The tendency is however to perceive such strategies in isolation. Although discussion of the merits of alternative strategies may occur in a policy-making environment, it would be unusual to find two or more strategies being discussed in the operational environment in which strategy is executed. It is difficult for a conventional organization to articulate action in terms of two strategies simultaneously. One consequence is that information on strategies employed by international bodies tends to be even more dispersed than that on the problems to which such strategies are designed to respond. Whilst the organizations described in the Yearbook of International Organizations may be able to identify precisely the set of problems to which they are responding, it is usually much clear less what strategy they are employing in the process.
Problems tend to be more explicitly recognized than strategies.
Organizations quite often have strategies which are not distinguishable within the organization from programme orientations, working style and the general objectives for which the body was originally established. Strategies, like problems, may not be distinguished as such. Many strategies are therefore implicit rather than explicit. The conventional approach of an organization or group to any problem situation is to elaborate a strategy, whether explicit or implicit. However, as demonstrated in Volume 1, the number, variety and interrelationships of the problems are such that it is legitimate to question whether any conventional strategy could be even partly adequate.