Strategy Formulation with the Playing to Win Framework

Learn how the Playing to Win Framework helps capture key choices and formulate a cohesive strategy.

An example of a choice cascade from the Playing to Win framework for XYZ Eco Group. Source: Playing to Win - Eco Group.

The essence of strategy lies in making choices and trade-offs ¹. In this sense, the Playing to Win Framework (PTW) by Roger L. Martin perfectly captures this idea through its cascade of choices:

• What is our winning aspiration? (a high-level, measurable goal that defines what winning looks like)
• Where will we play? (geographies, product categories, consumer segments, channels…)
• How will we win? (value proposition, competitive advantage…)
• What capabilities must be in place?
• What management systems do we need?

The core of the framework was first introduced in 2013 ². Since then, the framework has continued to evolve, with additional nuance and supporting ideas explored in the popular “Playing to Win” series on Medium, where Roger Martin examines related topics.

Practical Tips for Using the Playing to Win Framework

Summarizing some practical ideas for applying the framework:

• It’s not a “fill in the boxes” exercise — the cause-and-effect logic between the parts of the choice cascade is critical. All choices in the cascade are interconnected and meant to reinforce each other.
• While ‘where-to-play’ (WTP) and ‘how-to-win’ (HTW) are distinct choices, we must think of them as a pair ³.
• It’s bi-directional. We can cascade choices from winning aspirations and “where to play” down to value propositions, capabilities, and internal systems — and also in reverse. In this context, we can apply an approach Roger Martin calls ‘What Would Have to Be True’ ⁴, which helps move beyond wishful thinking to explore root causes, relevant risks, and critical assumptions.
• It’s experimental in nature. When working through the cascade of choices, we’re dealing with hypotheses to be validated through execution — not fixed plans. A good example is what Roger Martin refers to as “compelling customer action” ⁵ — we can formulate excellent strategies, but we cannot force customers to follow the intended path.
• It will evolve over time. Roger Martin emphasizes the need for continuous experimentation and strategic adaptation in one of the articles from the Playing to Win series ⁶.

Parallels with the Balanced Scorecard

At its core, the Playing to Win framework aligns well with the logic of the Kaplan & Norton Balanced Scorecard (Roger Martin shares his own analysis⁷). Both frameworks are based on a cause-and-effect logic that links strategic decisions to their outcomes.

We can observe clear parallels between the drivers of strategy in the Balanced Scorecard (Learning and growth, Internal) and those in Playing to Win (how we win, capabilities, management systems).

Likewise, there is a strong similarity between the outcomes of strategy in the Balanced Scorecard (Customers, Finance) and the outcomes in Playing to Win (where we play, winning aspirations).

The Role in the Ecosystem of the Framework

The framework strongly relies on the cause-and-effect logic of strategy (the strategy choice cascade).

The cascade of choices serves as a basic tool for describing strategy, and the framework’s core strength lies in strategy definition.

As a strategy definition framework, Playing to Win is fully compatible with other strategy execution frameworks that involve decomposition down to specific goals and their quantification ⁸. Roger Martin emphasizes this in one of the articles in his Playing to Win series ⁹.

An Example of Implementation

Below is an example of how the framework can be implemented in BSC Designer — a platform for strategic planning. This example is available as a template within the platform and can be adapted to your needs.

The example illustrates how XYZ Eco Group used the Playing to Win framework to articulate their strategic choice cascade.

Winning Aspiration

The company’s winning aspiration is: “Lead in urban green space creation, improving city livability and sustainability.”

This high-level goal is quantified by:

• % increase in urban green space coverage
• Reduction in city ambient temperatures

An example of how metrics are used within the Playing to Win framework. Source: Playing to Win - Eco Group.

Where to Play

The “where to play” choice is defined as: “Focus on cities with high heat island effects and air pollution.”

This is supported by one initiative: “Conduct environmental assessments in target cities,” and two metrics:

• Number of cities targeted with high heat island indices
• Number of signed contracts with municipalities in targeted cities

How to Win

The “how to win” choice is: “Offer integrated solutions combining green zones, smart management, and water generation.”

The related action plan is: “Develop and launch an integrated service package for urban planners.”

It is measured by:

• Customer satisfaction score on integrated solutions
• Reduction in operational costs through smart management

Capabilities

Key capabilities include two strategic directions, each with its own initiative:

• “Build expertise in IoT, solar energy, and atmospheric water generation”
• “Create an innovation lab”

Management Systems

Management system choices are expressed through two high-level goals:

• Use data-driven systems to optimize green space performance
• Implement predictive analytics

The strategic choice cascade, along with live data from associated metrics, is visualized in a cascade diagram within the platform.