Playing to Win

What does it really mean to play to win—not just to compete, but to dominate your field of choice? In Playing to Win: How Strategy Really Works, former Procter & Gamble CEO A.G. Lafley and strategist Roger L. Martin dismantle the fog around the word “strategy.” Their core argument is simple but radical: strategy is all about making choices—clear, deliberate decisions about where you will play and how you will win. Without choices, you’re not leading strategically; you’re merely managing by hope or habit.

The authors contend that many leaders confuse strategy with planning, vision statements, or best practices. They treat it as a static checklist rather than the ongoing, dynamic act of choosing where to invest energy. But real strategy, Lafley insists, means staking your future on a set of integrated choices that define your position in the landscape, unleash competitive advantage, and empower your team to win against rivals. This book captures how P&G—once struggling under the weight of complacency—reinvented itself under Lafley’s leadership, developing an internal discipline of strategic thinking that doubled its value between 2000 and 2009.

The Power of the Choice Cascade

Central to Lafley and Martin’s framework is the Strategic Choice Cascade—five interlocking questions forming the backbone of strategy: (1) What is your winning aspiration? (2) Where will you play? (3) How will you win? (4) What capabilities must be in place? (5) What management systems are required? Thinking of strategy as a cascade highlights how decisions at one level reinforce or refine those above and below. For a small startup, there might be one unified cascade; for a global giant like P&G, cascades exist at corporate, sector, and brand levels, intertwined yet self-adjusting.

This idea transforms strategy from an abstract exercise into a practical discipline. In companies like Apple or Southwest Airlines, competitive advantage arises from the alignment between aspirations, capabilities, and systems. Southwest’s low-cost model only works because its choices—from fleet standardization to ticketing simplicity—fit perfectly with where it plays (short-haul routes) and how it wins (customer convenience and speed). Likewise, P&G’s success with Olay or Tide emerged from disciplined choices that aligned consumer insight, innovation, and channel execution.

From Vision to Winning

The authors challenge the notion that having a “vision” or “mission statement” suffices. A statement like “to be the best” doesn’t offer guidance for action. Instead, strategy demands choosing where not to play and accepting what trade-offs come with those choices. This clarity creates freedom—to focus, innovate, and adapt. Great organizations, Lafley argues, decide to win rather than just to do good. The Mayo Clinic isn’t merely treating patients; it aims to lead the world in medical research and redefine healthcare delivery. That’s the difference between playing and playing to win.

The Discipline of Thinking Strategically

Throughout Playing to Win, strategy emerges as both art and craft—a blend of insight, courage, and choice-making discipline. Lafley learned this through decades at P&G, partnering with Martin and drawing influence from thinkers like Michael Porter and Peter Drucker. Porter’s landmark idea that competitive advantage arises from “choosing a different set of activities to deliver unique value” underpins their framework. Drucker’s notion that the purpose of business is to create a customer provides its heartbeat.

The authors emphasize that many leaders resist making choices because they fear risk and prefer to keep options open. But as Martin notes, keeping every option alive is the same as having no strategy at all. Olay’s revitalization story—where an aging drugstore brand transformed into a multi-billion-dollar “masstige” line—illustrates how bold, integrated choices can turn stagnation into momentum. Each choice—from price point to packaging to product technology—was coherent and mutually reinforcing.

Why It Matters Now

In our era of volatility and information overload, the authors insist that simplicity and clarity are the hallmarks of winning strategies. A clear aspiration provides direction; careful where-to-play and how-to-win choices concentrate energy; the right capabilities and systems sustain performance. Ultimately, Lafley and Martin show that strategy isn’t mysterious—it’s about making the tough calls others avoid and integrating them into a playbook that unleashes sustainable success. Whether you lead a startup or a multinational, “Playing to Win” teaches that the simplest act—choosing—can be the most powerful tool in business leadership.

When P&G found its once-iconic Oil of Olay brand derisively nicknamed “Oil of Old Lady,” it faced a crossroads. The team could abandon the brand, acquire a competitor, or reinvent. Their eventual choice—to reimagine Olay from the ground up—illustrates Lafley and Martin’s central principle: strategy is choice. Every win begins with clear, intentional decisions about what to do and, equally important, what not to do.

Making Choices That Define You

Most organizations stumble because they refuse to choose. They confuse motion with progress, optimizing what exists instead of imagining what could win. Lafley shows that “optimization of the status quo is not strategy.” Real strategy requires narrowing focus. P&G had to decide if it would compete head-on with luxury brands in department stores or transform the mass retail segment altogether. Choosing the latter allowed Olay to create a new category—the “masstige” channel—that borrowed prestige cues while leveraging P&G’s strength in mass distribution.

