Perhaps the greatest challenge business leaders face today is how…

DoctorRosePartridge14
Perhaps the greatest challenge business leaders face today is how…

Perhaps the greatest challenge business leaders face today is how business leaders face today is how to stay competitive amid constant to stay competitive amid constant turbulence and disruption. turbulence and disruption. 
THE BIG IDEA ACCELERATE!
 

The strategy system has its roots in familiar structures, practices, and thinking. Many start-ups, for example, are organized more as networks than as hierarchies, because they need to be nimble and creative in order to grab opportunities. Even in ma-ture organizations, informal networks of change agents frequently operate under the hierarchical ra-dar. What I am describing also echoes much of the most interesting management thinking of the past 
few decades—from Michael Porter’s wake-up call that organizations need to pay attention to strategy 
much more explicitly and frequently, to Clayton Christensen’s insights about how poorly tradition-ally organized companies handle the technological discontinuities inherent in a faster-moving world, to recent work by the Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman (Thinking, Fast and Slow, 2011) describing the brain as two coordinated systems, one more emotional and one more rational.The new strategy system also expands on the eight-step method I first documented 15 years ago (in Leading Change), while studying successful large-scale change: establishing a sense of urgency, creat-ing a guiding coalition, developing a change vision, communicating the vision for buy-in, empowering broad-based action, generating short-term wins, never letting up, and incorporating changes into the 
culture.There are three main differences between those eight steps and the eight “accelerators” on which the 
strategy system runs: (1) The steps are often used in rigid, finite, and sequential ways, in effecting or re-
sponding to episodic change, whereas the accelera-tors are concurrent and always at work. (2) The stepsare usually driven by a small, powerful core group, whereas the accelerators pull in as many people as 
possible from throughout the organization to form a “volunteer army.” (3) The steps are designed to 
function within a traditional hierarchy, whereas Idea in Brief Although traditional hierarchies and processes—which together form a company’s “operating system”—are optimized for day-to-day business, they can’t handle the challenges of mounting complexity and rapid change. the accelerators require the flexibility and agility of 
a network. For a long time companies could invest all their energy and resources in doing one new thing very 
well: They might spend two years setting up a large IT project that required many changes and then, af-ter a long pause, spend five years developing a pro-pensity for risk-taking in the product development function. They could put the eight-step process to work and then pack it away until it was needed again. But that methodology has a hard time producing ex-cellent results in a faster-changing world. Today companies must constantly seek competi-
tive advantage without disrupting daily operations. Sure, industries face varying levels of turmoil, but what smart company isn’t worried about being dis-intermediated, out-Googled, or otherwise made irrelevant—and how many are successfully doing something about it? In fact, the whole notion o”strategy”—a word that is now used loosely to cover sporadic planning around what businesses to be in and important policies concerning how to compete 
in those businesses—has to evolve. Strategy should be viewed as a dynamic force that constantly seeks 
opportunities, identifies initiatives that will caize on them, and completes those initiatives swiftly 
and efficiently. I think of that force as an ongoing 
process of “searching, doing, learning, and modify-
ing,” and of the eight accelerators as the activities 
that inform strategy and bring it to life. The network 
and the accelerators can serve as a continuous and 
holistic strategic change function—one that ac-
celerates momentum and agility because it never 
stops. They impart a kind of strategic “fitness”: 
The more the organization exercises its strategy 
skills, the more adept it becomes at dealing with a 
hypercompetitive environment. The network and 
the hierarchy, functioning as a dual operating sys-
tem, can produce more wealth, better products and 
The solution is a second 
operating system, devoted to 
the design and implementa-
tion of strategy, that uses an 
agile, networklike structure 
and a very different set of 
processes. The new operating 
system continually assesses 
the business, the industry, and 
the organization, and reacts 
with greater agility, speed, and 
creativity than the existing one. 
It complements rather than 
overburdens the hierarchy, thus 
freeing the latter to do what 
it’s optimized to do. It actually 
makes enterprises easier to 
run and accelerates strategic 
change. 
hbr.org
November 2012 harvard business review 47

