September 20, 2024 • 51 mins
Ask Nigel Rawlins a question or send feedback, click the link to text me.
In this episode of The Wisepreneurs Podcast, host Nigel Rawlins interviews Peter Compo, author of The Emergent Approach to Strategy. Drawing on 25 years of experience at DuPont, Peter illustrates how businesses can adapt and thrive in unpredictable environments by employing an emergent thinking framework.
He emphasises that identifying key obstacles, eliminating bottlenecks, and guiding decision-making are crucial steps in maintaining progress, especially when a shift in direction becomes necessary.
Peter’s methodology offers a structured design framework to manage uncertainty, which is very relevant for independent professionals and consultants, especially those in their sixties. He underscores the value of remaining creative, continuously adapting, and tackling challenges with both discipline and flexibility. Peter’s insights deliver practical advice to help you survive, grow, and thrive in your business.
Key Themes:
- Emergent Strategy: How businesses can adapt to change and grow through emergent thinking.
- Overcoming Bottlenecks: Identifying and tackling the biggest obstacles to success.
- Adaptive Design: How strategic rules help guide decision-making in uncertain times.
- Creative Innovation: Applying concepts from music and science to business strategy.
- Navigating Uncertainty: Embracing agility and adaptability in a fast-changing market.
Connect with Peter Compo
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/petercompo/
Website https://emergentapproach.com/
Wisepreneurs Newsletter: Thrive at 60+ with Purpose & Strategy
Smart, Sustainable Support for Women Entrepreneurs Beyond 60
Sign up here: https://wisepreneurs.com.au/newsletter/
Connect with Nigel Rawlins
website https://wisepreneurs.com.au/
Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/nigelrawlins/
Twitter https://twitter.com/wisepreneurs
Please support the podcast
https://www.buzzsprout.com/2311675/supporters/new
Stay one step ahead with The Wisepreneurs Insider newsletter
As a subscriber, you'll get:
- Sneak peeks at upcoming must-listen podcast episodes and guests
- Bonus wisdom straight from recent guest experts
- Marketing tips to attract your ideal clients
- Productivity hacks to streamline your independent business
- And more exclusive insights are delivered right to your inbox!
- Don't miss out on these invaluable resources
- Subscribe now and gain the edge you need to survive and thrive as a wisepreneur
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Nigel Rawlins (00:00):
In today's episode, I'm speaking with Peter
(00:02):
Compo author of the emergentapproach to strategy.
Drawing on his 25 years atDuPont, Peter explains how
businesses can adapt and thrivein unpredictable environments.
His emergent thinking frameworkidentifies key obstacles and
guides decision-making,especially when a change in
direction is needed.
(00:22):
For independent professionalsand consultants, particularly
those in their sixties, Peteroffers a structured approach to
navigating uncertainty.
He emphasizes the importance ofidentifying and clearing
bottlenecks to achieve a desiredfuture.
His insights highlight the valueof adapting over time, staying
creative and overcomingchallenges with discipline and
(00:46):
flexibility Welcome, Peter, tothe Wisepreneurs podcast.
Could you tell us somethingabout yourself and where you're
from
Peter Compo (00:53):
I'm from New York City originally, and, where I
grew up in a musical family.
Long line of musicians, in andaround the city.
But then I went on to get adegree in chemical engineering.
Uh, got my, uh, PhD in chemicalengineering and moved to
Wilmington, Delaware, whereDuPont was where I went to work
(01:16):
for 25 years.
And so since then I've lived inWilmington, Delaware, which for
people outside of the States isnot far from Philadelphia.
Nigel Rawlins (01:25):
Now, when you said, in New York City, I think
I read somewhere your father wasa musician.
Peter Compo (01:30):
Both my parents were musicians and, uh, there
were many generations ofmusicians on, on both sides.
And, now my son's a musiciantoo.
So it continues.
Nigel Rawlins (01:40):
obviously a musician as well as a chemical
engineer.
Was it hard to not go into musicyourself?
Peter Compo (01:50):
Well, I was not doing that well back then.
My early days were not so good.
And so, the music world was notfor someone who needed
structure.
And going to school, and I wentto school forever.
(02:11):
And eventually they throw youout, you know.
That gave me the structure Ineeded actually, but I never
lost the music.
And in fact I'm doing more nowand I have a site where I have
quite a bit of music on myYouTube site and so forth.
So it never, I never lost it.
Nigel Rawlins (02:27):
Now, that's good to hear.
Well, Interesting you talk aboutmusic, you've had a musical
career, but to be honest, doinga PhD, that's no mean feat.
That's pretty hard work, and youknow, I don't think I could ever
do a PhD.
I don't think I'd have thediscipline to sit through it,
and especially chemicalengineering.
Peter Compo (02:45):
I, I think if you just kind of hang in there, um,
there were many people who didmuch better than me and were
much smarter than me, but ifyou, if you just kind of hang in
there, it, you start to get the,the knack of it over time.
And I enjoyed it.
And I enjoyed the the rigor ofit and the logic of it.
And, and so it was not a, not aburden to do.
Nigel Rawlins (03:08):
Well, that's what I can see, because we're going
to talk about your book, TheEmergent Approach to Strategy,
but the things that obviouslyhave informed what I've, I've
read in that book, which I thinkis absolutely fascinating and
absolutely fantastic.
And I'll be honest upfront, ithas changed the way I think
about business and my ownbusiness.
(03:28):
But also that musical thing,because would you say that
music's almost like a science inmany ways, even though it's seen
as creative and so on?
Peter Compo (03:37):
I think this is one of the themes in my life that
I've seen the same patterns.
in music and hard science andengineering and then in business
and operations and technologydevelopment.
I think all fields have adiscipline and a rigor.
It's just not obvious in themore abstract things in the
(04:00):
arts.
Music is very abstract, but itdoesn't mean that there's not
this kind of underlying deeprigor to it.
It's not arbitrary.
It's not anything goes.
And, uh, there is a greatcommonality amongst all
endeavors.
And also we tend to call musiccreative, but you know, you can
(04:22):
be creative in accounting too.
You can find new solutions.
You can find efficiencies andways to help visualize what's
going on.
And, you know, I, I always useaccounting as an example,
because I thought that therewere many times when I, when a
great finance accounting personcould bring such clarity, to a
business.
(04:42):
So I think we, we kind of labelthese things a little bit wrong
by calling the arts creative, ormaybe a R& D person who's making
new products creative, buteverybody else in the
organization is not creative.
I just don't think it's true.
It's just a different field.
It's a different endeavour.
Nigel Rawlins (05:02):
I think that's a very important point.
All right, you've had a careerof 25 years at DuPont.
Now I'm assuming you did a wholerange of things, and I want to
talk about your book, but what Iwant to know is, how did your
career lead you to the book.
And then we should talk aboutthe book.
Peter Compo (05:19):
Well, we started hitting it a little bit, all
through those differentendeavors and yes, I had a very
diverse career at, at DuPont.
I worked in many different waysand different people and, and
different, businesses and alsodifferent levels of the company
and marketing and business andoperations planning.
(05:41):
And I think that it was seeing,as I said before, the similar
patterns in all of these things,and the particular pattern we're
talking about, and that I'mtalking about, is the Darwinian
nature of creativity and changeand innovation.
And, that was the thread that Isaw and not worth going into how
(06:05):
I even saw it in my graduateresearch that I worked on, on
particles that would sticktogether.
And there was a survival factorthat was very, very natural
selection like, but just in the,in the physical domain.
And so I had this interest allalong in how does creativity
(06:26):
occur?
How does innovation reallyoccur?
And.
It stayed with me through allthose experiences.
But when I got to DuPont and thecorporate world, and certainly
DuPont was not alone in this, Iwas discouraged by the way
people thought about innovationand about strategy.
And the two are intimatelylinked, right?
(06:47):
A strategy is to try toinnovate, try to create
something, some capability, somephysical things, some tangible
thing, or a capability.
That is new that wasn't therebefore.
And, I was a little frustratedwith the state of affairs of
(07:08):
strategy and innovation thinkingthroughout the industry, not
just DuPont.
And I started taking notes and Istarted, uh, thinking, Hey, I
got to say something about this,you know?
And, it kind of grew over theyears.
I would just keep taking notesand keep thinking and
theorizing.
I came into contact with thingslike complex adaptive theory.
(07:31):
I studied biology a little bit.
I, um, I listened to otherpeople about it and it was just
one of those things that wasn'tplanned.
And at some point I said, if I'mgoing to do this right, I'm
going to have to quit, and justgo out and spend full time
researching and writing.
And that's kind of how ithappened.
Nigel Rawlins (07:51):
And the book emerged.
So
Peter Compo (07:55):
It did.
Nigel Rawlins (07:55):
what did your wife think?
Peter Compo (07:59):
Oh, she was perfectly happy to have me go in
the back and leave her alone,I'm sure.
Nigel Rawlins (08:04):
Because I was thinking you quit your job and
you went out to write and you'vegot this amazing book.
Let's talk about the book.
It's called The EmergentApproach to Strategy, Adaptive
Design and Execution.
Now, I'll be honest to thelisteners.
I have read it once on myKindle.
But I had to buy the physicalbook, work my way through it.
(08:24):
I've taken 160 pages of, well,160 cards of notes.
I've distilled them down toabout 50 and I've distilled it
down to a page now.
And I think I'm getting my headaround it, but Peter.
Tell us something about why isit the emergent approach to
strategy?
Peter Compo (08:44):
It's because I mentioned this Darwinian view of
an adaptive view of creativityand innovation.
Actually, Darwin and biologicalevolution are probably the most
inspiring case of what generallycan be called emergence.
And that is this remarkableproperty of things that action
(09:08):
and interactions and forces atlow levels, at the, what we can
call different things, the microlevel, the local level, can over
time, over generations, lead tothe emergence, the development
of new structures, newcapabilities, new ideas.
