Prioritizing and Selecting Strategies for Implementation

Estimated reading: 6 minutes 6 views

What if you’ve generated 30 viable strategies from your TOWS matrix—only to realize you can only execute five? That’s the real challenge: not creating strategies, but choosing which ones will move the needle. I’ve been in this position over 150 times, across startups, midsize firms, and public sector organizations. The answer isn’t intuition. It’s a disciplined, data-informed process.

My experience shows that most teams fail not because of poor analysis but because they lack a clear strategy prioritization TOWS process. Without it, energy gets wasted on low-impact options while high-leverage opportunities are delayed or ignored.

This chapter gives you the tools to turn strategy from a list into a roadmap. You’ll learn how to apply a transparent, repeatable TOWS evaluation framework that balances feasibility, impact, and strategic alignment. If you’re working on a strategic plan, a business transformation, or a growth initiative, this is where theory becomes execution.

Why Strategy Prioritization TOWS Is Different

Many organizations treat strategy as a top-down mandate or a one-time exercise. But that’s not how real strategy works. The TOWS matrix generates potential—but only a strategy prioritization TOWS approach turns potential into momentum.

What makes this different? It’s not just about choosing “the best” idea. It’s about selecting the right mix of strategies that fit your capacity, risk tolerance, and long-term goals.

Here’s my key insight: not every strategy needs to be bold. Some are tactical—high feasibility, moderate impact. Others are transformational—high risk, high reward. The TOWS evaluation framework helps you understand that balance.

Four Core Questions That Drive Prioritization

Before assigning scores, ask these four questions. They form the foundation of any robust strategy prioritization TOWS process:

What is the expected impact on our strategic goals?
How difficult will execution be, given our current resources?
Does this strategy align with our core capabilities and market position?
How quickly can we see measurable results?

These aren’t vague concepts. They’re the lens through which every TOWS strategy must be evaluated.

Building Your TOWS Evaluation Framework

Let’s break down the most effective method I’ve used: the weighted scoring model. It’s not flashy—but it works. It forces clarity, reduces bias, and makes decisions defensible.

Step 1: Define Evaluation Criteria

Start by identifying 4–6 criteria that truly matter for your organization. Common ones include:

Strategic Impact (0–5)
Resource Requirements (0–5)
Timeline to Results (0–5)
Alignment with Core Capabilities (0–5)
Risk Level (0–5)
Stakeholder Support (0–5)

Assign weights to each criterion based on your strategic context. For example, if speed is critical, increase the weight on “Timeline to Results.” If resources are tight, weight “Resource Requirements” higher.

Step 2: Score Each Strategy

Score every strategy on a 0–5 scale per criterion. Use specific benchmarks:

Impact: 5 = directly drives top 3 strategic goals; 3 = supports secondary goals; 1 = minor relevance
Resources: 5 = uses existing teams and tech; 1 = requires new hires and external partners
Risk: 5 = low uncertainty; 1 = major dependency on external factors

Be honest. Overestimating feasibility leads to failure. Underestimating impact leads to missed opportunities.

Step 3: Calculate Weighted Scores

Use this formula:

Weighted Score = Σ (Score × Weight)

For example:

Strategy	Impact (Weight: 0.3)	Resources (Weight: 0.25)	Timeline (Weight: 0.2)	Risk (Weight: 0.15)	Total Score
Expand into Southeast Asia	4	2	5	2	3.4
Launch new digital product line	5	3	4	4	4.0
Rebrand for sustainability focus	3	4	3	1	3.0

The strategy with the highest score is your top priority—not because it looks good, but because it passes the test of strategic logic.

Using the Feasibility Grid for Quick Screening

Not every strategy needs a full weighted model. When time is short, use the feasibility grid to filter options fast.

Plot strategies on a 2×2 matrix:

X-axis: Feasibility (Low to High)
Y-axis: Impact (Low to High)

Place each strategy on the grid and categorize:

Green Zone (High Impact, High Feasibility): Execute immediately. These are your quick wins.
Amber Zone (High Impact, Low Feasibility): Invest in enabling work—hires, infrastructure, partnerships.
Red Zone (Low Impact, High Feasibility): Consider only if you have surplus capacity. Otherwise, deprioritize.
Gray Zone (Low Impact, Low Feasibility): Flag for elimination.

Use this to quickly identify your “A” list of high-leverage, achievable strategies.

Common Pitfalls in TOWS Strategy Selection

Even with a strong framework, teams fall into traps. Here are the most common—and how to avoid them:

Pitfall 1: Confusing urgency with importance. A strategy may be urgent due to a deadline, but not strategically valuable. Always tie back to goals.
Pitfall 2: Letting leadership bias override data. If the CEO wants a project, don’t ignore it—but make the case public. Score it like any other.
Pitfall 3: Overlooking interdependencies. One strategy may be high-scoring alone, but if it blocks another, its true value drops.
Pitfall 4: Failing to revisit scores after execution begins. Circumstances change. Re-evaluate every quarter.

These aren’t just warnings—they’re guardrails. They keep strategy grounded in real-world constraints.

Implementing Your Prioritized Strategy

Prioritization isn’t the end. It’s the moment to transition from analysis to action.

Once you’ve selected your top 3–5 strategies:

Assign an owner (not just a department, but a named individual).
Break each strategy into tangible milestones with deadlines.
Integrate with OKRs or KPIs—link performance to strategic outcomes.
Set up a quarterly review to track progress and recalibrate.

Remember: a strategy is not “done” when it’s written. It’s done when it delivers results.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I know if I should use weighted scoring or the feasibility grid?

Use weighted scoring when you have a complex, multi-layered strategy and need detailed justification. Use the feasibility grid when you’re under time pressure or need to present options to leadership quickly.

Can I apply the TOWS evaluation framework to public sector or nonprofit organizations?

Absolutely. The framework adapts to mission-driven goals. Replace “profit impact” with “mission impact” and “resource requirements” with “budget and staffing constraints.” The logic remains the same.

How many strategies should I select for implementation?

Never exceed 5–7 strategies per planning cycle. Too many dilute focus. The best strategies are often few and tightly aligned.

Should I involve the entire team in strategy prioritization?

Yes, but with structure. Let teams score strategies independently first, then compare. This reduces groupthink and surface differing perspectives.

What if two strategies have nearly the same score?

Revisit the scoring criteria. Adjust weights if necessary. Or consider a pilot test. Often, the difference is in execution risk, not theory.

How often should I re-evaluate my TOWS strategy list?

Every quarter. Markets shift. Competitors evolve. A strategy that was feasible last year may be outdated now. Reassess to stay agile.