Nearly every major corporation has embarked on some sort of transformation in recent years. By our estimates, at any given time more than a third of large organizations have a transformation program underway. When asked, roughly 50% of CEOs we’ve interviewed report that their company has undertaken two or more major change efforts within the past five years, with nearly 20% reporting three or more.

Unfortunately, most transformation programs aren’t all that transformative. Though they typically start with great fanfare—complete with big announcements and proclamations of wholesale change—most fail to deliver. Our research indicates that only 12% of major change programs produce lasting results. Too often, leadership accepts disappointing outcomes and moves on, only to launch another program in a few years’ time. One prominent U.S. bank, for example, has initiated three substantial restructuring programs in the span of just four years, yet all of them have fallen flat.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Over the past two decades we’ve worked with dozens of companies that have effectively transformed their businesses and studied hundreds of others that have attempted to. Our analysis has revealed six important differences between the programs that worked and those that didn’t. In this article we’ll explain why so many ambitious change initiatives come up short and outline the steps that leading companies are taking to defy the odds and realize the full promise of transformation.

Underwhelming Results

In late 2023, Bain & Company completed the second of two comprehensive surveys of 300 large companies worldwide that had attempted transformations. The first survey had taken place a decade earlier. The participating companies included both Bain clients and nonclients. The findings highlighted two concerning trends.

Less failure, but not more success.

In the 1990s John Kotter and other scholars identified the most common reasons for ineffective transformation attempts—notably, a lack of urgency, insufficient leadership, limited vision, poor communication, and a shortage of “quick wins.” Many companies have taken steps to avoid those pitfalls, often seeking outside advisory support. As a result, companies are experiencing fewer outright failures in their transformation endeavors. If we define “failure” as achieving less than half of what leadership aimed for, then only 13% of recent transformation programs can be labeled as such. That’s a significant improvement from the 38% rate observed in 2013 and can be attributed to lessons learned over the years.

But there’s a catch. Despite the decline in outright failures, success rates have not risen. If “success” is defined as meeting or exceeding leadership’s expectations, then only one in eight transformations can be considered successful—and that rate has remained constant since 2013.

An acceptance of mediocrity.

The percentage of transformation programs with so-so outcomes—that is, those that achieved more than 50% but less than 100% of their targets—increased from 50% in 2013 to 75% in 2023. Instead of pushing their organizations to deliver more, many senior leaders seem to settle for improved but still unexceptional performance. While that reaction is understandable, it often signals to employees that if they wait long enough, the status quo will be restored. Worse, it breeds cynicism that undermines the success of future change efforts.

* * *