(09:30):
And that this theory ofemergence that has been, of
course, it's very old, DavidHume and so forth, you know,
it's always been in philosophy.
But over the last decades, it'sslowly becoming more and more a
true science and a trueunderstanding.
And I don't believe there'sanything that doesn't follow the
(09:54):
laws of emergence, and followthe laws of how adaptive systems
emerge.
And it's contrasted with theidea of you can plan the future.
It's contrasted with thatcreativity is this Eureka thing
where it's just serendipity orplanned, that you have a vision
(10:16):
and then you know how to go getit.
It's not those things.
And the idea of emergence isthat the alternative is this
discipline at those lower levelsthat lead to those things.
And it can be planned to someextent.
I think the word that's betteris you can shape the direction.
(10:37):
And isn't that what strategy'sfor?
Trying to shape a direction.
Instead of saying, Oh, I knowhow to get there for sure.
And then modifying over time asyou walk down the road, as you
implement.
Nigel Rawlins (10:51):
That is definitely what the book has
been telling me, that it's atthe lower level things that
eventually emerge to something.
And that the future is sodifficult to predict.
And that's why I loved yourbook.
The main thing I was thinkingabout in terms of your book is,
for example, the people I workwith often work for themselves,
(11:12):
they may have worked in acompany like yourself and
they've decided they're stillyoung in their 60s.
They don't want to stop working,but they don't want to work full
time, but they do want to dosomething.
And that's where I thought yourbook was fabulous in terms of
the practical parts of that ishow we actually, maybe design or
(11:33):
discover something that we cando or something we can do in
business.
So let's go through some partsof it.
So the emergent thing is becauseIt emerges from some of the
little things, but we have todecide what those little things
are, don't we in many ways.
And you start with we've got tohave an aspiration.
Let's start there.
(11:54):
So you suggest it starts with anaspiration.
Can you tell us a little bitmore about what you mean by
aspiration and what's involvedin that?
And then we'll work our waythrough the framework.
Okay.
Peter Compo (12:05):
Yes.
And by the way, before we do getinto that, you said something
important.
This whole idea of low levelsand high levels and how
emergence occurs.
It's very abstract and we don'thave a common language for this.
You're not required tounderstand all that theory,
(12:25):
right?
Because I've translated it intopractice, into simple practice
things that you don't have to bethinking about those things.
And you're starting off withpart of that practice, right?
That articulating an aspirationis a great way to start.
You don't need to absolutelystart this way, but generally
(12:46):
you need some sense of whatyou're trying to accomplish.
And I use the term aspirationfor probably two reasons.
I needed an overall term thatencompasses three types of
aspirations that people can use.
A vision type aspiration, broad,abstract.
I don't know the specifics, butI want to go and be like this,
(13:10):
right?
Or do something like this.
Or a mission, which is a littlemore specific, narrows things
down, puts you in a little moreof a box.
I'm going to do this, but I'mnot going to do that.
Visions are more, what do I wantto be?
What do I, how do I want tofeel?
All that kind of stuff.
And then there's a third type ofgeneral aspiration.
And that is specific goals.
(13:33):
I want to make X thousands ofdollars by 2025.
You know, pick it.
It's usually got a numberassociated with it and a date,
two numbers, a date and anumber.
So the theory of strategy andthe emergent approach doesn't
care what the aspiration is.
It's not just for business.
(13:53):
It could be for IT and HR, orpeople have even bugged me about
articulating my musicalcomposition strategy.
And what I'm trying to achievethere, what's my aspiration in
composing?
It doesn't matter, but theaspiration is very important
because it narrows the worlddown of what might be, and as
we're probably going to talkabout in one minute, how you
(14:16):
then work from that aspirationdown to something else.
Nigel Rawlins (14:20):
The other thing I threw into my aspiration is,
what are my values?
What's important?
All right.
So that the aspiration, buthaving an aspiration doesn't
actually make anything happen.
We've got to figure out what dowe have to do.
So let's, let's move into thatbit.
Peter Compo (14:36):
So, two quick points.
Your aspiration may change.
As you work.
Yeah, your vision may stay thesame, but your specifics, your
specific mission, your specificgoals may change as you
discover.
So I just want to put that outthere.
There's nothing that says in theprocess, and in fact, everything
(14:56):
is provisional when you're doingstrategy like this.
Think of it as a puzzle and youcould change any part in any
time.
So what do we do with anaspiration?
Unfortunately, the vast majorityof strategies out in the world,
and I'm talking about from thebiggest businesses to
governments, to the smallestcommunity group and everything
(15:18):
in between is to take thataspiration, that goal, and break
it into a million parts and makelong lists of sub goals.
Okay.
We want to increaseprofitability, or I want to get
10 new customers in a year.
Okay, what do I have to do toget 10 new customers?
Well, I got to do advertisingand I'm going to do that.
(15:41):
And I'm going to do a newcollateral and I'm going to do
that.
And I'm going to join thisnetwork and I'm going to pay for
this and I'm going to do, andI'm going to develop these new
products and just work backwardsuntil you've got essentially
what's a laundry list of bulletpoints and, you know, that, uh,
uh, that doesn't work.
(16:01):
That's not a strategy.
So in summary, the so manystrategies are designed where
they say, I'll start with mygoal, my aspiration, whatever it
is, and I'll break it up into amillion pieces.
And this is often calledcascading.
And this is why so manystrategies are lists of things
to do.
(16:22):
And they're not reallystrategies for a lot of reasons.
Um, instead, the trick is to askwhat's in the way.
I call it the bottleneck.
You don't have to use that term.
It can be what's an obstruction,what's a limitation, what's a
barrier, or just the words, whatis in the way of keeping you
(16:47):
from this aspiration.
Rumelt uses that term, RichardRumelt.
What's in the way?
This is really the magic tofinding a strategy.
And it's along the old folkwisdom, right?
Of what's become folk wisdom.
A problem well defined, Is aproblem half solved.
(17:08):
And that's really why the magicto finding strategy is
articulating and understandingwhat's the bottleneck.
So that's the second, that'sreally the second step after
aspiration.
Nigel Rawlins (17:23):
Okay, so to find the bottleneck, you use an
influence diagram.
Can you explain what you mean byan influence diagram?
Peter Compo (17:31):
Yes.
It's really, it's really quitesimple.
And in fact, it looks likecascading.
It looks just like this idea ofbreaking out a, um, an
aspiration, a goal specific orbroad, doesn't matter again, um,
(17:52):
working backwards from thatgoal.
Some people call it, uh, reverseengineering.
For example, Roger Martin andothers call it reverse
engineering.
And that's exactly what it is.
You work backwards and break upthat aspiration.
And what you find is that if youmove backwards from that
aspiration, the amount ofdecisions and actions and
(18:15):
choices you have to take growreally big.
So you have an aspiration to get10 new customers.
All of a sudden you find you gota list of how many things that
you might have to, or maybeshould do.
And so you get this, what I calla characteristic shape, of an
(18:35):
influence diagram.
It starts very small on one sideand then imagine a V or a flock
of, uh, of, uh, geese, right?
It's very small in the beginningand it opens up and it gets
bigger and bigger as it goesback and actually scrolls out a
little bit.
It's not even a straight V.
(18:55):
And on the left hand side, areall these possible actions you
can take.
That's why I use the flock ofgeese.
When you look up in the sky, yousee them, you see the lead bird
in the front, and then they'removing to the left, right?
You see the, the flock, the Vform out there.
(19:15):
You could draw it any way youwant.
I just happen to go from rightto left.
And, uh, so that's the way youshould visualize it.
That the right hand side is thepoint.
And that's the aspiration.
The left hand side is this hugenumber of things you might need
to do or want to do.
(19:36):
But again, it's not a strategyjust to list all those things.
So the second point, then, ishow do you decide which of those
things to do?
And that's where the bottleneckcomes in.
So smack in the middle of thispicture of this V on its side,
(19:58):
There's a line, a barrier, thebottleneck that says, I need to
bust that bottleneck.
I need to overcome it.
I need to resolve it.
I need to, I need to bustthrough it.
Whatever language or image youwant in your mind, Uh, I like
(20:22):
bottleneck because it impliesrate.
You increase the size of thebottleneck, you de constrain the
system and there's more flow.
So whatever image it is that youwant, think of that bottleneck
being right in the middle.
And now the question on allthose actions you might take is,
(20:42):
what is going to get at thebottleneck that's in the way.
Not everything matters.
And in fact, when everythingmatters, nothing matters.
And I just find it so remarkablethat no matter what the
aspiration is, and again, thisapplies to anything,
articulating the bottleneck, andit doesn't even have to be right
(21:04):
at the beginning, but you got tostart thinking about it.
It could be this, it could bethat, it could be this.
That's when the magic begins.
That's when you start saying,Hey, wait a minute.
If that's the problem, we shoulddo this.
Right?
And I never thought we should dothat, but you know, unless we
(21:25):
fix this.
It doesn't matter what else wedo.
So the bottleneck is this thingin the middle that you got to
fix.
You got to get around or elseyou can't get to the aspiration.
Nigel Rawlins (21:39):
it's the stuff we have to actually do.
And I think you mentioned thereare four killer problems to get
through that bottleneck.
And we had one of them, we wereactually going to do this a week
ago, and my internet was down,which was one of the killer
problems.
Peter Compo (21:56):
Well, uh, we could, uh, maybe, maybe we'll throw in
one other idea and then hit thekiller problems.
What is the strategy?
A strategy, so think back againto that V on its side.
And on the right hand side isyour single aspiration and you
work back and I draw it, if you,see the, the graphics, you will
(22:19):
see choice, action, choice,action, all of these
possibilities on this big side,right on the open V side.
What is a strategy?
A strategy is the central rule,guiding light.
