Chapter 27: Future Considerations and Phase Two Thinking

Chapter 27: Future Considerations and Phase-Two Thinking - What Comes Next Without Confusing the Recommendation

Video: Future Considerations & Out-of-the-Box Ideas: Don't Confuse the Judges - Present Them the Right Way

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:

• distinguish the core recommendation from future opportunities;

• distinguish a committed implementation phase from a contingent future consideration;

• identify ideas that should not be pursued immediately;

• explain why an opportunity should be delayed;

• establish conditions that would make a future opportunity worth reconsidering;

• frame longer-term opportunities without weakening the current recommendation;

• decide whether a future idea belongs in the main presentation, appendix, Q&A preparation, or nowhere;

• use future considerations to demonstrate strategic sequencing and long-term thinking;

• protect the clarity and memorability of the core recommendation.

Why This Matters

Case analysis often produces more good ideas than a team can responsibly recommend. You may discover:

• another attractive customer segment;

• a second geographic market;

• an additional product opportunity;

• a promising technology;

• a possible acquisition;

• an international expansion path;

• a longer-term partnership;

• a new revenue model.

The temptation is to include all of them. That can create a serious problem. Judges may:

• confuse the future idea with the recommendation;

• question which strategic direction the team actually supports;

• assume the additional idea has already been approved;

• focus their Q&A on an underdeveloped opportunity;

• remember the final idea more clearly because of the recency effect;

• wonder why the team did not evaluate it as a formal alternative.

A future consideration should demonstrate strategic foresight, not strategic indecision.

Discover Your MAD Skills Principle

Not every good idea belongs in today’s recommendation.

Strategic thinking includes knowing:

• what to do;

• what not to do;

• what not to do yet;

• what evidence would justify reconsidering it later.

Focus Requires Exclusion

A strategy becomes stronger when the organisation concentrates its limited:

• capital;

• people;

• time;

• management attention;

• technology;

• organisational capacity.

Including every attractive opportunity can weaken execution of the core recommendation. The existence of another good idea doesn't mean it should become part of the current strategy. It may be:

• outside the scope of the case;

• too uncertain;

• dependent on capabilities that don't yet exist;

• financially premature;

• inconsistent with current priorities;

• a distraction from the central problem;

• better pursued after the core model has been proven.

The right answer may be: "This is a promising opportunity but not yet."

Recommendation, Implementation Phase, and Future Consideration

These concepts must be separated carefully.

• Core Recommendation
  • The strategic choice the organisation should approve now.
  • Enter Western Canada through a partnership-led pilot beginning in Calgary.
• Committed Implementation Phase
  • A later step that is already part of the approved recommendation.
  • If the pilot meets its predefined thresholds, expand into Edmonton during the next implementation phase.
  • This is part of the recommendation because it appears in the roadmap, financial model, resources, and decision gates.
• Future Consideration
  • A potential opportunity that has not been approved and requires additional evidence or analysis.
  • Explore a fully owned Western Canadian distribution network after the partnership model has established sufficient regional scale.
  • This is not part of the current recommendation.
• Rejected Alternative
  • An option the team evaluated and decided not to pursue under the current decision conditions.
  • Don't build owned regional infrastructure before demand is validated.

A rejected alternative should not be quietly reintroduced as a "future consideration" unless circumstances could materially change its attractiveness.

Phase Two Is Not Automatically a Future Consideration

Teams often call an idea "Phase Two" to make it sound connected to the recommendation, but there are two different types of Phase Two.

Committed Phase Two

The organisation intends to proceed if the implementation plan remains on track. It should appear in:

• the implementation roadmap;

• financial projections;

• resource requirements;

• KPIs;

• risk analysis.

Contingent Future Option

The organisation has not committed to the idea. It will reconsider it only if new information or conditions emerge. It should appear as:

• a future consideration;

• a strategic option;

• a topic for later evaluation.

Calling something "Phase Two" doesn't remove the need to clarify whether it is approved, conditional, or merely possible.

The Now, Next, Later, and Not Framework

A useful way to organise strategic ideas is:

Now: The Core Recommendation

What should the organisation approve and begin today? This receives:

• resources;

• leadership attention;

• implementation ownership;

• budget;

• KPIs.

Next: Committed Implementation

What follows after the initial milestones or decision gates are achieved? This remains part of the recommendation.

Later: Future Considerations

What opportunities may deserve evaluation after the core strategy creates new capabilities, evidence, or market access? These are options not commitments.

