Strategy Consulting – Summary of Reading Material + Lecture Notes
Week 1: Structured Problem Diagnosis
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 1 & 2
• Hambrick, D. C., & Fredrickson, J. W. (2005). Are you sure you have a strategy?
Academy of Management Executive, 19(4).
• Collis, D. J., & Rukstad, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your strategy is?. Harvard
business review, 86(4), 82-90.
• Jarzabkowski, P., & Whittington, R. (2008). A strategy-as-practice approach to
strategy research and education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 282-286.
• Martin, R. L. (2010). The execution trap. Drawing a line between strategy and
execution almost guarantees failure. Harvard Business Review, 88(7-8), 64-71.
• Bingham, C. B., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Furr, N. R. (2011). Which strategy when? MIT
Sloan Management Review.
• Lecture Notes Week 1
Week 2: Problem Disaggregation & Prioritization
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 3
• Bland, D. J., & Osterwalder, A. (2019). Testing business ideas: A field guide for rapid
experimentation (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons. Page 23-39.
• Lafley, A. G., Martin, R. L., Rivkin, J. W., & Siggelkow, N. (2012). Bringing science to
the art of strategy. Harvard business review, 90(9), 56-66.
• Kaplan & Norton, 2008. Mastering the Management System. Harvard Business
review.
• Gottfredson, Schaubert & Saenz, 2008. The new leader’s guide to diagnosing the
business. Harvard Business Review.
• Lecture Notes Week 2
Week 3: Structured Solution Development & Communication
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 4, 5 &7
• Williams, 1997. How to Write a Memo or Report. Harvard Business Review.
• Weeks, H. 2005. The best memo you will ever write. Harvard Business Review.
• Higgins, J. M. (2005). The eight ‘S’s of successful strategy execution. Journal of
change management, 5(1), 3-13.
• Collis, D. J. (2021). Why do so many strategies fail. Harvard Business Review, 99(4),
82-93.
• Lecture Notes Week 3
Week 4: Designing & Executing Business Experiments
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 6
• Bland, D. J., & Osterwalder, A. (2019). Testing business ideas: A field guide for rapid
experimentation (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons. Introduction chapter, p. 40-87, p. 88-
105, p. 230-235, p. 310-327.
• Felin, T., Gambardella, A., Stern, S., & Zenger, T. (2019). Lean startup and the
business model: Experimentation revisited. Forthcoming in Long Range Planning.
, • Bocken, N., & Snihur, Y. (2020). Lean Startup and the business model: Experimenting
for novelty and impact. Long Range Planning, 53(4), 101953.
• Lecture Notes Week 4
Week 5: Managing the Consultancy Firm
• Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. (2001). Colonizing knowledge: Commodification as a
dynamic of jurisdictional expansion in professional service firms. Human relations,
54(7), 933-953.
• Maister, D. H. (1982). Balancing the professional service firm. Sloan management
review, 24(1), 15-29.
• Anand, N., Gardner, H. K., & Morris, T. (2007). Knowledge-based innovation:
Emergence and embedding of new practice areas in management consulting firms.
Academy of management journal, 50(2), 406-428.
• Lecture Notes Week 5
,Week 1 (Structured Problem Diagnosis)
Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving (Conn & McLean) – Chapter 1 (Learn the
Bulletproof Problem-Solving Approach)
Problem solving = decision making when there is complexity and uncertainty that rules out
obvious answers, and when there are consequences that make the work to get good
answers worth it.
• Iterative process à at each stage understanding of the problem is improved and
used to refine early answers.
The bulletproof problem-solving process is both a complete process
and iterative cycle. It can be completed over any timeframe with the
information at hand and it consists out of seven steps:
1) Define the problem – Get a problem definition that is agreed
upon by those involved in deciding. The problem definition
must be specific, not general; it should clearly define
measurable success. It must be bounded by a specific time
frame and aligned with the decision maker’s values.
Additionally, it should involve a clear, actionable plan.
2) Disaggregate the issues – Here, the defined problem is Figure 1. The bulletproof problem solving cycle
broken down into component parts. Logic trees of various
types are employed to disassemble problems into parts for
analysis, driving from alternative hypotheses of the answer. This is an important step,
as you can isolate the most important analyses.
3) Prioritize the issues, prune the tree – Identifying which branches of the logic tree
have the biggest impact on the problem, including which you can most affect, and
focus your initial attention on these (i.e., being on the critical path).
4) Build a workplan and timetable – Once component parts are defined and prioritized,
you link each part to a plan for fact gathering and analysis. This workplan and
timetable assigns team members to analytic tasks with specific outputs and
completion dates.
5) Conduct critical analyses – This is the longest step in the process. Usually starting
with simple heuristics to get an order of magnitude understanding of each problem
component and to assess priorities quickly. This helps in understanding what needs
more work and what needs more complex analytic techniques.
