#strategy&

Bitcoin for Corporations (“BFC”), representing 38 member companies and 69% of all corporate Bitcoin holdings, reaffirms its mission to Accelerate Corporate Bitcoin Adoption through 2030. NASHVILLE, TN — September 17th, 2025 — Bitcoin for Corporations (BFC), an initiative cofounded by BTC Inc. and Strategy Inc (Nasdaq: STRF/STRC/STRK/STRD/MSTR), announced today a renewed five-year strategic partnership, reinforcing its long-term mission to accelerate corporate Bitcoin adoption worldwide. The agreement brings added stability and vision to BFC’s role as the trusted platform and executive network for Bitcoin treasury companies, service providers, and capital allocators navigating Bitcoin integration into corporate balance sheets. BFC currently represents 38 member companies — holding an estimated 69% of all corporate Bitcoin on balance sheets — with membership spanning North and South America, Europe, and Asia/Oceania. This global reach positions BFC as the leading voice in corporate Bitcoin strategy execution, education and awareness. “Securing this five-year extension to our partnership with Strategy, reinforces our conviction that corporate Bitcoin adoption is not slowing down and will only continue to accelerate,” said George Mekhail, Managing Director of Bitcoin for Corporations at BTC Inc. “I’m grateful for the opportunity to continue our collaboration with the Strategy team and look forward to building on the momentum of an incredible first year. Hyperbitcoinization is closer than we think.” Through this renewed partnership, BFC will continue to deliver executive-level networking opportunities, investor relations (IR) and public relations (PR) support, and access to practical best-in-class resources — including research reports, corporate case studies, and educational content tailored to the unique needs of corporations integrating Bitcoin into their financial operations. “We’re excited about extending our partnership with BTC Inc. and continuing to support the mission of accelerating corporate bitcoin adoption,” said Phong Le, CEO of Strategy. “Supporting every corporate leader who is looking to implement the Strategy Playbook is good for Bitcoin and we look forward to the ongoing collaboration with the BFC team over the next 5 years.” BFC members also benefit from access to a vetted network of service providers, peer institutions, and curated programming across global Bitcoin events in cities such as Las Vegas, Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, and Amsterdam. These offerings help corporate leaders design, communicate, and implement their Bitcoin treasury strategies with confidence based on market and jurisdictional needs. This milestone cements BFC’s foundation for continued innovation, collaboration, and best practices in the corporate Bitcoin ecosystem. About BTC Inc. BTC Inc. is the parent company of Bitcoin Magazine, the original and most trusted source for Bitcoin news and education, and producer of The Bitcoin Conference, the largest and most influential Bitcoin event in the world. Headquartered in Nashville, BTC Inc. builds media, data, events, and advocacy products that accelerate Bitcoin adoption around the globe. About Bitcoin for Corporations (BFC) Bitcoin for Corporations is BTC Inc.’s flagship enterprise initiative, offering corporations the tools, frameworks, and relationships necessary to integrate Bitcoin into treasury and operations. BFC supports leading organizations with education, strategic guidance, and access to a growing network of aligned corporate executives, investors, and service providers. Learn more at: b.tc/corporations About Strategy Strategy Inc (Nasdaq: STRF/STRC/STRK/STRD/MSTR) is the world's first and largest Bitcoin Treasury Company. Strategy is a publicly traded company that has adopted Bitcoin as its primary treasury reserve asset. By using proceeds from equity and debt financings, as well as cash flows from operations, Strategy strategically accumulates Bitcoin and advocates for its role as digital capital.

Dr. Shihab Elborai, Dr. Raed Kombargi, partners, Dr. Yahya Anouti, principal, and Anthony Yammine, manager, with Strategy& Middle East (formerly Booz & Company), part of the PwC network

Developing economies are likely to spend over $57 trillion on infrastructure projects in the next two decades, more than in developed countries. That spending represents a significant opportunity to boost growth, create jobs, and deliver other economic benefits. To capitalize on this, governments are crafting local-content policies to ensure that much of the spending goes to local providers. However, many local-content programs fall short of their objectives because policies are affected by the conceptual biases of policymakers. By understanding and addressing these biases directly, developing countries can ensure that they retain the bulk of the economic gains from the coming wave of infrastructure spending.