Not: Explicit Exclusions

What should the organisation avoid because it:

• doesn't fit the strategy;

• creates unacceptable risk;

• distracts from the core objective;

• lacks sufficient value;

• requires unavailable capabilities?

This framework protects strategic focus.

The Future Consideration Test

Before including a future idea, ask:

1. Is the idea outside the immediate case decision?

2. Does it support the long-term strategic direction?

3. Is there a clear reason not to pursue it now?

4. Does the core recommendation create capabilities or evidence that could make it more attractive later?

5. Can we identify conditions that would justify reconsidering it?

6. Can we explain it without introducing extensive new analysis?

7. Will including it strengthen rather than confuse the recommendation?

8. Are we comfortable answering detailed questions about it?

If several answers are no, leave the idea out.

Reasons to Delay a Good Idea

A future consideration should have a clear "not now" rationale.

• Insufficient Evidence
  • Demand, customer behaviour, or financial performance has not been validated.
• Capability Gap
  • The organisation lacks the required:

  • people;

  • technology;

  • operating processes;

  • partnerships;

  • management capacity.

• Financial Constraint
  • The organisation cannot responsibly fund both the core recommendation and the future opportunity.
• Strategic Sequence
  • The future idea depends on the core strategy succeeding first.
• Risk
  • The opportunity creates more uncertainty than the organisation should currently accept.
• Timing
  • The market, regulation, technology, or customer may not be ready.
• Focus
  • Pursuing the idea now would distract from the central strategic priority.

Saying "not now" should reflect logic, not avoidance.

Conditions Before Consideration

Don't attach an arbitrary date to a future idea.

• Weak: "In Year 3, expand internationally." Why Year 3? What will be different then?
• Stronger: "Evaluate international expansion after the domestic model achieves profitability, customer retention exceeds the required threshold, and the organisation develops the operating capacity to support another market."

Conditions might include:

• financial performance;

• customer adoption;

• profitability;

• capability readiness;

• available capital;

• regulatory approval;

• operational capacity;

• market growth;

• partnership performance;

• technology maturity;

• risk reduction.

This is strategic sequencing.

Use Evidence-Based Readiness Gates

A future opportunity becomes worth evaluating when predefined conditions are met. For example:

Future Opportunity	Not Now Because	Reconsider When
National expansion	Regional demand remains unproven	Pilot meets customer, margin, retention, and service thresholds
Owned distribution	Current volume doesn't justify fixed infrastructure.	Regional scale lowers the expected cost per delivery
International entry	Domestic capabilities are still developing	Domestic model is profitable and transferable
New customer segment	Current strategy requires focus	Core segment has been established, and research confirms adjacent demand
Full automation	Process and data are not standardised	Pilot proves the process and expected financial return

The readiness gate prevents future considerations from becoming vague ambitions.

Future Considerations as Strategic Options

A future consideration can preserve the organisation's ability to act later without requiring a full commitment today. For example, the organisation might:

• collect customer data;

• preserve contractual flexibility;

• develop a small partnership;

• monitor regulation;

• protect intellectual property;

• build transferable capabilities;

• conduct limited research.

These low-commitment actions create strategic options. The organisation is not pursuing the full opportunity now, but it is avoiding unnecessary barriers to future action.

Don't Turn Future Considerations Into a Second Recommendation

A future consideration should not contain:

• a complete new strategy;

• several new initiatives;

• a separate implementation roadmap;

• a new financial model;

• a new set of customers and capabilities;

• another recommendation statement.

If the future idea requires extensive explanation, one of three things may be true:

1. It belongs in the current alternative evaluation.

2. It requires further analysis before it can be mentioned.

3. It should be removed from the presentation.

The final minute of the presentation is not the place to introduce a second case.

Manage the Recency Effect

People often remember information presented most recently. If the future consideration is the last strategic idea judges hear, they may incorrectly assume it is the recommendation. Protect the core message by:

• clearly labelling the idea as future and contingent;

• limiting it to one or two opportunities;

• repeating the core recommendation afterwards;

• ending the presentation with the current decision and expected impact;

• placing less important ideas in the appendix.

The final message should reinforce what the organisation should do now.

Where Future Considerations Belong

Main Presentation

Include a future consideration when it:

• follows logically from the strategy;

• demonstrates meaningful long-term thinking;

• can be explained quickly;

• has clear readiness conditions;

• doesn't weaken the recommendation.

Implementation Roadmap

Include it only if it is a committed or conditionally approved implementation phase.

Appendix

Use the appendix when:

• the opportunity is useful but secondary;

• additional analysis may be needed during Q&A;

• including it in the main presentation would create distraction.