6) Synthesize findings from the analyses – Findings have to be assembled into a logical
structure to test validity and then synthesized in a way that convinces others of your
solution.
7) Prepare a powerful communication – Develop a storyline from the conclusions that
links back to the problem statement and the issues that were defined. Problem
solving isn’t over until you can synthesize the results of your analysis and tell a story
that convinces someone to act.
The boundaries on problem definition are really important to agree on up front, otherwise
you can take other factors into account which are not part of the actual problem.
, Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving (Conn & McLean) – Chapter 2 (Define the Problem)
Getting problem definition right, including boundaries, is essential to good problem solving
and can be an essential competitive advantage. Good problem statements have the
following characteristics:
• Outcomes focused: A clear statement of the problem to be solved, expressed in
outcomes, not activities or intermediate outputs.
• Specific and measurable wherever possible.
• Clearly time bound.
• Designed to explicitly address decision-maker values and boundaries, including the
accuracy needed and the scale of aspirations.
• Structured to allow sufficient scope for
creativity and unexpected results – too
narrowly scoped problems can artificially
constrain solutions.
• Solved at the highest level possible,
meaning for the organization as a whole,
not just optimized for a part or a partial
solution (e.g., what makes sense for a
single unit is not what makes sense for
the company overall).
SMART = specific, measurable, action oriented,
relevant, and timely. Though, SMART doesn’t
cover all factors, still make sure to have an
outcomes focus and work at the highest level.
Problem definition is more than just your problem statement; you need to know the
boundaries of the problem, the timeframe for solution, the accuracy required, and any other
forces affecting the decision. Problem statements keep on getting better when facts are
added to sharpen the problem definition. Setting up a dialogue with questions that have to
be answered is key to getting the required sharpness in problem definition. Consequently,
sharp problem statements lead to better and more testable hypotheses.
One of the most common problem statements related to the user experience. Design
thinking has developed as a powerful tool for problem solvers tackling consumer needs and
the user experience, often in product or service design situations. This is done through
sustained interaction over time, including interviewing, observing, and researching.
Design thinking is presented as an iterative and fluid
process with different stages: empathize, define, ideate,
build, test, and deliver. Design thinking methodology
that focuses on user understanding, research, and
iterating with prototypes, is a powerful tool to use in
conjunction with the seven-steps problem solving
approach, especially in the consumer/product space and
when novel/creative ideas are critical to the solution.
Week 1: Structured Problem Diagnosis
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 1 & 2
• Hambrick, D. C., & Fredrickson, J. W. (2005). Are you sure you have a strategy?
Academy of Management Executive, 19(4).
• Collis, D. J., & Rukstad, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your strategy is?. Harvard
business review, 86(4), 82-90.
• Jarzabkowski, P., & Whittington, R. (2008). A strategy-as-practice approach to
strategy research and education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 282-286.
• Martin, R. L. (2010). The execution trap. Drawing a line between strategy and
execution almost guarantees failure. Harvard Business Review, 88(7-8), 64-71.
• Bingham, C. B., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Furr, N. R. (2011). Which strategy when? MIT
Sloan Management Review.
• Lecture Notes Week 1
Week 2: Problem Disaggregation & Prioritization
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 3
• Bland, D. J., & Osterwalder, A. (2019). Testing business ideas: A field guide for rapid
experimentation (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons. Page 23-39.
• Lafley, A. G., Martin, R. L., Rivkin, J. W., & Siggelkow, N. (2012). Bringing science to
the art of strategy. Harvard business review, 90(9), 56-66.
• Kaplan & Norton, 2008. Mastering the Management System. Harvard Business
review.
• Gottfredson, Schaubert & Saenz, 2008. The new leader’s guide to diagnosing the
business. Harvard Business Review.
• Lecture Notes Week 2
Week 3: Structured Solution Development & Communication
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 4, 5 &7
• Williams, 1997. How to Write a Memo or Report. Harvard Business Review.
• Weeks, H. 2005. The best memo you will ever write. Harvard Business Review.
• Higgins, J. M. (2005). The eight ‘S’s of successful strategy execution. Journal of
change management, 5(1), 3-13.
• Collis, D. J. (2021). Why do so many strategies fail. Harvard Business Review, 99(4),
82-93.
• Lecture Notes Week 3
Week 4: Designing & Executing Business Experiments
• Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving – Conn & McLean - Chapter 6
• Bland, D. J., & Osterwalder, A. (2019). Testing business ideas: A field guide for rapid
experimentation (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons. Introduction chapter, p. 40-87, p. 88-
105, p. 230-235, p. 310-327.
• Felin, T., Gambardella, A., Stern, S., & Zenger, T. (2019). Lean startup and the
business model: Experimentation revisited. Forthcoming in Long Range Planning.
