There cannot be a question of formulating a right or wrong strategy. Strategy is only a matter of choice from the available alternatives. So at best a strategy when finalized can be the most appropriate one. The conclusion whether a strategy is right or wrong is a matter of judgment after the results of pursuing a strategy are obvious. So trying to make the right strategy may prove to be a wrong strategy. Instead understanding of vision or mission and values of the company, definite horizon for the desired results and knowledge of the challenges and factors that drive business are of prime importance to arrive at the most appropriate strategy. What is appropriate may not prove to be the right thing unless the plans are reviewed rigorously against the desired results and modified accordingly. The appropriate strategy evolves over time into the right or wrong strategy.

Recent strategic move announced by Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer to increase spending on R&D in internet search business appears in line with the fast follower strategy it pursued historically. The move has been hailed as good by the experts, but at this time no judgment can be passed on it being right or wrong. Simply because Microsoft has been exceptionally successful at entering and dominating established and promising markets in the past does not give any guarantee of making the move right for it.

Apple who was considered pioneers in personal computing with innovative products such as PCs, GUI and mouse - in fact it is these products that have created a distinct “innovative company” and “first mover” image for the company. In contrast to the earlier line of strategic moves, the company smartly emphasized MP3 players market with iPod and has been successful in gaining sizeable market share. Unlike prior pioneering strategies, MP3 players market was capitalized by Apple by extending on the features offered by companies like Rio.

So the key lies not in simply pursuing time tested strategic moves but in being creative enough in identifying the opportunities and challenges, developing various options, and zeroing on the most appropriate one. Though IBM has successfully maneuvered its move away from proprietary hardware to IT services, similar success seems to elude Sun Microsystems as of now. But drawing strategy through analogy does work for some companies as in the case of Intel which took cue from US steel industry and aggressively responded to the low end micro processor markets and has been immensely successful in growing and protecting its market share for high end microprocessors from new entrants or players engaged in the low end segment.