A Quote by John C. Maxwell

A strategy that doesn't take into account resources is doomed to failure. — © John C. Maxwell
A strategy that doesn't take into account resources is doomed to failure.
The opportunities and threats existing in any situation always exceed the resources needed to exploit the opportunities or avoid the threats. Thus, strategy is essentially a problem of allocating resources. If strategy is to be successful, it must allocate superior resources against a decisive opportunity.
You can talk all you want about having a clear purpose and strategy for your life, but ultimately this means nothing if you are not investing the resources you have in a way that is consistent with your strategy. In the end, a strategy is nothing but good intentions unless it's effectively implemented.
The paradox is that when we model future designs on past successes, we are inviting failure down the line; when we take into account past failures and anticipate potential new ways in which failure can occur, we are more likely to produce successful designs.
The greatest strategy is doomed if it's implemented badly.
Any approach to strategy quickly encounters a conflict between corporate objectives and corporate capabilities. Attempting the impossible is not good strategy. It is just a waste of resources.
The professed war-weariness among populations who have sent only a small percentage of their sons and daughters to fight in recent wars may derive from a failure to communicate effectively what is at stake in those wars and explain why the efforts are worthy of the risks, resources, and sacrifices necessary to sustain the strategy.
There is a long history of newspapers being doomed. They were doomed by radio. They were doomed by television. They were probably doomed by the telegraph way back when.
Rotten bosses don't get better. Any strategy that assumes they can is doomed.
What we face is a comprehensive contraction of our activities, due to declining fossil fuel resources and other growing scarcities. Our failure is the failure to manage contraction. It requires a thoroughgoing reorganization of daily life. No political faction currently operating in the USA gets this. Hence, it is liable to be settled by a contest for dwindling resources and there are many ways in which this won't be pretty.
The single most damaging misconception about strategy is that it is a set of financial performance goals. The so-called "strategies" created by many managements are nothing more than three-to-five year financial performance forecasts. They are then labeled "strategy" and shipped off to the board of directors which goes through the motions of discussing how big the numbers are. Strategy is not your aspirations. Strategy is concerned with how you will arrange your actions and resources to punch through the challenges you face.
A lot of times, with campaigns or parties, things are cyclical. We need a long-term strategy on how we continue to engage that goes beyond chair to chair. Always, you are balancing resources with your strategy because you have to win elections.
Mmm....she's doomed! You're doomed!! They're all doomed! Notice I didn't specify what kind of doom, so no matter what happens, I predicted it. How very WISE of me.
There must be an opportunity that matches with our strategy. Just because we have a gap, we don't want to go and acquire anything and everything. What we acquire should fit in with our strategy, human resources and market expectations.
Peak oil: The over-populated UK's ability to feed and supply itself for our privileged lifestyle requires the land and resources of other nations. Against a background of depleting oil resources, this is a dangerous strategy
As with military campaigns, cultural warfare is always decided over the pragmatic problems of strategy, organization and resources. . . . The factions with the best strategies, most efficient organization, and access to resources will plainly have the advantage and very possibly, the ultimate victory.
The [economic crisis] means that we have to address the challenges and the risks, and we need to take into account the level of resources. Doing better with less means doing it more together.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!