The end of rigid strategic plans: Leading in short cycles
- azaror
- Oct 2
- 3 min read
In less than two years, 7 out of 10 strategic plans become obsolete. What seems to be a solid roadmap at the beginning of the year loses its validity in a matter of months as it faces market changes, new regulations, or unexpected competitive moves. The problem is not planning, but believing that a fixed plan can survive in such a dynamic environment.
What works today is not the annual plan approved by the board, but the system that allows you to adjust its course without losing consistency. A management system that combines focus, short review cycles, and the courage to reallocate resources.
1. Strategy as cadence, not as an event
Organizations that navigate uncertainty best work with a few clear priorities and review them regularly. Three or four critical objectives at a time, never more. The logic is simple: only when those priorities are met can new ones be discussed. This limit forces difficult decisions and protects organizational capacity.
The cultural change is evident. Strategy ceases to be a “December PowerPoint” and becomes a quarterly ritual of reviewing and decision-making. What is up for discussion is not only progress, but whether it makes sense to continue betting on the same priorities, reallocate resources, or close projects that are no longer competitive.
2. Flexibles budgets
One of the most common pitfalls is budgeting based on historical data. This practice ensures continuity, but rarely ensures competitiveness. What we see in more advanced companies is a different logic: strategic budgets that allocate resources to priorities, with “flexible pools” ready to be moved from one quarter to another.
This is not improvisation. On the contrary, it is discipline. Resources are no longer tied to an organizational chart and, instead, follow the profitability of priorities. And when a project loses traction, the decision is not postponed until the end of the year but reassigned in the following review cycle.
3. Scenarios that guide decisions
Scenarios are useful only if they are connected to real decisions. Two or three plausible visions of the future are enough, always accompanied by observable signals that indicate when to change course. These triggers must be clear and visible on management dashboards: prices, rates, demand, and regulations. If these are met, actions are already defined.
In too many organizations, scenarios are presentations that are stored in a folder. A mature practice is different: it connects scenarios with measurable thresholds and responsible parties who know what to do if the signal lights up. This reduces paralysis and accelerates pivoting when needed.
4. Governance that connects strategy and execution
Short-cycle planning requires a different kind of governance. An annual review to validate major strategic decisions, and quarterly reviews to adjust the portfolio, move budgets around, and make concrete decisions. What's striking is that—when done properly—this dynamic does not generate more meetings, but better meetings.
The executive committee stops spending hours reviewing historical presentations and starts spending time deciding what to close, where to double down, and what new signals deserve attention. The focus shifts from explaining the past to anticipating the future.
The main question
Ultimately, what separates companies that adapt from those that stagnate is not their ability to predict the future, but their discipline to change course quickly.
Strategy is not a document; it is a cadence that combines focus, courage, and consistency.
If your management system today does not allow you to change direction in 90 days, you do not have a strategic plan: you have a constraint.
Is your company prepared to lead in short cycles?
About the author
Ricardo Sonneborn is a partner at SummaPartners and has more than 20 years of experience in strategic consulting and corporate finance.