The Five Questions That Shape Strategy

Every great strategy answers five questions in an integrated cascade:

• What is your winning aspiration? (Your purpose in winning terms.)
• Where will you play? (Which markets, products, and segments.)
• How will you win? (Your unique approach to value creation.)
• What capabilities must be in place? (Skills, resources, and partnerships that enable success.)
• What management systems are required? (Processes and measures that sustain execution.)

The cascade turns abstract thinking into practical design. Olay used these questions to redefine its brand from a budget cream to a technology-driven luxury experience accessible to middle-market consumers—bolstering its growth from $800 million to $2.5 billion within a decade.

Nested Choices and Organizational Alignment

In large enterprises, choices happen at multiple levels. A corporate strategy influences sector strategies; sectors affect categories; categories shape brand strategies. These are “nested cascades,” each refining but reinforcing the choices above. Lafley uses a yoga retail example to show how individuals at all levels—from CEO to store salesperson—make strategic decisions under different constraints but toward the same aspiration. This nesting ensures unity and agility across vast organizations.

“Making choices forces your hand and confines you to a path—but it also frees you to focus on what matters.”

Strategy is hard precisely because choice feels risky. But Lafley insists that risk increases when companies refuse to choose. Every brand, every department, every leader must articulate their own playbook built around these five questions. The moment you define a winning aspiration and choose where and how to pursue it, you stop drifting and start playing to win.

According to Lafley and Martin, the most dangerous strategic mistake is aiming merely to participate. Too many organizations “play to play”—launching products, chasing markets, or reacting to competitors—without defining what winning means. Strategy begins by answering a deceptively simple question: what does winning look like for us?

Aspiration vs. Reality

A lofty vision isn’t enough. A mission like “to lead innovation” sounds noble but gives no guidance. The winning aspiration must translate into measurable outcomes—market share leadership, superior value creation, and sustainable advantage. For Olay, the aspiration wasn’t “revive an old brand” but to “lead the North American skin-care market, achieve $1 billion in sales, and define a new masstige segment.” That clarity unleashed coordinated action across marketing, R&D, and retail partnerships.

Lessons from Saturn and P&G

The authors dramatize this idea through General Motors’ failed Saturn venture. Saturn’s goal was simply “to compete” against Japanese imports, not to win. It launched cars with fanfare but never built enough distinctiveness to beat Toyota or Honda. Two decades and $20 billion later, Saturn was shuttered. In contrast, P&G’s Global Business Services division under Filippo Passerini set out explicitly to win—by redefining IT process outsourcing through a “best-of-breed” model. By partnering with HP, IBM, and Jones Lang LaSalle, GBS turned cost management into strategic advantage, saving millions while driving innovation.

Winning with Those Who Matter Most

A winning aspiration must specify who you win with and against. Lafley urges leaders to obsess over their most important customers and best competitors. This shifts attention from internal metrics to external realities. By defining itself not as a maker of detergents but as a company “dedicated to improving consumers’ lives,” P&G reoriented its focus on consumer needs rather than product features—a lesson echoing Theodore Levitt’s warning against marketing myopia.

Raising the Bar

A too-modest aspiration breeds mediocrity; Lafley argues it’s “far more dangerous than a too-lofty one.” A company should define winning as creating industry-leading value, not simply surviving the next quarter. When winning becomes the standard, every decision—from pricing to product innovation—filters through that lens. Whether you’re a nonprofit, a tech start-up, or a family business, this principle demands courage: if you don’t decide to win, someone else will.

Once you know your aspiration, the next step is choosing your playing field—your markets, segments, and channels. Lafley shows that “where to play” defines the space where winning is possible. Every firm must decide where to compete and where not to compete. Often, narrowing focus creates strength.

Choosing Battles Wisely

P&G’s Bounty paper towel brand once struggled globally. By the late 1990s, expansion into Europe and Asia drained resources and profits. Charlie Pierce, head of global family care, made a decisive choice: Bounty would focus only on North America—the market with attractive margins and loyal consumers. Within that field, the team defined three distinct consumer segments and reinvented its products: Bounty Original, Bounty Extra Soft, and Bounty Basic. Each served a specific need—absorbency, softness, and price sensitivity—creating dominance across the upper half of the market.

