Frequently Asked Questions About Steve Patrick Scientific Business Strategy Framework
21 answers covering everything from basics to advanced usage.
// Basics
What does 'treat strategy like science' actually mean?
It means following the scientific method for strategy: start with a problem, form a hypothesis (your strategy), run experiments, then iterate based on results. This contrasts with the 'business approach' of cycling through flavor-of-the-day frameworks like SWOT or the 7 S's that produce activity without solving the real constraint. Your strategy is a testable hypothesis, not a fixed truth.
What is a Dream Outcome in this framework?
The Dream Outcome is the specific destination the business owner and team are trying to reach — the 'palm tree and pot of gold' that defines success. It could be growth, exit, market dominance, or geographic expansion. The Strategic Problem is defined as the single wall standing between the business and this Dream Outcome.
What is the Shared Aspiration and how is it different from a mission statement?
The Shared Aspiration is a clear, specific definition of what winning looks like, co-owned by all stakeholders — employees, customers, vendors, investors, and community. Unlike a vague mission statement or a pure revenue target, it must be concrete enough that anyone in the organization can use it as a decision filter. Avoid aspirational fluff and financial-only framing.
// How To
How many times should I ask 'why' in the Five Whys drill?
At least five times, but the real rule is to keep drilling until you reach the root constraint you can state in one clear sentence. If you can't write the Strategic Problem clearly, you haven't gone deep enough. Don't proceed to any other step until this single problem is locked and precisely named.
How do I build a strategic option from scratch?
For each option, work through three workflow steps: define Market Focus and Position (geography, products/services, industries, stage of production), select Competitive Behavior using Porter's three generic strategies, then identify Resources and Returns with a five-year cash flow and ROIC model. Repeat this for each distinct pathway — organic growth, M&A, joint venture — then run all options through the DPE Filter.
How do I test a strategy before committing all my resources?
Take your highest-scoring option and run small, real-world experiments: attempt to generate leads, make the offer, test the market position. Observe what emerges. The gap between your Intended Strategy and the Emergent Strategy reveals critical refinements. Never bet the entire business on the whiteboard plan alone — let real-world signals inform you before full commitment.
How do I define Market Focus and Position correctly?
Decide where you'll compete across four dimensions: geography (local, regional, national, international), products and services (specific offerings), industries (which verticals or segments), and stage of production (produce from raw inputs, white-label, or in between). Bad positioning in the wrong market kills even the best strategy — think location, location, location relative to where your ICP concentrates.
// Troubleshooting
My team jumped straight to an org chart and priority list. What should we do?
Pause all activity and return to Step 1. Assigning org responsibilities and listing 30 annual priorities before naming the Strategic Problem is the classic failure mode — you're building on an unknown foundation. Run the Five Whys to surface the actual number one constraint first. Every hour spent on org charts before the Strategic Problem is defined is waste.
What if my strategic option is desirable but not economical?
It fails the DPE Filter and should not be selected. All three gates — Desirable, Practical, and Economical — must pass. An option your team loves but that shows unviable cash flow or insufficient ROIC is a trap. Move on to another strategic option, or revisit the business model to see if the economics can be restructured to pass.
I can't decide between two ICPs. What should I do?
Commit to one. Listing multiple ICPs introduces compounding complexity across every downstream decision — market, offer, pricing, competitive behavior. Pick the single customer whose problems your strategy can solve better than anyone else, ideally a high-value segment. Remember the framework is iterative; you can address other segments in future loops once the first Strategic Problem is solved.
What if my real-world test shows the strategy isn't working?
That's the point of testing — the Emergent Strategy is giving you data the whiteboard couldn't. Use the gap between intended and emergent to refine your option, or return to generate a new one. Testing small before full commitment is precisely how you avoid betting the farm on an untested hypothesis. Iterate rather than abandoning strategy entirely.
// Comparisons
How does this framework compare to Lean Startup or MVP testing?
Both share a test-and-iterate spirit, but this framework front-loads constraint diagnosis and competitive positioning before testing. Lean Startup often tests product-market fit directly; here you first name the single Strategic Problem, lock one ICP, choose a Porter generic strategy, and validate financials (ROIC) — then run experiments. The Intended vs. Emergent concept mirrors MVP learning but applies at the whole-strategy level.
How is this different from just doing SWOT analysis?
SWOT lists strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats but doesn't force you to identify a single root constraint or test anything. This framework explicitly rejects flavor-of-the-day frameworks that produce activity without solving the real problem. It demands one Strategic Problem, one ICP, financial validation, and real-world testing — turning strategy from a brainstorm into a scientific hypothesis.
How does Cost Leadership differ from being the cheapest?
Cost Leadership is about building the lowest cost structure so you can offer competitive prices while maintaining margins — it's an internal operational advantage, not a pricing race to the bottom. A cost leader can actually charge market prices and earn higher margins. Confusing the two and simply charging the lowest price is a common strategic pitfall that erodes profitability.
How does the DPE Filter compare to a standard pros-and-cons list?
A pros-and-cons list is unstructured and weights nothing. The DPE Filter is three hard gates — Desirable, Practical, Economical — where an option must pass all three to survive. It forces financial rigor (cash flow and ROIC) and honest capability assessment alongside team preference, preventing you from choosing an option you simply like but can't execute or afford.
// Advanced
Can this framework be used repeatedly as the business grows?
Yes — strategy is iterative, not a one-time annual event. Solving one Strategic Problem reveals the next one, so you re-run the loop as the business advances toward its Dream Outcome. Treating strategy as a single yearly exercise is a pitfall. Each cycle re-diagnoses the current root constraint and may shift your ICP, positioning, or competitive behavior.
How do I model Resources and Returns for a five-year horizon?
List every resource required — people, technology, capabilities, capital — then build a financial model projecting cash flow over at least five years. Evaluate two metrics: whether there's sufficient cash flow to fund execution, and whether the Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) justifies pursuing the option. This is where strategy and finance converge, filtering out options that look good but can't be funded.
How do I generate genuinely different strategic options?
Vary the path to solving the same Strategic Problem: organic growth, M&A roll-up, joint venture, new market entry, or partnership with a complementary provider. For each, run the full workflow — Market Focus, Competitive Behavior, Resources and Returns — so you're comparing complete strategies, not fragments. Then score each through the DPE Filter; a strong score across all three gates signals the winning option.
What role does the ICP play in evaluating strategic options?
The ICP sits at the literal center of the framework, and every strategic option is evaluated by one question: does this solve the ICP's problems better than anyone else? Market choices, competitive behavior, and offers are all filtered through that lens. Building strategy around what leadership wants instead of the ICP is a core pitfall that produces internally-focused, uncompetitive plans.
Can I combine Porter's generic strategies instead of choosing one?
No — you should choose one primary generic strategy as the foundation of your Competitive Behavior. Trying to be both the cost leader and the differentiator typically leaves you stuck in the middle, excelling at neither. Pick Cost Leadership, Differentiation, or Focus/Niche based on how you can best serve your single ICP, then build the business model beneath it.
What should the business model beneath my generic strategy include?
Define your core offer, offer economics (revenue versus cost to acquire and fulfill), funnel, and operating model. Then identify and eliminate activities that add no value to the company or the ICP. The business model operationalizes your chosen generic strategy — it's how the competitive posture actually gets delivered to the customer profitably.