Informed i’s Weekly Business Insights
Extractive summaries and key takeaways from the articles carefully curated from TOP TEN BUSINESS MAGAZINES to promote informed business decision-making | Since 2017 | Week 423, covering October 17 – 23, 2025 | Archive

Is This a Moment for Strategic Hibernation?
By Christopher Marquis | Harvard Business Review Magazine | November–December 2025
Extractive Summary of the Article | Listen
3 key takeaways from the article
- In an era marked by economic turbulence, business leaders today find themselves navigating a whiplash of regulatory measures on issues such as trade, climate change, and diversity and inclusion. Conventional strategy responses to such challenges typically include exit, voice, and loyalty. All three responses, however, can have drawbacks. Strategic hibernation offers a fourth option: quietly preserving internal capacities while reducing external exposure.
- In a world where political headwinds are growing stronger and reputational risks more volatile, successful strategic hibernation depends on three things: maintaining core assets, investing in political risk analysis, and being disciplined about external visibility. The goal isn’t to stand still—it’s to build quietly, align deeply, and prepare to reemerge when conditions shift.
- The firms that will lead in the long run are not those that are loudest in challenging times, but those that navigate such periods with clarity of purpose and control of their exposure. To respond to an age of backlash and whiplash, the smartest strategy may be to advance steadily—just below the radar.
(Copyright lies with the publisher)
Topics: Strategic Hibernation, Leadership, Strategy
Click for the extractive summary of the articleIn an era marked by economic turbulence, business leaders today find themselves navigating a whiplash of regulatory measures on issues such as trade, climate change, and diversity and inclusion. These executives would be well served by examining how companies have successfully managed historical moments of sharp political change, such as biotech firms amid the George W. Bush–era stem cell restrictions, Indian banks during the period of intense regulatory oversight that started in the 1980s, and Chinese tech firms under Xi Jinping.
Conventional strategy responses to such challenges typically include exit, voice, and loyalty. All three responses, however, can have drawbacks. Exit may mean losing competitive footholds. Voice could escalate conflict, opening firms up to attacks by politicians and consumers. And loyalty may dilute a company’s reputation for ethical behavior. Strategic hibernation offers a fourth option: quietly preserving internal capacities while reducing external exposure.
Keep the Lights On. The first step in strategic hibernation is to maintain the company’s core assets. One of the most illuminating examples comes from 2001, when the Bush administration imposed limits on federally funded embryonic stem cell research, a decision that was driven by the politics of abortion. To respond, many biotech firms adopted strategies to preserve their scientific capacity while avoiding political firestorms.
This decision to pause rather than pivot to new research areas or abandon their missions, which included the research and development of cutting-edge therapies that relied on stem cells, was driven in part by the firms’ core values. Many were grounded in the belief that embryonic stem cells had transformative medical potential for a range of uses, from treating spinal cord injuries to curing or managing degenerative diseases. The approach also reflected the foresight that the government’s policy would likely be reversed which actually happened.
How could they be confident in this prediction? Public opinion polling and the federated nature of the U.S. political system both clearly demonstrated that opposition to embryonic stem cell research was not monolithic. Second, it was clear that many other countries were enthusiastic about this line of research, as they stepped in to offer funding. These signals—from state-level investments to global partnerships—indicated that stem cell research was not only surviving but thriving outside U.S. federal constraints, reinforcing the rationale for a strategic pause rather than a strategic pivot. U.S. biotech firms also retained core teams, managed IP portfolios, and continued research that did not require direct work with stem cells. This way, the firms could sustain scientific progress, protect knowledge capital, and remain ready to restart high-cost experimental research as soon as the policy barriers lifted.
Keep Your Ear to the Ground. The second element of strategic hibernation is political risk analysis, including monitoring political signals, identifying policy inflection points, and planning for a shift in the wind. Hibernation creates an advantage only when firms have the external awareness to seize a future opportunity and retain the right internal capabilities. Doing so can mean closely monitoring political signals, understanding policy inflection points, and investing in the preservation of assets such as talent, market relationships, and core systems.
Be Strategic in Your Speech. A third key element of strategic hibernation is being disciplined about external visibility. In politically volatile environments, firms in strategic hibernation can rarely afford to speak freely—or to stop speaking entirely. The most resilient organizations learn to walk a careful line: speaking just enough to signal their alignment with the party line, but not so much that they lose internal coherence. In China under Xi Jinping, for example, the state has increasingly asserted control over private enterprise, and leading technology firms have had to master the art of flying below the radar.
show less
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.