The classical strategy approach is most suitable for stable environments which are predictable, where the rules of competition or conduct are well-established, making them non-malleable. These predictable and non-malleable environments are continuations of the past. Hence, the bases for achieving sustainable competitive advantage are known and can be achieved through competitive positioning using differentiation or cost leadership through scale.

Second, the mapping logic of the strategy approaches to the strategy space is questionable, as it assumes that the different states of the strategy space can only be served by one strategy approach. Mapping exercises are different from typology constructions which require mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive (MECE) categories []. Strategy approaches do not have to be mutually exclusive (ME) in their coverage of the strategy space, but they should be comprehensively exhaustive (CE). For instance, the visionary strategy approach and most of the related tools associated with it, which are prescribed to predictable and malleable environments, can also be used in environments characterized by unpredictability and malleability.

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 [].

This strategy approach is highly analytical and involves three key activities - analysis, planning, and executing. The emphasis here is on being efficient and optimal. The strategy methods, tools and techniques associated with it are well-known because this approach has and still enjoys wide adoption by organizations, business schools, and consulting firms. Out of the strategy tools that were surveyed, were identified as belonging to the classical approach. These strategy tools include SWOT, Cs, Porter’s five forces, BCG portfolio matrix, core competencies, resource-based view, value chain, and strategy maps.

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.