Dr. Shihab Elborai, partner, Strategy& Middle East

Such an approach is particularly important for the GCC, where governments are investing significant sums to develop infrastructure. Saudi Arabia, for example, is likely to spend $1.1 trillion from 2019-2038, while the UAE is scheduled to invest $350 billion over a similar time frame. These large development schemes can allow local companies not just to substitute imports, but also to grow non-oil exports by enhancing their capabilities. However, policymakers need to stress the importance of economic openness and free trade given the region’s need to export. At the same time, there are many capabilities that the region, because of its small size, does not possess and that it must import to build infrastructure. GCC governments therefore need to think logically about how they balance the need to localize manufacturing while pursuing sound economic policies.

Indeed, local-content policies are now widespread, whether in the GCC or elsewhere. There are currently nearly 300 local-content requirements in place in non-OECD countries. For example, Indonesia requires that up to 71% of infrastructure spending on electrical power come from local suppliers, along with as much as 50 percent of spending on wireless broadband equipment. Brazil has steadily raised its local content requirements from 30% to 65% on offshore deep-water oil and gas exploration and development projects. In the region, Saudi Aramco’s In-Kingdom Total Value Add (IKTVA) program seeks 70% localization by 2021.

Although there is compelling logic behind these policies, countries need to ensure that they are founded in objective, fact-based judgment. Frequently, policymakers face a growing sense of urgency and public pressure to deliver results. Critically, even the most experienced professionals can succumb to unconscious biases in reasoning and evaluation, leading to policies that fall short.

In particular, there are three deep-rooted illusions that distort local-content policies. First, policymakers can overestimate the localization potential from a product category. Usually this is because categories have greater variety in sizes, designs, and costs than at first glance. A valve, for example, could be a cheap piece of plastic or a highly-engineered piece of equipment costing tens of thousands of dollars. Putting such different objects into the same category creates the illusion of a large market opportunity.

Second, policymakers tend to be overly concerned with familiar product categories, such as consumer goods, wind farm equipment, or solar panels. This puts other types of goods, such as intermediate components and less well-known industries, at a disadvantage. Local-content policies are about value-creation, not favorable publicity.

Third, policymakers often aim for high percentages of local content without analyzing the actual value created. This is understandable. Large numbers are attractive. Yet local content only creates value for the national economy to a certain level, beyond which it can actually destroy. This is because it will be cheaper to import some items than make them locally.

To neutralize these biases, policymakers need two kinds of safeguards: behavioral and analytical. These safeguards are mutually reinforcing and complementary.

Dr. Raed Kombargi, partner, Strategy&

Analytical safeguards involve policymakers developing a detailed baseline of information, including all procurement spending (encompassing sub-components and raw inputs) along with local manufacturing capabilities. Effective policies need precision, not averages. Governments must also be able to quantify the economic value from the policies they implement. A few accurate, comprehensive, and easy-to-administer metrics are a further safeguard as they allow governments to base their decisions on data and to test, and improve, their policies over time.

Behavioral safeguards start with mere awareness of cognitive biases, an awareness that helps policymakers identify and replace ingrained thinking. Leaders should encourage dissent and constructive debate, particularly from the junior employees who often have direct experience with policy implementation. Finally, local content policy recommendations should be subject to adversarial reviews, including by external experts. The prospect of having to policymakers being forced to justify their analyses and recommendations should make them more rigorous in how they formulate policies, and make these policies more robust.

Decisions on local-content policies can have considerable and irreversible effects on long-term economic growth, productivity, and national competitiveness. So while the economic prize is tremendous, policymakers in the GCC and elsewhere need a more deliberate, conscious approach to policy making. If they understand their biases and counteract them, they can improve the quality of their analyses and the effectiveness of local content policies, ensuring that their economies benefit.

Dr. Shihab Elborai, Dr. Raed Kombargi, partners, Dr. Yahya Anouti, principal, and Anthony Yammine, manager, with Strategy& Middle East (formerly Booz & Company), part of the PwC network

  The post Harnessing the Potential of Local Suppliers in the GCC appeared first on Bloomberg Businessweek Middle East.

Digitale Transformation: Chief Digital Officer noch die Ausnahme

Zentrale Ergebnisse der „2015 Chief Digital Officer“-Studie von Strategy&, der Strategieberatung von PwC:

Mit einem Anteil an CDOs von 13% liegt Europa ganz vorne, gefolgt von Nordamerika mit 7%. Global sind es innerhalb der Versicherungsbranche 8%, in der Branche Kommunikation, Medien und Unterhaltung 13%, in der Nahrungsmittelbranche 11% und in der Konsumgüterbranche 9% der Unternehmen. 

