Numbers Being Transformations

Claimed success or sometimes not.  Rarely seen the actual numbers discussed.    Metrics are important.

The numbers behind successful transformations   By Kevin Laczkowski, Tao Tan, and Matthias Winter

“What gets measured,” Peter Drucker famously observed, “gets managed.” One might add a corollary that what goes unmeasured—or gets measured only superficially—risks being mismanaged or, at least, undermanaged.

So it is with transformations. As we’ve noted before, the term “transformation” can be vague, and it too often refers only to minor or isolated initiatives. What should define a transformation is in fact the opposite: an intense, well-managed, organization-wide program to enhance performance and to boost organizational health. And the results should always be measured.

Transformatics: Inside the metrics of transformation

As part of an analysis we term “transformatics,” we’ve built the capability to measure the data set we’ve assembled of more than 200 large transformations stretching back nearly a decade. More recently, we isolated the 82 public companies that had undertaken a full-scale transformation and had an observable 18-month transformation track record to see what we could learn from a statistical analysis of their experiences. The research highlighted four indicators that showed a statistically significant correlation with top-quartile financial performance during the 18-month test period (for more about the methodology, see sidebar “Transformatics: Inside the metrics of transformation”). Taken together, the four indicators suggest some potential lessons for senior managers seeking to maximize the odds of a successful transformation. Let’s look at each in turn.  ... "