, • Bocken, N., & Snihur, Y. (2020). Lean Startup and the business model: Experimenting
for novelty and impact. Long Range Planning, 53(4), 101953.
• Lecture Notes Week 4
Week 5: Managing the Consultancy Firm
• Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. (2001). Colonizing knowledge: Commodification as a
dynamic of jurisdictional expansion in professional service firms. Human relations,
54(7), 933-953.
• Maister, D. H. (1982). Balancing the professional service firm. Sloan management
review, 24(1), 15-29.
• Anand, N., Gardner, H. K., & Morris, T. (2007). Knowledge-based innovation:
Emergence and embedding of new practice areas in management consulting firms.
Academy of management journal, 50(2), 406-428.
• Lecture Notes Week 5
,Week 1 (Structured Problem Diagnosis)
Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving (Conn & McLean) – Chapter 1 (Learn the
Bulletproof Problem-Solving Approach)
Problem solving = decision making when there is complexity and uncertainty that rules out
obvious answers, and when there are consequences that make the work to get good
answers worth it.
• Iterative process à at each stage understanding of the problem is improved and
used to refine early answers.
The bulletproof problem-solving process is both a complete process
and iterative cycle. It can be completed over any timeframe with the
information at hand and it consists out of seven steps:
1) Define the problem – Get a problem definition that is agreed
upon by those involved in deciding. The problem definition
must be specific, not general; it should clearly define
measurable success. It must be bounded by a specific time
frame and aligned with the decision maker’s values.
Additionally, it should involve a clear, actionable plan.
2) Disaggregate the issues – Here, the defined problem is Figure 1. The bulletproof problem solving cycle
broken down into component parts. Logic trees of various
types are employed to disassemble problems into parts for
analysis, driving from alternative hypotheses of the answer. This is an important step,
as you can isolate the most important analyses.
3) Prioritize the issues, prune the tree – Identifying which branches of the logic tree
have the biggest impact on the problem, including which you can most affect, and
focus your initial attention on these (i.e., being on the critical path).
4) Build a workplan and timetable – Once component parts are defined and prioritized,
you link each part to a plan for fact gathering and analysis. This workplan and
timetable assigns team members to analytic tasks with specific outputs and
completion dates.
5) Conduct critical analyses – This is the longest step in the process. Usually starting
with simple heuristics to get an order of magnitude understanding of each problem
component and to assess priorities quickly. This helps in understanding what needs
more work and what needs more complex analytic techniques.
6) Synthesize findings from the analyses – Findings have to be assembled into a logical
structure to test validity and then synthesized in a way that convinces others of your
solution.
7) Prepare a powerful communication – Develop a storyline from the conclusions that
links back to the problem statement and the issues that were defined. Problem
solving isn’t over until you can synthesize the results of your analysis and tell a story
that convinces someone to act.
The boundaries on problem definition are really important to agree on up front, otherwise
you can take other factors into account which are not part of the actual problem.
, Textbook: Bulletproof Problem Solving (Conn & McLean) – Chapter 2 (Define the Problem)
Getting problem definition right, including boundaries, is essential to good problem solving
and can be an essential competitive advantage. Good problem statements have the
following characteristics:
• Outcomes focused: A clear statement of the problem to be solved, expressed in
outcomes, not activities or intermediate outputs.
• Specific and measurable wherever possible.
• Clearly time bound.
• Designed to explicitly address decision-maker values and boundaries, including the
accuracy needed and the scale of aspirations.
• Structured to allow sufficient scope for
creativity and unexpected results – too
narrowly scoped problems can artificially
constrain solutions.
• Solved at the highest level possible,
meaning for the organization as a whole,
not just optimized for a part or a partial
solution (e.g., what makes sense for a
single unit is not what makes sense for
the company overall).
SMART = specific, measurable, action oriented,
relevant, and timely. Though, SMART doesn’t
cover all factors, still make sure to have an
outcomes focus and work at the highest level.
Problem definition is more than just your problem statement; you need to know the
boundaries of the problem, the timeframe for solution, the accuracy required, and any other
forces affecting the decision. Problem statements keep on getting better when facts are
added to sharpen the problem definition. Setting up a dialogue with questions that have to
be answered is key to getting the required sharpness in problem definition. Consequently,
sharp problem statements lead to better and more testable hypotheses.
One of the most common problem statements related to the user experience. Design
thinking has developed as a powerful tool for problem solvers tackling consumer needs and
the user experience, often in product or service design situations. This is done through
sustained interaction over time, including interviewing, observing, and researching.
Design thinking is presented as an iterative and fluid
process with different stages: empathize, define, ideate,
build, test, and deliver. Design thinking methodology
that focuses on user understanding, research, and
iterating with prototypes, is a powerful tool to use in
conjunction with the seven-steps problem solving
approach, especially in the consumer/product space and
when novel/creative ideas are critical to the solution.
