Strategy with
named bets

Most product strategy is an org chart with feature headings. We write explicit bets instead — with impact, risk, timeline and a kill criterion. If the bet loses, it loses visibly. If it wins, the quarter ships a capability that compounds.

Impact-vs-risk strategy grid with named bets positioned by return and risk bets.plane impact · risk · window h1 · h2 · h3 · h4 · kill Risk → Impact → safe · low return bet · high return noise kill candidates H1 vendor X insource H2 emea via partner H3 agent review layer H4 product merge kill by Q3

CAPABILITIES

Six surfaces of a real strategy practice

Executive planning, roadmapping, scope control, architecture decisions, AI-era operating model and sunset playbooks — run together, not farmed out to four advisors.

01

Executive planning

Three-year outlook, quarterly plan, explicit bets. Decisions trace to a thesis the leadership team would bet money on.

02

Technical roadmaps

Roadmaps tied to architectural milestones, not feature wishlists. Every quarter lands with platform capability that compounds.

03

Scope control

Clear in-scope / out-of-scope lines, killed feature log, deprecation calendar. Saying no is the feature.

04

Architecture decisions

ADRs that capture trade-offs. Every architectural choice has a write-up a future engineer can read without a meeting.

05

AI-era operating model

How AI capability changes your org chart, your review gates and your vendor mix. A written policy, not hand-waving.

06

Wind-down playbook

Products are sunsetted on schedule, not abandoned. Migration path, customer comms, contractual exits.

BETS LEDGER

Four bets a leadership team actually signs

A worked example of the bets format we deliver at the end of a strategy engagement. Each bet has an impact the CFO can underwrite, a risk the CTO can speak to, and a window the whole team can plan around.

H1

Replace vendor X with in-house capability

P&L: $1.4M opex savedrisk · Delivery team bandwidth · model maturityNext 6 months
H2

Enter EMEA via partner channel

Revenue: +$3.2M ARRrisk · Compliance setup · pricing localisationQ3–Q4
H3

Ship AI agent review layer on Console

Retention: +6pp NRRrisk · AI safety · eval maturityQ4 + 2
H4

Merge two internal products into one

Ops: -24% costrisk · Customer disruption · migration pathsNext 12 months
AI changes the org chart

Strategy in 2026 is not "add AI features". It is deciding which roles, reviews and vendors an AI-aware operating model consolidates — and which it cannot.

Open AI discipline ↗

PRACTICE STACK

Frames and rituals we default to

Strategy frames and operational rituals we use in most engagements. Pick what fits the company — never all at once.

Strategy

  • North-star + inputs
  • Wardley mapping
  • Jobs-to-be-done
  • Opportunity sizing

Roadmap

  • Now / Next / Later
  • Capability lanes
  • Architectural milestones
  • Quarterly planning rituals

Decisions

  • ADRs (architecture decision records)
  • RFC template
  • Kill-list + deprecation calendar
  • Trade-off ledger

AI operating model

  • AI capability map
  • Human-in-the-loop policy
  • Vendor mix guardrails
  • Eval-gated release

Adjacent disciplines

Plan · bet · prune

Write a strategy the finance and engineering sides both sign

Share the problem space, the current roadmap and the constraint envelope. We come back with a bets ledger, architectural milestone plan and quarterly operating rhythm inside ten working days.