The pendulum of operating models

Most large organisations have lived through this. A big change needs to land, so a programme is set up with its own leadership, budget and authority. It works, because focus works. Then the programme ends, or the money runs out, and the work is handed back to the functions. Within a few years someone notices that the functions are protecting their own patch, change is slow to cross boundaries, and another programme is needed. Round it goes.

Neither model is the mistake

When a swing back happens, the usual explanation is that the previous model failed. We do not think that is the right reading. A programme-led model is very good at moving fast on a defined goal and is poor at looking after the everyday business. A functional model is very good at stable, efficient running and is poor at coordinating change across boundaries. Each is a sensible answer to the problem in front of you at the time.

The trouble starts when we expect a model to have no weaknesses. Then every weakness feels like a failure, and the natural response is to lurch towards whatever looks like the opposite.

Choose it, and name its limits

The more useful question is not which model is right, but which model fits what you need to achieve now, and what that choice will cost. If you pick a programme-led approach, say plainly that the functions will feel disrupted and that you will need a deliberate way of handing back. If you pick a functional approach, say plainly that cross-boundary change will need extra effort and decide who provides it.

Saying these things out loud at the start is what stops the swing becoming a surprise. People can live with a known limit. They find it much harder to live with one that nobody mentioned.

Move in stages that suit the organisation

A target operating model is rarely reached in one go, and it should not be. Sensible interim stages let you test what is working, adjust, and keep the business running while you do it. Each stage should be a place the organisation could stand for a while, not just a step on the way to somewhere else.

Good governance holds this together. It keeps invested stakeholders informed as the model evolves, makes decisions at the right level, and keeps the whole thing pointed at the outcome instead of the structure.

In short

Pendulums swing because we treat each model as the answer. Treat it as a trade-off instead, be honest about what you are giving up, and prepare for it. That is usually enough to turn a swing into a steady, deliberate move.