The central principle that givesguidance for taking those
(22:39):
actions such that you bust thatbottleneck, not such that you
achieve your aspirations.
It is true that your whole pointis to achieve the aspiration,
but you can't do it directly.
You have to work through whatwill get rid of the bottleneck.
(23:00):
And as you get rid ofbottlenecks, your system
improves, you get better, andyou get the next bottleneck, and
you keep going, and you'reconstantly elevating the
situation as you fight offwhat's in the way.
Nigel Rawlins (23:14):
Now, that was very important, that, that idea
of strategy.
We should talk a little bit moreabout strategy and then come
back to what we call the killerproblems.
I had not realized that astrategy in the way you define
it is actually a rule to makedecisions against.
And, and I've got to be honest,I've done lots and lots of
things, but I've never beendisciplined enough to follow a
(23:37):
strategy rule until I've readyour book.
And I thought, Oh my golly, youknow, it's, it's taught me to
discipline rather than reading50 different types of books.
Maybe I need to concentrate onthe ones to help me reach my
aspiration.
So yes, I, I hadn't realizedthat through following your
process, you come up with astrategy rule that you then
(24:01):
stick to, which is really quiteimportant.
Peter Compo (24:04):
Well, this is a a major outcome of the model.
And I've derived strategy.
This is not me just saying, Hey,I think it's a rule.
It actually comes out of a modelof adaptive systems and a model
of emergence that you can followin the first half of the book.
Not even the first half, thefirst quarter of the book.
(24:24):
Again, you don't need thismodel.
to use the practice, but it'sgood to know that it comes from
something foundational.
There are very few people whohave derived the function of
strategy or the definition ofstrategy from a model.
I know of one other who did itfrom game theory, but the vast
majority of strategies in theworld are not a game theory type
(24:47):
situation, right?
You're not faced with two orthree very exact or very clear
choices.
And I'm also not the firstperson, though, to have
suggested that a strategy is a,uh, a rule.
I think I'm the first also to bevery clear that it is a central
rule.
It is the overarching rule thateverything must adhere to.
(25:13):
You can't have a rule that,okay, well, in this case, we're
not going to do it, right?
It is the overarching rule.
Then there's other tools,tactics and plans and other
things for dealing with smallerquestions.
But this one overall rule, astrategy gives the overall
guidance that will direct allthe resources to busting that
(25:37):
bottleneck in the service ofachieving the aspiration.
Nigel Rawlins (25:41):
And on that topic, you've actually got a
point of view about the use ofthe word strategy and strategic.
Let's go into that for a bit,and then we'll go back to
looking at the framework.
Peter Compo (25:50):
Well, it's quite easy to explain.
I think that 95 percent of allthe uses of instances of people
using the word strategicactually are not only not
needed, but do damage.
Because what happens is you putstrategic in front of a word and
(26:13):
all of a sudden you think you'vecreated insight or that you've
said something, uh, powerful,you know, our strategic
initiatives.
Okay.
so are we going to talk, whatabout our initiatives then?
Right?
Are we going to have nonimportant initiatives?
(26:35):
Who wants to have non importantinitiatives?
Okay, we're gonna have astrategic dashboard.
All right.
Who's going to sit around forthe meeting afterwards to talk
about the non strategicdashboard?
It's a nonsense word in so manycases.
And not only do you reduce thenoise level of the discussion,
(26:57):
but you force people to talk inplain English.
No jargon.
What do you mean a strategicinitiative?
Well, uh, uh, you know, okay,let me think.
Um, one that we must do?
Well, I'm not so sure aboutthat.
Maybe then it isn't so importantthat we do it.
Well, what does it mean, youknow?
(27:19):
So, and I've heard people talkabout this a little bit too, but
I'm really bringing it to thefore.
Get rid of the word strategic.
And it'll help you think.
Nigel Rawlins (27:30):
I've got to agree so much.
Anybody who's seen my writing,if you do see that word
strategic in there, it means Ididn't proofread it properly.
I have been avoiding using itsince I've read your book.
I see it everywhere.
Yeah, you're right.
It's a very busy word that meansnothing, but it, it sounds good,
doesn't it, to some people.
But if everyone's using it, itmeans nothing.
Peter Compo (27:52):
You know, I think there's an occasional time, you
know, okay, we need somestrategic thinking here.
I think that has some meaningbecause it says we have to think
about the full picture.
We're not allowed to just lookat a sub part of this thing.
Okay, that's valid.
I can live with that.
Uh, strategic management?
(28:12):
Not so sure.
What kind of management is notstrategic?
Oh, is that the management wherewe're not going to follow the
strategy?
You know, in most cases, youdon't need it.
Nigel Rawlins (28:24):
If you work in a job and you decide you're going
to be self employed or aconsultant or something like
that, you suddenly start usingbusiness lingo and, you know,
strategy is one of them, andmodelling, and I guess there's a
whole heap of them.
And just because you use thosewords does not mean you actually
understand it or it actuallymeans anything.
(28:45):
Okay, so where do we go fromthere?
Peter Compo (28:46):
We took a little detour to talk about strategic,
but we, um, but getting back,we, we've defined what I call
the triad so far.
And that triad of aspiration,and remember, that can be a
simple goal, it doesn't have tobe a big deal, uh, or it can be
a big deal.
(29:07):
Um, if the aspiration is a bigdeal, your bottlenecks going to
be a big deal.
And your strategy is going to bea big deal.
If your aspiration is small,your bottleneck may be small.
Your strategy may be small.
Um, but you have this aspirationon the right hand side, this V,
you've got the bottleneck in themiddle.
That's what's in the way ofachieving it.
(29:27):
And the strategy is the centralrule that brings together all of
the choices and determines whichare truly needed for achieving
the aspiration by busting thebottleneck.
And I call it the aspirationbottleneck strategy triad.
(29:49):
We
Nigel Rawlins (29:49):
should mention that within that V are all the
things that we think we shouldbe doing and then we group them
together a bit and then look atthe interactions because
basically you labelled them allthe variables that are affecting
what we need to do to meet theaspiration and then out of all
that we, we sort out What's themajor bottleneck?
(30:12):
And then, okay, that's the majorbottleneck, this is how we're
going to bust it, because we'regoing to use this strategy rule.
And then you talked about killerproblems.
The killer problems are the oneswe've got to overcome.
Peter Compo (30:24):
Yeah, the killer problems are smack in the middle
of this model of how strategywas derived from a model of
emergence, a model of adaptivesystems.
And what they say, if you keepthat V in your mind again, uh,
that there are some fundamentalbarriers, not just your specific
(30:45):
bottleneck, but fundamental, uh,problems that exist in all
creative endeavors, all changeendeavors.
And the four are, one we'vetalked about a lot.
There are so many possiblechoices.
They have to be made coherently,and there's no way to do that
(31:07):
without some kind of guidance,some kind of rule.
There's others though.
The second is, there's a timedelay between when you take the
actions you think are right.
There's a time delay betweenyour hypothesis, your strategy
framework is a hypothesis,right?
(31:27):
There's a time delay betweenwhen you take the actions and
when you find out whether or notyou're getting the result you
thought you should get.
And the bigger and moredifficult the program is, the
longer that takes.
You're trying to create a wholenew product line, you know, and
you think it's going to be fouryears.
Well, it's kind of tough to waitfour years to find out whether
(31:48):
you're doing the right things,you need a better way.
Right?
So the time delay between actionand desired result is the second
killer problem.
The third killer problem is.
There are influences outside ofyour control.
Government, regulation, all of asudden.
(32:09):
Interest rates is one that inthe last few years, how long did
we have low interest rates thatpeople got lulled into the
belief that money was free for,for how long, right?
And then all of a sudden, boing,they're, uh, they're 5, percent
again, right?
Uh, depending which one you'relooking at.
(32:30):
Competitor action.
Can't control it.
You might influence it, but youcan't control it.
Uh, macro trends around productsand markets.
You know, it's obvious thatthere are things out of
anybody's control.
This adds a whole anotheruncertainty for how to choose
what to do.
(32:51):
To get a certain result in thefuture.
And the fourth, in some ways, isa summary of the other three.
And that is, if you look at thatV again, with all those possible
choices on the left hand sideand possible actions and
decisions you can make, and youlook at that, aspiration, what
(33:11):
you're trying to achieve on theright, it's just terrible, but
the thing that's most important,that aspiration on the right and
achieving it, is the leastactionable thing.
It's all the actions anddecisions on the left hand side
that are granular enough thatyou can actually do them.
(33:32):
You can choose, to create a newproduct or choose to invest in
new, new development or newmarketing plans or partnerships
or whatever we might use for aspecific example of how to grow
customers.
You can do those things, butultimately they don't matter
unless they filter up toachieving the aspiration.
(33:55):
So I like to somewhat think ofthis fourth killer problem is
almost a summary that what'smost important, the emergent
outcome you want, the result youwant in the future can't be
managed, cannot be directlyachieved, but the things you can
directly do.
don't ultimately matter.
(34:16):
And so what it says that youcan't work directly on what
ultimately matters.
This is life.
This is creativity.
And this is what this model ofstrategy and model of emergence
is trying to reveal.
And that's where we get fromthat, we're able to say, well,
what is a strategy?
What is a bottleneck?
(34:37):
And how do we, how do we bridgethese killer problems?
How do we solve them?
And actually, we come up with afew, a few requirements of a
solution to the killer problems.
One is you got to give peoplereal time guidance.
You can't say, I want you towork on this aspiration of
developing a new product linethat we think is going to take
(34:58):
four years from now.
That's not enough guidance.
There has to be more specificguidance about what are the
nature of the products?
Or what are they aimed at andwhat resources we have and
things like that.
And that information needs to besomething can be followed in
real time.
The second thing is a solutionhas to be on the left hand side
(35:19):
of the influence diagram.
It can't be, as we just said,directly getting the aspiration.
And the third is the strategy.
