Strategy vs. Tactics

Strategy vs. Tactics

Something I touched upon yesterday (http://sumocat.blogspot.com/2008/11/resume-vs-interview.html) was the concept of strategy vs. tactics. The two are often used interchangeably, but as the use of the plural for one but not the other shows, they are not the same. A strategy is a long-term plan designed to achieve a given goal. A tactic is a singular action, often used in tandem with others, to attain an immediate goal. Tactics get you from one point to the next. Strategy is the set of points.

A good strategy is coherent and moves forward without significant change. It is planned and structured. Tactics are fluid. They flex with changing conditions. Since one cannot anticipate everything, tactics inevitably change. However, a strong strategy consider a broad range of options, reducing the need for hard shifts in tactics.

With that in mind, look at the campaigns. Obama has pressed forward with a strategy that has steadily built momentum, progressing smoothly from the primaries to the general, on a message of change. By contrast, McCain's campaign is marked by erratic shifts in tactics that have undercut his message and revealed little strategy. McCain's message has jumped from experience to maverick to change then back to experience, engaging in "kitchen sink" attacks along the way.

Now look at their plans. McCain lays out several strong points, but are they coherent? Do they form a strategy? I don't see it and neither do others. By contrast, Obama explains the problems, how he intends to address them, and it all comes together in his big picture. McCain hits the issues separately, tactically. Obama pulls them together, strategically.

And when all is said and done, when the victory and loss are analyzed, McCain's campaign will be broken down into separate turning events, while Obama's will be viewed as the sum of its parts.
[+/-] Hide/Show Text
[+/-] Hide/Show Text