Run a Corporate Strategy Workshop
A corporate strategy workshop should end with choices, commitments, and tests that could change the direction. Bring the people who can commit resources and deliver the customer outcome. Give them alternatives to decide between before asking them to approve initiatives.
This is an original workshop format for corporate development teams. It draws on the frameworks introduced in this section; it is not a workshop product from Roger Martin, BCG, or McKinsey.
Prepare the decisions before the meeting
Have the CEO or strategy sponsor name the decision the meeting must resolve. Examples include which adjacent market to enter, which business to prioritize, or which capability to obtain. Invite the relevant business leaders, finance, and the functions needed to deliver the choice.
Circulate a short evidence pack. Keep observed facts separate from management estimates and unresolved assumptions.
| Preparation | What it must make clear |
|---|---|
| Current strategy | Who the customer is and why the company expects to win |
| Customer and competitor evidence | Which needs matter and what alternatives customers have |
| Portfolio and resource view | Business performance, existing commitments, and available capacity |
| Strategic alternatives | At least two credible paths, including the current course where relevant |
| Open assumptions | What must be learned before a larger commitment |
Do not make the group reconstruct the evidence during the meeting. Ask sponsors to read the alternatives and submit disagreements beforehand.
Work through choices in sequence
Use the frameworks to answer the questions for which they were designed. The sequence below is a suggested agenda, with timing adjusted to the decision.
| Discussion | Method | Required output |
|---|---|---|
| Agree the customer outcome | Playing to Win | A specific aspiration and intended customer benefit |
| Compare where and how to compete | Alternative strategic choices | A preferred direction and explicit exclusions |
| Assess the market conditions | BCG strategy palette | The approach to planning, experimentation, or partnership |
| Review portfolio commitments | BCG and McKinsey portfolio frameworks | Resource priorities and assumptions behind them |
| Decide what to test | Evidence review | A test owner, decision criterion, and review date |
| Assign the work | Commitment review | Named operating sponsors and approved next steps |
When leaders disagree, identify the source of the disagreement. Different customer evidence calls for research. Different risk preferences require a leadership decision. Different resource assumptions require a common budget view.
Capture the strategy on one page
Use the following original template as a decision record. Write complete answers rather than filling each row with keywords.
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Decision and scope | The businesses, customers, and period covered |
| Customer outcome | The improvement customers should experience |
| Where to play | Priority markets and explicit exclusions |
| How to win | The reason customers will choose the offer |
| Parent contribution | What common ownership adds and what it costs |
| Capabilities and gaps | What is in place and what must be obtained |
| Resource choices | Commitments to make, reduce, or stop |
| Critical assumptions | Evidence supporting the choice and what remains unknown |
| Tests and decision criteria | Owner, evidence required, review date, and response to failure |
| Management commitments | Accountable leaders, measures, and review routines |
Keep supporting analysis in an appendix. Record the rejected alternatives and why they lost so the team can reconsider them when circumstances change.
Turn a gap into a CorpDev mandate
Consider the hypothetical industrial software group used throughout this section. Leadership chooses diagnostics for existing manufacturing customers and excludes operating maintenance crews.
The initial mandate is to compare internal development, a diagnostic partnership, and a specialist acquisition. The product leader owns the customer outcome. CorpDev researches available partners and targets. Engineering tests the data requirements, while finance compares the full cost of each route.
The first commitment is a customer and technical trial. An acquisition search can begin alongside it, but a target's availability does not settle the strategic choice. If customers prefer separate diagnostic tools, leadership revisits the integrated offer before increasing its commitment.
Review the choices when evidence changes
At each review, compare what happened with the assumptions behind the decision. Decide whether to continue, change, or stop a commitment. Update the decision record and the affected budgets together.
- Translate the direction into an M&A strategy.
- Define approval gates.
- Carry the approved case into a value creation plan.
© 2026 CorpDev.Ai Unified Process for M&A