We don’t have a map of the terrain ahead— but we can equip our ship to make the most of currents and winds to reach the shores we’re drawn to.

Strategic roadmapping is dead. Even its backward-looking cousin—backcasting—is showing its age. Both approaches are grounded in the assumption that strategy unfolds in a clean, controlled environment, where causal logic rules and planned interventions yield predictable outcomes. But the world we operate in today is anything but a clean lab. The terrain is rugged, dynamic, and foggy—and in such an environment, off-roading and adaptive exploration aren’t just survival tactics, they’re strategic imperatives.

Opportunity-Driven Strategy (ODS) has been emerging as a robust response to this new reality. It provides a framework that is not only agile and adaptive but also deeply intentional. Rather than relying on static plans or abstract incrementalism, it balances exploration and execution by building strategy around real, unfolding opportunities—guided by a clear and ambitious purpose.

From Either/Or to Both/And

Traditional strategy debates have long revolved around a binary: Should we be competition-oriented, constantly scanning for threats and market positions to exploit? Or should we be resource-oriented, focusing inward on our core competencies and distinctive capabilities?

Opportunity-Driven Development transcends this dichotomy. It offers a both/and logic: stay outwardly alert to emerging opportunities and inwardly focused on developing the capabilities needed to seize them. The result is a dynamic, learning-oriented approach to strategy that is equally grounded in vision and pragmatism.

Source: Civil Society Toolbox

The Core Architecture of Opportunity-Driven Strategy

At the heart of ODS lies a deceptively simple architecture, built on four interconnected elements:

1. Strategic Intent

The compass for the journey. Strategic Intent articulates a compelling vision of the change the organization wants to create in the world over the next 3–5 years. It is a direction-setting statement that combines long-term ambition with action-oriented realism.

According to Hamel & Prahalad, a strong strategic intent has three dimensions:

• Direction: A clear long-term position
• Discovery: An exploratory perspective
• Destiny: Emotional resonance that inspires commitment

The Strategic Intent can be crafted as a visionary narrative, specified by a set of 3-5 intermediate Outcome Goals. These are specific, measurable goals that describe the desired impact on target groups and society.

2. Opportunities

These are the shifting winds and open windows inside and outside the organization that emerge unpredictably: new funding lines, potential partnerships, policy shifts or market trends. They can be identified in regards to the Outcome Goals. Relevant areas of opportunity include

• • Market Opportunities: New or underserved needs
  • Technological Opportunities: Innovations and disruptions
  • Regulatory Opportunities: Law or policy shifts
  • Operational Opportunities: Internal efficiencies
  • Strategic Partnerships: Collaborations and alliances

Opportunities cannot be planned or foreseen in the long run, but they can be recognized and seized in the moment—if the organization is prepared. At the strategy frame formulation stage, relevant and plausible opportunity clusters (or “types”) are identified. In the subsequent strategic cycles, environmental scanning and foresight are used to identify concrete opportunities within these clusters.

3. Development Goals (“Construction Sites”)

Opportunities often exceed current organizational capacity. Development goals bridge that gap. They focus attention on the internal competencies and capabilities the organization needs to build in order to identify and make better use of emerging chances. Such competencies can include strengthening networks, accelerating decision-making, enhancing quick resource mobilization, or developing new impact models. The development goals are defined on the basis of the opportunity clusters and form a backlog that can be drawn from in the course of the 3-5 year strategic period. Where they relate to Organization Development needs, they often require complex intervention models.

4. Strategic Cycles

Rather than fixed roadmaps, ODS is implemented through rolling strategic cycles. Every 6–9 months, the organization revisits:

• What new opportunities are opening up?
• What next step aligns with our strategic intent?
• What capabilities must we develop now?

This cycle enables adaptive steering while maintaining long-term coherence. The length of the cycles can be adjusted – often an annual planning routine is too unresponsive, while the 3 month OKR cycle proves to be somewhat hectic.

