Strategy seems to be defined by the particular combination of two elements that complement and oppose each other at the same time. These two elements are the funding structure of the company's vision and has been described by J. Collins and J. Porras as the Core Ideology and the Envisioned Future in its article “Building your company’s Vision”. What the authors propose here is that every successful company have a fixed “soul” that contains all the values and principles that define them as an organization but that there is also a need for a flexible side, that has the mission to adapt, foresee, anticipate and create an improved image of its future. This may sound very logical but in reality, the inner structure of a company's vision needs to be strong and clear enough to resist the ongoing process of decision making and strategic planning. This is probably the first task when developing a strategy; strengthen this structure would signify to ensure there is a shared agreement of what the company is and will continue to be in the future, and also ensure that the core will keep nurtured and playing its role of attracting and inspiring the people around.
However strong is the nucleus, the moldable layer surrounding is equally important. In this case instead, not everyone in the organization would play an active role in its definition and as stated by S. Kaplan its direction might be difficult to predict given that in most cases strategy is more likely to be defined in real-time scenarios rather than in annual enclosed meetings. What Kaplan adds to the argument is that as much flexible strategic planning is, it still needs a defined framework in order to be efficient; a plan of who, how and when those decisions will be taken. Defining the key actors within the company seems to be crucial, and strategic planning becomes more of a preparation for the journey rather than a list of predetermined objectives.
So how flexible strategy should be? According to M. Reeves in its article “Your Strategy needs a strategy”, as flexible as can be. Reeves, arguments that for a company to succeed in the marketplace, decision-makers should adopt different strategic styles according to the specific challenges that are facing depending how predictable is the future and to what extent can the company play a role in that scenario. Reeves defines different types of strategy as classical, adaptive, shaping and visionary, explaining that successful managers would choose those according to the specific needs to achieve the desired goals.