by Hans-Paul Bürkner, Lars Fæste, and Jim Hemerling
- Funding the Journey. Launch short-term, no-regret moves to establish momentum and to free up capital to fuel new growth engines.
- Winning in the Medium Term. Develop a business model and operating model to increase competitive advantage.
- Building the Right Team, Organization, and Culture. Set up the organization for sustainable high performance.
- Employees, to determine if there is a consensus regarding the changes that are needed; ideally, leaders should speak with 30 to 50 employees from across all units and at all levels
- Customers, to get unvarnished opinions of the company’s performance in addressing their needs
- Industry and functional experts, to understand the company and the complexities or disruptions in the market
A NEW RETAIL CEO HITS THE GROUND RUNNING
A new CEO was hired to run a retail organization that had been losing market share for several years and that was starting to see profitability decline. During the 100 days before taking over, the CEO visited stores, talked with customers, studied international best practices to build on his own experience abroad, and talked with experts in the retail sector. Through that process, he realized that the immediate priority was to identify rapid, no-regret moves that could increase top-line sales and reenergize the organization.
While conducting this due diligence, the new CEO also developed a strong presentation to introduce his plan to the organization. As soon as he took over, he gave the presentation during the first executive-committee meeting, supporting the plan with the customer feedback he’d generated firsthand, along with his international experience with retail peers. In this presentation, he used very direct language and simple terminology, which made the messages powerful, credible, and resonant.
During his first month, the CEO gave similar presentations to larger groups of employees and managers, which provided clarity and reduced anxiety in the organization. He also traveled to meet the extended management team, visited crucial countries, and granted interviews to select media outlets—always with the same clear and consistent messages.
Within the first quarter, the company had begun to roll out several no-regret moves on the basis of his international retail experience and firsthand research, including a loyalty campaign, extended operating hours for a particular store format, and new promotions. The results jump-started top-line growth for the first time in years, leading to subsequent gains in market share. With those gains behind them, employees were more willing to accept the cost cuts and other measures required for the company to become leaner and more agile.
- During these conversations, a new CEO should primarily listen, encourage open and honest discussion, and make sure that all possible dynamic factors and all possible solutions are being brought to the forefront. Through this process, the CEO must start to diagnose problems and create hypotheses regarding which aspects of the company require improvement. This means assessing the urgency of the various situations—in terms of both scope and timing—and determining whether the company should seek to transform a specific function, market, or division or instead undergo a more comprehensive effort that affects multiple areas of the company.
A TECHNOLOGY LEADER CREATES MOMENTUM THROUGH RAPID MOVES
At a global technology company, the head of a business unit realized that the organization was not winning the highly competitive war for talent. The company had dropped in the ratings at websites such as Glassdoor.com and in Fortune magazine’s annual “Best Companies to Work For” review. The results of employee engagement surveys had been falling for years. And the unit head knew from personal interactions with employees that they were not happy or motivated to go above and beyond. He wanted a transformation that would increase employee engagement, restore internal pride, and persuade employees to go the extra mile.
But his challenges did not stop there. Customer feedback was very troubling. For example, one customer commented: “When we look at your products, we can see how your organization is structured. Your products are siloed, with incompatible components and broken interfaces—which is just like your siloed organization. We need integrated solutions with components that work together to solve our problems, and we need them now.” Such feedback gave the unit head a second impetus for a transformation.
In response, he defined a bold ambition to transform the unit in order to win the war for talent, energize his engineers, deliver the integrated solutions that customers were demanding, and free up resources to deploy on opportunities for growth.
His first step was to conduct a thorough analysis of the root causes of the performance issues. On the basis of this analysis, the unit head defined the ambition for a step-change transformation across multiple dimensions, including growth, innovation, leadership capabilities, workforce quality, organizational efficiency, employee productivity, and culture.
Within the first few weeks, he selected the leadership team to drive the transformation program and communicated the case for change, initially among the top 150 leaders, and then across the business unit.
In the first 100 days, the unit head launched the full transformation program with multiple teams, a program management office, change-management processes, and an employee communications plan. Over the next year, the transformation delivered significant improvements across multiple performance dimensions—the result of a business unit leader conducting a thorough diagnostic and defining a bold transformation ambition.
