In this text I will make the connection between strategy and storytelling and elaborate on how narratives help make sense of complex and uncertain situations.

In Lawrence Freedman’s excellent book “Strategy: A History” he argues that strategists construct narratives to provide a framework for action in complex and uncertain situations. The book traces the development of strategic thinking from ancient times to the present day, examining how different societies, cultures and events have formulated and executed plans for achieving their goals. Freedman suggests that effective strategy requires a deep understanding of the cultural and historical contexts in which it is being developed and executed, as well as a willingness to adapt and change as circumstances dictate. He also makes the conclusion that the best strategists are those that manage to make sense of uncertainty, who are able to tell compelling stories that inspire action, ultimately creating meaning and purpose in a frightening, chaotic and unpredictable world.

Furthermore, Freedman refers to Robert McKee’s book “Story” as THE book for understanding the mechanisms of storytelling.

In “Story” McKee makes the point that effective storytelling is essential to creating compelling narratives that resonate with audiences. McKee emphasises the importance of understanding the fundamental structure of storytelling, which he breaks down into several key elements, including character, plot, and theme, as well as more technical considerations like dialogue, structure, and pacing.

If one were to read “Story” as a book about strategy, the key takeaway would be that effective storytelling is a critical element of successful strategy. McKee’s focus on character, plot, and theme in storytelling mirrors the importance of understanding context, objectives, and values in Freedmans ideas of strategizing. In both storytelling and strategy, authenticity and emotional resonance are key factors in engaging audiences, creating action and achieving success. McKee’s emphasis on the importance of grounding stories in reality and tapping into universal human experiences reflects the need for strategies that are grounded in an understanding of the real world and that connect with people on an emotional level. Similarly, McKee’s emphasis on craft and attention to detail speaks to the importance of disciplined execution in both storytelling and strategy. Both endeavors require constant learning, improvement and adaptation in order to achieve the desired outcomes. If so, mastering the art of storytelling, we can better understand and exploit the challenges we face and find creative solutions to even the most difficult problems.

One of the problems with the word strategy is that it lacks a fixed definition. Its meaning changes over time and context. I think that the same thing goes with the word narrative. For this text when talking about narrative, what I refer to is a deliberate construct that contains and tells a story that captures the imagination of your audience with the objective of achieving change.

So, how do one construct a good narrative?

Some years ago I came across The Rob Cast where Rob talks about the narrative and the counter narrative (20:20+). I like this way of thinking since the narrative never exists in a void. A powerful and convincing narrative also by definition must challenge a dominant narrative. Essentially it needs not only to maintain consistency, persistence, and coordination etc as McGee suggest but also be constructed as a persuasive, engaging, and subversive counter narrative that confront and undermine the dominant overarching one. It needs to challenge the prevailing perception of what is currently viewed as true and challenge current power structures and its legitimacy. In the end one need to believe that your narrative offer a deeper understanding of uncertainty and has better ways of dealing with it.

McGee, Freedman and Rob all makes the argument that this task is not achieved through logical argumentation, but through emotional resonance. And just as a good story it will require a certain degree of suspension of belief to succeed. Strategy is often viewed as a manoeuvre of skill and intelligence, but viewed as a narrative it also needs to feel more true.

History is said to be the war of myths and it is a story told by the victors. In strategic terms narratives can be described as a weaponisation of the story (or of emotions). If your objective is to acheiveng change and if you don’t have a coherent contra narrative you will not achieve anything, it is to phrase Sun Tzu the noise before defeat. (“Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”).

This also gives the conclution that in comparison to critisising the dominant narrative it is far more effective to create and communicate your own.

All stories that are told have an underlying emotional anchor. The news, company communication, pop culture. Whatnot. Sometimes the story is a story about injustice. sometimes about victimhood, right or wrong, winners and losers, fear or entitlement. Connecting to earlier texts I have written about the meta modern. Maybe what is new is that you now, as strategist need not only to receive these stories as an intended target audience and feel things but when you do, you also need to understand what is being told, recognising the feeling it is intended to create and channel that to create a own parallell counter narrative.

The process of doing so involves understanding the key elements of the prevailing narrative, including its assumptions, values, and beliefs, and identifying its weaknesses and vulnerabilities. The strategist/storyteller can then develop a new story that through dialogue, structure, and pacing provides an alternative perspective and resonates with the intended audience’s values and aspirations. Doing so the strategist/storyteller must also offer a clear and actionable path forward that addresses the key challenges and opportunities in the context.

In my earlier text about the OODA loop I refer to the loop as a strategic operating system. If so, the counter narrative is the carrier. And in the same way the OODA loop iterates indefinitely the narrative too is like a never ending soap opera about things that happen and being dealt with, without clear storyline, beginning or end.

To intercept the dominant narrative, the strategist can apply the OODA loop. First identify key elements of the dominant narrative, assess its strengths and weaknesses, and find gaps or inconsistencies to exploit. Consider the intended audience’s values and aspirations to create a new story challenging the dominant narrative. Decide on the best approach to intercept the main narrative, including identifying key moments or events, amplifying the counter narrative, or shifting the conversation. Implement the counter narrative by creating content, engaging with stakeholders, or leveraging other strategies, preferably with multiple test narratives. Iterate and adjust based on feedback.

It is somewhat liberating to think about strategy and storytelling as closely related. In earlier texts I have argued that risk and strategy are ways to make sense about uncertainty and the progress of the two concepts really is a progress in cognition. I think that recognising this also is to recognise the subjective and emotional aspects of strategy in meta modern mode of thinking.