Weiter hält es stark von der Unternehmensgröße ab, ob ein CDO erforderlich ist: 9% der Konzerne beschäftigen einen führenden Digitalmanager. In nur 2% der Firmen mit weniger als 1.000 Mitarbeitern und nur in jeweils 3% der Unternehmen mit 1.000 bis 5.000 sowie mit 5.000 bis 10.000 Angestellten gibt es einen CDO. 

Die berufliche Vita von CDOs teilt sich wie folgt auf: 34% kommen aus dem Marketing, 17% aus dem Vertrieb, 14% aus der Technologieentwicklung und 13% aus dem Consultingbereich. 

What’s in a name?

PwC found itself in a pickle. After pushing forward with the acquisition of Booz & Company for an undisclosed sum in autumn of 2013, they faced the difficult task of rebranding what they envisioned to become the crown-jewel in their consulting service line. PwC was barred from using the name of the 100-year old consulting fixture – one responsible for helping create the NFL or credited with coining the term ‘Supply Chain Management’ – due to legal agreements with the Carlisle Group after the split with Booz Allen Hamilton. Both PwC and Booz & Company’s leadership must have carefully considered the value of an acquisition that would eliminate the target's brand equity in an industry built on reputation, heritage, and demonstrated value.

What’s in a name? Consider the following thought experiment: all else being equal, would you prefer to work for Booz & Company or Strategy&? The Booz & Company brand carries with it visibility (the oldest consulting firm, founded in 1914, with global operations), associations (responsible for the successful publication Strategy+Business, a partner in developing the annual and globally sited Innovation Index in collaboration with INSEAD, etc.), and customer loyalty (not only are a large portion of its revenues drawn from historic ‘Centurion’ clients, but it has a demonstrated history of attracting and retaining human capital). The acquisition of Monitor provides a good working example of how much equity is carried in a consulting brand name. Deloitte acquired the Monitor Group after it filed for bankruptcy at the end of 2012. The timing of the merger was widely criticized at the time by industry insiders.  Allowing Monitor to fail before acquiring it implied that Deloitte was able to buy the brand only after many of Monitor’s seniors and human capital had already departed the firm for other consultancies. What, many asked, did Deloitte actually buy if not the real capital of the company? The answer: an industry name which they ultimately rebranded as Monitor-Deloitte. Few will remember the circumstances of Monitor’s acquisition, but most will recall their association with Monitor as a niche consultancy built on strong academic and analytic foundations. Conversely, though it lost the name, PwC garnered overwhelming support from Booz & Company partners for the merger and was therefore able to retain a large part of the Booz & Company team. In an industry where talent is ultimately the differentiator, PwC can be forgiven for having been forced to relinquish a name to gain a strategic partner. After all, a more discerning and long-lived client counterpart is far more concerned with quality of advice it receives – so long as it comes from a name it can trust. The true challenge of this acquisition is how PwC integrated and positioned Booz & Company into its brand architecture.

Strategy& - Sadly, it’s not a typo

From a branding perspective, the inability to retain the Booz & Company might actually be an asset for PwC. First, had the Booz name persisted, the powerful associations of the Booz & Company brand would have either been dissipated by its relationship with PwC or would have otherwise overcome its master brand. Simply, two powerful brands cannot succeed side-by-side in a cobrand, endorsed/endorser brand, or sub brand relationship. Second, there would have been a fundamental fit problem between the two brands. The management consulting culture to which Booz & Company belonged is staunchly committed to its classic business model of providing premium strategy consulting to a who’s who of industry leaders. The Booz & Company leadership would have been hard pressed to associate their legacy brand with what they perceive as less desirable operations and implementation consultancy. The opportunity, then, to create an entirely new brand – with new associations, perceptions, and identity – while retaining the essence of the old brand in the form of human capital gave PwC the opportunity to combine the best of both firms. The PwC-Booz experiment is a radical departure from the conventional consulting business model and service platform. It combines the best of Booz & Company – a classic management consultancy – with the power of the PwC network. It is a response to a market need. Clients don’t just want great ideas; they want actionable strategies and delivered results. The new entity will not only provide clients with differentiated solutions to their most pressing problems, it will also help them implement on a global scale. In short, together they are pioneering the strategy-through-execution model, and that deserves a fresh approach and an entirely new brand image.