Strategy Shmategy

I don’t often strategically write a post about one word, but I’m thinking strategically today and, strategically speaking, the supposedly strategic use of the word "strategic" is not strategically helpful. The word means “relating to or concerned with a plan of action.” So to sound strategically intelligent, everyone in PR these days seems to think that strategically it’s a good strategy to call everything they do – every decision, every phone call, every everything – strategic, lest they be accused of acting willy-nilly. But like the tired-as-all-get-out “integrated” and “seamless,” the word “strategic” has lost its oomph. It no longer implies, strategically or otherwise, that whatever is being done is being done on purpose and with an objective in mind. It no longer has the force of its intended meaning. So inured are we to its presence that our eyes gloss over it without even taking it in. Instead, the word just sits there on a page forlornly, taking up space. Through nonstrategic overuse, misuse, and abuse, a perfectly good and powerful word is no longer powerful. We have forgotten to strategize.

Comments

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1174061951]

What about strategic vs. tactic? Are they opposites?

[Dan]

I think there's a difference, though "opposite" isn't necessarily the word I'd use. A strategy is the plan; a tactic is what you're going to do to achieve it. For instance, say a client wants to be known as a thoughleader in its industry. Tactics may include working with the CEO to give speeches at high-profile industry events, hosting salon dinners for industry influencers, and promoting the company's intellectual property.