Reimagining use of Strategy with OCSM© as key qualifiers
W alk the corridors of any organisation today, and you will encounter one of the most frequently uttered and least understood words in business: strategy. There are several other fashionable words too: transformation, digital, quantum leap, change management, IPO ready, differentiating approach, customer centricity, unique value proposition, and so on. But none of these, come close to the enviable pedestal from which strategy is preached. Preached, but neither understood nor practiced in most cases.
Here is the chain reaction: Leaders proclaim it, managers claim to execute it, and consultants promise to reinvent it. Yet, ask a room full of executives to define strategy, and you will likely hear a variety of interpretations: goals, plans, visions, execution frameworks. Even better are the living specimens generated in strategy offsites, and inherited ideas of strategy cascades. These misunderstandings are not merely semantic; they have real consequences. When strategy is misidentified, it is misapplied. And when it is misapplied, organisations falter at some deep level. While on the face of it, in a growing industry any decent organisation will not suffer much due to this, but one hard twist in the lane ahead – and Jack and Jill, will come tumbling down the hill, spilling many pails of water.
Where things go wrong: the word without the meaning
At its core, strategy is not a plan. It is a behaviour. It is how individuals and organisations think, choose, shape, and manoeuvre; especially under conditions of ambiguity, complexity, and change. This behavioural lens of strategy is what I propose through the OCSM© model: Observe, Choose, Shape, Manoeuvre.
The OCSM© model is not a theoretical abstraction. It is drawn from the lived experiences of organisations; those that thrive and those that have and continue to stumble. It is a behavioural operating system that enables strategy to live not in boardrooms but in day-to-day decisions.
Strategy misunderstood: the planning fallacy
The interchangeability of strategy with planning is among the most persistent and damaging misinterpretations invented in business management corridors. Plans are important. They outline activities, allocate resources, and set milestones. But plans are not strategy; nor are the favourite corporate: ‘Strategic Initiatives’. Just because your plan needs some initiatives where everyone must rally around, it doesn’t really become strategic. In fact, in planning phase of financial years, strategy and its derivatives, just get used to adding artificial weight and attention seeking hubris. Strategy precedes planning. It answers a more fundamental set of questions: ‘Where will we play? How will we win? What must we change?’, to begin with, and then extending to at least two dozen more.
Consider Kodak. The company that invented the digital camera failed not because it lacked planning or resources. It failed because it lacked strategic orientation. It observed the signals but did not interpret them meaningfully, thus failing to make hard choices. Therefore, they clung to legacy systems, and were outmanoeuvred by more agile players. Kodak mistook product innovation for strategic adaptation.
Contrast that with Netflix. Long before streaming was mainstream, Netflix observed not just the rise of digital infrastructure but the changing habits of viewers. It made a bold choice to pivot, shaped its organisational model around content delivery and personalisation, and manoeuvred continually to adapt to consumer preferences and competitive threats.
These examples underscore a fundamental truth: strategy is somewhat about forecasting the future and even more about preparing to adapt to it.
The four postures of strategic behaviour
The OCSM© is Strategy expressed / figured-out / lived through interconnected postures:
1. Observe: Strategic insight begins with awareness. This is not just market research or customer feedback. It is pattern recognition, contextual sensing, and meaning-making. Strategic organisations train their people to see around corners of time, competition and customers. E.g. Steve Job’s and now Apple’s focus on iPhones.
2. Choose: Strategy requires choice and every choice implies a trade-off. Choosing where to focus and where not to, is the essence of strategic clarity. It is not about saying yes to everything but about having the courage to say no to something lucrative all competitors are going after. E.g. Samsung’s focus on displays, while everyone was literally just aggregating electronic components.
3. Shape: Choices must be enabled. This means designing systems, structures, incentives, and processes that align with strategic intent. Without shaping, strategy remains aspirational. E.g. Amazon’s focus on Cloud Infra and Robotics companies, despite being a retail giant.
4. Manoeuvre: In a dynamic environment, strategy must be enacted with agility. Manoeuvring is the capacity to adapt while remaining anchored in intent. It is not about reacting; it is about navigating. E.g. NVIDIA’s focus on AI chips.
Strategic behaviour in practice
Take IKEA. The company chooses to serve value-conscious customers with a limited, well-designed product range. It shapes its supply chain, store layout, and self-service model to reinforce that choice. It manoeuvres by adapting its formats in urban markets while staying true to its core philosophy. Every behaviour across the organisation reflects strategic coherence.