 

 

The Big idea accelerate!
services, and a more exciting place to work in an era 
of exponential change.
The Limits of hierarchy and Conventional Change ManagementHierarchies are useful. They let us sort work into de-
partments, product divisions, regions, and the like 
with expertise, time-tested procedures, and clear 
reporting relationships and accountability so that 
we can do what we know how to do with efficiency, 
predictability, and effectiveness. Hierarchies are di-
rected by familiar managerial processes for planning, 
budgeting, defining jobs, hiring and firing, and mea-
suring results. 
We have learned how to improve our hierarchy-
based businesses. We launch initiatives to take on 
new tasks and improve performance on old ones. We 
have learned how to identify new problems, find and 
analyze data in a dynamic marketplace, build busi-
ness cases for change, and gain approval. We have 
learned to execute by adding task forces, tiger teams, 
project-management and change-management de-
partments, executive sponsors for new initiatives, 
and associated measurement and incentive schemes. 
We can do this while taking care of the day-to-day 
work of the organization because this change meth-
odology is easily accommodated by the hierarchical 
structure and basic managerial processes. It works 
especially well if we make the structure less bureau-
cratic, with fewer layers and fewer questionable 
rules, and give more discretion to people who sit 
lower in the hierarchy. This methodology can deal 
with both tactical and strategic issues in a changing 
world—but only up to a point. 
The old methodology simply can’t handle rapid 
change. Hierarchies and standard managerial pro-
cesses, even when minimally bureaucratic, are in-
herently risk-averse and resistant to change. Part of 
the problem is political: Managers are loath to take 
chances without permission from superiors. Part of 
the problem is cultural: People cling to their habits 
and fear loss of power and stature—two essential ele-
ments of hierarchies. And part of the problem is that 
all hierarchies, with their specialized units, rules, 
and optimized processes, crave stability and default 
to doing what they already know how to do. (These 
characteristics are even more pronounced when 
you pile one hierarchy on top of another to create a 
matrixed organization.)
Moreover, strategy implementation methodolo-
gies, hung on the hierarchical spine, are not up to 
the challenge of managing speedy transformation. 
Change management typically relies on tools—such 
as diagnostic assessments and analyses, communi-
cations techniques, and training modules—that can 
be invaluable in helping with episodic problems for 
which there are relatively straightforward solutions, 
such as implementing a well-tested financial report-
ing system. These approaches are effective when 
it is clear that you need to move from point A to a 
well-defined point B; the distance between the two 
is not galactic; and pushback from employees will 
not prove to be herculean. Change-management 
processes supplement the system we know. They 
can slide easily into a project-management organi-
zation. They can be made stronger or faster by add-
ing more resources, more-sophisticated versions of 
the same old methods, or smarter people to drive 
the process—but again, only up to a point. After that 
point, using this approach to launch strategic initia-
tives that ask an organization to absorb more change 
faster can create confusion, resistance, fatigue, and 
higher costs. 
Complementary SystemsMounting complexity and rapid change create stra-
tegic challenges that even a souped-up hierarchy 
can’t handle. That’s why the dual operating system—
a management-driven hierarchy working in concert 
with a strategy network—works so remarkably well. 
traditional hierarchies and processes, 
which together form an organization’s 
“operating system,” do a great job of 
handling the operational needs of most 
companies, but they are too rigid to 
adjust to the quick shifts in today’s 
marketplace. the most agile, innovative 
companies add a second operating 
system, built on a fluid, networklike 
structure, to continually formulate 
and implement strategy. the second 
operating system runs on its own 
processes (see “the eight accelerators,” 
page 52) and is staffed by volunteers 
from throughout the company.
two Structures, One Organization
48 Harvard Business review November 2012

 

 

