On the Origin of Strategy, What?
Bruce D. Henderson’s The Origin of Strategy suggests that businesses follow the same principles as nature using analogies for strategy incorporated from mathematical and evolutionary biology. He starts by stating G.F. Gause’s Principle of Competitive Exclusion that “no two species can coexist that make their living in the identical way” and subtly introduces Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution saying “Darwinian natural selection, based on adaptation and the survival of the fittest” was what competition in nature was for millions of years (pp. 139-143). Henderson then redirects his argument that business and biological competition are the same by providing a counterpoint that business strategists who are by nature human beings, a higher order species, can imagine and use logical reasoning to produce competitive strategy. He then expands upon this hypothesis by providing a definition for strategy as a “deliberate search for a plan of action that will develop a business’s competitive advantage and compound it.” (pp. 139-143) Henderson is clearly an expert at deconstructing scientific theory and repurposing it for business use, but we must question whether his arguments are validated by the facts. As a soon to be marketer and formerly trained scientist, I will only be able to accept his hypothesis if it stands the test of scrutiny so let us look at the data.
First, Henderson assumes that human beings are different from the rest of nature because we have the exclusive rights to imagination and logic which can be used for strategy: in the case of businesses, competitive strategy (pp. 139-143). Homo sapiens have a recorded evolutionary history of no more than 200,000 years in the fossil record (O'Neil, 1999-2013). His claims are shortsighted considering evolution can be convergent (Wikipedia ). In the context of biology, there are numerous species who have evolutionary histories of millions of years that use strategy to survive. According to recent studies from the U.S. Geological Survey, wolves were observed using foresight, understanding and planning while hunting muskoxen utilizing communications and waiting-to-ambush behavior (Mech, 2006). Clearly, Henderson was trying to repurpose science to make a business argument without solid knowledge in biological sciences.
Later, in the context of business strategy he states, “Any competitor’s failure to react and then deploy and commit its own resources against the strategic move of a rival can turn existing competitive relationships upside down. That is why strategic competition compresses time. Natural competition has none of these characteristics. Natural competition is wildly expedient in its moment-to-moment interaction. But it is inherently conservative in the way it changes a species’ characteristic behavior…Natural competition is evolutionary. Strategic competition is revolutionary. (pp. 139-143)” In my professional opinion, this line of reasoning is only true in certain circumstances and not in others. If you are providing competitive advantage by using frameworks like Porter’s five forces analysis, discerning the benefits, target markets and identifying competitors, then Henderson’s hypothesis works for you (Amadeo, 2018).
If this type of strategic transformation is simply unattainable, what is an organization to do? Evolution or Henderson’s natural competition is what will be necessary: a steady rate and process of change (Ruddick, 2016). In this digital age, many organizations are seeking transformational change but industries like healthcare are at a snail’s pace, being disrupted, and many are planning to wait, analyze, then act. Frameworks such as the three horizons model puts evolutionary changes in the context of an organization’s capabilities (Ruddick, 2016).
While Henderson’s arguments carry some validity in the business world, it is difficult to agree with all his antiquated lines of thinking when you have a preponderance of evidence that suggests otherwise. The scientist in me just cannot agree with many of his points about natural vs strategic competition, and while many of his ideas may have been revolutionary in 1989, in today’s business world, his ideas need to be modernized for a digital, open-source economy.
References
Amadeo, K. (2018, Oct 29). What Is Competitive Advantage? Three Strategies That Work. Retrieved from The Balance: https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-competitive-advantage-3-strategies-that-work-3305828
Henderson, B. D. (1989). The Origin of Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 139-143.
Mech, L. D. (2006, Dec 18). Possible Use of Foresight, Understanding, and Planning by Wolves Hunting Muskoxen. Retrieved from Ucalgary.ca: http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic60-2-145.pdf
O'Neil, D. (1999-2013). Early Modern Homo sapiens. Retrieved from Palomar.edu: https://www2.palomar.edu/anthro/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm
Ruddick, G. (2016, Dec 9). Does Your Business Need Transformation Or Evolution? Retrieved from CMO.com: https://www.cmo.com/features/articles/2016/12/8/does-your-business-need-transformation-or-evolution.html
Wikipedia . (2019, Mar 4). Convergent Evolution. Retrieved from Wikipedia.org: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution