I need to be honest about something that’s been bugging me. There’s this narrative that corporate strategy is this smooth transition from consulting, and it’s the right move for anyone who wants a slightly less crazy life while staying intellectually engaged. I don’t think that’s accurate, and I’ve been asking people in the community who’ve actually made the jump.
Here’s what I’m hearing instead: Corporate strategy roles can be incredible, but they can also be politically complex in ways consulting isn’t. You’re not parachuting into a situation, diagnosing it, and leaving. You’re embedded in the organization, which means your success depends on internal dynamics, executive alignment, and sometimes just being in the right place at the right time.
I’ve also heard from people who took the role expecting to do deep analytical work and ended up in execution mode instead. Others who thought they’d have autonomy but ended up reporting to leaders who didn’t empower strategy. And some who found the actual day-to-day grinding because they went to places where strategy doesn’t actually influence decisions—it just justifies them.
I’m not saying don’t do it. I’m saying go in with eyes open. What’s one reality about corporate strategy that nobody tells you until you’re already in the role?
here’s what they don’t tell you—strategy in most corporations is just post-hoc rationalization. executives make decisions based on politics, ego, or market pressure, then strategy teams are asked to build the business case afterward. you spend weeks modeling and analyzing, present it tuesday, and wednesday morning they’ve already decided to do something else. it’s not about being smarter—it’s about reading the room and knowing who actually has power.
The most significant reality is that corporate strategy success depends utterly on executive sponsorship. If your CEO or CFO genuinely values rigorous analysis and data-driven decisions, you’ll find the role tremendously rewarding. If they view strategy as a support function rather than a decision-making driver, you’ll feel marginalized regardless of how brilliant your work is. Before joining any role, explicitly ask your would-be boss: What’s one time you disagreed with a recommendation from your strategy team, and what happened? Their answer reveals whether strategic influence is real or performative.
Evidence suggests that corporate strategy impact correlates strongly with three factors: reporting line proximity to CEO or Board, decision rights clarity (do you approve budgets or recommend them?), and stakeholder diversity in strategy meetings. Organizations where strategy lacks explicit decision authority typically experience higher turnover in those roles. Additionally, strategy effectiveness is lower in organizations without established quarterly business review processes or strategic planning cadences.
wow so like… strategy roles can be kinda fake sometimes? that’s actually really important to know before applying lol, thanks for being real about it!
I had a rude awakening my first three months. Spent a month building a case for a new product line, got great feedback, presented to the leadership team, and then nothing happened for six weeks. Turns out the CFO’s pet project got prioritized instead, and my case was just… tabled. That’s when I realized the politics matter way more than i expected coming from consulting where you advise and leave.
also nobody tells you this—you become the bearer of bad news. if your analysis says a project doesn’t pencil out, suddenly you’re the obstacle. people don’t blame their own decision-making, they blame strategy for not ‘getting it.’ that wears on you after a while, especially if leadership isn’t actually backing you up publicly.
so like… how long it takes to get approval on stuff tells you how much actual power the strategy team has? thats genius lol