At the heart of the dual operating system are ve 
principles: 
• Many change agents, not just the usual few 
appointees. To move faster and further, you need 
to pull more people than ever before into the strate-
gic change game, but in a way that is economically 
realistic. That means not large numbers of full-time 
or even part-time appointments but volunteers. And 
10% of the managerial and employee population is 
both plenty and possible. 
• A want-to and a get-to—not just a have-to—
mind-set. You cannot mobilize voluntary energy 
and brainpower unless people want to be change 
agents and feel they have permission to do so. The 
spirit of volunteerism—the desire to work with oth-
ers for a shared purpose—energizes the network. 
• Head and heart, not just head. People won’t 
want to do a day job in the hierarchy and a night job 
in the network—which is essentially how a dual op-
erating system works—if you appeal only to logic, 
with numbers and business cases. You must ap-
peal to their emotions, too. You must speak to their 
genuine desire to contribute to positive change and 
to take an enterprise in strategically smart ways into 
a better future, giving greater meaning and purpose 
to their work. 
• Much more leadership, not just more man-
agement. At the core of a successful hierarchy is 
competent management. A strategy network, by 
contrast, needs lots of leadership, which means it 
operates with diff erent processes and language and 
expectations. The game is all about vision, oppor-
tunity, agility, inspired action, and celebration—not 
project management, budget reviews, reporting 
relationships, compensation, and accountability to 
a plan.
• Two systems, one organization. The net-
work and the hierarchy must be inseparable, with a 
constant ow of information and activity between 
them—an approach that works in part because the 
volunteers in the network all work within the hi-
erarchy. (See the exhibit “Two Structures, One Or-
ganization.”) The dual operating system is not two 
supersilos, like the old Xerox PARC (an amazing stra-
tegic innovation machine) and Xerox (which pretty 
much ignored PARC and the commercial opportuni-
ties it uncovered).
Governed by these principles, the strategy net-
work can be incredibly exible and adaptable; the 
accelerators can drive problem solving, collabora-
tion, and creativity; and the people doing this work—
the volunteer army—will be focused, committed, 
and passionate. 
The network is like a solar system, with a guid-
ing coalition as the sun, strategic initiatives as plan-
ets, and subinitiatives as moons (or even satellites). 
This structure is dynamic: Initiatives and subinitia-
tives coalesce and disband as needed. Although 
HIERARCHY
GUIDING COALITION
VOLUNTEERS 
STAFF THE NETWORK
INITIATIVE
SUBINITIATIVE
NETWORKHIERARCHY
Two Structures, One Organization
HBR.ORG
November 2012 Harvard Business Review 49

 

 