The solution to the killerproblems must unify all those
decisions.
So you can't say you have astrategy for growing to 10 new
customers within a year or two,um, or whatever timeframe, uh,
(35:44):
your strategy is to create a newproduct line, you know, that may
not give guidance to the rest ofthe organization.
It has to unify.
And the end of the story is thefunctional thing that most can
meet those three requirementsand are the best solution to
those killer problems that areuniversal to all creative
(36:08):
effort.
is a rule, a central rule.
And that's why a strategy is sopowerful.
It can achieve meeting theserequirements.
It's the best possible way tomeet the requirements, tactics,
plans, metrics, they can allmeet it to some extent, but
(36:29):
they're limited.
That's why it starts with thestrategy central rule, and then
you fill in with all that otherstuff to complete the story.
Nigel Rawlins (36:37):
It's actually quite a, bit of work to actually
come up with all of that, isn'tit?
Because there's a whole lot ofthinking, it's quite a
discipline.
And the whole point of I wantedyou on the podcast for is to
explain to people who may beworking for themselves or
thinking of becoming selfemployed that It may be coming
across complex, what we'retalking about, but it is
(37:00):
actually quite simple when youstart to think about it.
But it is a discipline ofthinking.
A discipline for makingdecisions, but you've also got
some frameworks that youdiscussed to work through to get
a better picture of this.
Could, could you talk a littlebit about those frameworks?
There was a simple one, and thenthere's the more complex one,
(37:23):
which you, you call the,strategy alternative matrix.
Peter Compo (37:26):
And again, I want to stress.
You don't have to keep all thistheory in mind.
I, we're just, uh, you know,we're just proving it exists and
giving some logic for whystrategy is defined the way it
is.
It's not needed to use thesetools.
So a simple tool is the onewe've already talked about.
(37:48):
The triad, the, uh, the simplestatement of, can we articulate
our aspiration?
Can we articulate and discoverand agree on what's really in
the way of that aspiration andthen what is a central rule that
will help us focus on that?
And maybe we should give a verysimple, you know, follow up on
(38:10):
that example we were giving.
We feel as though we need toincrease the number of customers
we have.
And a traditional way is towrite down all the things that a
business has to do and do itbetter, right?
Every single thing.
Or, We say, well, what's reallyin the way?
(38:31):
Is it our reputation?
Is it the products?
Is it our resources to be ableto to get out to people?
Is it people don't know aboutus?
Is it lack of skilled staff tobe able to do it?
I mean, we could just go throughall the things that businesses
(38:52):
deal with.
I'm trying to keep in mindsmaller businesses that you, you
have in your uh, network here,right?
Um, All of these things can be,uh, can be relevant and 10 times
more that you could think of,right?
That can be in the way.
Um, but what if it turns outthat there's one that's really,
(39:15):
really the big one?
Maybe it is.
you need to get a reputationfirst.
Somehow you've got to get somekind of view that you know what
the hell you're talking about,or that you're a relevant player
in this thing, and you mightthink that having a big brochure
(39:35):
of all your products and allyour services and, you know,
developing them to the lastlittle bit, um, it might turn
out that it would have no effectuntil your reputation gets out
there.
And so the strategy rule mightbe something along the lines of,
we're going to put everythingelse on hold and we're going to
(39:58):
say, how the hell are we goingto bust this bottleneck of
reputation or mind space thatpeople would think we're, we're
a player in this, in this game.
There's so many different waysthat you might go after that,
and it might depend on otherthings, like how much money you
have and so forth, whether youcan buy that, or whether you
(40:20):
have to do it by, by yourself,or whether it's a matter of
getting a great marketingperson, or whatever it might be.
But the point is, if you've got10 things you're going to focus
on, and that one gets one tenthof the focus, um, you're
probably not going to get there.
Or get there very slowly.
(40:41):
We can come up with otherexamples, you know, but, uh, I
want to be sure that there'ssome sense of what that central
rule is.
And then the trick is you can'tviolate it.
Then somebody says, Oh, come on,we're going to work on some new
services, new products.
No.
And how many good strategistshave said the term, you know,
have said the most importantthing is to say no.
(41:04):
right?
The most important thing is todefine what you're not going to
do.
And that follows perfectlybecause what defines what not to
do?
A rule.
A rule is something that tellsyou what not to do.
And you've got to stick withthat rule, even though shiny
objects appear all the time.
Nigel Rawlins (41:24):
That is my biggest problem.
You've, you've explained itperfectly, but you know, the
other day I had that aha momentwith myself.
That I realised, oh my golly,I'm trying to do too many
things.
I'm going to have to have thatstrategic rule.
That's a perfect explanation.
And I think that's almostprobably sufficient enough
rather than us to go into thedetails of the other things.
(41:47):
So that is actually fantastic.
Peter Compo (41:49):
You know, the shiny object thing is really a good
image in this because, you know,there are so many things that
are seductive.
And in fact, often I describestrategy as a way to avoid
seduction.
Seduction about the things thaton the surface seem to be good.
(42:11):
But if you really understand thebottleneck and what's in the
way, and you're really adheringto your rule, you'd find out
they're not, they're not good.
And, uh, you know, a classic onewould be, I get this in
nonprofits that I, that I'minvolved with and serve on
boards and help, fundraising.
It's so hard to let go of allthese smaller donors, right?
(42:36):
Let go to put your energy intolarger potential donors.
But somebody calls, right?
And says, you know, will you dothis?
Can we do this?
And, and you have to have theguts to say no.
And that shiny thing is gotta belet go.
For example, and you might haveto live through some pain and
(42:56):
that's another factor ofstrategy, right?
There's got to be trade offs andthere's got to be pain involved
because you have to give upsomething to get something.
Nigel Rawlins (43:05):
perfectly put.
I think I have to cut up mycredit card.
That's the next, that's probablyone of my bottlenecks there.
Cut the credit card up.
But I don't know if that's a menthing, but you know, shiny
objects that, oh, I want thatnew app, and I want that app,
and I want to try that app, andI want to try that app, which is
(43:28):
what I have been doing, I mustadmit, but I do trial them.
Peter Compo (43:31):
We all suffer from this.
It's, it's very difficult.
It's very difficult to gothrough life and not being
seduced by shiny objects.
Nigel Rawlins (43:41):
I think we've done pretty well.
We've probably coveredeverything.
Peter Compo (43:43):
Well, maybe we could just mention that
sometimes the right strategy forbusting the bottleneck is not so
obvious.
And you can make a little matrixwhere you compare alternatives.
All right, alternative is one,to hire a publicist, help get
our reputation that way.
Alternative number two is weactually go bug people till they
(44:05):
pay attention.
Alternative number three is webuy new suits.
I don't know, whatever it isyou're gonna do, right?
And there's a disciplined way,relatively simple.
but a disciplined way to comparethose alternatives versus what
you think matters and what youthink will lead to busting the
bottleneck.
And that's called a strategyalternative matrix.
(44:28):
Mine isn't the first one everinvented, but I think mine has
some very unique features thatmake it very practical.
It's not all numbers.
It's not all words.
It's really down to earth andpeople can grasp it, I think,
pretty quick.
Um, but only if you need to lookat alternatives to, to bust in
the bottleneck.
(44:49):
I
Nigel Rawlins (44:49):
Again, that's a fantastic explanation of it.
Um, so Peter, I think we've donepretty well.
Is there anything else thatyou'd like to mention?
The book is available as aKindle, which is what I
purchased eventually, but Ithink it's a better read in the
physical book.
I think it's much better in yourhand and it's much easier to
(45:10):
refer back to.
So on the Kindle, it's oftendifficult to go back and reread.
I'm rereading it for the thirdtime now, going into aspects and
getting a deeper understandingof it.
Your writing is very, very good.
And there are gems in there thatevery time you go back into it
you get a better picture and abetter understanding.
(45:31):
So is there anything else thatwe haven't covered that you'd
like to say?
Peter Compo (45:34):
think we hit I think we hit the core and that
there's really no need to pileon it at, at this point.
I will say that we're working ona guidebook to help bring this
out in, in a, even a little moredetail and a little more
practical bent, kind of how toimplement those design
principles that are throughoutthe book and that it is design
(45:58):
principle based, not strategyadvice based.
Don't get my book if you'relooking for a strategy to do
something, right?
I don't give advice on what youshould do.
This is all about how to findyour own reality.
Discover what you know to be theright thing to do.
Nigel Rawlins (46:20):
Actually, a perfect way of explaining that,
there aren't answers in the backof the book.
You've got to figure it out anddo it yourself.
Peter Compo (46:28):
And isn't that real life?
And the way I describe it inpart two of the book, we hit
this a little bit, and maybeit's worth saying.
Creativity, innovation, andstrategy development is like
solving a puzzle.
It's not like following arecipe.
You pick your aspiration, thenyou do your bottleneck, then you
get your strategy, then you doyour tactics and plans and your
(46:50):
metrics, and then you implement.
No, it's all one big mess.
But imagine the puzzle that's alittle different from the
traditional.
It doesn't have clear endpoints.
Pieces change color.
You'll never have all thepieces.
I love it when people say, Oh,you know, as if this is
meaningful, you know, sometimesyou gotta make a decision
(47:12):
without all the data.
What do you mean?
There is no data of the futureand decisions are only about the
future, right?
Um, It's a puzzle that thepieces will never fit.
You'll never have them all.
They'll never have all of them.
You'll never even know where theends are.
And most important, there's nopicture on the top of the box
(47:33):
top that tells you what thepicture should like.
You've got to discover it.
That's what creativity andinnovation is about.
And what I've tried to providepeople is a theory, but more
important, a practice.
Simple, in many ways, methodsfor finding that picture for
yourself.
(47:54):
Because that's realinvestigation.
That's real creativity.
Nigel Rawlins (47:57):
That's fantastic.
All right, Peter.
