Transformation in uncertain times: Tackling both the urgent and the important

October 5, 2021
Here is an excerpt from an article written by Darius Bates, David Dorton, Seth Goldstrom, and Yasir Mirza for the McKinsey Quarterly, published by McKinsey & Company. To read the complete article, check out others, learn more about the firm, and sign up for email alerts, please click here.

* * *

A sprint-based transformation approach can help organizations achieve full potential.
In ordinary times, successful leaders continually strive to master the balance between the urgent and the important, both in their organizations and their daily schedules. But today’s CEOs face unprecedented financial, health and safety, and operational challenges. For them, the problem isn’t balancing the urgent with the important. It’s that most everything is both urgent and important and, given the ongoing uncertainty about COVID-19 and its aftershocks, that’s not likely to change anytime soon.
To address these challenges in the present and in the next normal, some leaders will instinctively pick two or three top priorities. Then, on the assumption it’s better to focus an already-stressed organization on must-win battles, they will launch major efforts to realize such goals.
 
Focus on the whole of the organization. Our research has shown that bold programs focused on a granular set of initiatives achieve more than limited efforts do: for example, our analysis of 100-plus transformations shows that 68 percent of their initiatives are worth $250,000 or less and that, on average, each initiative owner manages no more than two of thousands of initiatives. In our experience, the best-performing transformations focus on driving change by moving pebbles, not just boulders.So how does a company tackle the urgent and the important while also delving into sufficient detail to achieve a step change in performance and value creation? In recent years, we’ve seen several organizations achieve these goals through a structured, sprint-based approach we refer to as “road-mapping.”

When you come to a fork in the road, take it

Road-mapping’s premise is simple: initiatives with different levels of urgency, importance, and complexity often require different planning and implementation horizons. To meet this challenge, road-mapping organizes initiatives into a series of themed “sprints”—time-bound planning and implementation efforts aligned with the organization’s priorities.

We typically see groups of sprints focused on one or more of the following themes:

  • Impact timing and complexity. Sprint 1 focuses on initiatives meant to have an impact in the first year. Subsequent sprints address long-term or complex initiatives, such as those requiring more capital or up-front testing.
  • Impact type. Sprint 1 focuses on one or more major impact types, such as cost, growth, margin, working capital, or capital expenditures. Subsequent sprints address one or more of the remaining impact types.
  • Business segment. Sprint 1 focuses on a specific part of the business (such as a business unit or division), and subsequent sprints focus on other parts.

After setting the themes and sequence of the sprints, the organization turns the proposed initiatives of Sprint 1 into comprehensive plans and begins to implement them; meanwhile, the planning process for Sprint 2 begins, and so on. In this way, organizations tackle urgent issues right out of the gate in Sprint 1 but follow a defined pathway ensuring later sprints address the important and the complex alike (See Exhibit 1).

Although road-mapping is a journey tailored to a company’s context, a specific set of outcomes and benefits regularly emerges. For example, Sprint 1, regardless of theme, typically addresses low-hanging-fruit opportunities that generate meaningful impact quickly. Driving heightened focus on this set of initiatives reduces the risk that organizations stall during the challenge of solving complex, big-bet initiatives.

Additionally, the speed and success of Sprint 1 put points on the board, inspiring the organization to attain the full potential of the transformation. In our experience, organizations can execute initiatives worth roughly one-third of a program’s overall value within 180 days. These quick wins accelerate the program’s momentum and free up cash for initiatives in later sprints. What’s more, addressing complex, big-bet initiatives in later sprints gives organizations more runway to get their plans right and increases confidence that they can realize their full value.

* * *

Here is a direct link to the complete article.

 

Posted in

Leave a Comment





This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.