The Big idea accelerate!
Davidson knew much of what he wanted: 
a less costly sales operation, a broader 
range of distributors, the ability to move 
into the marketplace faster, and more 
focus on high-growth asian markets. to 
get started on making those changes, he 
convened the sales division’s executive 
committee for a daylong meeting and 
charged it with creating a statement of op-
portunity. I can’t share the statement (my 
team worked with Davidson), but here are 
its main points:
• We have an opportunity to increase our 
sales growth by 50% or more in two years, 
and to become the number one sales orga-
nization in the industry.
• This is possible because (1) customer 
needs are changing, requiring competitors 
to change (but it is not guaranteed that 
they will change fast enough), (2) markets 
in developing countries are starting to 
explode, and (3) we are not operating at 
peak efficiency within the company.
• We have not changed fast enough 
to keep up with external demands, even 
though we have great people. We are 
capable of changing faster—we’ve done it 
in the past.
• We can create a very successful field 
organization that we’re deeply proud of. 
Davidson put the eight accelerators 
to work for his company. First he pulled 
together an “urgency team” made up of 20 
volunteers from across the field organiza-
tion who had credibility and who had em-
braced the opportunity statement—intel-
lectually and emotionally—as soon as they 
heard it. this group agreed to an ambitious 
goal: getting buy-in from at least 50% 
of the 1,500-member sales division. The 
urgency team spent three months devising 
dozens of ideas for forging a broad under-
standing of, passion for, and commitment 
to the opportunity. It organized meetings, 
created support materials, and built an in-
tranet portal filled with information, videos, 
blogs, and stories about the ways in which 
individuals on the sales team were already 
changing. 
Next the urgency team, working with the 
executive committee, invited employees 
to apply for a role in the guiding coali-
tion. the application form asked why they 
wanted to be on the Gc, how they planned 
to manage the additional workload, and 
more. About 210 people applied, and 36 
were selected, mostly—but not entirely—
from middle management and below. they 
functioned without a formal leader, though 
a facilitator organized meetings and phone 
calls. Despite initial awkwardness about 
the range of formal status across the Gc, 
a new organizational logic arose: For any 
given activity, the people with the relevant 
information, connections, motivation, and 
skills took the lead. 
With input from top management, the 
outside study, and colleagues throughout 
the organization, the Gc developed a vision 
and a strategy. the vision statement is con-
fidential, but it said roughly this: “Within 
12 months we will be using intermediaries 
successfully more than we ever have; our 
growth rate in emerging markets will be at 
least twice what it is today; we will have 
developed a discipline around innovation; 
and decision-making time will be cut in 
half, from a month to two weeks. We will 
be a proud, passionate group, still gaining 
momentum to make us the most admired 
sales organization and the best place to 
work in the industry.” the statement was 
perfectly rational, but there was also a lot 
of heart in it.
The guiding coalition then took a first 
pass at identifying specific initiatives. Its 
members agreed on five, including attract-
ing and hiring outstanding people with 
asian experience, and making the product-
introduction process faster and more effi-
Paul Davidson, a sales executive for a B2B technology firm 
(I’ve disguised his name and some company details), had 
seen sales growth slip for a number of years. When his 
division started to lose market share, he commissioned 
an outside study, which recommended both a new strat-
egy and an implementation process that Davidson judged 
to be too rigid and complex for the kind of rapid change 
needed. So he persuaded his division head and the CEO 
to support a more dynamic approach to change. 
the Dual Operating System in Practice
a typical hierarchy tends not to change from year to 
year, the network can morph with ease. In the ab-
sence of bureaucratic layers, command-and-control 
prohibitions, and Six Sigma processes, this type of 
network permits a level of individualism, creativity, 
and innovation that not even the least bureaucratic 
hierarchy can provide. Populated with employees 
from all across the organization and up and down its 
ranks, the network liberates information from silos 
and hierarchical layers and enables it to flow with far 
greater freedom and accelerated speed. 
The hierarchy differs from almost every other 
hierarchy today in one very important way: All the 
junk ordinarily pasted on it for tackling big strategic 
initiatives—work streams, tiger teams, strategy de-
partments—has been shifted over to the network. 
That leaves the hierarchy less encumbered and able 
to perform better and faster what it is designed for: 
doing today’s job well, making incremental changes 
to further improve efficiency, and handling the small 
initiatives that help a company deal with predictable 
adjustments such as routine IT upgrades. 
The strategy network meshes with the hierarchy 
as an equal. It is not a super task force that reports 
to some level in the hierarchy. It is seamlessly con-
nected to and coordinated with the hierarchy in 
50 Harvard Business review November 2012

 

 