Or consider Zara. Its ability to sense fashion trends rapidly (Observe), prioritise speed over variety (Choose), structure its operations for fast-turnaround (Shape), and continuously adjust to local market demands (Manoeuvre) exemplifies strategic behaviour embedded in everyday decisions.
Compare this with the trajectory of WeWork. Its initial growth was explosive, but its strategy lacked clarity and coherence. The organisation expanded without a clear sense of what trade-offs it was making or how its systems supported sustainable differentiation. When external conditions shifted, it could not manoeuvre effectively.
From strategy as a noun to strategy as a verb
The challenge for most organisations is that strategy is treated as a noun, a fixed statement, a deliverable, a slide deck. To be effective, strategy must become a verb. It must be enacted.
This requires a shift from:
- Static documents to dynamic behaviours
- Top-down declarations to shared orientations
- Periodic reviews to continuous sense-making
The OCSM© model provides the scaffolding for this shift. It is not a replacement for traditional tools but a complement. It humanises strategy. It locates strategy where it matters most – in the minds, choices, and actions of people.
Embedding OCSM©: from model to muscle
Adopting the OCSM© model is not a matter of training alone. It is about embedding a new strategic culture. Here’s how:
- Language: Use OCSM© vocabulary in team conversations. Ask: What are we observing? What choices are we making?
- Rituals: Incorporate reflection moments in meetings to assess strategic alignment.
- Metrics: Track not just outcomes but decision quality, system alignment, and adaptive responses.
- Leadership: Model the behaviours. Strategic behaviour is contagious when demonstrated consistently.
In one engagement, I helped a finance firm embed OCSM© into its branch review meetings and development activities. Field officers began using the language of manoeuvring to talk about on-ground adaptations. Managers reframed performance discussions around observed patterns and shaped enablement. The organisation began to think more strategically, without needing a new strategy document.
A Call to Strategic Consciousness
In an age of complexity, speed, and disruption, strategy cannot be a document that gathers digital dust. It must be a living practice, a way of seeing, choosing, shaping, and moving. If your strategy does not influence how your people behave, it does not exist. If your systems do not support your strategic intent, you will not succeed. And if your organisation cannot manoeuvre, it will be outpaced.
The good news? Strategic behaviour can be learned. It can be built. And it can be scaled.
Observe with clarity. Choose with intent. Shape with purpose. Manoeuvre with agility.
That is what it means to make strategy real.
References
- Chandran, S.K. (2021). Adopt an Integrated Approach for Excellence. The HRM Nepal, Kartik 2078
- Chandran, S.K. (2021). Are You Balancing ‘Built by the Organization’ and ‘Organization Building’? The HRM Nepal, Mangshir 2078
- Chandran, S.K. (2022). High Performing Teams – A Key to Strategic Success. The HRM Nepal, Bhadra 2079
- Chandran, S.K. (2022). Managing Business – A Fine Balance Between Leadership and Management. The HRM Nepal, Ashwin 2079
- Dixit, A., & Nalebuff, B. (1991). Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life. W.W. Norton & Company
- Unilever Frontline Sensing System
Source: The Economist (2012), Harvard Business School Case Study (2013) - Spotify’s “Bets Board”
Source: First Round Review (2019), Company Engineering Blog - Haier’s Rendanheyi Microenterprise System
Source: Gary Hamel & Michele Zanini, Humanocracy (2020); HBR (2018) - IBM Watson Health Failure
Source: Stat News, Forbes, and WSJ Reports (2021–22) - Zara / Inditex Operating Model
Source: Harvard Business Review Case Studies, INSEAD Retail Strategy Analysis (2020) - Twitter (Post-Musk 2022–23)
Source: New York Times, Bloomberg, The Verge (2022–2023 Analysis) - Samsung’s Trend Labs
Source: Harvard Business Review (2008). “How Samsung Became a Design Powerhouse” by Verganti & Lee. - Adobe Creative Cloud Pivot
Source: Adobe Inc. Annual Reports (2012–2015); Forbes (2016). “How Adobe Transitioned to SaaS”. - Netflix Culture Deck
Source: McCord, P. (2014). “How Netflix Reinvented HR”, Harvard Business Review. - Shopify Logistics Exit (2023)
Source: The Verge, TechCrunch (May 2023). “Shopify sells its logistics business to Flexport”.
(Sai Kumar Chandran© is the founder of OrbitShift. He is a coaching and consulting practitioner and an entrepreneur at heart. He can be reached at saikumarchandran@orbitshift.com.)
