What We Do

1) Clarify the institution’s irreducible purpose

We help leaders clarify and articulate the institution’s irreducible purpose: the goals and obligations that must remain intact regardless of political winds, technological change, and social upheaval. This is the backbone of an institution. It provides stability when everything else must adapt, and it gives leaders a defensible basis for prioritization, tradeoffs, and refusal.

We help you distinguish clearly between what must remain fixed, what can and should bend in response to context, and what has accumulated over time but no longer adds value. The goal is a shared, unambiguous understanding that leadership, staff, and external stakeholders can hold onto as conditions change, and against which strategy, tradeoffs, and execution can be judged.

Output: a shared articulation of the institution’s irreducible core, and the challenges and opportunities that flow from it.

2) Expose areas of alignment and friction

Even when institutions are clear on their core purpose, deep friction can emerge around how that purpose is pursued, particularly under conditions of uncertainty. This work surfaces three kinds of tension that, if left unexamined, quietly undermine execution and legitimacy.

First: friction within the mission itself

The same stated purpose can imply radically different strategies depending on time horizon. Institutions often feel forced to default to short-term optimization during periods of volatility, relinquishing the opportunity that uncertainty presents to act upon and shape the environment in a way that better serves their long-term purpose. We surface these implicit time horizons, name the tradeoffs they create, and give you what you need to decide deliberately what the institution is optimizing for now, next, and over the long term.

Second: misalignment within the organization

Different parts of an institution inevitably develop distinct incentives, interpretations of purpose, and theories of success. Some degree of divergence is normal, even helpful—but leaders need clarity on where that tension is productive and where it prevents execution. We identify how values and goals are interpreted differently across your institution, so that you can decide how to address those tensions—whether through clearer direction, structural change, or managed dissent.

Third: misalignment among stakeholders

Change inevitably reshapes an institution’s relationship with its stakeholders. As strategy evolves in response to new conditions, some stakeholders will remain essential, some will dissent, some will no longer serve or be served by an institution and thus drift off, and new stakeholders will emerge. We help institutions map their stakeholder landscape honestly so that they can approach that change with intention. This allows institutions to move forward deliberately, without drifting into paralysis or incoherence.

Output: a clear picture of where alignment exists, where friction is structural, and which tensions must be resolved, managed, or accepted.

3) Establish strategic direction without prediction

At this moment, reliable forecasting is not possible. We are in the midst of significant historical change. Broad technological, political, and social forces are clearly taking shape, but it is impossible to predict how they will settle over the short, medium, or long term. In this environment, traditional long-range planning risks producing either false confidence or paralysis.

In periods of instability, institutions shape the future through the cumulative effect of leadership decisions—what is prioritized, what is refused, and how pressure is absorbed.

We work with leaders to clarify the role their institution will play over time by examining how it exercises power, how it balances influence and restraint, and what conditions it requires to remain effective. This is not about articulating a speculative end state, but about establishing a durable orientation that can guide judgment as circumstances evolve.

From there, we work backwards to determine the institution’s appropriate posture in the present. This includes identifying:

• what capabilities must be built or protected in the near term;
• which fights are essential to the institution’s goals, and which should be avoided; and
• where current actions are foreclosing future options.

The result is not a fixed plan tied to uncertain predictions, but a strategic orientation that allows leaders to make coherent, joined-up decisions in the present—decisions that remain consistent with who the institution intends to be, even as conditions change.

Output: a durable strategic orientation that guides present-day decisions during deep uncertainty.

How Studdart & Company works

Studdart & Company takes a bespoke approach to its work, engaging with institutions that differ widely in mission, governance, stakeholder complexity, and operating context. Engagements are tailored to the needs of the institution and may range from short, intensive sprints to longer-term work over several months.

We typically work directly with senior leadership and boards, and—where it materially improves understanding and execution—with staff, users, clients, and/or grantees. While engagements often result in written interim and final materials, we also believe that dialogic work with decision makers is essential: leaders benefit most from sustained, candid conversation that surfaces assumptions, sharpens judgment, and supports decision-making under pressure.