Why Your Strategy Needs a Fresh Perspective — And How AI Fits In (Part 1)

Your strategy is only as good as its ability to adapt — in real time.

In today’s business landscape, traditional strategy models often fall short, failing to keep up with rapid change. Organizations frequently struggle with misalignment between strategy and execution — what we call the Strategy-Market Gap. This two-part series explores both the problem and the solution. Part 1 examines why static strategy approaches break down and why a fresh perspective is needed. Part 2 then introduces a structured framework — GPS (Goals–Problems–Solutions) — that enables organizations to continuously adapt and align execution with strategic priorities.

In today’s business landscape, traditional strategy models often fall short, failing to keep up with rapid change. Organizations frequently struggle with misalignment between strategy and execution — what we call the Strategy-Market Gap. This two-part series explores both the problem and the solution. Part 1 examines why static strategy approaches break down and why a fresh perspective is needed. Part 2 then introduces a structured framework — GPS (Goals–Problems–Solutions) — that enables organizations to continuously adapt and align execution with strategic priorities.

In today’s business landscape, traditional strategy models often fall short, failing to keep up with rapid change. Organizations frequently struggle with misalignment between strategy and execution — what we call the Strategy-Market Gap. This two-part series explores both the problem and the solution. Part 1 examines why static strategy approaches break down and why a fresh perspective is needed. Part 2 then introduces a structured framework — GPS (Goals–Problems–Solutions) — that enables organizations to continuously adapt and align execution with strategic priorities.

In today’s business landscape, traditional strategy models often fall short, failing to keep up with rapid change. Organizations frequently struggle with misalignment between strategy and execution — what we call the Strategy-Market Gap. This two-part series explores both the problem and the solution. Part 1 examines why static strategy approaches break down and why a fresh perspective is needed. Part 2 then introduces a structured framework — GPS (Goals–Problems–Solutions) — that enables organizations to continuously adapt and align execution with strategic priorities.

Why Strategy Needs to Be Machine-Readable

When we started In Parallel, our goal was ambitious but clear: find a way to capture and codify business strategies so they could not only guide human decision-making but also serve as a “learning layer” for AI. We knew that companies aiming to stay competitive would need a systematic, iterative approach to strategy — especially in a world where AI is rapidly transforming knowledge work.

Back then — what feels like a lifetime ago in AI terms — we anticipated that businesses would soon turn to AI to enhance human decision-making. But honestly, we didn’t fully anticipate how quickly AI would become a near-ubiquitous “exoskeleton” for middle management, leadership, and beyond. Now that it’s happening, one thing is evident: if AI and the new agents-based technologies are going to help you excel in the workplace, just like humans, it needs visibility into your strategy. It’s not enough for AI to know your personal preferences (think: memory) or operational metrics — it needs to understand your higher-level goals, the biggest obstacles to those goals, and how best to overcome them.

On our mission to crack the code, we’ve spent the past two years uncovering exciting insights into what it truly means to represent strategy in a “machine-readable” format.

The biggest obstacle on this journey so far was the realization that nearly everyone defines “strategy” differently. Some see it as an overarching plan, others as an integrated set of choices, and still others see it as an exercise done once every five years. We’ve seen how these differences lead to confusion, jargon overload, and missed opportunities.

A key to success is establishing a shared language and ensuring alignment on terminology. 

For us, the challenge was defining strategy in a universal, clear, and AI-friendly way — one that honored the nuances of different frameworks while remaining practical for machine processing. After codifying hundreds (if not thousands) of strategies, we developed a methodology that consistently resonates: GPS (Goals–Problems–Solutions).

Before diving into why GPS is such a game-changer, let’s step back and consider the larger context:


  • Numerous studies show that up to 90% of strategic initiatives fail to achieve their intended outcomes.

  • 60% of teams end up misaligned or focused on work that doesn’t support strategic priorities.

  • As a result, companies struggle to adapt when the market shifts — leaving employees working on initiatives that get canceled or fail to deliver meaningful impact.

Why does this happen? Simply put, a static strategy alone makes it difficult to determine the highest-value job to be done at any given moment. And as soon as a strategy is formulated, market conditions start to shift. We call this the Strategy-Market Gap. 

Much like the gap between product and market for startups, achieving the right fit is crucial for the success of enterprise strategy. 

The Strategy–Market Gap

One of the most common issues we see is what we call the strategy–market gap. Companies invest heavily in a sequential strategy formulation process — often locking in annual or five-year goals — only to watch external changes invalidate those goals almost immediately. A competitor launches, tariffs roll out, a war breaks out, customer needs shift, AI capabilities evolve, or a global crisis hits. Suddenly, those neatly laid plans are shelved.

A Chief Strategy Officer recently told us how, just four months into a new corporate strategy, urgent market realities forced them to halt every initiative and go into crisis mode. Why? Because the world moves faster than any static planning process can accommodate.

In studying the teachings of strategy luminaries like Rumsfeld, Peter Compo, Roger Martin, and others, we consistently see one clear principle: strategy must be dynamic — adaptable and responsive to emerging challenges.. That’s precisely what GPS does — it enables you to continuously observe, prioritize, and solve the issues that threaten your overarching goals.

Introducing the GPS Framework

We define GPS as follows:

  1. Goals – The strategic outcomes you want to achieve.

  2. Problems – The blockers or obstacles (internal or external) that slow down or threaten progress toward those goals.

We define GPS as follows:

  1. Goals – The strategic outcomes you want to achieve.

  2. Problems – The blockers or obstacles (internal or external) that slow down or threaten progress toward those goals.

Why GPS?

Key levers, must-win battles, choices, and goals — all carry deep meaning and are carefully named for good reason. Unfortunately, computers don’t interpret these definitions the way we humans do. 

Traditional frameworks often emphasize the “big objectives” or “key metrics,” but fail to keep tabs on new obstacles that pop up in real time. OKRs, for example, map the path to an objective through key results — yet both can quickly break down when unexpected events occur. GPS, however, systematically identifies and prioritizes Problems so that you’re always tackling the most critical blockers first.

Static strategies fail because they don’t evolve as conditions change. What’s needed is a more adaptive, structured way to continuously refine strategy in real time. That’s where GPS comes in. 

In Part 2, we explore how GPS works, why it’s designed to be machine-readable, and how it helps organizations execute strategy with precision.

Key levers, must-win battles, choices, and goals — all carry deep meaning and are carefully named for good reason. Unfortunately, computers don’t interpret these definitions the way we humans do. 

Traditional frameworks often emphasize the “big objectives” or “key metrics,” but fail to keep tabs on new obstacles that pop up in real time. OKRs, for example, map the path to an objective through key results — yet both can quickly break down when unexpected events occur. GPS, however, systematically identifies and prioritizes Problems so that you’re always tackling the most critical blockers first.

Static strategies fail because they don’t evolve as conditions change. What’s needed is a more adaptive, structured way to continuously refine strategy in real time. That’s where GPS comes in. 

In Part 2, we explore how GPS works, why it’s designed to be machine-readable, and how it helps organizations execute strategy with precision.

Share on LinkedIn
Share on LinkedIn
Share on LinkedIn
Share on LinkedIn

All Articles

All

All Articles

All

All Articles

All

All Articles

All

All Articles

All