The Dual Operating System in Practice cient. The vision and list of initiatives went 
first to the executive committee, which 
was generally enthusiastic but worried that 
the GC might be taking on too much too 
fast. The GC extended the timetable on 
one of its initiatives and went to work.
The original urgency team’s methods 
helped the GC take the vision and the 
strategy to the entire field organization, 
using training, communications tools, the 
portal, and face-to-face conversations, 
which proved to be particularly powerful. 
The more team members talked to col-
leagues, the more excited people became. 
I was at one lunch where a GC member 
spoke, and as the group broke up, the man 
next to me said, “For the first time ever, I 
understand where we need to go, and how. 
And it really makes sense!”
Six months in, the GC had five major 
initiatives in place, each of which had from 
one to six subinitiatives. The initiative to 
hire excellent people in Asia, for example, 
sprouted a subinitiative to bring new peo-
ple up to speed more quickly. The focus 
was on eliminating barriers to accelerated 
movement in the right direction. 
The people involved talked, e-mailed, 
and met as needed to get the work done. 
In the main GC meetings, members 
reported progress, shared information, so-
licited ideas, and asked for help (“Who has 
experience with the Japanese market?”). 
Senior managers helped to ensure that 
lower-level employees got the informa-
tion they needed to make smart deci-
sions. Lower-level people added frontline 
information that ordinarily wouldn’t have 
made it up the hierarchy to the executive 
committee. 
The guiding coalition came up with a big, 
visible win six months into the process: It 
built a new, simplified IT tool at a remark-
ably low cost in a short period of time. (IT 
had been a time-consuming trouble spot.) 
First an initiative team interviewed users 
to understand why the existing system was 
failing; then it reached out to the volunteer 
army for expertise. One e-mail request 
for help, sent to 100 people, elicited 35 
responses within four days. Salespeople 
and their managers loved the end product. 
Success with this single effort, observed in 
the field organization and broadcast on the 
portal, accelerated progress by removing a 
big barrier and boosted the dual operating 
system’s credibility.
The company never let up. I have lost 
count of how many initiatives it has com-
pleted over the past three years and how 
many barriers have been removed. Many 
mistakes occurred along the way, but the 
system continues to improve, and version 
2.0, now at the division level, is without a 
doubt more sophisticated than version 1.0. 
The biggest accomplishments so far 
have been institutionalized in the hier-
archical organization and integrated in 
daily operations. In cases where strate-
gic changes don’t fit some aspect of the 
company culture, the relevant team looks 
for ways to change the culture. To a large 
extent this happens naturally if the new 
approach produces better results; but 
sometimes changes are so big that nurtur-
ing is needed. 
Three years after Davidson began to 
create a dual operating system, his field 
organization, and increasingly the entire 
division, are handling important issues in a 
new way. No one on the executive commit-
tee is overwhelmed by being appointed to 
help guide two or three strategic initiatives 
at once. Despite all the change, com-
plaints about change fatigue in the core 
business are few. 
The results are dramatic. The system has 
accelerated the creation of new partner-
ships, new ways of dealing with direct 
customers, a faster product-introduction 
process, shorter response times on 
complaints, superior data for the product 
development group on shifting customer 
needs, and faster growth in Asia—it was up 
by more than 60% in 2011, compared with 
25% three years ago. And the division has 
started to win back market share, which 
the financial community has rewarded 
with a 55% increase in the company’s 
market cap.
These are still early days. If the dual op-
erating system is to achieve its true poten-
tial, it must spread to the entire enterprise. 
I think it will. That’s when the company will 
become a model of both strategic agility 
and short-term efficiency: Today’s results 
will grow stronger and stronger while the 
whole organization works together to 
sense threats and respond to them before 
it’s too late—and, more important, to 
seize and exploit opportunities at a pace 
that will ensure that it flourishes for years 
to come. 
a number of ways, chiefly through the people who 
populate both systems. Still, the organization’s 
leaders play an important role in launching and 
maintaining the network: the C-suite or executive 
committee must create it (more on that later) and 
explicitly bless and support it. The network cannot 
be viewed as a rogue operation. It must be treated as 
a legitimate part of the organization, or the hierarchy 
will crush it.
The Eight Accelerators These are the processes that enable the strategy net-
work to function: 
1. Create a sense of urgency around a sin-
gle big opportunity. This is absolutely critical 
to heightening the organization’s awareness that 
it needs continual strategic adjustments and that 
they should always be aligned with the biggest op-
portunity in sight. Urgency starts at the top of the 
hierarchy, and it is important that executives keep 
acknowledging and reinforcing it so that people will 
wake up every morning determined to find some ac-
tion they can take in their day to move toward that 
opportunity. 
Sufficient urgency around a strategically rational 
and emotionally exciting opportunity is the bedrock 
hbr.OrG
November 2012 harvard business review 51