How would you like people tofind you?
I will put all of this in theshow notes and your book and
where to find it.
So, how do they get in contactwith you, Peter?
Peter Compo (48:10):
I think, uh, you definitely can find me on
LinkedIn.
Of course, that's global.
So, um, message me there.
Uh, or you can go toemergentapproach.
com, which has quite a bit of,uh, extra information, some
additional examples.
Something we didn't talk about,but you might find fun is the
(48:32):
five disqualifiers of strategyin chapter eight, which are some
fun tests that you can use todecide whether you're right on
track.
There's some extra examples inaddition to the ones in the
book.
So emergentapproach.
com or LinkedIn.
And of course the book isavailable from online retailers
and obviously Amazon worldwide.
Nigel Rawlins (48:54):
Fantastic.
Peter, thank you very much forbeing my guest.
Um, I was very, very reluctantto, uh, to talk to you until I
read your book a couple of timesand really studied it.
I'm still obviously coming toterms with it, but you've been a
fabulous guest and I hope peoplehave got a good sense about what
(49:14):
you've been saying and howuseful it is.
So thank you for, for joiningme.
Peter Compo (49:18):
It's been a pleasure.
In today's episode, I'm speaking with Peter
(00:02):
Compo author of the emergentapproach to strategy.
Drawing on his 25 years atDuPont, Peter explains how
businesses can adapt and thrivein unpredictable environments.
His emergent thinking frameworkidentifies key obstacles and
guides decision-making,especially when a change in
direction is needed.
(00:22):
For independent professionalsand consultants, particularly
those in their sixties, Peteroffers a structured approach to
navigating uncertainty.
He emphasizes the importance ofidentifying and clearing
bottlenecks to achieve a desiredfuture.
His insights highlight the valueof adapting over time, staying
creative and overcomingchallenges with discipline and
(00:46):
flexibility Welcome, Peter, tothe Wisepreneurs podcast.
Could you tell us somethingabout yourself and where you're
from
Peter Compo (00:53):
I'm from New York City originally, and, where I
grew up in a musical family.
Long line of musicians, in andaround the city.
But then I went on to get adegree in chemical engineering.
Uh, got my, uh, PhD in chemicalengineering and moved to
Wilmington, Delaware, whereDuPont was where I went to work
(01:16):
for 25 years.
And so since then I've lived inWilmington, Delaware, which for
people outside of the States isnot far from Philadelphia.
Nigel Rawlins (01:25):
Now, when you said, in New York City, I think
I read somewhere your father wasa musician.
Peter Compo (01:30):
Both my parents were musicians and, uh, there
were many generations ofmusicians on, on both sides.
And, now my son's a musiciantoo.
So it continues.
Nigel Rawlins (01:40):
obviously a musician as well as a chemical
engineer.
Was it hard to not go into musicyourself?
Peter Compo (01:50):
Well, I was not doing that well back then.
My early days were not so good.
And so, the music world was notfor someone who needed
structure.
And going to school, and I wentto school forever.
(02:11):
And eventually they throw youout, you know.
That gave me the structure Ineeded actually, but I never
lost the music.
And in fact I'm doing more nowand I have a site where I have
quite a bit of music on myYouTube site and so forth.
So it never, I never lost it.
Nigel Rawlins (02:27):
Now, that's good to hear.
Well, Interesting you talk aboutmusic, you've had a musical
career, but to be honest, doinga PhD, that's no mean feat.
That's pretty hard work, and youknow, I don't think I could ever
do a PhD.
I don't think I'd have thediscipline to sit through it,
and especially chemicalengineering.
Peter Compo (02:45):
I, I think if you just kind of hang in there, um,
there were many people who didmuch better than me and were
much smarter than me, but ifyou, if you just kind of hang in
there, it, you start to get the,the knack of it over time.
And I enjoyed it.
And I enjoyed the the rigor ofit and the logic of it.
And, and so it was not a, not aburden to do.
Nigel Rawlins (03:08):
Well, that's what I can see, because we're going
to talk about your book, TheEmergent Approach to Strategy,
but the things that obviouslyhave informed what I've, I've
read in that book, which I thinkis absolutely fascinating and
absolutely fantastic.
And I'll be honest upfront, ithas changed the way I think
about business and my ownbusiness.
(03:28):
But also that musical thing,because would you say that
music's almost like a science inmany ways, even though it's seen
as creative and so on?
Peter Compo (03:37):
I think this is one of the themes in my life that
I've seen the same patterns.
in music and hard science andengineering and then in business
and operations and technologydevelopment.
I think all fields have adiscipline and a rigor.
It's just not obvious in themore abstract things in the
(04:00):
arts.
Music is very abstract, but itdoesn't mean that there's not
this kind of underlying deeprigor to it.
It's not arbitrary.
It's not anything goes.
And, uh, there is a greatcommonality amongst all
endeavors.
And also we tend to call musiccreative, but you know, you can
(04:22):
be creative in accounting too.
You can find new solutions.
You can find efficiencies andways to help visualize what's
going on.
And, you know, I, I always useaccounting as an example,
because I thought that therewere many times when I, when a
great finance accounting personcould bring such clarity, to a
business.
(04:42):
So I think we, we kind of labelthese things a little bit wrong
by calling the arts creative, ormaybe a R& D person who's making
new products creative, buteverybody else in the
organization is not creative.
I just don't think it's true.
It's just a different field.
It's a different endeavour.
Nigel Rawlins (05:02):
I think that's a very important point.
All right, you've had a careerof 25 years at DuPont.
Now I'm assuming you did a wholerange of things, and I want to
talk about your book, but what Iwant to know is, how did your
career lead you to the book.
And then we should talk aboutthe book.
Peter Compo (05:19):
Well, we started hitting it a little bit, all
through those differentendeavors and yes, I had a very
diverse career at, at DuPont.
I worked in many different waysand different people and, and
different, businesses and alsodifferent levels of the company
and marketing and business andoperations planning.
(05:41):
And I think that it was seeing,as I said before, the similar
patterns in all of these things,and the particular pattern we're
talking about, and that I'mtalking about, is the Darwinian
nature of creativity and changeand innovation.
And, that was the thread that Isaw and not worth going into how
(06:05):
I even saw it in my graduateresearch that I worked on, on
particles that would sticktogether.
And there was a survival factorthat was very, very natural
selection like, but just in the,in the physical domain.
And so I had this interest allalong in how does creativity
(06:26):
occur?
How does innovation reallyoccur?
And.
It stayed with me through allthose experiences.
But when I got to DuPont and thecorporate world, and certainly
DuPont was not alone in this, Iwas discouraged by the way
people thought about innovationand about strategy.
And the two are intimatelylinked, right?
(06:47):
A strategy is to try toinnovate, try to create
something, some capability, somephysical things, some tangible
thing, or a capability.
That is new that wasn't therebefore.
And, I was a little frustratedwith the state of affairs of
(07:08):
strategy and innovation thinkingthroughout the industry, not
just DuPont.
And I started taking notes and Istarted, uh, thinking, Hey, I
got to say something about this,you know?
And, it kind of grew over theyears.
I would just keep taking notesand keep thinking and
theorizing.
I came into contact with thingslike complex adaptive theory.
(07:31):
I studied biology a little bit.
I, um, I listened to otherpeople about it and it was just
one of those things that wasn'tplanned.
And at some point I said, if I'mgoing to do this right, I'm
going to have to quit, and justgo out and spend full time
researching and writing.
And that's kind of how ithappened.
Nigel Rawlins (07:51):
And the book emerged.
So
Peter Compo (07:55):
It did.
Nigel Rawlins (07:55):
what did your wife think?
Peter Compo (07:59):
Oh, she was perfectly happy to have me go in
the back and leave her alone,I'm sure.
Nigel Rawlins (08:04):
Because I was thinking you quit your job and
you went out to write and you'vegot this amazing book.
Let's talk about the book.
It's called The EmergentApproach to Strategy, Adaptive
Design and Execution.
Now, I'll be honest to thelisteners.
I have read it once on myKindle.
But I had to buy the physicalbook, work my way through it.
(08:24):
I've taken 160 pages of, well,160 cards of notes.
I've distilled them down toabout 50 and I've distilled it
down to a page now.
And I think I'm getting my headaround it, but Peter.
Tell us something about why isit the emergent approach to
strategy?
Peter Compo (08:44):
It's because I mentioned this Darwinian view of
an adaptive view of creativityand innovation.
Actually, Darwin and biologicalevolution are probably the most
inspiring case of what generallycan be called emergence.
And that is this remarkableproperty of things that action
(09:08):
and interactions and forces atlow levels, at the, what we can
call different things, the microlevel, the local level, can over
time, over generations, lead tothe emergence, the development
of new structures, newcapabilities, new ideas.
(09:30):
And that this theory ofemergence that has been, of
course, it's very old, DavidHume and so forth, you know,
it's always been in philosophy.
But over the last decades, it'sslowly becoming more and more a
true science and a trueunderstanding.
And I don't believe there'sanything that doesn't follow the
(09:54):
laws of emergence, and followthe laws of how adaptive systems
emerge.
And it's contrasted with theidea of you can plan the future.
It's contrasted with thatcreativity is this Eureka thing
where it's just serendipity orplanned, that you have a vision
(10:16):
and then you know how to go getit.
It's not those things.
And the idea of emergence isthat the alternative is this
discipline at those lower levelsthat lead to those things.
And it can be planned to someextent.
I think the word that's betteris you can shape the direction.
(10:37):
And isn't that what strategy'sfor?
Trying to shape a direction.
Instead of saying, Oh, I knowhow to get there for sure.
And then modifying over time asyou walk down the road, as you
implement.
Nigel Rawlins (10:51):
That is definitely what the book has
been telling me, that it's atthe lower level things that
eventually emerge to something.
And that the future is sodifficult to predict.
And that's why I loved yourbook.