A CONSUMER PACKAGED GOODS CEO REVAMPS THE COMPANY’S STRUCTURE AND PRODUCT LINE
A new CEO took over a global consumer packaged goods (CPG) company that had been languishing owing to declining sales and a sagging stock price. Recognizing that the company’s historic profit core was shrinking and that dramatic action was required, the CEO established a bold vision to change the shape and direction of the entire organization.
Specifically, the CEO split the company in two, creating a slower-growth domestic organization and a rapidly expanding international player. In addition, the least desirable divisions were sold off, which represented approximately 20 percent of the total portfolio. Finally, the CEO made several acquisitions, particularly in growth areas that could piggyback on the company’s existing distribution channels.
Executing this transformation required strong leadership, not only from the CEO but also from the entire senior-management team. Senior leaders were assigned to new organizations on the basis of their skills and experience in various markets. In addition, the new CEO changed the board to include members with a more activist investor mind-set who would help shape the company’s growth agenda.
Collectively, these measures more than doubled the company’s market value and moved its total shareholder return into the top quartile of the CPG sector.
A PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY TRANSFORMS ITSELF AND GENERATES $20 BILLION IN VALUE
A global pharmaceutical company had been extremely successful—consistently growing earnings by 15 percent a year and reinvesting all remaining excess capital. However, management challenged itself to improve performance through a comprehensive transformation of the company. The investor community also indicated that the company could create more value by accelerating earnings growth. As the company began to consider a transformation, it faced an additional challenge—a hostile take-over attempt.
In response, the company launched an extremely rapid initiative to cut activities that generated a low return on investment and restructured to quickly increase earnings. The project team analyzed and redesigned the entire company in only three months and then implemented the new design. Despite the rapid launch, virtually all functions and business units were included in the scope. Notably, the company implemented the transformation through both senior leaders and managers who were several levels down in the organization hierarchy. This approach led to very specific, pragmatic solutions, and it built momentum for the initiative throughout the company’s workforce.
Through this transformation, the company cut its annual costs by more than $500 million and increased its earnings growth rate from 15 percent to more than 20 percent. These changes yielded an improvement in company value of approximately $20 billion. The transformation also represented a value-creating alternative to the hostile takeover and enabled management to strike a deal with a different acquirer on more favorable terms.
The First 100 Days: Prepare and Launch the Transformation
A MANUFACTURER LAYS THE GROUNDWORK FOR AN AMBITIOUS TRANSFORMATION
The U.S. housing industry suffered a steep correction following the 2008 global financial crisis. The CEO of a manufacturing company responded with a number of measures that did not improve its financial performance.
Realizing that stronger measures were called for, the CEO decided to launch a more ambitious transformation program, with the goal of increasing earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) in one year, independent of market growth or price changes.
To prepare for the transformation, seven teams—four composed of employees from business units and three made up of employees from major function areas—developed a roadmap of initiatives around growth, pricing, cost reductions, and operational productivity improvements. Each initiative specified the target EBIT improvement, required actions, milestones, and resources. The company also enabled the teams to meet these aggressive goals by providing them with new analytical frameworks and problem-solving methodologies and tools.
To ensure the overall program delivered on the EBIT ambition, the company set up a steering committee composed of senior executives and a program management office (PMO) to provide governance and drive the pace of the transformation.
The PMO provided rigorous program management, including the monthly tracking of improvements. The reports highlighted any initiatives that were exceeding or falling short of their targets. This gave management a clear view of overall performance and flagged situations that required interventions.
As a result, the company was able to deliver on the ambitious EBIT target set by the CEO. In addition, the business units adopted a continuous- improvement approach to capture gains after the formal transformation program ended.
- Insufficient accountability among the owners and sponsors of the initiatives
- Failure to have in place clear plans and roadmaps, backed with specific actions and milestones that are linked to financial objectives
- A lack of resources and expertise on initiative teams
- Management incentives that do not support the objectives of the transformation
- Failure to engage stakeholders and overcome institutional resistance
A GLOBAL INSURER IMPLEMENTS A VALUE-BASED TRANSFORMATION
A new CEO took over at a global insurance company that had multiple lines of business. The CEO conducted an outside-in analysis to assess the company’s current situation, along with its capabilities, its competitive position both globally and in individual markets, and industry analysts’ perceptions.
