My research studies the moves companies make. To find the Winning Moves, I look at the difference between successful versus unsuccessful moves, and I have been doing so for more than 25 years. My methods contrast with some very well known research that studies successful versus unsuccessful companies, rather than studying moves like I do. But, I have been studying moves because it has advantages.
Yet, well-known research that studies companies, rather than moves, has produced several best-selling books. The bestseller “In Search of Excellence”, by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman, was based upon research that studied the differences between excellent companies and not-so-excellent companies. Jim Collins’ bestseller “Good to Great” looks at the difference between great companies and not-so-great companies, as does Collins’ most recent bestseller “Great by Choice”, with co-author Morten Hansen. Collins’ earlier bestseller “Built to Last”, with co-author Jerry Poras, studied the difference between companies that endured over time and companies that did not.
Despite the preponderance of bestsellers spawned by studying companies, a bestseller based upon studying moves is Blue Ocean Strategy by W. Kim Chan and Renee Mauborgne, which came out in 2005. Like my research, the research for Blue Ocean Strategy found no evidence that there are great or excellent companies. They concluded that the appropriate unit of analysis is the strategic move, rather than the company. Thus, they studied moves, not companies. So do I, and I have been for more than 25 years, looking at a broader range of issues than what was covered in the book Blue Ocean Strategy.
Studying moves has a major advantage over studying companies. I find that all companies, no matter how successful, generally make some moves that fail in addition to those that succeed. And, even the most exceptional companies can experience stellar success for a while, but may also have periods of mediocre performance, and even major failure. As a result, companies classified as great or excellent can lose their luster, or even end up in serious trouble. In fact, whether it’s companies classified as great/excellent, or it’s companies awarded recognition as top performers in a particular area, big trouble shortly after being crowned the best is not unusual.
According to my findings, this happens because no company is inherently great or excellent. A company is only as successful as the moves it has been making. Some companies make a longer string of successful moves, or what I call Winning Moves, than others do. If a company starts making too many unsuccessful moves, the company will not perform well and will not retain any positions of distinction (e.g., great, excellent) it has attained. Likewise, when a company starts making numerous successful moves, it can achieve stellar results even if it was previously in trouble. And, those kinds of reversals of fortune are exactly what happened to some companies in the bestsellers that are based upon studying companies, rather than studying moves.
As authors of those bestsellers may explain, the companies were studied during a particular time period, and a company’s performance can change over time. While this is true, it’s also why studying moves, which is my approach, can work better than studying companies. It’s the moves that determine how and when a company succeeds. So studying them sheds insights into what succeeds and what does not. By studying moves, we also reduce the potential for mislabeling a failing move as successful merely because the move is associated with a great company.
Yet, though studying moves has its advantages, either research method–studying moves or studying companies–can provide valuable information. In fact, some of the research findings from studying moves are the same as findings from studying companies. But by studying moves, we avoid the confusion that occurs when a company that is great today is failing tomorrow. And, we focus upon understanding the reasons for business success.