The main thing I was thinkingabout in terms of your book is,
for example, the people I workwith often work for themselves,
(11:12):
they may have worked in acompany like yourself and
they've decided they're stillyoung in their 60s.
They don't want to stop working,but they don't want to work full
time, but they do want to dosomething.
And that's where I thought yourbook was fabulous in terms of
the practical parts of that ishow we actually, maybe design or
(11:33):
discover something that we cando or something we can do in
business.
So let's go through some partsof it.
So the emergent thing is becauseIt emerges from some of the
little things, but we have todecide what those little things
are, don't we in many ways.
And you start with we've got tohave an aspiration.
Let's start there.
(11:54):
So you suggest it starts with anaspiration.
Can you tell us a little bitmore about what you mean by
aspiration and what's involvedin that?
And then we'll work our waythrough the framework.
Okay.
Peter Compo (12:05):
Yes.
And by the way, before we do getinto that, you said something
important.
This whole idea of low levelsand high levels and how
emergence occurs.
It's very abstract and we don'thave a common language for this.
You're not required tounderstand all that theory,
(12:25):
right?
Because I've translated it intopractice, into simple practice
things that you don't have to bethinking about those things.
And you're starting off withpart of that practice, right?
That articulating an aspirationis a great way to start.
You don't need to absolutelystart this way, but generally
(12:46):
you need some sense of whatyou're trying to accomplish.
And I use the term aspirationfor probably two reasons.
I needed an overall term thatencompasses three types of
aspirations that people can use.
A vision type aspiration, broad,abstract.
I don't know the specifics, butI want to go and be like this,
(13:10):
right?
Or do something like this.
Or a mission, which is a littlemore specific, narrows things
down, puts you in a little moreof a box.
I'm going to do this, but I'mnot going to do that.
Visions are more, what do I wantto be?
What do I, how do I want tofeel?
All that kind of stuff.
And then there's a third type ofgeneral aspiration.
And that is specific goals.
(13:33):
I want to make X thousands ofdollars by 2025.
You know, pick it.
It's usually got a numberassociated with it and a date,
two numbers, a date and anumber.
So the theory of strategy andthe emergent approach doesn't
care what the aspiration is.
It's not just for business.
(13:53):
It could be for IT and HR, orpeople have even bugged me about
articulating my musicalcomposition strategy.
And what I'm trying to achievethere, what's my aspiration in
composing?
It doesn't matter, but theaspiration is very important
because it narrows the worlddown of what might be, and as
we're probably going to talkabout in one minute, how you
(14:16):
then work from that aspirationdown to something else.
Nigel Rawlins (14:20):
The other thing I threw into my aspiration is,
what are my values?
What's important?
All right.
So that the aspiration, buthaving an aspiration doesn't
actually make anything happen.
We've got to figure out what dowe have to do.
So let's, let's move into thatbit.
Peter Compo (14:36):
So, two quick points.
Your aspiration may change.
As you work.
Yeah, your vision may stay thesame, but your specifics, your
specific mission, your specificgoals may change as you
discover.
So I just want to put that outthere.
There's nothing that says in theprocess, and in fact, everything
(14:56):
is provisional when you're doingstrategy like this.
Think of it as a puzzle and youcould change any part in any
time.
So what do we do with anaspiration?
Unfortunately, the vast majorityof strategies out in the world,
and I'm talking about from thebiggest businesses to
governments, to the smallestcommunity group and everything
(15:18):
in between is to take thataspiration, that goal, and break
it into a million parts and makelong lists of sub goals.
Okay.
We want to increaseprofitability, or I want to get
10 new customers in a year.
Okay, what do I have to do toget 10 new customers?
Well, I got to do advertisingand I'm going to do that.
(15:41):
And I'm going to do a newcollateral and I'm going to do
that.
And I'm going to join thisnetwork and I'm going to pay for
this and I'm going to do, andI'm going to develop these new
products and just work backwardsuntil you've got essentially
what's a laundry list of bulletpoints and, you know, that, uh,
uh, that doesn't work.
(16:01):
That's not a strategy.
So in summary, the so manystrategies are designed where
they say, I'll start with mygoal, my aspiration, whatever it
is, and I'll break it up into amillion pieces.
And this is often calledcascading.
And this is why so manystrategies are lists of things
to do.
(16:22):
And they're not reallystrategies for a lot of reasons.
Um, instead, the trick is to askwhat's in the way.
I call it the bottleneck.
You don't have to use that term.
It can be what's an obstruction,what's a limitation, what's a
barrier, or just the words, whatis in the way of keeping you
(16:47):
from this aspiration.
Rumelt uses that term, RichardRumelt.
What's in the way?
This is really the magic tofinding a strategy.
And it's along the old folkwisdom, right?
Of what's become folk wisdom.
A problem well defined, Is aproblem half solved.
(17:08):
And that's really why the magicto finding strategy is
articulating and understandingwhat's the bottleneck.
So that's the second, that'sreally the second step after
aspiration.
Nigel Rawlins (17:23):
Okay, so to find the bottleneck, you use an
influence diagram.
Can you explain what you mean byan influence diagram?
Peter Compo (17:31):
Yes.
It's really, it's really quitesimple.
And in fact, it looks likecascading.
It looks just like this idea ofbreaking out a, um, an
aspiration, a goal specific orbroad, doesn't matter again, um,
(17:52):
working backwards from thatgoal.
Some people call it, uh, reverseengineering.
For example, Roger Martin andothers call it reverse
engineering.
And that's exactly what it is.
You work backwards and break upthat aspiration.
And what you find is that if youmove backwards from that
aspiration, the amount ofdecisions and actions and
(18:15):
choices you have to take growreally big.
So you have an aspiration to get10 new customers.
All of a sudden you find you gota list of how many things that
you might have to, or maybeshould do.
And so you get this, what I calla characteristic shape, of an
(18:35):
influence diagram.
It starts very small on one sideand then imagine a V or a flock
of, uh, of, uh, geese, right?
It's very small in the beginningand it opens up and it gets
bigger and bigger as it goesback and actually scrolls out a
little bit.
It's not even a straight V.
(18:55):
And on the left hand side, areall these possible actions you
can take.
That's why I use the flock ofgeese.
When you look up in the sky, yousee them, you see the lead bird
in the front, and then they'removing to the left, right?
You see the, the flock, the Vform out there.
(19:15):
You could draw it any way youwant.
I just happen to go from rightto left.
And, uh, so that's the way youshould visualize it.
That the right hand side is thepoint.
And that's the aspiration.
The left hand side is this hugenumber of things you might need
to do or want to do.
(19:36):
But again, it's not a strategyjust to list all those things.
So the second point, then, ishow do you decide which of those
things to do?
And that's where the bottleneckcomes in.
So smack in the middle of thispicture of this V on its side,
(19:58):
There's a line, a barrier, thebottleneck that says, I need to
bust that bottleneck.
I need to overcome it.
I need to resolve it.
I need to, I need to bustthrough it.
Whatever language or image youwant in your mind, Uh, I like
(20:22):
bottleneck because it impliesrate.
You increase the size of thebottleneck, you de constrain the
system and there's more flow.
So whatever image it is that youwant, think of that bottleneck
being right in the middle.
And now the question on allthose actions you might take is,
(20:42):
what is going to get at thebottleneck that's in the way.
Not everything matters.
And in fact, when everythingmatters, nothing matters.
And I just find it so remarkablethat no matter what the
aspiration is, and again, thisapplies to anything,
articulating the bottleneck, andit doesn't even have to be right
(21:04):
at the beginning, but you got tostart thinking about it.
It could be this, it could bethat, it could be this.
That's when the magic begins.
That's when you start saying,Hey, wait a minute.
If that's the problem, we shoulddo this.
Right?
And I never thought we should dothat, but you know, unless we
(21:25):
fix this.
It doesn't matter what else wedo.
So the bottleneck is this thingin the middle that you got to
fix.
You got to get around or elseyou can't get to the aspiration.
Nigel Rawlins (21:39):
it's the stuff we have to actually do.
And I think you mentioned thereare four killer problems to get
through that bottleneck.
And we had one of them, we wereactually going to do this a week
ago, and my internet was down,which was one of the killer
problems.
Peter Compo (21:56):
Well, uh, we could, uh, maybe, maybe we'll throw in
one other idea and then hit thekiller problems.
What is the strategy?
A strategy, so think back againto that V on its side.
And on the right hand side isyour single aspiration and you
work back and I draw it, if you,see the, the graphics, you will
(22:19):
see choice, action, choice,action, all of these
possibilities on this big side,right on the open V side.
What is a strategy?
A strategy is the central rule,guiding light.
The central principle that givesguidance for taking those
(22:39):
actions such that you bust thatbottleneck, not such that you
achieve your aspirations.
It is true that your whole pointis to achieve the aspiration,
but you can't do it directly.
You have to work through whatwill get rid of the bottleneck.
(23:00):
And as you get rid ofbottlenecks, your system
improves, you get better, andyou get the next bottleneck, and
you keep going, and you'reconstantly elevating the
situation as you fight offwhat's in the way.
Nigel Rawlins (23:14):
Now, that was very important, that, that idea
of strategy.
We should talk a little bit moreabout strategy and then come
back to what we call the killerproblems.
I had not realized that astrategy in the way you define
it is actually a rule to makedecisions against.
And, and I've got to be honest,I've done lots and lots of
things, but I've never beendisciplined enough to follow a
(23:37):
strategy rule until I've readyour book.
And I thought, Oh my golly, youknow, it's, it's taught me to
discipline rather than reading50 different types of books.
Maybe I need to concentrate onthe ones to help me reach my
aspiration.
So yes, I, I hadn't realizedthat through following your
process, you come up with astrategy rule that you then
(24:01):
stick to, which is really quiteimportant.
Peter Compo (24:04):
Well, this is a a major outcome of the model.
