The Mistake of Expecting Strategy from the CTO

Introduction

As the importance of IT and products grows, expectations like “The CTO should also lead business strategy” or “People who understand technology should formulate strategy” are increasingly voiced. However, in reality, a paradox occurs: the more you expect strategy from the CTO, the more absent strategy becomes. This article organizes why expecting strategy from the CTO is itself a mistake, not by shifting the discussion to individual capability or role devaluation, but from the perspective of role design and management structure.

The CTO is Not Designed as a “Role that Decides Strategy”

The original responsibilities of the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) are clear. They are technology selection, validating the soundness of technical decisions, managing technical debt, and ensuring the technical sustainability of products and systems. In other words, the CTO is responsible for making a decided direction technically viable; it is not a role that decides “what to aim for.”

Strategy is Not About “Technology”

Strategy is essentially the answer to questions like: “In which market do we compete?”, “On what value do we focus?”, “What do we abandon?”, and “Where do we allocate limited resources?”. These are all management judgments, not technical judgments. Technology is a means to realize strategy, not the strategy itself.

The Distortion Created by Expecting Strategy from the CTO

The moment you expect strategy from the CTO, the following distortions arise. What is technically “possible” becomes the strategy, the technology roadmap becomes a substitute for management policy, and product discussions get pulled towards technical optimization. This is not a CTO running amok; it is an inevitable reaction to trying to fill the void of absent strategy with technology. As a result, decisions that are technically correct but have little business meaning accumulate.

The Difference with Companies Where the CTO Can Discuss Strategy

In some companies, the CTO may appear to be discussing strategy. However, this is mostly the case when conditions are aligned, such as the CTO also being a top executive, the founder also serving as CTO, or the company being in an early phase where business and technology are not yet separated. In other words, it is not the CTO discussing strategy, but the executive discussing technology. Ignoring this premise and expecting strategy from the CTO as a formal role will inevitably cause the structure to break down.

Expecting Strategy from the CTO Creates a “Management Vacuum”

The biggest problem with a structure that expects strategy from the CTO is that management itself stops taking ownership of strategy. The moment you delegate, saying “IT strategy is for the CTO, technical matters are for the experts,” business strategy and IT strategy become disconnected. This very disconnection is what reproduces the causes of the previously seen CIO dysfunction, the information systems department becoming defensive, and the failure of IT transformation.

What is the Correct Division of Roles?

The correct structure is clear. Management decides the strategy of “what to aim for and what to abandon.” On the other hand, the CTO’s role is to make that strategy technically viable and to clarify technical constraints and possibilities. The value of the CTO lies in not “breaking” the strategy with technology—that is, stopping unrealistic strategies and shaping them into a technically sustainable form is their true role.

Conclusion

“The mistake of expecting strategy from the CTO” is not a discussion that undervalues the CTO. Quite the opposite, to maximize the CTO’s value, you must not burden them with strategy. Management must take ownership of strategy, and the CTO must make that strategy technically viable. Only when this division of roles becomes clear can IT organizations like the CIO, CTO, and information systems department each begin to function correctly. Who you expect strategy from is an act that determines where the organization makes decisions, and that responsibility always lies with management.