Good Strategy, Bad Strategy in Business Cases

Many business cases fail to gain approval for a reason that is rarely recognised.

It is not always because the numbers are wrong.

It is not always because the writing is weak.

And it is not always because there is not enough evidence.

Instead, it is built on a slogan, a target, a politically convenient story, or a preferred solution seeking justification. That is a serious problem, because a business case is not just a funding request. It is a decision-grade argument for why one course of action should be approved over other options.

If the strategy is weak, the recommendation will be weak, even if the document looks polished.

In his book Good Strategy/Bad Strategy, Richard Rumelt draws this distinction clearly. He argues that strategy is an approach to overcoming critical obstacles, not simply a set of ambitions or financial goals. McKinsey makes a similar point, warning that many organisations confuse strategy with targets and broad aspirations rather than a coherent response to a real challenge.

A business case recommendation should be the result of strategy, not advocacy

A high-quality business case should follow a disciplined logic:
 

At Chase Consulting, this disciplined logic is reflected in our 5 Steps approach to developing a solid business case approach. It helps ensure the recommendation is based on a structured assessment of the opportunity, options, evaluation, implementation, and approval pathway — not on advocacy or a preselected solution.

But many business cases are built backwards.

The organisation starts with a preferred project, system, facility, restructure, or program. The analysis is then shaped to support that answer. Once that happens, the business case stops being a serious evaluation and becomes an exercise in advocacy.

That is one of the clearest signs of bad strategy in business case development.

A recommendation should not emerge because it is fashionable, because a sponsor likes it, or because it sounds ambitious. It should emerge because it is the strongest strategic response to the actual challenge.

What good strategy looks like in a business case

Good strategy starts with a real diagnosis. Diagnosis is more than describing symptoms. It identifies the underlying challenge that matters most.

For example, this is weak:

• Our systems are outdated and inefficient.

This is stronger:

• Fragmented systems are driving duplicated work, poor data quality, slow decisions, and rising compliance risk, which now constrain service delivery, management visibility, and growth.

The second statement is more useful because it identifies the mechanism of the problem, not just the visible symptoms.

Rumelt’s well-known formulation is that good strategy has three elements: diagnosis, guiding policy, and coherent action. In business case terms, that means:

• Clearly identifying the core challenge
• Defining the strategic approach to address it
• Showing the coordinated actions needed to make the recommendation work

1. Diagnosis

A strong business case diagnoses the challenge honestly.

It explains what is blocking progress, why it matters now, and what will happen if nothing changes.

Without this, the recommendation has no strategic anchor.

2. Guiding policy

A recommendation should reflect a clear strategic approach, not just a desired outcome.

For example, “improve customer experience” is not strategy. “Consolidate high-volume customer interactions into a standardised digital workflow to reduce delays, rework, and service inconsistency” is much closer to strategy.

That kind of statement gives direction. It implies choice. It narrows the field.

3. Coherent action

Good strategy is not just a statement of intent. It must be translated into coordinated action.

In a business case, that means the implementation model, capability uplift, governance, funding, risk response, sequencing, and benefits realisation plan should all support the recommendation.

If those elements do not reinforce each other, the recommendation is not yet strategically sound.

What bad strategy looks like in a business case

Bad strategy usually appears in familiar ways.

Mistaking goals for strategy

A goal is not a strategy.

Statements such as:

• Become a market leader
• Reduce cost by 20%
• Deliver digital transformation
• Improve stakeholder experience

may describe what the organisation wants, but they do not explain how it will deal with the actual challenge.

McKinsey explicitly notes that many executives mistake financial goals and desired outcomes for strategy itself.

Avoiding the real problem

Some business cases soften the diagnosis because the real issue is uncomfortable.

The actual challenge may be fragmented governance, weak management discipline, outdated service design, lack of capability, or long-term underinvestment. But instead of confronting that, the case uses softer language such as “enhancement,” “modernisation,” or “future readiness.”

If the business case does not face the true challenge, the recommendation will usually be vague, overextended, or insufficient.

Trying to do everything at once

Bad strategy often shows up as a long list of initiatives with no real prioritisation.

The recommendation promises growth, savings, service improvement, capability uplift, better data, stronger compliance, cultural change, and innovation all at once. This may sound comprehensive, but it is often a sign that no hard choices have been made.

Rumelt warns against exactly this problem: incoherent policies and actions bundled together without real focus.

Starting with the solution

This is common in business cases.

A team decides early that it wants a building, platform, program, or restructure. The options analysis then becomes a formality. Criteria are shaped to support the preferred answer. Risks are softened. Benefits are exaggerated.

Once that happens, the recommendation is much harder to defend under executive, CFO, or board scrutiny.
 

