ABSTRACT
In the 1990s, consulting firms and academics made strategy a dominant part of executive management. Creating long-term strategies for the company could only be done by a special breed of people with expertise in seeing long-term trends, speculating on competitor actions and games, analyzing the company’s share in segments and its position, creating optimal capital structure, deciding on when and how to act, and many other aspects. Some firms specialized in providing industry analysis and static strategies for companies. This included the rules companies should follow to dominate their industries. Certain firms made strategy formulation fun and easy by equating their clients’ products, divisions, and subsidiaries to dogs, cows, and stars and helping them decide which ones to shed, milk, and nourish. Some business schools stopped providing courses in finance, accounting, and other commonplace subjects in an attempt to create world-class strategists by case studies and general knowledge. However, in spite of all the strategies articulated and implemented by companies, most have lost shareholder value in the last 10 years. This could indicate that there may have been some systematic issues with the ideas used in strategy creation. It also points to significant issues with the education doled out by schools specializing in strategy without teaching the fundamentals of business first.
