First, the use of dichotomous variables (predictability, malleability, and harshness) has resulted in the creation of a limited, coarse-grained strategy space. This is problematic because it means that fewer strategy approaches are identified to cover the strategy possibilities space, and these approaches are broad (i.e., umbrella approaches). This has resulted in a loss of precision in guiding the selection of the appropriate strategy. Take for example the umbrella strategy approach of adaptation, which has been operationalized primarily through continuous experimentation. Within this umbrella approach, there are several approaches such as static and dynamic robust strategy approaches [], which would only be revealed if the predictability dimension incorporated a greater number of states. This would help create a richer, more textured, and nuanced strategy space which differentiates between the varying levels of uncertainty [].

The shaping strategy approach emphasizes collaboration through the orchestration of activities with other players in the ecosystem. Shapers engage, orchestrate, and evolve. Shapers first engage other players in the ecosystem in the creation of a shared vision for the industry. Subsequently, they orchestrate the collaborative activities through a platform. Lastly, they evolve the platform by scaling it up. BCG research has identified five strategy tools which can be used with the shaping approach. These strategy tools include S-curve, ecosystem strategy, co-opetition, open innovation, and shared value framework.

The adaptive strategy approach is evolutionary, necessitating the creation of solution hypotheses and testing them through experiments, then selecting promising options and scaling them up. The emphasis here lies in creating strategic flexibility. BCG research has identified strategy tools that can be used with the adaptive approach. These strategy tools include time-based competition, first mover advantage, dynamic capabilities, strategy as simple rules, adaptive advantage, and transient competitive advantage.

The Strategy Palette framework was first published in Harvard Business Review (HBR) in by the lead author, Martin Reeves, and two colleagues, Claire Love and Philipp Tillmanns []. It had two dimensions: predictability and malleability; as well as four strategy approaches. Subsequently in , the framework was updated, and a third dimension was added called harshness, resulting in five strategy approaches. This updated version was published in the book “Your Strategy Needs a Strategy: How to Choose and Execute the Right Approach”, which was written by the lead author, Martin Reeves, and two new co-authors, Knut Haanaes and Janmejaya Sinha [].

The generic visionary strategy approach is entrepreneurial and usually used by start-ups. It involves envisaging, building, and persisting. The approach starts with envisaging an opportunity that has arisen due to technological discontinuity, change in customer behavior, or the emergence of a megatrend. Once a vision has been agreed on, the entrepreneurs move to create a company that can fulfil the vision. Then, they commit resources and persist in pursuing the vision. BCG research has identified seven strategy tools that can be used with the visionary approach. These strategy tools are innovation adoption curves, discontinuous innovation, disruptive innovation, value innovation, competing for the future, tipping point, and blue ocean strategy.