Theoretical Roots

From Fit to Stretch: Closing the Capability Gap

Traditional strategy emphasizes strategic fit—aligning current capabilities with market opportunities. It is inherently conservative and risk-averse. In contrast, ODS is rooted in strategic stretch, a concept introduced by Hamel & Prahalad. Stretch starts with an ambitious intent that exceeds current capabilities, thereby creating productive tension.

“Strategic intent creates an extreme misfit between resources and ambitions. Top management then challenges the organization to close the gap by systematically building new advantages.”
— Hamel & Prahalad, 2005

Stretch fosters innovation. It encourages new business models, market-shaping behavior, and internal transformation. Rather than asking “Where do we already fit?”, ODS asks “What must we become to fulfill our intent?”

Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploration and Exploitation

Organizational ambidexterity—the ability to pursue both exploration and exploitation—is not just compatible with ODS, it is essential to its success.

Opportunity-Driven Strategy thrives on agility and openness but risks fragmentation if it lacks structure. Ambidexterity provides that structure. It enables:

• Exploitation: Operational excellence in delivering today’s value
• Exploration: Strategic readiness to seize tomorrow’s opportunities

The strategic intent acts as a unifying north star, while development goals serve as a mechanism to evolve the organization’s capabilities in a balanced way.

Two Architectures for Opportunity Orientation

ODS can be embedded into program and departmental routines in different ways:

1. Two-Track Architecture

Separate capacities for stability and agility. One part of the team focuses on long-term, ongoing programs, while another part remains flexible and available for opportunity-driven work. Resources can be rebalanced dynamically depending on the workload.

2. Full-Flex Architecture

Every team regularly adjusts its implementation based on strategic checkpoints and emerging opportunities. The entire organization works in an opportunity-driven mode. This is more holistic but risks losing focus if not carefully anchored in strategic intent.

What ODS Is—And Is Not

It’s important to stress: ODS is not a license for reactive, ad-hoc management. Nor is it an excuse to abandon long-term direction. Rather, it’s a disciplined approach that accepts the unpredictability of the environment and equips organizations to navigate it effectively.

Key Ideas:

• Exploration does not preclude intentionality: A clear intent guides the journey.
• Adaptivity does not mean playing small: ODS supports bold internal transformation.
• Seizing opportunities is not a detour—it’s the path: Every captured opportunity is fuel toward the destination.

It’s like planning 5 moves ahead in a chess game and being surprised and annoyed that your playing partner messed up your plot with their own move along the way. The answer to this problem is not to abandon strategizing, but to develop your positions in a way that allows you to make gains as opportunities arise.

Insights from the Field: Legitimizing What Already Works

In practice, many organizations are already working in an opportunity-driven way—without naming it as such. When presented with the ODS model, leaders often say: “This is what we’ve been doing all along. We just didn’t think it was professional.”

Formal strategy documents may offer comfort and clarity—but often end up in a drawer, replaced by agile decision-making and emergent action. ODS legitimizes this mode of operation while offering a structure to retain coherence, focus, and long-term impact.

Final Thoughts: Why Is This Still So Rare?

Despite the growing popularity of agile and adaptive methods in operations and project management, innovative strategy frameworks remain rare. Strategy – even if increasingly focused on market opportunities – still carries the burden of traditionalism. ODS challenges that inertia by offering an approach that is dynamic, intentional, and fit for complexity.

In a world where there’s a new flavor of chocolate every week, perhaps it’s time our strategy frameworks caught up with the pace of change.

Further Reading

• Hamel & Prahalad (1994): Competing for the Future
• Hamel & Prahalad (2005): Strategic Intent – Harvard Business Review
• Peter Skat-Rørdam (1999): Changing Strategic Direction
• Witek-Crabb (2022): Stretch and Strategic Misfit
• Lost Navigator: Evolutionary Strategy
• Strategy Works: Strategic Opportunity Management