After watching bunch of videos about strategy, I can confirm this Prof’s material is legit. The “And” between positioning and capabilities makes his theory quite convincing. I’m buying the book
I made an error, BTW, I heard Lenny asking me about Richard D'Aveni when in fact he asked me about Richard Rumelt. I answered about D'Aveni not Rumelt. Totally my bad. Wasn't listening carefully enough! Roger
Hey Roger, could you kindly address Lenny's original question about how Richard Rumelt's view on strategy fits into your work? I'd greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts on this. Thanks!
I’d like to know your thoughts about good strategy / bad strategy and the kernel of a good strategy. I have your book and Rumelt’s and like both of them :) Thanks!
@@raoul-thomascampian1726 Roger wrote on Medium (8 April 2024) how Rumelt's framework was compatible with his's. It's called "Good Strategy/Bad Strategy & Playing to Win"
I loved when you asked Roger Martin how he categorized Hamilton and Richard. For a product I am working on, I use Roger's model for strategy and integrated one of the 7 Business Strategies from Hamilton book. It is in How to Win question. So yes, Hamilton books fits into Roger's model.
I don't recall being riveted to a podcast such as this (Lenny - Roger Ft). As Roger stated, secret behind super successful/successful people is practice practice. The more reps you take, the better you get at the skill. Thank you Lenny
Playing to win: 1. Low cost provider 2. Be differentiated 3. Find a different place to win Things to think about when writing your winning strategy: 1. What is our winning aspiration? 2. Where will we play? 3. How will we win? 4. What capabilities must be in place to win? 5. What mgt capabilities must we have to make sure the capabilities are in place?
Such a fantastic interview. I'm a huge fan of Roger's work and helping designers understand and be truly strategic in their thinking and work. Thanks for hosting this fantastic interview, and for using Figjam as a practical example.
Sorry Lenny, this one was a clunker. Instead of the usual deep insights, this one was full of shade towards other practitioners, unsubstantiated claims, and few takeaways if at all.
After watching bunch of videos about strategy, I can confirm this Prof’s material is legit. The “And” between positioning and capabilities makes his theory quite convincing. I’m buying the book
I made an error, BTW, I heard Lenny asking me about Richard D'Aveni when in fact he asked me about Richard Rumelt. I answered about D'Aveni not Rumelt. Totally my bad. Wasn't listening carefully enough! Roger
Hey Roger, could you kindly address Lenny's original question about how Richard Rumelt's view on strategy fits into your work? I'd greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts on this. Thanks!
Thank you for thanking the time Roger - a brilliant mind!
@@raoul-thomascampian1726 That is Rumelt. It spell-checked me. R
I’d like to know your thoughts about good strategy / bad strategy and the kernel of a good strategy. I have your book and Rumelt’s and like both of them :)
Thanks!
@@raoul-thomascampian1726 Roger wrote on Medium (8 April 2024) how Rumelt's framework was compatible with his's. It's called "Good Strategy/Bad Strategy & Playing to Win"
Holy damn. First Rory, then Roger? This is wonderful Lenny.
It was a pleasant suprise to find Roger on the podcasts.
Fantastic ep, Lenny.
Thank you for defining a barrier to entry in which space it’s, to costly or time consuming for your competitors.
Absolutely brilliant
Fantastic! I couldn't even see time going by while watching, and I loved how Roger unapologetically says things as they are.
Wonderful interview. Roger's views are so clear and compelling. Spot on.
I loved when you asked Roger Martin how he categorized Hamilton and Richard.
For a product I am working on, I use Roger's model for strategy and integrated one of the 7 Business Strategies from Hamilton book. It is in How to Win question.
So yes, Hamilton books fits into Roger's model.
I don't recall being riveted to a podcast such as this (Lenny - Roger Ft). As Roger stated, secret behind super successful/successful people is practice practice. The more reps you take, the better you get at the skill. Thank you Lenny
I need to watch this twice, but with my stylus pen in my hand. Love the knowledge in this.
Excellent podcast - great guest. 👍
Playing to win:
1. Low cost provider
2. Be differentiated
3. Find a different place to win
Things to think about when writing your winning strategy:
1. What is our winning aspiration?
2. Where will we play?
3. How will we win?
4. What capabilities must be in place to win?
5. What mgt capabilities must we have to make sure the capabilities are in place?
Such a fantastic interview. I'm a huge fan of Roger's work and helping designers understand and be truly strategic in their thinking and work. Thanks for hosting this fantastic interview, and for using Figjam as a practical example.
I love following Roger Martin and I have learnt so much from him.
Great video that concisely discusses strategy! Great work
Outstanding interview!
Can’t believe Lenny tried to explain AI to him😂 and how he laughed it off saying ya I’m writing a paper on it😅
Roger Martin is the fuckin man. Absorbed much from him strategy wise. Great choice.
Very excited for this! Great work
I really liked the interview!
@lenny in the words of DJ Khaled “another one”
Amazing!!!
great!
Very weird vibes this episode, not sure why. Great insights and content!
Out of curiosity, why no rapid fire questions at the end, Lenny?
I wanted to make more time for more important questions for Roger, so decided to keep going with those questions, and skip the lightning round.
2 Years of business school in 1hr 2o mins.
The Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
MICHAEL E.PORTER
thank you. Just because of you I discovered him and ordered his book
Life is too short huh, okay. Interesting perspective.
I love lenny’s podcast and that’s why I share my thoughts of this episode: I felt this person spoke too much to say too little.
Sorry Lenny, this one was a clunker. Instead of the usual deep insights, this one was full of shade towards other practitioners, unsubstantiated claims, and few takeaways if at all.