And I've derived strategy.
This is not me just saying, Hey,I think it's a rule.
It actually comes out of a modelof adaptive systems and a model
of emergence that you can followin the first half of the book.
Not even the first half, thefirst quarter of the book.
(24:24):
Again, you don't need thismodel.
to use the practice, but it'sgood to know that it comes from
something foundational.
There are very few people whohave derived the function of
strategy or the definition ofstrategy from a model.
I know of one other who did itfrom game theory, but the vast
majority of strategies in theworld are not a game theory type
(24:47):
situation, right?
You're not faced with two orthree very exact or very clear
choices.
And I'm also not the firstperson, though, to have
suggested that a strategy is a,uh, a rule.
I think I'm the first also to bevery clear that it is a central
rule.
It is the overarching rule thateverything must adhere to.
(25:13):
You can't have a rule that,okay, well, in this case, we're
not going to do it, right?
It is the overarching rule.
Then there's other tools,tactics and plans and other
things for dealing with smallerquestions.
But this one overall rule, astrategy gives the overall
guidance that will direct allthe resources to busting that
(25:37):
bottleneck in the service ofachieving the aspiration.
Nigel Rawlins (25:41):
And on that topic, you've actually got a
point of view about the use ofthe word strategy and strategic.
Let's go into that for a bit,and then we'll go back to
looking at the framework.
Peter Compo (25:50):
Well, it's quite easy to explain.
I think that 95 percent of allthe uses of instances of people
using the word strategicactually are not only not
needed, but do damage.
Because what happens is you putstrategic in front of a word and
(26:13):
all of a sudden you think you'vecreated insight or that you've
said something, uh, powerful,you know, our strategic
initiatives.
Okay.
so are we going to talk, whatabout our initiatives then?
Right?
Are we going to have nonimportant initiatives?
(26:35):
Who wants to have non importantinitiatives?
Okay, we're gonna have astrategic dashboard.
All right.
Who's going to sit around forthe meeting afterwards to talk
about the non strategicdashboard?
It's a nonsense word in so manycases.
And not only do you reduce thenoise level of the discussion,
(26:57):
but you force people to talk inplain English.
No jargon.
What do you mean a strategicinitiative?
Well, uh, uh, you know, okay,let me think.
Um, one that we must do?
Well, I'm not so sure aboutthat.
Maybe then it isn't so importantthat we do it.
Well, what does it mean, youknow?
(27:19):
So, and I've heard people talkabout this a little bit too, but
I'm really bringing it to thefore.
Get rid of the word strategic.
And it'll help you think.
Nigel Rawlins (27:30):
I've got to agree so much.
Anybody who's seen my writing,if you do see that word
strategic in there, it means Ididn't proofread it properly.
I have been avoiding using itsince I've read your book.
I see it everywhere.
Yeah, you're right.
It's a very busy word that meansnothing, but it, it sounds good,
doesn't it, to some people.
But if everyone's using it, itmeans nothing.
Peter Compo (27:52):
You know, I think there's an occasional time, you
know, okay, we need somestrategic thinking here.
I think that has some meaningbecause it says we have to think
about the full picture.
We're not allowed to just lookat a sub part of this thing.
Okay, that's valid.
I can live with that.
Uh, strategic management?
(28:12):
Not so sure.
What kind of management is notstrategic?
Oh, is that the management wherewe're not going to follow the
strategy?
You know, in most cases, youdon't need it.
Nigel Rawlins (28:24):
If you work in a job and you decide you're going
to be self employed or aconsultant or something like
that, you suddenly start usingbusiness lingo and, you know,
strategy is one of them, andmodelling, and I guess there's a
whole heap of them.
And just because you use thosewords does not mean you actually
understand it or it actuallymeans anything.
(28:45):
Okay, so where do we go fromthere?
Peter Compo (28:46):
We took a little detour to talk about strategic,
but we, um, but getting back,we, we've defined what I call
the triad so far.
And that triad of aspiration,and remember, that can be a
simple goal, it doesn't have tobe a big deal, uh, or it can be
a big deal.
(29:07):
Um, if the aspiration is a bigdeal, your bottlenecks going to
be a big deal.
And your strategy is going to bea big deal.
If your aspiration is small,your bottleneck may be small.
Your strategy may be small.
Um, but you have this aspirationon the right hand side, this V,
you've got the bottleneck in themiddle.
That's what's in the way ofachieving it.
(29:27):
And the strategy is the centralrule that brings together all of
the choices and determines whichare truly needed for achieving
the aspiration by busting thebottleneck.
And I call it the aspirationbottleneck strategy triad.
(29:49):
We
Nigel Rawlins (29:49):
should mention that within that V are all the
things that we think we shouldbe doing and then we group them
together a bit and then look atthe interactions because
basically you labelled them allthe variables that are affecting
what we need to do to meet theaspiration and then out of all
that we, we sort out What's themajor bottleneck?
(30:12):
And then, okay, that's the majorbottleneck, this is how we're
going to bust it, because we'regoing to use this strategy rule.
And then you talked about killerproblems.
The killer problems are the oneswe've got to overcome.
Peter Compo (30:24):
Yeah, the killer problems are smack in the middle
of this model of how strategywas derived from a model of
emergence, a model of adaptivesystems.
And what they say, if you keepthat V in your mind again, uh,
that there are some fundamentalbarriers, not just your specific
(30:45):
bottleneck, but fundamental, uh,problems that exist in all
creative endeavors, all changeendeavors.
And the four are, one we'vetalked about a lot.
There are so many possiblechoices.
They have to be made coherently,and there's no way to do that
(31:07):
without some kind of guidance,some kind of rule.
There's others though.
The second is, there's a timedelay between when you take the
actions you think are right.
There's a time delay betweenyour hypothesis, your strategy
framework is a hypothesis,right?
(31:27):
There's a time delay betweenwhen you take the actions and
when you find out whether or notyou're getting the result you
thought you should get.
And the bigger and moredifficult the program is, the
longer that takes.
You're trying to create a wholenew product line, you know, and
you think it's going to be fouryears.
Well, it's kind of tough to waitfour years to find out whether
(31:48):
you're doing the right things,you need a better way.
Right?
So the time delay between actionand desired result is the second
killer problem.
The third killer problem is.
There are influences outside ofyour control.
Government, regulation, all of asudden.
(32:09):
Interest rates is one that inthe last few years, how long did
we have low interest rates thatpeople got lulled into the
belief that money was free for,for how long, right?
And then all of a sudden, boing,they're, uh, they're 5, percent
again, right?
Uh, depending which one you'relooking at.
(32:30):
Competitor action.
Can't control it.
You might influence it, but youcan't control it.
Uh, macro trends around productsand markets.
You know, it's obvious thatthere are things out of
anybody's control.
This adds a whole anotheruncertainty for how to choose
what to do.
(32:51):
To get a certain result in thefuture.
And the fourth, in some ways, isa summary of the other three.
And that is, if you look at thatV again, with all those possible
choices on the left hand sideand possible actions and
decisions you can make, and youlook at that, aspiration, what
(33:11):
you're trying to achieve on theright, it's just terrible, but
the thing that's most important,that aspiration on the right and
achieving it, is the leastactionable thing.
It's all the actions anddecisions on the left hand side
that are granular enough thatyou can actually do them.
(33:32):
You can choose, to create a newproduct or choose to invest in
new, new development or newmarketing plans or partnerships
or whatever we might use for aspecific example of how to grow
customers.
You can do those things, butultimately they don't matter
unless they filter up toachieving the aspiration.
(33:55):
So I like to somewhat think ofthis fourth killer problem is
almost a summary that what'smost important, the emergent
outcome you want, the result youwant in the future can't be
managed, cannot be directlyachieved, but the things you can
directly do.
don't ultimately matter.
(34:16):
And so what it says that youcan't work directly on what
ultimately matters.
This is life.
This is creativity.
And this is what this model ofstrategy and model of emergence
is trying to reveal.
And that's where we get fromthat, we're able to say, well,
what is a strategy?
What is a bottleneck?
(34:37):
And how do we, how do we bridgethese killer problems?
How do we solve them?
And actually, we come up with afew, a few requirements of a
solution to the killer problems.
One is you got to give peoplereal time guidance.
You can't say, I want you towork on this aspiration of
developing a new product linethat we think is going to take
(34:58):
four years from now.
That's not enough guidance.
There has to be more specificguidance about what are the
nature of the products?
Or what are they aimed at andwhat resources we have and
things like that.
And that information needs to besomething can be followed in
real time.
The second thing is a solutionhas to be on the left hand side
(35:19):
of the influence diagram.
It can't be, as we just said,directly getting the aspiration.
And the third is the strategy.
The solution to the killerproblems must unify all those
decisions.
So you can't say you have astrategy for growing to 10 new
customers within a year or two,um, or whatever timeframe, uh,
(35:44):
your strategy is to create a newproduct line, you know, that may
not give guidance to the rest ofthe organization.
It has to unify.
And the end of the story is thefunctional thing that most can
meet those three requirementsand are the best solution to
those killer problems that areuniversal to all creative
(36:08):
effort.
is a rule, a central rule.
And that's why a strategy is sopowerful.
It can achieve meeting theserequirements.
It's the best possible way tomeet the requirements, tactics,
plans, metrics, they can allmeet it to some extent, but
(36:29):
they're limited.
That's why it starts with thestrategy central rule, and then
you fill in with all that otherstuff to complete the story.
Nigel Rawlins (36:37):
It's actually quite a, bit of work to actually
come up with all of that, isn'tit?
Because there's a whole lot ofthinking, it's quite a
discipline.
And the whole point of I wantedyou on the podcast for is to
explain to people who may beworking for themselves or
thinking of becoming selfemployed that It may be coming
across complex, what we'retalking about, but it is
(37:00):
actually quite simple when youstart to think about it.
