Training the top of the T

Strategists are usually defined by their discipline - business, brand, creative, product, content, etc. This is their Vertical specialization, and this specialization becomes deeper with experience.

But there is another part of the strategist skill set - a collection of skills common to all strategists - Horizontal aptitude. This part of the skill set includes things like:

  • Insight identification: the ability to fashion insights from data and context, and determine which ones connect to others and can bear the weight of a strategic idea

  • Narrative development: crafting a story that commands attention, builds drama and elicits consensus and enthusiasm

  • Comfort with ambiguity: understanding that strategy is largely bespoke, and being able to figure out a way forward from confusion to clarity

  • Executive persuasion: A function of all of the above, and also the ability to understand the business and personal objectives of decision-makers, and incorporate these into the strategy

If you’ve heard the term “T-shaped strategists” you know what I’m talking about. If you haven’t, this is what I mean:

I spend most of my time coaching Horizontal aptitude, and for a few reasons. First, it is my experience that strong performance in the horizontal skills allows for the creation of strategies that are more clear and cogent. They hit harder and are more likely to inspire action, because they are both well-constructed and well-aimed.

Second, I’ve found that developing these skills allows strategists develop more fully, more quickly. They create a higher ceiling because the work is about outcomes, not just activities. And they allow for each engagement to be a little more fluid, a little less fraught. Feeling like you’re not coming from behind in strategy work does a lot for confidence, and confidence does a lot for growth.

Finally, developing horizontal skills creates greater flexibility - both for the strategist and their agency. It becomes easier for strategists to flex across different kinds of projects, even those outside of their stated specialization. This is good for the agency of course because it makes these people easier to resource. And it’s good for the strategist because they have less need to wait for a perfect fit project and can spend more time engaged in their craft. And this utility infielder capability can also help shield them when work ebbs, as they can contribute to a broader range of projects.

I guess a fourth reason is that a lot of agencies have specific processes and approaches to the vertical specialization - their own frameworks and briefs, etc. I’m not trying to standardize specialization across the industry, and respect what each agency has found works for them (though some specifically ask for help reshaping some of this if it doesn’t work). But my focus remains on helping strategists first understand and use their brains, and then understand and use the tools they have available. With the time I have with them, I’ve found training the top of the T generates the greatest return - for the strategist and their employer.

Previous
Previous

The shape of a strategy

Next
Next

Is it coaching, or micromanaging?