When 84 percent of executives say their organizations aren’t prepared for the next disruption, the problem isn’t just about managing the uncertainty; it’s outright confusion. Too many leaders still mistake planning for strategy. A plan is a list of actions, whereas a strategy is a set of interrelated, intentional choices about where to play, how to win and what to do (or not do). Planning and strategy are not the same thing. That distinction has never mattered more. In an economy defined by geopolitical tension, supply-chain fragility, A.I. disruption, key resource constraints and shifting consumer behavior, mistaking activity for strategy is proving costly.
Plans give comfort. Strategy gives direction.
Plans are comforting. They fill calendars, generate deliverables and soothe anxiety, especially when volatility arises. Strategy, on the other hand, is uncomfortable. It demands clarity, trade-offs and courage. It forces leaders to choose a direction amid incomplete information and to stand by it when the ground shifts. The same pattern repeats across industries: when uncertainty strikes, organizations retreat into activity: more plans, more timelines, more deliverables. They confuse movement with momentum. But strategy is about direction and coherence. It connects intentions to outcomes and determines how you’ll compete when the familiar rules no longer apply.
Across sectors, the companies thriving in today’s turbulence are those that have resisted the reflex to over-plan. They’ve made deliberate, sometimes unpopular, choices that gave them direction when others drifted. Having been involved in the design and delivery of a variety of strategies in more than 30 sectors, four examples illustrate this distinction.
1. IKEA: strategy as discipline, not detail
In a volatile retail environment, IKEA has stayed consistent for decades by staying anchored to one clear choice: making good design affordable for the many, not the few. Every element of IKEA’s model flows from it: flat-pack design, global sourcing, self-service logistics and long-term cost discipline.
Even in the face of inflation and supply-chain shocks, IKEA doubled down on that positioning. In 2024, it invested more than €2 billion ($2.33 billion) to lower prices for customers, even though that meant a 5 percent fall in reported sales. That decision was strategic, not reactive, made to protect trust and volume. As a result, visits rose 21 percent, and online sales grew strongly. IKEA’s success demonstrates that when your strategy is clear, you can flex your plans without losing your compass.
2. Nintendo: defining your own game
In a sector driven by rapid planning cycles and constant hardware upgrades, Nintendo has consistently outperformed by ignoring the arms race. While Sony and Microsoft compete on processing power, Nintendo’s strategy has always centered on fun, creativity and accessibility, or in gaming terms, playability. Rather than chasing competitors, Nintendo chose to define its own game.
The Switch console, once questioned by analysts due to its unconventional form, has sold over 150 million units globally, becoming one of the best-selling consoles ever. Its operating margins exceed 30 percent, far higher than many peers. That success was the result of clear, consistent strategy. Nintendo aligned its hardware, software and IP around one simple idea: games that bring people joy, not just pixels and technical performance. Sometimes, the most powerful strategic move is to refuse to play the same game as your competitors.
3. LEGO: clarity creates resilience
The LEGO Group is another case study in the power of strategic clarity over rigid planning. While many toy makers stumbled post-2020, LEGO outpaced the market. In 2024, the company grew revenue by 13 percent to DKK 74.3 billion ($11.6 billion) and operating profit by 10 percent year over year. Instead of relying on increasingly lengthy checklists and rollout plans, LEGO redefined its core mission: to become a global leader in creator play, rather than just a manufacturer of toy bricks. That strategic reframing led to partnerships with Fortnite and Star Wars, digital experiences, adult markets and major sustainability investments. LEGO didn’t rely on a fixed five-year plan. It had a strategy rooted in a timeless idea: creativity as a lifelong, global pursuit.
4. Novo Nordisk: long-term clarity in a short-term world
In the pharmaceutical industry, Novo Nordisk’s success has been built on strategic focus over tactical plans. Its 2025 corporate strategy set a clear direction: expand leadership in diabetes and metabolic health care, and aligning R&D, manufacturing and go-to-market partnerships to that goal. The payoff: in 2024, revenue grew 26 percent to DKK 290 billion ($45.2 billion), with operating profit also up 26 percent at constant exchange rates. Obesity-care sales surged by 57 percent to DKK 65.1 billion.
While competitors chased diversification into every adjacent category, Novo Nordisk kept its positioning simple: focus where it could lead and stop where it couldn’t, a rare trait in a market addicted to quarterly results. That clarity has made it one of Europe’s most valuable companies. In uncertain markets, leaders who stick to their strategic choices, and communicate them clearly, build the confidence and resilience others seemingly lack.
Why the confusion persists
If strategy is so clearly superior, why do so many leaders cling to planning? Because planning feels safe. It creates the illusion of progress with slides, charts and milestones that comfort shareholders. Strategy, by contrast, feels risky. It requires saying no, holding tensions, living with ambiguity and potential paradoxes and thinking longer-term when short-term pressures dominate.
Research shows that many senior executives spend very little time on strategic discussions. In some cases, leadership teams reportedly spend less than a day a month on strategy-related activities. At the same time, a large share of corporate planning efforts fail to deliver meaningful change, in part because nearer-term planning activities are prioritized ahead of longer-term strategic choice discussions and decisions.
The paradox here is that real strategic positioning actually reduces risk. It creates coherence and flexibility. Plans can change as often as needed—as long as the direction remains clear.
From plans to positioning
Leaders can make three shifts straight away. Be clear on your ambition. Start by clarifying where to play and how to win, not with the timeline or task list. Ensure you’re having these conversations. Treat strategy as dynamic choice-making. Surface, challenge and update assumptions, not goals. Successful companies like IKEA, Nintendo, LEGO and Novo Nordisk prove that clarity, not rigidity, drives resilience. Build foresight and flexibility. Firms with strong foresight systems can grow significantly faster than peers, in some cases by more than 30 percent. Strategic positioning is anticipatory. It shapes the future rather than reacts to it.
The cost of getting it wrong
When organizations mistake planning for strategy, three predictable outcomes follow: they optimize yesterday’s business model, reward activity over impact and lose confidence and coherence.
By contrast, BCG research shows that organizations with precise alignment of purpose, strategy and culture can generate significantly higher shareholder returns. Such companies delivered annual shareholder returns up to 9 percentage points higher than the market average. Firms classified as “future-built” generated returns roughly three times those of the S&P 1200. The numbers make the case clear: strategy is a survival tool for chaotic times.
Be strategic, be courageous
Volatility isn’t going away. From A.I. disruption and inflation shocks to geopolitical realignment, uncertainty is now the baseline condition of leadership. The leaders who thrive won’t be those with the best laid plans, but those with the clearest direction—and the courage to hold it. Planning is about control. Strategy is about courage. So ask yourself, and your team, one simple question: Are we executing a plan, or living a strategy?
