Strategy

What to do when your strategy is not working

When outcomes stop matching the effort being invested, the answer is usually not more delivery. It is a pause to understand whether the direction itself still holds.

Why struggling strategies need recalibration rather than blind momentum, and how to separate execution issues from deeper flaws in the thinking behind them.

07 April 20246 min read

Why this moment is easy to ignore

Underneath the visible progress, there is often a growing sense that the outcomes are not matching the effort being put in.

That moment is easy to ignore.

Because admitting a is not working is uncomfortable.

A lot has usually already been invested by that point. Time, budget, , internal momentum. The has likely been presented, agreed, and socialised across the organisation. Walking that back can feel like failure, so the natural instinct is to push forward, refine execution, and hope the results start to improve.

Sometimes they do.

Often, they do not.

The instinct to push forward can keep a weak strategy alive long after the signals say it needs to be challenged.

Why more effort is often applied to the wrong direction

What tends to happen instead is that more effort is applied to the same direction.

Teams double down on , more are added, more are made, and more optimisation is layered on top of what already exists. The assumption is that the problem sits in how the work is being executed, rather than questioning whether the direction itself is correct.

This is where begin to quietly break down.

Because execution can only take you so far if the underlying thinking is wrong.

Key takeaway

If the strategy itself is flawed, extra delivery effort usually amplifies the problem rather than solving it.

Why the first step should be a pause

The first thing that needs to happen when a is not delivering is not more work.

It is a pause.

Not a full stop, but a deliberate step back to understand what is actually happening.

This is where many organisations struggle, because stepping back feels like losing momentum. In reality, it is the only way to regain control. Without that pause, decisions continue to be made based on assumptions that may no longer hold true.

The focus needs to shift from to understanding.

What to examine before changing direction

That starts with looking at the evidence properly.

What is actually happening in the ? Where are users dropping off? Which parts of the experience are being used, and which are being ignored? What is coming through from users, customer support, or internal teams? It is important to look at this objectively, without trying to justify the existing direction.

This is not about defending the .

It is about testing it.

Once that picture is clear, the next step is to identify where the problem sits.

How to tell whether the issue is execution or strategy

In some cases, the itself is sound, but the execution has not aligned with it. may have been delivered in a way that does not fully address the problem, or key parts of the experience may have been overlooked. In those situations, the answer is .

But in other cases, the issue is deeper.

The assumptions that shaped the may be wrong.

Perhaps the problem was misdiagnosed. Perhaps was misunderstood. Perhaps internal were underestimated. When that happens, no amount of on the current path will produce the right outcome, because the direction itself is flawed.

This is the harder realisation.

Because it requires change.

Why recalibration matters more than patching

At that point, the needs to be revisited, not patched.

That does not mean starting from scratch, but it does mean being willing to challenge the original thinking. What was assumed to be true? What has been proven to be incorrect? What has changed since the was defined?

This is where experience matters.

Knowing what to hold onto, and what to let go.

A failing does not mean everything within it is wrong. There are often elements that still have value, that remain relevant, and progress that can be built upon. The key is to separate those from the parts that are not working, and to be deliberate about how the direction is adjusted.

This is not about reacting.

It is about recalibrating.

Why transparency and learning prevent repeat failure

Communication plays a critical role here.

One of the reasons are allowed to drift is because people are hesitant to surface issues early. There is a concern about how it will be perceived, or whether it reflects poorly on the work that has been done. In practice, being transparent about what is not working is what allows the strategy to improve.

It creates around reality, rather than maintaining in something that is no longer delivering.

The final piece is making sure the same situation does not repeat.

If a has failed to deliver, it is worth understanding why it was allowed to continue for as long as it did. Were success measures unclear? Was not being surfaced effectively? Were decisions too closely tied to the original plan?

Without addressing those underlying issues, there is a risk that the next follows the same .

do not fail all at once.

They drift.

They move slightly off course, then a little further, and over time the gap between intention and outcome becomes too large to ignore. Recognising that early, and being willing to step back and adjust, is what separates that recover from those that continue to underperform.

A not working is not the problem.

Not recognising it is.

LET'S WORK TOGETHER

Ready to improve your product?

UX, research and product leadership for teams tackling complex digital services. The work usually starts where things have become harder than they need to be: unclear journeys, inconsistent products, competing priorities, or teams trying to move forward without a clear direction. I help simplify the problem, shape the right next step, and turn complexity into something people can actually use.

Previous feedback

Will Parkhouse

Senior Content Designer

01/20