 

 

THE BIG IDEA ACCELERATE!
CREATE A SENSE 
OF URGENCY 
AROUND A 
SINGLE BIG 
OPPORTUNITY.
Build and maintain a 
guiding coalition.
THE BIG IDEA ACCELERATE!
Celebrate visible, 
signifi cant short-
term wins.
upon which all else is built. In my original work 15 
years ago, I found that ridding an organization of 
complacency was important. In my more recent 
work, I’ve seen ongoing urgency emerge as a strong 
competitive advantage. It can galvanize a volunteer 
army and keep the dual operating system in good 
working order. It moves managers to focus on oppor-
tunities and allow the network to grow for the ben-
e t of the organization. Without an abiding sense of 
urgency, no chance of creating a grander business 
will survive.
For clients, my team has begun by having the ex-
ecutive committee take a rst pass at articulating the 
strategic opportunity. This makes sense because its 
members are in a position to see the big picture and 
because their role in nurturing the dual structure is 
vital—particularly in the early days, when it is most 
vulnerable to the forces of resistance. (For the story 
of how one sales executive at a technology rm cre-
ated urgency, see the sidebar “The Dual Operating 
System in Practice.”)
2. Build and maintain a guiding coalition. 
The core of a strategy network is the guiding co-
alition (GC), which is made up of volunteers from 
throughout the organization. In my work with cli-
ents, people fill out applications to be on the GC. 
With a su cient sense of urgency, you may get 10 
times as many applications as there are roles in the 
network’s core.
The GC is selected to represent each of the hier-
archy’s departments and levels, with a broad range 
of skills. It must be made up of people whom the 
leadership trusts, and must include at least a few 
outstanding leaders and managers. This ensures 
that the GC can gather and process information as 
no hierarchy ever could. 
All members of the GC are equal; no internal hi-
erarchy slows down the transfer of information. The 
coalition can see inside and outside the enterprise, 
knows the details and the big picture, and uses all 
this information to make good enterprisewide de-
cisions about which strategic initiatives to launch 
and how best to do so. The social dynamics of the 
GC may be uncomfortable at rst, but once a team 
learns how to operate well, most members seem to 
love being part of it.
3. Formulate a strategic vision and develop 
change initiatives designed to capitalize on the 
big opportunity. The vision will serve as a strate-
gic true north for the dual operating system. A well-
formulated vision is focused on taking advantage of 
a big make-or-break opportunity. (If no such oppor-
tunity exists, because you operate in a rare pocket of 
competitive stability, you may not need this system 
quite yet. But keep your eyes open: That situation 
won’t last.) The right vision is feasible and easy to 
communicate. It is emotionally appealing as well 
as strategically smart. And it gives the GC a picture 
of success and enough information and direction to 
make consequential decisions on the fly, without 
having to seek permission at every turn.
In creating one company’s vision statement, the 
guiding coalition sought input from top manage-
ment, a consultant’s report, and colleagues through-
out the organization. The vision statement described 
what the sales group, which was dealing with mar-
ket losses, could look like in a year if it accelerated 
toward a big opportunity. It outlined pragmatic 
goals but framed them with emotional resonance, 
using words such as “proud,” “passionate,” and “ad-
mired.” As a result, the group vowed to work better 
with partners, double growth in emerging markets, 
Formulate a strategic 
vision and develop 
change initiatives 
designed to capitalize 
on the big opportunity.
Communicate the 
vision and the strategy 
to create buy-in and 
attract a growing 
“volunteer army.””volunteer army.”Accelerate 
movement toward 
the vision and the 
opportunity by 
ensuring that the 
network removes 
barriers.
Never let up. 
Keep learning 
from experience. 
Don’t declare victory 
too soon.
Institutionalize 
strategic changes 
in the culture.
The Eight AcceleratorsThe processes that enable the strategy network to function
52 Harvard Business Review November 2012
HBR.ORG