Q&A Preparation

Prepare future ideas as responses to questions such as:

• What happens after the pilot?

• How could the strategy scale?

• What other markets might be attractive?

• What would you do with additional capital?

Leave It Out

Remove the idea when it:

• is speculative;

• lacks evidence;

• doesn't fit the strategic direction;

• creates unnecessary confusion;

• exists only because the team likes it.

Strategic discipline includes deletion.

The Future Consideration Formula

A concise future consideration can follow this structure: Not now because [CONSTRAINT OR DEPENDENCY]. If [READINESS CONDITIONS] are achieved, the organisation should evaluate [FUTURE OPPORTUNITY] because [STRATEGIC RATIONALE]. For example, we don't recommend owned regional infrastructure at this time because customer demand and delivery volume remain unproven. If the partnership-led pilot meets the required customer, margin, and volume thresholds, the company should evaluate owned distribution to improve long-term control and unit economics. This makes the distinction between current and future action clear.

Connect Future Opportunities to Capabilities

The current recommendation may create capabilities that unlock later opportunities. For example:

Current Strategy:

• Regional partnership-led pilot

Capabilities Created:

• regional customer knowledge;

• partner-management experience;

• local supplier relationships;

• customer data;

• proven unit economics.

Potential Future Opportunities:

• entry into a second city;

• expanded product range;

• owned distribution;

• institutional customer offering.

This shows how the core strategy builds future option value without committing to every opportunity now.

Worked Example: Meal-Kit Regional Expansion

The current recommendation is: Enter Western Canada through a partnership-led pilot in Calgary, with expansion contingent on customer, financial, and service thresholds.

Now

Launch and validate the Calgary pilot. Focus on:

• time-constrained urban professionals;

• customer adoption;

• retention;

• contribution margin;

• fulfilment reliability.

Next

Expand into Edmonton if the Calgary pilot achieves:

• at least 1,200 active customers;

• contribution margin of at least $28 per order;

• acceptable customer-acquisition cost;

• required customer retention;

• on-time delivery above 95%.

This is a committed conditional phase of the recommendation.

Later

Evaluate owned Western Canadian distribution.

Not Now Because

• regional delivery volume is not yet proven;

• owned infrastructure requires substantial capital;

• the partnership provides a lower-risk way to build demand;

• management capacity should remain focused on validating the market.

Reconsider When

• multiple regional markets are operating profitably;

• delivery volume can support the fixed infrastructure;

• the cost per delivery is expected to improve;

• the company has sufficient capital and regional operating capability.

Not

Don't pursue immediate national expansion. That choice would:

• exceed current organisational capacity;

• increase capital exposure;

• reduce the learning value of the pilot;

• weaken focus on the regional strategy.

The distinction among Now, Next, Later, and Not is clear.

Future Considerations Slide

A simple slide might contain:

• What We Recommend Now: Launch the partnership-led Calgary pilot and scale it regionally once the defined thresholds are met.
• What We May Explore Later: Evaluate owned regional distribution after customer volume and unit economics justify the investment.

Readiness Conditions

• multiple profitable regional markets;

• sufficient delivery volume;

• available capital;

• proven operating capability.

The current recommendation should receive greater visual emphasis than the future opportunity.

Keep the Future List Short

One strong future consideration is usually more effective than five speculative ideas. A long list can suggest:

• lack of prioritisation;

• unfinished alternative evaluation;

• a desire to impress rather than decide;

• uncertainty about the recommendation.

Select future opportunities based on:

• strategic fit;

• potential value;

• logical connection to the current strategy;

• realistic readiness conditions.

Winning the Room

A future consideration might be presented as: "Our recommendation is to validate the Western Canadian market through the Calgary partnership pilot and expand regionally only after the customer and financial thresholds are met. We don't recommend owned infrastructure today because regional volume remains unproven. Once multiple markets are profitable and delivery scale supports the fixed investment, management should evaluate owned distribution as a longer-term opportunity to improve control and unit economics." Then return to the core message: "For now, the priority is clear: partner, prove the model, and scale only when the evidence supports it." The final sentence protects the recommendation.

Coach's Lens

Teams often become attached to an idea because it is creative, exciting, or different. They worry that excluding it wastes good thinking. It doesn't. A good idea can still be the wrong idea for:

• this decision;

• this organisation;

• this moment;

• this level of evidence.

If the judges are likely to ask: "Why aren't you recommending that instead?" then determine whether:

• it belongs in the current recommendation;

• it should have been evaluated as an alternative;

• it requires additional analysis;

• it should be removed.

