- \n
- decarbonization<\/a> runs from electrification of transportation to revitalization of energy grids to renewable energy;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- environmental transformation rubs against decarbonization but uniquely includes resiliency planning, impacts to (public) health, travel, where we live, and so on;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- pandemic work-from-home\u2019s legacy is to accelerate evolution of how work gets done;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- never mind the deferred corporate and government operational investments that are obviously past due.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Just running through impacts on the five environmental considerations (STEEP) I was taught in business school\u2014part of any good business plan\u2014would fill a page or two.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Transformation is everywhere all the time<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
All of which is to say every organization could and probably should have at least one transformation going on. That\u2019s a decent indicator \u201ctransformation\u201d is not<\/em> merely a buzzword.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Oddly, not every organization is transforming some<\/em>thing. Admittedly these are relatively few and will be part of an ever-shrinking portion for years to come. They will<\/em> transform in some material way soon\u2026 or they will be eliminated. Either way, Schumpeter\u2019s<\/a> point is well made.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"Joseph](\"https:\/\/institute-x.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/creative-destruction.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nSometimes those organizations actually transforming in some meaningful way don\u2019t even consider it, and certainly don\u2019t publicize the fact. Huh? How can this happen? Isn\u2019t it a rule that an organization\u2019s journey of transformation must be loudly and widely proclaimed\u2014as a testament to their own insight and courage if nothing else?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It would seem so, provided of course that the organization has (a) publicly listed stock, (b) an employee CEO\u2014or Elon Musk, (c) a contract with a major \u201ctransformation\u201d consulting firm, and (d) is making this declaration mostly for those who can affect its share price. Not all organizations qualify on this basis though. So they\u2019re quieter about transforming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Being modestly less glib, some organizations have never reached a comfortable equilibrium or stasis. They have been evolving through persistent change. Sometime the changes are innocuous and narrowly focused (say, shifting cost\/operating structure toward full variability or doing the same with capital equipment\u2014e.g., J-I-T or moving to the Cloud). Other times they are much more obviously transform something. These tend to happen with significant dislocations to labour or location. Moving the real\u2014as opposed to nominal\u2014headquarters would be an example; as would any extensive automation effort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Back to the question. Is transformation a buzzword? And why did I<\/a> <\/a>say it can be?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
All transformation; no change<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
I\u2019m assured Texans are prone to judging a poseur as \u201cAll hat no cattle.\u201d Imagine \u201ctransformation\u201d as a ranch operation. Sometimes a big cowboy hat means you have a big ranch with a big herd. Sometimes the hat is cover for having neither. That\u2019s a ten-gallon buzzword.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A business or government organization that does the hard work (transformations ARE hard work, make no mistake). One that identifies\u2014in some narrow or broad respect\u2014its present and its future on its current arc and determines where it would rather be. One that establishes the means to get on a new trajectory and takes continuing tangible steps to achieve its desired future\u2014even though it is becoming progressively unrecognizable<\/em> to itself\u2014is justifiably transforming. It may choose to say so or not. If it does, it can point to the herd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another business or government organization that creates and continuously repeats a slideware mantra describing what its transformation needs to be and why, includes some objectives and high-level strategies, invests in flavour-of-the-day change (think: CRM this year, ERP last year, KAIZEN next year, digitization that\u2019s really just making PDF versions of paper documents\u2026), and makes no progress altering its core essence<\/em> is not<\/em><\/strong> really transforming. This organization probably says it is<\/em> to anyone listening for what\u2019s coming out from under that giant Stetson.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
No doubt, \u201ctransformation\u201d has been an incantation (i.e., buzzword) to make stock prices rise. This is why so many employee CEOs and senior executives have been loud and proud of transformational aspirations. The practical aspect may have been secondary; just enough \u201ctransformative change\u201d to maintain the illusion and keep the market gods happy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It\u2019s arguable that time has passed. Whether by virtue of the maturity and evolution of what digital transformation entails or because of market demands, like ESG, it\u2019s much harder to put on the Transformation hat and pretend without getting called out on it. Today, it\u2019s much less likely\u2014not impossible, mind you\u2014but much less likely to find it being used as a buzzword among the more evolved and sophisticated or at least conscientious in business and government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As always though, when you first hear the word it\u2019s important to look past the speaker\u2019s hat to see if the bullshit is on the ground where it\u2019s supposed to be, or floating around dangerously close.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n