Capability to Transform

Transformation requires a primary ability to recognize patterns. Any transformation effort is therefore fraught with challenges as the complexity of the pattern spreads across a cultural one, a vision one, a structure/systems one, execution and communication one – at the least.

Let us for the time being consider the pattern below. The question is, which is the logical transformed pattern (from the set in the right), in sequence with the set on the left?

We have possibly solved problems like the one above a few times as part of adaptive-intelligence tests. In reality, a successful outcome of a transformation is much more difficult to obtain as there is an element of multi-variables (not just the yellow/blue/+), a much more erratic sequence of movements and most importantly, an element of time. Whereas many challenges may be solved by a larger cohort of people with time, transformative change-drives have a lower cushion on time, which creates a significant impact on the decision-making/communication/execution process and thereby on the outcome.

Transformation requires a higher plane of thought, and simultaneously a tremendous eye for detail – and the ability to understand that seemingly dissimilar elements may couple together during a transformation effort, to create a sum larger than the parts, or the other way round.

Transformations fail in the absence of a few fundamental ingredients

1)    The ability to eliminate or minimize hierarchic decision-making

2)    Focus on groups and teams, rather than individuals (change-champions are individuals though, in most cases)

3)    Interim measures and controls to track progress

4)    Reduced internal competition and silos towards building trust

5)    Blending/balancing organic and inorganic capabilities (and inside-out ability as much as an outside-in - the right mix of knowledge and awareness on internal capability to transform, as much as one brought in through external consultants, for example.)

6)    Ability to define end-steps or future steps expected out of the transformation

7)    Realizing that the competencies required to transform are very different from those required to innovate or maintain status-quo or business-as-usual growth.

8) The ability to invest in a team (preferably culled out from the best in the existing workforce) that works on specific transformation-driven projects/work, so that existing and ongoing operations are not affected.

Interestingly, efforts labelled as “transformative”, may also be deceptive in order to create distractions. A large promoter-driven organization embarked on a ‘transformation’ effort with money invested in through multiple investors. The transformation effort was initiated when the investors pressed down on payback arising out of an over-sold deal. In this case the intent was to gain timelines to avoid rising pressure from the investors (rather than an effort to change internal culture and processes fraught with leakages), and therefore failure was destined. Most organizations, however, indulge in a transformation process arising out of a genuine need to alter form, structure, shape, processes, business value proposition in order to reposition itself in the face of changing market/customer expectations.

Transformation-goaled organizations need paradigm shifts in the way organizational learning happens, and in terms of how it reacts with the environment and internal factors in managing uncertainty and planned objectives. There is therefore a possibility of a significant correlation and combination of team and organizational factors, as well as individual capabilities along with cultural factors that break or make transformative outcomes.

Read more of this article first published by Peoplematters February 2018 edition under "Transformation require paradigm shifts"