Exploring Multiple Dimensions

“Where” includes geography, product type, consumer segment, distribution channel, and stage of production. A company might choose to go broad or deep, local or global. Lafley cautions against three traps: refusing to choose, trying to buy your way into attractive markets, and accepting current choices as immutable. Each trap creates a diffusion of focus and undermines advantage. He cites General Electric’s decision to divest entertainment holdings like NBC and polymer businesses to focus on infrastructure—a bold pruning that clarified its playing field.

Imagining New Space

Sometimes, companies must redefine the field entirely. Chip Bergh’s team at P&G turned the uninspired hard-surface cleaner line (Comet, Spic ’n Span) into a billion-dollar innovation: Swiffer. By integrating P&G’s expertise in chemistry and paper technology, they created a new way to clean—fast, dry, and fun. Swiffer was born from asking a new kind of where-to-play question: not “how do we compete in cleansers?” but “how can we change the game of cleaning at home?”

“Choosing where not to play is the first act of strategic courage.”

Whether pruning global distractions like P&G’s withdrawal from Europe for tissues or venturing into new territory like fine fragrances, Lafley’s lesson is universal: don’t drift into markets by default. Choose the battleground intentionally, guided by core capabilities and customer insight. Every successful expansion—like SK-II from Japan to global high-end skin care—starts with asking where the odds of winning are highest.

“How to win” defines the method of victory in your chosen field—the unique formula that delivers superior value to customers better than competitors. Lafley applies Michael Porter’s distinction: there are only two fundamental ways to win—cost leadership or differentiation.

Two Paths to Advantage

Low-cost players dominate by producing at a lower cost structure. Differentiators win by offering products perceived as distinctively more valuable. Mars, for example, doesn’t underprice Hershey’s but uses its cost advantage to buy prime shelf space nationwide. P&G often plays on differentiation—through brand equity, innovation, and consumer trust—but sometimes wins on cost in categories like laundry through global scale advantages.

P&G’s Partnership Innovation

The Glad ForceFlex story epitomizes creative thinking about “how to win.” When P&G developed advanced plastic technology but faced fierce competition in trash bags, it resisted launching alone. Instead, it partnered with rival Clorox in a joint venture—trading technology and expertise for equity. The result: a billion-dollar business in five years. Lafley calls this “innovation of the business model,” reminding leaders that winning sometimes means rewriting rules, not playing harder.

Reinforcing Where and How

A strong “how to win” must fit the “where to play.” Tide’s expansion from a single detergent to an entire “cleaning experience” shows this alignment. In Japan, P&G’s Joy concentrated detergent exploited structural efficiencies and consumer needs better than oversized local bottles. Olay’s success relied not only on brilliant marketing but also on superior product technology like VitaNiacin—proof that winning requires multiple reinforcing elements working in harmony.

A Practical Lesson for You

In your work, defining how to win means identifying what you can do decisively better than others. It could be delivering faster response times, designing delightfully simple products, or cultivating world-class customer empathy. The test is whether your strategy, once copied, still holds power. Sustainable advantage comes from fit—from aligning capabilities, systems, and culture toward your chosen recipe for victory.

Capabilities are the backbone of strategy. They are the activities and skills enabling your organization to win in its chosen way. Lafley calls them an activity system—a network of reinforcing strengths built to deliver competitive advantage. The P&G-Gillette merger shows how strategic fit between capabilities can amplify performance exponentially.

The Gillette Acquisition

P&G’s 2005 purchase of Gillette succeeded precisely because the two companies’ capabilities complemented each other. Gillette brought global brand strength in grooming and oral care; P&G added mastery in consumer insight, innovation, and scale. Together, they leveraged shared capabilities—marketing, R&D, global reach—to drive growth in razors and toothbrushes. The secret was integration across Lafley’s five capability pillars.

• Deep consumer understanding
• Innovation across products and business models
• Brand-building expertise
• Go-to-market partnerships
• Global scale and learning

Activity Systems and Reinforcing Rods

Each capability reinforces the others, like steel rods running through every floor of a skyscraper. Consumer insight fuels innovation; innovation strengthens retailer relations; scale magnifies both. Lafley borrows from Michael Porter’s concept of “activity systems” to show that sustainable advantage comes not from any single skill but from how capabilities fit together. P&G’s centralized R&D and global business services created cost and learning synergies no competitor could emulate.

“A strategy that isn’t feasible, distinctive, or defensible isn’t a winning one.”