But it is a discipline ofthinking.
A discipline for makingdecisions, but you've also got
some frameworks that youdiscussed to work through to get
a better picture of this.
Could, could you talk a littlebit about those frameworks?
There was a simple one, and thenthere's the more complex one,
(37:23):
which you, you call the,strategy alternative matrix.
Peter Compo (37:26):
And again, I want to stress.
You don't have to keep all thistheory in mind.
I, we're just, uh, you know,we're just proving it exists and
giving some logic for whystrategy is defined the way it
is.
It's not needed to use thesetools.
So a simple tool is the onewe've already talked about.
(37:48):
The triad, the, uh, the simplestatement of, can we articulate
our aspiration?
Can we articulate and discoverand agree on what's really in
the way of that aspiration andthen what is a central rule that
will help us focus on that?
And maybe we should give a verysimple, you know, follow up on
(38:10):
that example we were giving.
We feel as though we need toincrease the number of customers
we have.
And a traditional way is towrite down all the things that a
business has to do and do itbetter, right?
Every single thing.
Or, We say, well, what's reallyin the way?
(38:31):
Is it our reputation?
Is it the products?
Is it our resources to be ableto to get out to people?
Is it people don't know aboutus?
Is it lack of skilled staff tobe able to do it?
I mean, we could just go throughall the things that businesses
(38:52):
deal with.
I'm trying to keep in mindsmaller businesses that you, you
have in your uh, network here,right?
Um, All of these things can be,uh, can be relevant and 10 times
more that you could think of,right?
That can be in the way.
Um, but what if it turns outthat there's one that's really,
(39:15):
really the big one?
Maybe it is.
you need to get a reputationfirst.
Somehow you've got to get somekind of view that you know what
the hell you're talking about,or that you're a relevant player
in this thing, and you mightthink that having a big brochure
(39:35):
of all your products and allyour services and, you know,
developing them to the lastlittle bit, um, it might turn
out that it would have no effectuntil your reputation gets out
there.
And so the strategy rule mightbe something along the lines of,
we're going to put everythingelse on hold and we're going to
(39:58):
say, how the hell are we goingto bust this bottleneck of
reputation or mind space thatpeople would think we're, we're
a player in this, in this game.
There's so many different waysthat you might go after that,
and it might depend on otherthings, like how much money you
have and so forth, whether youcan buy that, or whether you
(40:20):
have to do it by, by yourself,or whether it's a matter of
getting a great marketingperson, or whatever it might be.
But the point is, if you've got10 things you're going to focus
on, and that one gets one tenthof the focus, um, you're
probably not going to get there.
Or get there very slowly.
(40:41):
We can come up with otherexamples, you know, but, uh, I
want to be sure that there'ssome sense of what that central
rule is.
And then the trick is you can'tviolate it.
Then somebody says, Oh, come on,we're going to work on some new
services, new products.
No.
And how many good strategistshave said the term, you know,
have said the most importantthing is to say no.
(41:04):
right?
The most important thing is todefine what you're not going to
do.
And that follows perfectlybecause what defines what not to
do?
A rule.
A rule is something that tellsyou what not to do.
And you've got to stick withthat rule, even though shiny
objects appear all the time.
Nigel Rawlins (41:24):
That is my biggest problem.
You've, you've explained itperfectly, but you know, the
other day I had that aha momentwith myself.
That I realised, oh my golly,I'm trying to do too many
things.
I'm going to have to have thatstrategic rule.
That's a perfect explanation.
And I think that's almostprobably sufficient enough
rather than us to go into thedetails of the other things.
(41:47):
So that is actually fantastic.
Peter Compo (41:49):
You know, the shiny object thing is really a good
image in this because, you know,there are so many things that
are seductive.
And in fact, often I describestrategy as a way to avoid
seduction.
Seduction about the things thaton the surface seem to be good.
(42:11):
But if you really understand thebottleneck and what's in the
way, and you're really adheringto your rule, you'd find out
they're not, they're not good.
And, uh, you know, a classic onewould be, I get this in
nonprofits that I, that I'minvolved with and serve on
boards and help, fundraising.
It's so hard to let go of allthese smaller donors, right?
(42:36):
Let go to put your energy intolarger potential donors.
But somebody calls, right?
And says, you know, will you dothis?
Can we do this?
And, and you have to have theguts to say no.
And that shiny thing is gotta belet go.
For example, and you might haveto live through some pain and
(42:56):
that's another factor ofstrategy, right?
There's got to be trade offs andthere's got to be pain involved
because you have to give upsomething to get something.
Nigel Rawlins (43:05):
perfectly put.
I think I have to cut up mycredit card.
That's the next, that's probablyone of my bottlenecks there.
Cut the credit card up.
But I don't know if that's a menthing, but you know, shiny
objects that, oh, I want thatnew app, and I want that app,
and I want to try that app, andI want to try that app, which is
(43:28):
what I have been doing, I mustadmit, but I do trial them.
Peter Compo (43:31):
We all suffer from this.
It's, it's very difficult.
It's very difficult to gothrough life and not being
seduced by shiny objects.
Nigel Rawlins (43:41):
I think we've done pretty well.
We've probably coveredeverything.
Peter Compo (43:43):
Well, maybe we could just mention that
sometimes the right strategy forbusting the bottleneck is not so
obvious.
And you can make a little matrixwhere you compare alternatives.
All right, alternative is one,to hire a publicist, help get
our reputation that way.
Alternative number two is weactually go bug people till they
(44:05):
pay attention.
Alternative number three is webuy new suits.
I don't know, whatever it isyou're gonna do, right?
And there's a disciplined way,relatively simple.
but a disciplined way to comparethose alternatives versus what
you think matters and what youthink will lead to busting the
bottleneck.
And that's called a strategyalternative matrix.
(44:28):
Mine isn't the first one everinvented, but I think mine has
some very unique features thatmake it very practical.
It's not all numbers.
It's not all words.
It's really down to earth andpeople can grasp it, I think,
pretty quick.
Um, but only if you need to lookat alternatives to, to bust in
the bottleneck.
(44:49):
I
Nigel Rawlins (44:49):
Again, that's a fantastic explanation of it.
Um, so Peter, I think we've donepretty well.
Is there anything else thatyou'd like to mention?
The book is available as aKindle, which is what I
purchased eventually, but Ithink it's a better read in the
physical book.
I think it's much better in yourhand and it's much easier to
(45:10):
refer back to.
So on the Kindle, it's oftendifficult to go back and reread.
I'm rereading it for the thirdtime now, going into aspects and
getting a deeper understandingof it.
Your writing is very, very good.
And there are gems in there thatevery time you go back into it
you get a better picture and abetter understanding.
(45:31):
So is there anything else thatwe haven't covered that you'd
like to say?
Peter Compo (45:34):
think we hit I think we hit the core and that
there's really no need to pileon it at, at this point.
I will say that we're working ona guidebook to help bring this
out in, in a, even a little moredetail and a little more
practical bent, kind of how toimplement those design
principles that are throughoutthe book and that it is design
(45:58):
principle based, not strategyadvice based.
Don't get my book if you'relooking for a strategy to do
something, right?
I don't give advice on what youshould do.
This is all about how to findyour own reality.
Discover what you know to be theright thing to do.
Nigel Rawlins (46:20):
Actually, a perfect way of explaining that,
there aren't answers in the backof the book.
You've got to figure it out anddo it yourself.
Peter Compo (46:28):
And isn't that real life?
And the way I describe it inpart two of the book, we hit
this a little bit, and maybeit's worth saying.
Creativity, innovation, andstrategy development is like
solving a puzzle.
It's not like following arecipe.
You pick your aspiration, thenyou do your bottleneck, then you
get your strategy, then you doyour tactics and plans and your
(46:50):
metrics, and then you implement.
No, it's all one big mess.
But imagine the puzzle that's alittle different from the
traditional.
It doesn't have clear endpoints.
Pieces change color.
You'll never have all thepieces.
I love it when people say, Oh,you know, as if this is
meaningful, you know, sometimesyou gotta make a decision
(47:12):
without all the data.
What do you mean?
There is no data of the futureand decisions are only about the
future, right?
Um, It's a puzzle that thepieces will never fit.
You'll never have them all.
They'll never have all of them.
You'll never even know where theends are.
And most important, there's nopicture on the top of the box
(47:33):
top that tells you what thepicture should like.
You've got to discover it.
That's what creativity andinnovation is about.
And what I've tried to providepeople is a theory, but more
important, a practice.
Simple, in many ways, methodsfor finding that picture for
yourself.
(47:54):
Because that's realinvestigation.
That's real creativity.
Nigel Rawlins (47:57):
That's fantastic.
All right, Peter.
How would you like people tofind you?
I will put all of this in theshow notes and your book and
where to find it.
So, how do they get in contactwith you, Peter?
Peter Compo (48:10):
I think, uh, you definitely can find me on
LinkedIn.
Of course, that's global.
So, um, message me there.
Uh, or you can go toemergentapproach.
com, which has quite a bit of,uh, extra information, some
additional examples.
Something we didn't talk about,but you might find fun is the
(48:32):
five disqualifiers of strategyin chapter eight, which are some
fun tests that you can use todecide whether you're right on
track.
There's some extra examples inaddition to the ones in the
book.
So emergentapproach.
com or LinkedIn.
And of course the book isavailable from online retailers
and obviously Amazon worldwide.
Nigel Rawlins (48:54):
Fantastic.
Peter, thank you very much forbeing my guest.
Um, I was very, very reluctantto, uh, to talk to you until I
read your book a couple of timesand really studied it.
I'm still obviously coming toterms with it, but you've been a
fabulous guest and I hope peoplehave got a good sense about what
(49:14):
you've been saying and howuseful it is.
So thank you for, for joiningme.
Peter Compo (49:18):
It's been a pleasure.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com