There is a woman in the water meadows of Oxford. Draped in Oxford blue, she sits in quiet majesty, her lap sheltering a small, idealized city. Its dreaming spires rise like prayers from her womb. She is Isis, Queen and Mother, as imagined by Evelyn Dunbar in her painting Oxford. Her presence is not merely symbolic; she is guardian and giver, Nature herself, both origin and overseer of the knowledge this city cultivates. Looking upon her, I’m reminded that Oxford does not simply teach. It nurtures. It transforms. And it was in this very landscape, physical and symbolic, that I found myself in October of 2018, immersed in the University’s Advanced Management and Leadership Programme.

By 2019, the Oxford Advanced Management and Leadership Programme had achieved No. 1 status among UK Open Programmes in the Financial Times rankings, a position it held for five consecutive years including during my attendance in 2018.

An evening of debate on 23 October 2018 at the University of Oxford's Advanced Management and Leadership Programme

As a teenager, I dreamed of one day attending the University of Oxford. In 2017, at the age of 49, I finally applied to study in a three-week intensive course at Saïd Business School. I still recall the delight I felt when, at the end of my interview with Professor Lalit Johri, I was invited to participate in the Oxford Advanced Management and Leadership Programme.

Although I had been working in both for-profit and non-profit organisations since 1987, I had never received formal instruction in business during those years. This made the experience all the more meaningful. The programme, held from 7–27 October 2018, was an immersive 21-day, in-person learning journey at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School.

It was designed for senior leaders, including C-suite executives, board members, and directors, typically with 10+ years of leadership experience across public, private, and non-profit sectors. What I discovered was more than a course, it was the beginning of several transformative academic studies at Oxford that have left an indelible imprint on my professional path and personal outlook.

“Even more lasting, however, have been the friendships formed during those three weeks. The members of our cohort, leaders from across sectors and continents, have remained close companions in thought and in practice. It is a community of peers that continues to support and inspire me seven years on.”

Midway through the programme, our cohort turned from frameworks to practice.

We engaged in a structured debate, “The Great Debate,” as Professor Johri called it. Professor Johri set out both the proposition and the opposition positions, and my role was to deliver the closing argument in favor of the proposition for our team. Though brief, it was meaningful to write, present, and reflect upon as part of the experience.

What follows is the text of my closing argument.

Closing Argument

Culture eats strategy for breakfast. Three nouns, one verb, and one preposition. Culture is the behavior norms of a given group of people. Strategy is the game plan that can only be developed through the mind of the group in conjunction with the presence of leadership. We hold these truths to be self-evident. Strategy and culture are not created equal. In the words of the erudite thinker, Dr. Kunal Basu, “culture drives strategy.” “Eat” is a word of action; a verb. By definition, to ingest; to devour. Culture ingests strategy. Culture devours strategy. This is a question of priority. Which is first? Culture? Strategy? “Breakfast is usually the first meal of the day. Being a noun, breakfast is used to identify a person, group, or thing. A person? Jimmy Carter? A group? The congregation at Oxford. A thing? Breakfast. Breakfast is not a verb; breakfast is not an action. Breakfast is a noun; a thing and that thing is strategy. The key word in this discussion is the preposition “for.” A preposition is a word that governs, usually preceding, a noun or pronoun. Here, the word “for” precedes the noun “breakfast.” The determining factor is the relation of the word “for” to “breakfast.” “For” is defined as such: “as being or constituting.” For example, he was taken for a fool. She ate eggs for breakfast. Culture eats strategy for breakfast. The relation of for: he equals a fool; eggs equal breakfast; strategy equals breakfast. Thus, a symbiosis of sorts exits with he and fool; eggs and breakfast; strategy and breakfast. They are one. Grammatically, this cannot be otherwise legitimately argued based on the affirmative: culture eats strategy as the meal for breakfast. Culture is a noun. Strategy is a noun. Breakfast is a noun. The verb eats defines what culture does to strategy. Strategy defines what is for breakfast. Dr. Johri was invited by Prudential insurance company to develop a 12-step transformation process model. This case was discussed yesterday in class. All are familiar with this scenario. The “Reflection Questions” assigned to be considered prior to the first meeting include the words “culture” and “strategy.” On this entire page, culture is mentioned four times. Strategy is mentioned two times. Consider that all four references were made prior to the two references to strategy. Culture is first in priority. Strategy is second. Also, of the two words culture is mentioned 66% of the time on the first and 34% of time first page. On the second page, a 12-step process is displayed. Steps 4, 5, 6, and 7 all discuss culture as part of the transformation process model. Step 8 is the only step that references strategy. Culture is first in priority in the model since culture drives strategy. Of the 12-boxes (or steps), culture comprises 33% of the model while strategy comprises only 8% of the process and is second in priority. On the evidence of Dr. Peter Drucker, Dr. Kunal Basu, and Dr. Lalit Johri, we respectfully submit that, “culture does, indeed, eat strategy for breakfast.

The calibre of those who taught us made that debate, and my own learning, possible.

The programme brought together an exceptional faculty whose teaching and guidance shaped my thinking in profound ways:

Oxford Advanced Management and Leadership Programme Faculty

Looking back, the evening of debate captures the arc of the entire experience.

This first experience of formal study at Oxford was academically enriching and personally transformative, an anchor for how I continue to approach leadership and organisational life. This experience continues to shape not only how I lead, but how I learn.

Share this article
The link has been copied!