As a Senior Controlling Analyst at Zubr Capital, I’ve had the chance to work closely with over 20 portfolio companies across the tech sector. In that time, I’ve seen firsthand how even experienced teams run into the same strategic pitfalls – often not because of bad ideas, but because of how the strategy was structured or implemented.

To help companies avoid these traps, we use a framework built around three foundational stages of strategic development:

• Preparation stage: market analysis, key domains identification, industry players,, trends, and threats
• Strategy development: building a short- and long-term plan with agile milestones fit to the situation
• Formalisation & implementation: translating strategy from theory into action with clear accountability

Below, we explore the five most common strategic mistakes – and how to prevent them before they undermine your growth or competitive edge.

#1 – Setting unclear goals & misaligning shareholder vision

Strategic failure is almost always rooted in vague or overly complex goals that do not translate well into a corporate environment. You need measurable action to occur, so something ethereal like ‘We make the world a better place’ is not easy to achieve without clarity. The same is true if you’re constantly micromanaging every step of the process, making it slow, rigid, and challenging to execute.

A good way to avoid this mistake is to use measurable goals through the lens of the SMART framework. First created in 1981 in the journal Management Review, this acronym means:

• Specific: clearly define the who, what, why, where, when, and how
• Measurable: capable of meeting specific criteria that can be tracked and monitored
• Achievable: realistic goals that are attainable given the resources of the corporation
• Relevant: goals that align with the mission and vision of the company in question
• Time-bound: there is a specific deadline for achievement or, at the very least, defined milestones

With SMART strategy development, a company can cultivate clear OKRs and KPIs so there is a measurable, benchmarked roadmap. You eliminate the stress of conflicting visions from multiple shareholders or internal friction that could paralyse decision-making.

OpenAI experienced this conflict. What began as a new nonprofit to research and develop AI in 2015 slowly grew into a new subsidiary for profit – OpenAI LP in 2019. New investors jumped on board focused on profit which led to conflicts of interest, a change in the Board of Directors, and internal conflicts.

Zubr Capital witnessed a similar strategic mistake with an e-commerce client. One partner wanted to scale the company aggressively, while others preferred conservative dividend payouts, and others feared disruption. Even though they were local leaders for 5 years, the conflict about the company’s future development of starting new projects vs dividends vs current processes led to major issues. Only by agreeing to natural limitations like a budget for new projects, risk projection, tested hypotheses period could a consensus be reached.

#2 – Ignoring market & competitor analysis

A corporate strategy cannot be developed inside a box. While internal perceptions are valuable, objective market data should also be considered. You don’t want to focus on ‘what you’re good at’ and ignore ‘where the market is going and how competitors are re-positioning’.

Kodak is an excellent example of this mistake. The company created the modern digital camera in 1975, but shelved the project to protect current traditional film sales. When the market caught up with the technology, Kodak drastically lost market share until its eventual bankruptcy filing in 2012.

Blockbuster is another example. They led the industry in DVD rentals with thousands of retail locations throughout North America. However, they famously passed on purchasing an upstart digital company called Netflix. The rest is history, as one is now the leading digital streaming provider and the other no longer exists.

Zubr Capital helps companies find these blind spots. We recently supported a client who believed its IT platform to be its UVP. We uncovered a 2% website conversion rate and outdated infrastructure. The problem was that the company hadn’t benchmarked competitors or revalidated its value proposition in years.

We’ve also worked with a financial marketplace that served as the third-largest player in their industry. When a smaller competitor emerged, it demonstrated a more efficient method for monetizing traffic by offering niche products ignored by larger firms. Despite its lower traffic, that upstart quickly moved to the top. It wasn’t until we connected the dots between characteristics for comparison and differentiation that strategic advancements were considered to maintain competitiveness.

To overcome these challenges, you must:

• Analyse competitors, not just your own company
• Identify those features that drive actual revenue, not only interest
• If you must, use third-party audits or experts

Those will help validate any assumptions whenever internal biases get in the way.

#3 – Rigid adherence to strategy

Strategy should not be based on fixed instructions. You need a framework for making evolving decisions alongside markets, trends, and consumer demand. Zubr Capital advocates for high-level strategic flows rather than fixed systems. The more data and circumstances evolve, the more flexibly your strategy should be.

One of our 2019 portfolio financial marketplace companies committed to entering the highly competitive US market. In doing so, they never defined clear KPIs or traction indicators. For an entire year, the project dragged on with little to no measurable progress. That is a year of lost revenue and higher expenses due to undefined expansion. After a failed experiment, it became clear that forming a step-by-step plan and indicators of success (KPIs) would help the company understand their ability to go to market at a lower cost.

You need to execute refined strategic thinking whenever you're considering a change. Establish clear ‘phased’ execution plans with defined KPIs for each stage or benchmark. That will empower you to document strategic exclusions and reassess before any pivot. The result is a built-in agility backed by metrics to guide every new test you implement before making a big move.

#4 – Poor timing of strategic shifts

Even the strongest corporate strategies can fail if they are introduced at the wrong time. You must consider the timing of your decision-making, especially in industries sensitive to macroeconomic shifts, sociopolitical decisions, or regulatory changes.

Consider automaker Ford’s Edsel Launch in 1958. The company spent upwards of $250 million on a new branded division of cars that hadn’t been seen since 1939’s Mercury. Unfortunately, the Edsel models failed because the division was launched during a recession (Eisenhower Recession) when consumers sought economical cars, not high-end automobiles.

Nokia also made this timing mistake. They were once the global leader in mobile phone sales, but drastically underestimated the impact of the Apple iPhone.  By the time they realised the error, it was too late, and Android and Apple devices seized market share.

We’ve seen this timing issue with our clients at Zubr Capital. We supported a e-commerce company in 2022 that was developing a new strategic shift. While the process began in March, by May the landscape changed due to:

• New legislation opening new product categories
• Competitors entering and leaving the market
• Introduction of regulatory price controls

Our client’s company became obsolete before it implemented changes. We had to pause and stabilize operations until 2024, when the company could launch with a clear market view and an adapted plan.

You must focus on operational resilience to avoid timing mistakes. Revisit your strategy only when reliable trendlines reemerge, and stick to short-term planning until the changes settle down a bit before revisiting long-term goals.

#5 – Lack of accountability & implementation ownership

The final corporate strategy development mistake to avoid is failing to define who is responsible for delivery and how incentives align with your strategic goals.

We once worked with an IT outsourcing firm targeting enterprise clients. A new VP of Sales was hired, but they did not align with internal structures or KPIs. Most sales and delivery teams kept focusing on smaller clients because they were incentivised with bonuses in that segment. That left enterprise-level sales out in the cold.

There must be someone or some entity accountable for the strategy. Always assign clear ownership for every strategic initiative. Review and update your organisational charts when possible to reflect new focus areas – including an operational flow of who is responsible for what. That will allow you to realign incentive systems across all departments.

Wrapping up

Corporate strategy development is not some static document you pull out now and then to consult. It is a living, breathing framework designed to grow, but it must be built on clarity, adaptability, and accountability.

The five common strategic mistakes outlined above are not theoretical ideas you learn in business school. These happen all the time to some of the most well-known companies in the world. Everyone from a local startup in Europe to a multinational corporation is at risk of making these mistakes. They will cost money. They will cause delays. They will force you into a corner.

Companies implementing strategies using disciplined agility do more than survive a change. Those companies lead industries and set the tone for all other competitors. Those are the companies we at Zubr Capital seek to support and recommend you mirror when developing your corporate strategy.