 

 

The Big idea accelerate!
innovate constantly, and halve the time it took to 
make decisions. 
Next the GC identified the five strategic initia-
tives that its members deemed critical to achieving 
the vision and that they wanted very much to work 
on, including “innovation in attacking growing mar-
kets.” Inspired by the vision and guided by the initia-
tives that flowed logically from it, everyone within 
the network became an author of strategic change. 
That’s very powerful. 
To keep the two parts of a dual operating system 
connected and aligned, we have found, the GC must 
show a draft of the vision and initiatives to the or-
ganization’s executive committee for comments. 
A well-functioning GC will treat the committee’s 
comments as highly valuable input but won’t auto-
matically accept them as commands. 
4. Communicate the vision and the strategy 
to create buy-in and attract a growing volun-
teer army. A vividly formulated, high-stakes vi-
sion and strategy, promulgated by a GC in ways that 
are both memorable and authentic, will prompt 
people to discuss them without the cynicism that 
often greets messages cascading down the hierarchy. 
Done right, with creativity, such communications 
can go viral, attracting employees who buy in to the 
ambition of the message and begin to share a com-
mitment to it. 
This point tends to prompt skepticism from 
people who have seen attempts to motivate a work-
force fail. But if the right messages are sent from 
a passionate GC to colleagues who feel a sense of 
urgency, the volunteer army will start to gather. I’ve 
seen it happen. Motivation is an issue when people 
are forced to work in boxes within a hierarchy where 
workers become bored, new ideas aren’t welcome, 
and managers aren’t effective. And it does not take 
many volunteers to get a network launched: Again, 
10% of the total employee population will do. That’s 
500 people in an organization of 5,000.
5. Accelerate movement toward the vision 
and the opportunity by ensuring that the net-
work removes barriers. Perhaps a sales rep has 
gotten customer complaints about bureaucratic 
hang-ups. He doesn’t know how to fix the problem 
and doesn’t have time to think about it. Someone 
in the network gets wind of this and says, “I’ve 
seen that. I volunteer. I’ll put together a group and 
attack it.” That person writes up a description and 
sends it out to the volunteer army, and five people 
immediately step forward. They set up a call to be-
gin learning why this is happening, figuring out how 
to remove the barrier, and designing a solution— 
a better CRM system, perhaps. The team probably 
includes someone from IT who has technical exper-
tise and can help identify where the money for the 
new system might come from. The team works with 
additional volunteers who have relevant informa-
tion—from whatever quarter may be germane—to 
act quickly and efficiently. The time between the 
first call and this point might be two weeks—a model 
of accelerated action. The network team settles on 
a practical solution that properly supports the sales 
team. Then its members take their thinking to the 
CIO, who gives feedback and may offer the budget 
and the resources. 
Design and implementation occur in the network 
and are instituted within the hierarchy. And if the 
network is truly operating hand-in-glove with the 
hierarchy, the people in the hierarchy are champing 
at the bit to get the new CRM system. 
6. Celebrate visible, significant short-term 
wins. A strategy network’s credibility won’t last long 
without confirmation that its decisions and actions 
are actually benefiting the organization. Skeptics 
will erect obstacles unless they see proof that the 
dual operating system is creating real results. And 
people have only so much patience, so proof must 
come quickly. To ensure success, the best short-term 
wins should be obvious, unambiguous, and clearly 
Sufficient urgency around a strategically rational and emotionally exciting opportunity is the bedrock upon which all else is built. 
54 Harvard Business review November 2012
HBr.org

 

 

The Big idea accelerate!
The Big idea accelerate!
related to the vision. Celebrating those wins will 
buoy the volunteer army and prompt more employ-
ees to buy in. Success breeds success. 
If wins are not forthcoming, that in itself is use-
ful feedback: Something is wrong. A committed GC, 
with many eyes and ears to take in the reality of the 
situation and with no status or terr