Building on your strengths means starting at the “indivisible level”—where actual value creation happens—and ensuring that higher layers of management add competitive advantage through shared resources and skill transfer. P&G’s pruning of noncore brands like Folgers and Pringles exemplifies this discipline. For individuals, the same applies: know the few capabilities that make you decisive, invest disproportionately in them, and align your systems to amplify them.

Even the best strategy fails without systems that sustain it. Lafley and Martin argue that management systems—the structures, rhythms, and measures that reinforce strategic choices—often determine whether a strategy lives or dies. At P&G, these systems transformed chaotic “corporate theater” into focused strategy dialogues that built strategic muscles across the organization.

Reinventing Strategic Conversations

In the past, P&G’s strategy reviews were defensive presentations. Managers brought huge decks of slides and braced for interrogation. Lafley replaced this with intimate, dialogue-driven meetings—no slides, just discussion of a few critical strategic questions. By limiting participation to small groups and focusing on inquiry rather than advocacy, the team swapped performance anxiety for productive collaboration.

Culture of Assertive Inquiry

Inspired by Harvard’s Chris Argyris, Lafley introduced “assertive inquiry”—balancing advocacy (“Here’s my view”) with curiosity (“What do you see that I might miss?”). This mindset encourages team members to explain their reasoning, listen actively, and engage disagreement constructively. It’s the communication habit of great strategists. The stance Lafley taught was humble yet confident: “I have a view worth hearing, but I may be missing something.”

Systems that Drive Focus

To operationalize strategy, P&G used a one-page OGSM framework—Objectives, Goals, Strategy, and Measures. Each brand distilled its purpose and choices into this document. Review meetings, budget plans, innovation discussions—all linked back to the OGSM, keeping every unit aligned with corporate aspirations. On an enterprise level, Lafley communicated three mantras that translated strategy into daily action: “Make the consumer the boss,” “Win the consumer value equation,” and “Win the two moments of truth.” These simple phrases unified 135,000 employees worldwide.

Measuring Success

Finally, management systems require meaningful metrics. Lafley replaced old total shareholder return measures with Operating TSR—an integrated score of sales growth, profit improvement, and capital efficiency. At the product level, Deb Henretta’s “Weighted Purchase Intent” metric helped quantify how consumers evaluated brands holistically, not just by technical performance. Together, these measurements turned aspirations into action, teaching that you can’t manage what you don’t measure—and you can’t measure what you haven’t clearly chosen.

After defining your choices, how do you decide between them? Lafley and Martin provide a disciplined thinking process called the Strategy Logic Flow and a decision method known as reverse engineering. Together, these tools help transform debates into collaboration and uncertainty into clarity.

The Strategy Logic Flow

The logic flow organizes strategic analysis across four dimensions: industry, customers, relative position, and competition. Leaders examine industry structure (via Porter’s five forces), customer values, company capabilities and costs, and potential competitive reactions. For instance, Crest’s defeat by Colgate Total in the 1990s came from ignoring industry segmentation evolution; by reframing oral care as a complete regimen (whitening, health, freshness), Crest regained leadership. The framework ensures that analysis flows logically, linking external realities to internal advantage.

Reverse Engineering: Asking “What Would Have to Be True?”

The most important question in strategy, Martin says, is “What would have to be true for this to be a great choice?” Instead of arguing over who’s right, teams map the conditions under which each option would succeed, then test the least-likely assumptions first. This “lazy person’s approach” saves time and avoids unnecessary analysis. When Olay debated whether women would pay $18.99 for a mass-market premium cream, they didn’t assume—they tested. Discovering that the price appealed to both mass and prestige shoppers validated the choice and unlocked the masstige model.

From Fight to Dialogue

Traditional strategy processes pit advocates against skeptics, producing political compromises instead of insight. Reverse engineering reframes skepticism as curiosity. The most doubtful team member designs the test for their barrier condition, ensuring rigor and fairness. If the condition proves true, everyone can commit. This method converts confrontation into confidence—a shift that underpins Lafley’s belief that “strategy can be taught and learned, but it requires disciplined thinking and courage.”

Shortening the Odds

In business, there are no sure bets—just better ones. These analytical and collaborative tools shorten your odds of success by focusing energy where it matters. Every strategic decision, from entering emerging markets to launching new brands, gains rigor when framed around these questions: What would have to be true? What will we test first? What does winning mean? As Lafley concludes, great strategy doesn’t guarantee victory, but it dramatically increases your chances of playing to win.