Don't introduce a new strategic direction in the final minute and expect judges to ignore it.

Common Mistakes

• Too Many Future Ideas: A long list weakens focus.
• Treating Every Rejected Idea as a Future Opportunity: Some ideas should remain rejected.
• Calling It "Phase Two" Without Clarifying Commitment: Explain whether the action is approved, conditional, or merely possible.
• Arbitrary Timing: Don't use "Year 3" without explaining what changes by then.
• No "Not Now" Logic: Explain why the organisation should wait.
• No Readiness Conditions: State what must be true before reconsideration.
• Introducing a New Strategic Direction: Future considerations should extend the core logic, not replace it.
• Unsupported Future Ideas: Don't present speculation as strategic insight.
• Detailed Future Implementation: The current strategy warrants implementation details.
• Confusing Judges: Use clear labels and visual separation.
• Ending on the Future Idea: Reinforce the current recommendation before closing.
• Using Future Considerations to Avoid a Decision: "Do everything eventually" is not strategic sequencing.
• Ignoring Opportunity Cost: Even a future idea will require capital, people, and management attention.
• Failing to Prepare for Q&A: If you mention the idea, expect judges to challenge it.

MAD Skills Drill

Take every promising idea your team chose not to include in the recommendation.

Part One: Classify the Ideas

Place each into:

• Now;

• Next;

• Later;

• Not.

Part Two: Test the Later" Ideas

For each future consideration, ask:

• Does it fit the long-term strategy?

• Why should it not be pursued now?

• What evidence is missing?

• Which capability must exist first?

• What would make the opportunity more attractive later?

• Could it confuse the recommendation?

Part Three: Select One

Choose the single future consideration having the strongest strategic connection to the recommendation.

Part Four: Complete the Formula

• Not now because…
• Later, if [conditions], the organisation could evaluate…
• This would create value by…

Part Five: Establish the Readiness Gate

Identify:

• one customer condition;

• one financial condition;

• one operational or capability condition;

• one risk condition.

Part Six: Choose Its Location

Decide whether it belongs in:

• the main presentation;

• the roadmap;

• the appendix;

• Q&A preparation;

• nowhere.

Part Seven: Protect the Recommendation

Present the future consideration in 20 seconds. Then restate the current recommendation in one sentence. Ask your teammates:

• Was it obvious what we recommend now?

• Did the future idea sound contingent?

• Were the readiness conditions clear?

• Did it strengthen or distract from the core strategy?

Reflection Questions

1. Which ideas are part of the current recommendation?

2. Which actions are committed to later implementation phases?

3. Which ideas are only future options?

4. Why should each future consideration not be pursued now?

5. What conditions would justify reconsidering it?

6. Does the current strategy create capabilities that support it?

7. Is the future opportunity consistent with the core strategic direction?

8. Would including it confuse the judges?

9. Is it better placed in the appendix or Q&A preparation?

10. Which opportunities should the organisation explicitly reject?

11. Does the final presentation end by reinforcing the current recommendation?

12. Can every team member explain the difference between Now, Next, Later, and Not?

Chapter Summary

Strong strategy is not only about choosing what to do. It also requires deciding:

• what to do now;

• what comes next;

• what to reconsider later;

• what not to pursue.

A disciplined future-consideration process moves through: Opportunity → Not-Now Rationale → Dependency → Readiness Conditions → Future Evaluation. Future considerations should preserve strategic options and demonstrate long-term thinking without weakening the current decision. The recommendation must remain clear. This is what we recommend now. This is what may become possible later.

Key Takeaways

✓ Not every good idea belongs in the current recommendation.

✓ Distinguish the core recommendation, committed implementation phases, contingent future options, and rejected alternatives.

✓ "Phase Two" must indicate whether an action is approved, conditional, or merely possible.

✓ Use the Now, Next, Later, and Not framework to organise strategic ideas.

✓ Explain why a future opportunity should not be pursued today.

✓ Establish evidence-based readiness conditions rather than arbitrary dates.

✓ Connect future opportunities to capabilities created by the current strategy.

✓ Treat future considerations as options, not commitments.

✓ Include only the one or two opportunities that strengthen the long-term strategic story.

✓ Place secondary ideas in the appendix or Q&A preparation when appropriate.

✓ Don't introduce a second recommendation in the final minute.

✓ Protect against the recency effect by ending with the core recommendation.

✓ Strategic focus includes knowing what not to do yet and what not to do at all.