Shared context and uncomfortable truths: How S-Group reframed strategy at Harvard
Why would you fly 50 of your top leaders to Harvard? It is an unusual choice at a time when leadership teams are under pressure to do more with less. When I heard that S-Group had done exactly that, I wanted to understand why. As the head of Noren’s strategy practice, I spend much of my time helping organizations rethink how strategy is made and realised. The idea of taking a broad group of leaders out of their daily routines to reflect together, in a setting built for deep thinking rather than quick decisions, immediately caught my attention.
When I sat down with CEO Hannu Krook, he described their thinking behind the decision. S-Group had begun its latest strategy cycle in a familiar way, setting targets and discussing growth. But partway through the process, Krook and his team realised that the real challenge was not in refining the plan but in deepening the shared understanding behind it – and raising the bar. They needed a stronger common context, a way for leaders across different levels to interpret the world through the same lens and speak the same language.
That insight led to a program at Harvard designed around S-Group’s own strategy. The goal was not to hear interesting – yet often very general – lectures but to pause, test assumptions, and strengthen the foundation for future decisions.
Lesson 1: Focus on what truly matters
The starting point for the Harvard initiative came directly from S-Group’s strategy. The company had identified three key priorities: growth, performance, and digital integration. The last of these became a catalyst for the program, not only as a technological challenge but as a way to rethink how data, automation, and AI could support growth and efficiency across all business areas.
“Every topic we discussed, every expert we enlisted, and every Harvard case we studied was selected based on our most important strategic priorities,” Krook explained.
The process brought the organization’s most critical questions to the forefront. Instead of fragmenting focus, it concentrated energy where alignment mattered most.
Lesson 2: Take time together, and make effort matter
What stood out most in S-Group’s process was the deliberate investment of time and preparation. Participants did not just show up in Boston; they came together for months beforehand. Each read 21 cases, and the group met monthly for joint sessions to go to the gym together, discuss insights and build a common foundation.
“People read numerous cases, we held monthly training sessions, and we arrived with common references already in place. At Harvard we could focus on building alignment, not absorbing everything from scratch,” Krook said.
The program also reached beyond the executive team to include key experts from across the organization. “Involving not just the executive team but also −2, −3, even −4 levels of key players made it stick,” he noted.
Preparation was not a formality. It was a signal of intent. The shared effort elevated the seriousness of the conversation and built a stronger sense of ownership for the outcome.
Lesson 3: Choose a context that challenges
Why Harvard? Krook’s answer was simple: they wanted to place themselves in an environment where average would not be enough. Harvard’s intellectual rigor and tradition in strategic thinking created a setting where leaders had to articulate their reasoning with clarity and confidence.
Krook and his team ensured that the sessions were not generic. They built the program around S-Group’s real strategic challenges, using Harvard cases as mirrors for their own context. The professors did not rewrite the company’s strategy. Instead, they sharpened the logic behind it.
“We got feedback from Harvard that this was a uniquely well-prepared program. We pushed them to give their very best to us,” Krook said.
When leaders step into an environment that challenges their assumptions, thinking deepens. The context itself becomes part of the learning.
Lesson 4: Create space for uncomfortable truths
The most meaningful discussions at Harvard were not about success stories but about the difficult realities of how things actually work. “If the goal is a tidy, layered architecture, you have to be ready to hear that some parts of it look like a bowl of spaghetti,” Krook said. That level of frankness requires a culture where people can speak openly, even when their observations challenge the dominant narrative.
Krook described how this openness has become a leadership principle. “We used to have quite a closed, even somewhat authoritarian culture. When I was appointed to this role, I made it clear that I’m not the kind of person who stands on ceremony. I decided to stay exactly as I am in how I lead and interact with people.”
When leaders model humility, others gain the courage to speak up. This shift transforms discussions from polite consensus to productive friction, where differences of perspective are not suppressed but explored.
Reflection: Quality comes only with friction
Listening to Hannu Krook, it struck me that S-Group’s Harvard journey was not about producing a new strategy but about living one. It was a collective exercise in reflection, testing, and shared understanding. The theories and frameworks were helpful, but the true work happened in the conversations between people.
In our own practice at Noren, we see the same truth: the quality of strategy depends on the quality of dialogue. When leaders dare to expose their thinking to challenge and make space for discomfort, alignment becomes real. Shared context does not mean sameness; it means being able to see the world together, from different angles but through a common lens.
Strategy, at its best, is not written. It is lived. And like any living thing, it grows stronger through friction.
Read more about our approach: Changing Minds: Why Strategy Change Requires More Than a PowerPoint 
INTRIGUED AND WANT TO LEARN MORE? GET IN TOUCH!