1. Your organization is a complex system of interdependent components. You must modify a number of these components, not just one single factor, to create sustainable change.

The silver bullet approach to managing, where one action will solve all your problems, simply doesn't work. “Fire the manager!” is a great example of a single factor solution that underperforming enterprises choose.

Everyone can tell a story about how a new boss came in and created a dramatic turn around. But this “white knight” solution ignores the vast number of changes any new manager makes. A closer look would typically reveal that other members of the leadership team – coaches, scouts, managers - are replaced, or have their roles changed.

Changes also extend to the systems, structures and procedures put in place for day-to-day management-- as well as training and recruitment-- that are all frequently out of the public eye. And the changes take some time to jell.

From our experience, we all know that in business the ‘right' manager or chief executive will not solve all the problems of any organization. However, the simple, easy-sounding solution is very compelling - and fun to talk about. The performance requirements of winning organizations that stand the test of time extend far beyond the office of the Chief Executive.

2. The highest impact leverage points are often counter-intuitive and require thorough study. The most common mistake is to assume that the organizational structure or some key people are the source of the problem.

A long-standing client was producing a device that distilled water in the home, for a niche market segment. With the well-known success of bottled water, they decided to expand into a broader market.

Thinking that a “customer is a customer,” they duplicated and expanded the current marketing strategy, which was heavily weighted toward the health benefits of drinking distilled water. Despite tremendous effort and fanfare the launch failed.

The company's first reaction was to level blame to all within reach: the VP of Manufacturing, the Group Manager, the manufacturing process, logistics, warehouse personnel, suppliers, and on and on.

When the blame game didn't resolve the issue they decided to take a systemic look at their strategy. They used modeling tools that allowed them to understand and visually described the system that produced the failed launch.

The distilled water is now broadly marketed as “fortified” due to a critical variable identified through the modeling process: taste. The flatness of the distilled water was addressed through the addition of minerals, further boosting the health claims of the water!

Although many of the “solutions” discovered through the modeling tools learned in Systems Thinking are still evolving, two years later the water business is now a strong and successfully performing business unit.

3. There is a time delay between cause and effect. Sustain the change initiative over time to allow the effects to take hold.

An engineering client provides an unfortunate example of giving up too soon. The firm was experiencing declining market share and profitability. The CEO of its parent company issued an ultimatum: turn the situation around.

Senior management found that their root problems were the lack of a consistent process for managing projects and inadequate training for project managers.

As they began to implement plans to address these issues, the president resigned. His replacement had his own solution: layoffs to stop the bleeding. He also halted the improvement initiative at the very time it would have begun to achieve measurable results.

These layoffs produced a downward spiral which led to decreased revenue and market share. Critical employees saw the handwriting on the wall and began to leave. Key clients experienced a loss of confidence and started to migrate to the competition. The company was eventually bought by one of its competitors.

4. Brute force or coercion rarely, if ever, brings systemic change. Desired changes must become a natural way of doing business, not imposed by managers who can be ignored as soon as their attention is diverted to the new “crisis du jour” or “initiative of the month.”

You can create successful, meaningful and sustainable change. It is not unattainable. But you cannot keep doing what you have always done and expect different results. You know what that is the definition of, don't you?

In order to move an organization to “sanity” and create sustainable business success, a couple of key elements should be in place:

• Competitive Strategy:

Good personal chemistry, the desire to become a “world class” organization or the aspiration to make money is not enough. Deliberately choosing a different set of activities to deliver a unique mix of value creates and sustains competitive advantage. It answers the question, “What will we look like when we are successful?” and develops the business case for superior profitability.

• Leadership Commitment:

There must be commitment and alignment among leadership in order to provide the discipline required to decide which industry changes and what customer needs the organization will respond to first. An organization cannot be, “all things to all people.” Leadership is about making choices about what the organization will and will not do.

• Organizational Alignment:

There must be a road map that describes how the organization will achieve the strategy, the desired future state. (This is similar to a project work plan which is clear to follow.) People need a structure, as well as information on what is required of them to make a positive contribution.

• Assessment:

There must be a sustained commitment to implementation from leadership accompanied by periodic and honest assessments of progress. This follows the dictum that people tend to “manage what is measured.”