Why this matters in options analysis

The options analysis section is where strategy quality becomes visible.

Weak business cases compare options on superficial grounds such as cost, timing, or stakeholder preference alone.

Strong business cases compare options on a more important basis:

Which option best addresses the diagnosed challenge, with acceptable risk, affordability, and implementation feasibility?

This approach to options analysis changes everything. It is also a core feature of our 5 Steps for building solid business cases, where options are tested against the case for change, strategic logic, value, risk, and deliverability — not just preference or headline cost.

This approach to option analysis changes everything.

• The cheapest option is not always the best option.
• The largest option is not always the best option.
• The most popular option is not always the best option.

The preferred option should be the one that offers the strongest strategic response.

This is why the case for change is so important. It establishes why action is required, what is at risk if nothing changes, and why incremental improvement or delay is unlikely to be enough. A strong case for change ensures the options analysis begins with the problem that must be addressed, not with a solution that someone already wants.

This is also why the strategic logic statement is critical. It provides the connecting argument between the challenge, the preferred option, and the intended outcome. It explains why this option is the most appropriate response, why it is stronger than the alternatives, and how it will create value in practice.

That is why the base case matters. That is why a genuine longlist matters. And that is why the shortlist must represent real alternatives rather than slight variations of the same answer.

A business case recommendation becomes much stronger when it can clearly explain:

• Why the case for change is compelling
• Why the challenge matters now
• Why this option is the strongest strategic response
• Why the alternatives were not preferred
• What trade-offs are being accepted
• How implementation will turn strategic intent into results

This approach to options analysis is a core feature of our 5 Steps for building solid business cases, helping ensure that recommendations are based on evidence, strategic fit, and implementation logic rather than advocacy or a preselected answer.
​​​​​​​

A practical test for whether your recommendation is based on good strategy

Before finalising a business case recommendation, ask these five questions.

1. Have we diagnosed the real challenge?
   Can we state the core problem clearly, with evidence, in plain language?
    
2. Does the recommendation express an approach, not just an aspiration?
   Does it explain how the organisation will respond?
    
3. Are trade-offs visible?
   Have we made choices about scope, priorities, exclusions, and sequencing?
    
4. Do the actions reinforce each other?
   Are implementation, governance, funding, risks, capability, and benefits aligned?
    
5. Is the recommendation genuinely supported by the options analysis?
   Could an independent reviewer see why this option is superior?

If the answer to these questions is unclear, the strategy is probably weak.

What executives, CFOs, and boards are really looking for

Senior decision-makers are not just approving a document.

They are approving:

• A strategic pathway
• An investment decision
• A delivery risk profile
• A set of consequences

They want confidence that the organisation has identified the real issue, considered real alternatives, and selected a recommendation that is both strategically sound and practically achievable.

That is why good strategy matters so much in a business case.

A strategically strong case gives decision-makers confidence that:

• The recommendation addresses the right problem
• The option choice is disciplined
• The trade-offs are understood
• The actions are coherent
• The implementation pathway is credible

A weak strategy does the opposite. It leaves the recommendation exposed during approval and increases the risk of implementation failure later.

If you want a practical structure for applying this in real business case development, see our article on the 5 Steps to develop a solid business case.
 

Conclusion

A business case should not recommend a project simply because it is attractive, modern, or already preferred.

It should recommend a course of action because it is the best strategic response to the real challenge.

Good strategy in a business case means:

• Diagnosing the issue honestly
• Defining a clear guiding policy
• Presenting coherent actions that support delivery

Bad strategy substitutes slogans for analysis, goals for strategy, and preferred solutions for genuine evaluation.

That is why strong business cases do not start with the answer.

• They start with the challenge.
• They diagnose it properly.
• They assess real options.
• They make trade-offs explicit.
• Then they build a recommendation that is strategically sound, economically defensible, and approval-ready.

Rumelt’s core argument is that good strategy is about overcoming critical obstacles through focused, coherent action, not wishful thinking or arbitrary targets.

Want to build a stronger, approval-ready business case?

My Business Case Hub® helps you clarify the case for change, develop and compare options, strengthen your recommendation, and produce a business case with clearer logic, better structure, and stronger decision-maker confidence.

If you want personalised support, we also provide Business Case Coaching to help you sharpen your strategic logic, test your recommendation, strengthen your analysis, and improve approval readiness before your case goes to executive, CFO, or board review.
 

References

McKinsey & Company (2022) Getting strategy wrong—and how to do it right instead.
Porter, M.E. (1996) ‘What is strategy?’, Harvard Business Review, November–December.
Rumelt, R.P. (2011) Good strategy/bad strategy: The difference and why it matters. London: Profile Books.