A recent article in the Financial Times by Andrew Hill—“Wanted: Flexible Corporate Strategies for Fast Times”—painted a not-so-rosy picture of the effectiveness of strategic frameworks in today’s fast -changing, increasingly complex, and dynamic business environment. Many comments on the article suggested the situation was actually worse.

A.T. Kearney’s research suggests that the state of strategy today is much more positive and holds more promise than this article and many of the comments grant it.

It is true that the proliferation of strategic freedom—especially over the last 15 years since the Internet barged onto the scene —has derailed strategy and the frameworks established during the heydays of the 70s and 80s. But to bemoan the inability of strategy to bounce back, suggest that it was never any good anyway, or to argue that that agility or an escape to unchallenged blue waters is the only reasonable recourse, runs in opposition to the many businesses that have found new and much more suitable ways of making strategy work for them in this day and age.

Such companies no longer look at competitive strategy as analyses-driven, specialist-owned, and ivory tower-dispelled instructions to be cascaded down and implemented by the organization – only to get bogged down in failing change management efforts and strategic interrupters. Instead, those companies see strategy as a continuous process of engaging their organizations to translate select future-oriented inspiration into discrete opportunities for competitive advantage. As a result, their organizations are more future-aware, anticipatory, and, perhaps most importantly, their organizations are committed owners of both the process and the strategic outcomes. Leadership still decides, but instructs less and guides more.

This also explains why strategy today is far less visible than the grand swooping plans, big ideas, and frameworks of the past. It is now more granular and continuous in order to more deftly respond to fast-changing environments and the constant need for change and adaptation. Strategy is no longer a singular linear behemoth plan but is now treated like a portfolio of competitive missions all with different life cycles pursued and managed on an ongoing basis.

In short, the fact that strategy as we knew it is no longer as relevant or useful as it once was is really not the point, because what we are getting in return is simply much more attractive. Instead of hard to implement strategic plans, we are moving toward strategy as a guiding organizational energy, providing both purpose and direction at the same time.