In the world of strategic planning, there are two common phrases. The first phrase is “leaders need to paint the big picture.” The second phrase is “leaders need to help people connect the dots, not just collect the dots.” Both phrases reflect a mindset about planning that is common. I also think both phrases need significant unpacking in order to be useful.
The first phrase, “leaders need to paint the big picture”, often refers to the idea that a leader and a group of people involved in planning need to step back from day to day operations in order to understand the world in which they are delivering their goods and services. Once they have stepped back, it is the role of the leader to describe “the picture” of what is happening in the world.
The difficulty of this phrase is that most leaders describe “the picture” like it is a framed painting. They tell the group all that they see in the picture. Rarely do they ask others what they see in the big picture. There is the assumption within the phrase that the leader is all-seeing and all-knowing when in reality a leader often only sees part of the picture due to their own biases and normal blindspots.
At the same time, the world in which goods and services are being offered is not a big framed picture. Instead, it is in constant motion. It is more like a movie that is continually evolving.
Therefore, the best way to understand what is happening in the world is to understand the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. This principle states that we cannot know the position and speed of a particle, such as a photon or electron, with perfect accuracy. The more we nail down the particle’s position, the less we know about its speed and vice versa.
For me, painting the big picture comes with an inherent uncertainty because most leaders paint it in a static form, i.e. we nail down the particle’s position. However, we do not know it’s speed or direction. Therefore, I think a better way “to paint the big picture” is to illustrate the emerging trends that are taking place within the world in which goods and services are offered. Within these trends, we can see the speed of change and the possible direction of change, e.g. think of the changing demographics within the USA.
Furthermore, we need a diversity of leaders to share the trends that they believe are significant. This is why I advocate for a PESTEL analysis which stands for political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal trends analysis. The aggregate of these trend lines give a more holistic understanding of what is happening in the world, and what is happening over time. I also encourage leaders to read the following article: “Your Strategy Needs A Strategy” by Martin Reeves, Claire Love, and Philipp Tillmanns, Harvard Business Review, September 2012. It will be good food for thought and generate important sharing amongst a group that is engaged in strategic planning.
The second phrase, “leaders need to help people connect the dots, not just collect the dots,” is an interesting one. While I have referenced it myself many times, I think the phrase also needs to be unpacked in order to access the truth within it.
First, the phrase assumes that those who are involved in the planning and the subsequent execution are aware of the “dots” and the need for them to be connected. The problem that many leaders miss is two fold. One, the integration of the dots assumes the process of separation has already taken place. Two, that there is an awareness that the dots need to be reconnected. I think the challenge is that most people have not consciously separated the dots. Instead, I believe most people are completely unaware that there are dots. And if they are aware of the dots, they had no idea how they are connected, or why they would need to be reconnected. Therefore, connection and integration wouldn’t be possible or warranted.
The missing clarity within this phrase revolves around two leadership skill sets, namely the ability to synthesize and the ability to integrate. For our purposes here today, synthesis is defined as the combining of multiple sources of information in order to form a new and unique perspective or comprehensive understanding of a concept or topic. Synthesis involves critical analysis and interpretation of information to develop this new understanding of something. Integration, on the other hand, focuses on merging different elements into a cohesive whole, often without generating a new insight or perspective. Integration means bringing parts together to function as one unit.
What most leaders do in planning, and why many of the problems occur during execution of the plan, starts with a lack of synthesis. Few leaders want to spend the time combining multiple sources, i.e. think trends, to form a new and unique perspective or comprehensive understanding of what is happening in the world. Furthermore, few leaders know how to do critical analysis and interpretation of information that has been synthesized in order to develop a new understanding based on the trends.
One big reason leaders struggle with this part of planning is that they want to create a document that lowers the level of disequilibrium within the organization, i.e. think the feeling of things being chaotic, out of control, or not predictable, in order to create or maintain a level of SOP. However, the desire for predictability does not take into account the potentially disruptive elements surfacing within the PESTAL analysis. These adaptive challenges, which are normally found when studying the emerging trend lines, are typically complicated, complex, or both complicated and complex. Thus, a singular goal, objective, or strategy can not solve them
Furthermore, with these kinds of adaptive challenges, defining the actual problem is part of the problem. Plus, these kinds of problems call into question fundamental assumptions and beliefs about the business. They also can call into question past strategic choices and current systems. In short, connecting the dots and integrating the dots may only represent a maintaining of status quo in a world that has, or is continually evolving away from the company’s core business strategy, e.g. think of the evolution away from cable TV to someone choosing a variety of customized streaming platforms.
Therefore, I think leaders need to spend more time helping people to synthesize and integrate the idea of strategy. By lengthening the planning process to more than the normal 1-2 day strategic planning retreat, and instead encouraging regular and in-depth strategic dialogues over a 90 - 120 day planning cycle before document creation begins, we will then have the time and space to think about the proverbial “old” dots and consider the possibility of “new” dots. The sum of these two actions has the potential to create more clarity and new ways of thinking about the core mission of the company. The outcome will be two fold, namely more ownership and more thoughtful execution.
When one unpacks the previous two phrases with their team and does the subsequent work connected to them, they will discover the profound and important insight: strategy is a part of everything we do on a day to day basis and that everything is connected back to strategy. As leaders realize this level of interconnection, they can then show how strategy is a part of everything and that everything is connected to it. In short, they can paint the picture of the interconnected networks throughout the company. And along the way, they can paint the picture of the relational networks, too. Because in the end, the successful execution of strategy, which is the desired goal of all strategic planning, is always more relational than analytical.
© Geery Howe 2025