Summary

At moments of change, breadth is seductive. But as promises widen and priorities multiply, the signal blurs. Real progress comes when leaders make explicit trade-offs and use brand as a system for decisions. That’s how organisations regain pricing power and sharper focus across sales and delivery.

→ Watch more videos in this playlist on YouTube

Our Perspective

What this means for leaders navigating growth, change or transformation in their organisation.

The Cost Of Ambiguity

When leaders avoid trade-offs, they don’t keep options open; they weaken conviction. Broad claims invite broad interpretation, and that’s where trust begins to fray—internally and externally. People hear different promises and act on different priorities. Sales push everything to everyone. Product hedges. Finance funds too much. The outcome is busyness without momentum.

There’s also a blunt perception gap. McKinsey notes a striking mismatch: 80 percent of executives think their offer is distinct, while only 8 percent of customers share that view. That gulf isn’t a messaging glitch; it’s the mark of choices left unmade and claims left unproved.

Trade-Offs Create Power

Trade-offs concentrate value. They don’t shrink ambition; they focus it where you can actually win. By drawing clear edges, you raise the relevance of your promise and the credibility of your price. Precision simplifies the sale and sharpens delivery.

What gets stronger when you choose:

• Pricing integrity: a clear “why us” that holds the line under pressure.
• Pipeline quality: fewer, better-fit opportunities that move faster.
• Operating tempo: teams align on what matters and drop the rest.
• Proof discipline: evidence stacks where you compete, not scattered everywhere.

Brand As Decision System

Most organisations overestimate the words and underestimate the system. Positioning isn’t a paragraph; it’s the architecture that directs people, budgets, and priority. It should tell you where to invest, what to stop, and how to prove progress. In our experience with leadership teams at key inflection points, the fear of narrowing is usually a fear of missing out; yet specificity reduces risk by exposing weak bets early.

Make the position operational:

• Define where you win—and write down what you will not pursue this year.
• Bake it into pipeline scoring, budgeting gates, and hiring briefs.
• Publish proof points, retire misaligned offers, and record the choices made.

Leadership Implications

The hardest act is saying no when the spreadsheet says maybe. Here’s the practical lens we advise leaders to keep:

• Judge bets by concentration, not volume: can you become the obvious choice for a defined buyer and job-to-be-done?
• Treat brand choices as capital allocation: ask what you’ll stop funding when you back this move.
• Measure conviction, not activity: velocity of qualified deals, price realisation, and customer proof where you’ve chosen to compete.

Trade-offs don’t narrow potential; they bank credibility. Over time, organisations that decide what not to chase earn the right to expand—because they’ve made a position strong enough to carry them into the next decision.

Sources:

• Strategy to beat the odds — McKinsey

Further Resources

1. Brand Strategy: Beyond Logos and Design Assets
2. When Brand Awareness Undermines Your Demand Strategy
3. Rethinking Product Launches: Strategy Beyond Naming

Curious how this applies in your market? We’re speaking with leaders across industries every week. Let’s talk.

Back to top