This process identified some clear challenges. The company’s return on capital was low, and its capital position was weak. The company also lacked a rigorous process for allocating capital and had inefficient cost structures and an unfocused portfolio of business units, whose performance varied widely.
Through this analysis, the CEO defined the ambition for a transformation and established explicit financial targets. Once he took over the top job, he built momentum for the effort in a series of meetings with the board of directors and the executive committee.
As part of the transformation, the CEO looked at specific insurance segments and restructured the company into 40 “cells.” Each cell represented businesses and markets with similar underlying characteristics (for example, vehicle insurance in the UK, pension insurance in Poland, and corporate insurance for large companies in the U.S.). The CEO then assessed the performance of the individual cells across several dimensions through financial analyses and the evaluation of market prospects.
On the basis of the results, the company grouped its businesses into three clusters: “grow” (the top 25 percent), “turnaround” (the middle 50 percent), and “divest” (the bottom 25 percent).
Within the first 100 days, and backed by the senior management team, the CEO had begun communicating a new 18-month initiative to the entire organization.
The transformation would include specific corrective actions to improve the cash flow performance of the turnaround units. In addition, the program would reduce costs throughout the company and strengthen the capital management process, with more integrated planning and a better performance-management cycle.
In all, the effort generated more than $400 million in savings in its first year—a savings that included a reduction of 25 percent in the head count of senior management.
That success stemmed from several factors. First, the company took a strictly fact-based approach to analyzing business performance, in part by eliciting an outside-in assessment from the investor and analyst communities. Second, the CEO ensured that all executive committee members had accountability for specific initiatives. And third, the implementation plan was clear from the start, thanks to strong communication and full buy-in from the management team.
A BANK’S TRANSFORMATION BOOSTS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
In the wake of the financial crisis, a large bank was struggling to resume a growth trajectory. It suffered from poor profitability and process inefficiency, compared with its peers. The bank also had severe liquidity issues and high write-downs on loans in both core and distant markets. More fundamentally, it had an unclear value proposition for customers and little organizational focus on performance and collaboration among employees.
In response, the CEO and leadership team launched a three-step transformation aimed at improving customer satisfaction and financial results.
The first step was to reorganize the company around the customer experience rather than around divisions and functions, which was the current, silo-based approach. That process clarified the roles for specific functions, and it rewired processes to foster greater collaboration across departments. At the same time, the company revamped its leadership team, making some new hires and giving some current leaders new roles.
The second step was developing a new strategy—new business leaders were tasked with defining the strategy for their units. Those individual strategies were grouped into one major transformation effort that was owned by the CEO and had three specific objectives: better customer satisfaction, greater efficiency, and a performance-based culture.
In the third step—currently under way—the CEO and leadership team are putting their full focus on executing the new strategy.
- Ensure the commitment and change capabilities of the executive team, including their ability to set the right priorities, mobilize and energize initiative teams, and hold themselves accountable for the results.
- Deploy change-management tools and processes (such as an activist PMO, roadmaps, and rigor testing) to engage stakeholders and deliver results. (For more on rigor testing, see “The Hard Side of Change Management,” Harvard Business Review, October 2005.)
- Install an HR team that can act as a transformation partner, anticipating talent and leadership needs, rather than as a mere service provider.
- Build a talent pipeline that can help fill crucial roles, and develop capabilities in areas critical for the transformation, such as go-to-market strategies, pricing, sourcing, lean methods, digitization, innovation, and HR.
- Simplify the organization and culture to sustain high performance in conjunction with the new strategy. Usually this entails eliminating waste and low-value work, trimming bureaucracy, implementing shared services, automating processes, and enabling the organization to continue taking these steps on an ongoing basis.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Maya Gavrilova, Jonas Lumby Jensen, Paul Millerd, Louise Herrup Nielsen, Mai-Britt Poulsen, and Fredrik Vogel for their contributions to this report. The authors also are grateful to Jeff Garigliano for his assistance in writing this report and Katherine Andrews, Gary Callahan, Kim Friedman, Abby Garland, Trudy Neuhaus, and Sara Strassenreiter for their contributions to the editing, design, and production.
https://on.bcg.com/3raaf7R