Strategy Offsite Agenda Builder: Plan a Day That Ends in Decisions

Eleven priorities and a dictionary of 21 terms

Donald Sull, Rebecca Homkes and Charles Sull describe the annual executive off-site at one tech company. The executives went to great pains to present the strategy and objectives. They also introduced 11 corporate priorities, different from the strategic objectives, a list of core competencies, a set of corporate values and “a dictionary of 21 new strategic terms to be mastered.” The managers left baffled about what mattered most ⁴.

That offsite was full of content and empty of decisions. It is the usual failure, and it starts with the agenda: a list of topics invites presentations, and presentations invite more topics. The thesis of this page: an offsite agenda is a list of decisions, not topics. If you cannot write down beforehand what the room must decide and who decides, the day will produce a mood, not a strategy.

The builder below asks for the ten things a decision offsite needs, from the questions on the table to the date the written decisions go out. It checks your answers as you type and assembles a one-page agenda you can send with the pre-read. It takes about ten minutes, longer if the first field starts an argument, which is the point.

Write the decisions first. The agenda is whatever it takes to make them.

Why offsites drift

In 2003, Marakon Associates and the Economist Intelligence Unit surveyed top management team members at 187 companies with market capitalizations of at least $1 billion. Michael Mankins reported the results: more than 65% of leadership team meetings were not called to make a decision, and only 12% of executives believed their top team meetings consistently produced decisions on important strategic or organizational issues. The meetings that did focus on strategy were most commonly “off-site brainstorming sessions—typically amorphous events that produce few tangible outputs” ¹.

Two forces push an offsite that way. Discussion feels productive and costs nobody anything, while a decision creates losers in the room. And without a named decider, the safest outcome is a statement everyone can sign. Richard Rumelt describes a 1992 strategy meeting at Digital Equipment Corporation where the CEO asked three camps with incompatible strategies to reach consensus; they produced a statement Rumelt calls “a political outcome,” not a strategy ⁵.

The shape the builder gives you

1. Decisions as questionsEach item on the agenda is a question with answers to choose between. Mankins's advice is to focus on decisions, not discussions ¹.
2. One deciderName who decides if the room does not agree. Everyone else argues, informs or agrees.
3. A pre-read with a purposeAt Cadbury Schweppes, materials went out at least five days before each chief executive committee session, with a cover sheet saying whether each was for information, for discussion or for a decision ¹.
4. Facts, then alternatives, then a choiceMankins and Steele describe companies, Textron among them, that take each issue in two sessions: one to agree the facts and a set of viable alternatives, a second to evaluate them and select a course ². Mankins recommends at least three real alternatives ¹.
5. Operations elsewhereKeep operating results out. Kaplan and Norton warn that when operating and strategy meetings are doubled up, operational crises can drive out strategic issues ³.
6. Written decisions, fastRead each decision back before the room breaks, then send it in writing. Mankins found that after meetings participants often take away very different interpretations of what was decided ¹.

A filled-in agenda

When one day is not enough

A decision on the current strategy fits in a day. A new strategy does not. Kaplan and Norton suggest that developing an entirely new strategy may take two sets of meetings, each lasting two to three days: the first to reexamine the company's fundamental assumptions and competitive environment, and the second, after homework and research, to decide ³. The builder's purpose field has an option for each round. Do not let round one end with a choice; it should end with agreed facts and real alternatives.

The fair objection is that some offsites are not meant to decide anything. Teams need time to build trust, and a day of open conversation can be worth it. Fine: then call it that, and do not call it a strategy offsite. The damage comes from a day labeled strategy that produces no choices, because the organization concludes that this is what strategy is.

And treat the offsite as one moment in a year, not the whole of it. Mankins and Steele found that companies taking strategic issues one at a time, continuously through the year, made more major decisions than those confining strategy to an annual event ². An offsite that clears three decisions and schedules the next three is doing its job. If you are unsure whether you need a decision day or a new strategy, start with our refresh-or-re-plan guide; for running the room itself, see getting a room to decide.

Questions

What should be on a strategy offsite agenda?

Two or three decisions written as questions, the person who decides if the room does not agree, the facts to settle first, at least three real alternatives for each decision, time to commit owners and resources, and a read-back of what was decided. Status updates and operating results belong in the pre-read or another meeting.

How long should a strategy offsite be?

A day is usually enough to make two or three decisions on an existing strategy if the pre-read does the explaining. Choosing an entirely new strategy takes longer: Kaplan and Norton suggest two sets of meetings of two to three days each, with research between them, the first to reexamine assumptions and the second to decide.

How far ahead should the pre-read go out?

Early enough to be read. Mankins describes Cadbury Schweppes sending materials at least five days before each chief executive committee session, each marked as for information, for discussion or for a decision. The builder asks for a number of days so that the deadline is explicit.

Should a strategy offsite aim for consensus?

Aim for a decision, with one named decider. Consensus is welcome when it happens, but a room required to reach it on a hard choice tends to settle on wording everyone can accept and nobody can act on, as Rumelt's account of Digital Equipment Corporation shows.

Where to go next

• Getting a Room to Decide: A Decision-Making Framework
• Quarterly Business Review Template: An Agenda That Ends in Decisions
• Refresh or Re-Plan? A Decision Guide
• Decision Log | Strategy Lexicon