Strategic Options Evaluation

Generate a small set of genuinely different strategic options, screen them for suitability, acceptability and feasibility, and commit to one, stated in a strategy statement of 35 words or fewer. The governing judgement: a plan with one option has not made a choice, and a strategy that cannot be stated briefly with an objective, a scope and an advantage is not yet a strategy.

Use When

• A business plan, marketing plan or board paper must show the options considered, the one chosen and why the others were rejected.
• Candidate strategies from a TOWS matrix, strategic audit or founder brainstorm need SAFe screening: suitability, acceptability (risk, return, stakeholder reactions) and feasibility (funds, people, capabilities).
• The competitive position must be placed on the strategy clock with a three-year path, or the firm must decide how to respond to a low-cost entrant.
• The plan's strategy statement must pass the 35-word gate before sections 01, 02 and 07 are drafted.

Do Not Use When

• Use meta-strategic-factor-analysis instead when the weighted factor tables and TOWS candidates do not yet exist.
• Use meta-critical-thinking-business-logic instead to review claim, evidence and warrant quality across a draft plan.
• Use meta-business-model-design instead when the question is how the business makes money, not which strategic direction to take.
• Use meta-international-market-entry instead when the options are countries and entry modes.
• Use meta-valuation or 10-financial-projections for the financial models; this skill consumes their outputs.