of products until the company could regain stability. This move, while unexpected, resulted in huge success. Similarly, in the Gulf War, General Schwarzkopf performed an unexpected left-hook maneuver to topple the Iraqi defenses, as opposed to a costly head-on attack. This ingenious and coordinated plan was likewise successful.

Every successful strategy shares a common logical structure: an accurate diagnosis, a guiding policy, and coherent actions. An ineffective strategy lacks this structure and tends to mask problems and evade difficult decisions. Hopefully, by understanding this difference people will develop the skills to design effective strategies. The key is to concentrate resources on resolving the most significant challenges, rather than attempting to appease varying conflicting interests.