# What Would Have to Be True

> Turn a debate over options into a list of conditions you can test.

Chapter II, Decision making · 2.17 · Origin: Roger L. Martin (2013) · Time: 45 to 90 min · Group

**Use it when** a strategy looks attractive and you need to know what it rests on.

Interactive workspace: https://kogu.tools/tools/what-would-have-to-be-true

## Abstract

Strategy discussions often stall because everyone argues for their favourite option. Roger Martin's question shifts the conversation. For each option, the group writes down what would have to be true for it to be a great choice.

Most of those conditions are easy to agree on. A few aren't, and those barrier conditions are where the disagreement actually sits. Each one gets a test that would convince the most sceptical person in the room, and the decision follows the test results.

## Method

1. **Frame the choice.** State the decision and two or three options that really differ. Assume any of them could be right.
2. **List the conditions.** For each option, write what would have to be true for it to work. Martin groups these into customers, industry, capabilities and costs.
3. **Rate your confidence.** Go through the conditions and mark how sure you are that each one already holds.
4. **Find the barriers.** The conditions you're least sure about are the barrier conditions. Spend your time on those.
5. **Design the tests.** For each barrier, agree on a test and the result that would convince the biggest sceptic, then give it an owner.
6. **Choose.** Run the tests and pick the option whose conditions hold up best.

## When to use it

- A team is split between options and the discussion keeps going round in circles.
- A bold strategy looks attractive and you want to know what it's assuming.
- Before a big investment, to work out which uncertainties to test first.

## Common pitfalls

- Writing what you believe is true. The question asks what would need to be true for the option to work.
- Listing too many conditions. Five important ones are more useful than thirty minor ones.
- Testing the conditions you're already sure of. The useful tests are on the ones you doubt.
- Letting the person who favours an option design its tests. Ask the sceptic what would convince them.

## References

- Lafley, A. G., & Martin, R. L. (2013). Playing to Win: How Strategy Really Works. Harvard Business Review Press.
- Martin, R. L. (2014). The big lie of strategic planning. Harvard Business Review, 92(1/2).
- Martin, R. L. (2010). The execution trap. Harvard Business Review, 88(7/8).