The First 90 Days: Proven Strategies for Getting Up to Speed Faster and Smarter

by Michael D. Watkins

Trying to restructure your way out of deeper problems.

Creating structures that are too complex. This is a related trap. It may indeed make sense, as it did in Hannah’s situation, to implement a matrix structure. Done well, matrices foster shared accountability and help you work through creative tension. But take care to strike the right balance and not diffuse decision making or introduce sclerotic complexity. Strive, where possible, for clear lines of accountability. Simplify the structure to the greatest degree possible without compromising core goals.

Overestimating your organization’s capacity to absorb change.

It’s commonplace for less-senior people to complain about obvious misalignments and to wonder why “those idiots” higher up tolerate clearly dysfunctional arrangements. By the time you reach the midsenior levels of most organizations, however, you are well on your way to becoming one of those idiots. You’re therefore well advised to begin learning something about how to assess and design organizations.

Strategic direction. The organization’s mission, vision, and strategy Structure. How people are organized in units and how their work is coordinated, measured, and incentivized Core processes. The systems used to add value through the processing of information and materials Skill bases. The capabilities of key groups of people in the organization

Aligning an organization is like preparing for a long sailing trip. First, you need to be clear on whether your destination (the mission and goals) and your route (the strategy) are the right ones.

Then you can figure out which boat you need (the structure), how to outfit it (the processes), and which mix of crew members is best (the skill bases).

Begin with strategic direction. Take a hard look at how your unit is positioned with respect to the larger organization’s goals and your agreed-to priorities. Make sure your mission, vision, and strategy are well thought through and logically integrated.

Look at supporting structure, processes, and skills. Look at whether your group’s existing structure, processes, and skill bases support the strategic direction—either the existing one (if you decide not to change it) or the one you envision. Dig into and understand the relationships among these elements. If one or more of them is ill suited to the mission or strategy you have in mind, figure out how you will either adapt your direction or build (or acquire) the capabilities you need.

Decide how and when you will introduce the new str...

Think through the correct sequencing.

Strategic direction encompasses mission, vision, and strategy. Mission is about what will be achieved, vision is about why people should feel motivated to perform at a high level, and strategy is about how resources should be allocated and decisions made to accomplish the mission.

Focus on customers, capital, capabilities, and commitments:

SWOT—an acronym for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats—was originally developed by a team at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) in the late 1960s.2 The group came up with the idea of simultaneously analyzing internal capabilities (strengths and weaknesses) and developments in the external environment (threats and opportunities) to identify strategic priorities and develop plans to address them.

The correct approach is to start with the environment and then analyze the organization. The first step is to assess the organization’s external environment, looking for emerging threats and potential opportunities. Naturally this assessment must be conducted by people who are grounded in the reality of the organization and knowledgeable about its environment.

One caution: much of an organization’s power gets allocated via its structure, because it defines who has the authority to do what.

What is structure exactly? Most simply, your group’s structure is the way it organizes people and technology to support the mission, vision, and strategy.

perfect organizational structure;

common problems

The organization has silos of excellence.

Employees’ decision-making scope is too narrow or too broad.

Employees have incentives to do the wrong things.

Reporting relationships lead to compartmentalization or diffusion of accountability.

Aligning Core Processes

Book

Keep in mind that the extent and types of processes you need depend on the trade-offs you need to make. Think, for example, about whether your primary goal is to drive flawless execution or to stimulate innovation.

Analyze Processes

Align Processes with Structure

Improve Core Processes

Developing Your Group’s Skill Bases

Identify Gaps and Resources

Keep in mind that culture is not something you can change directly. It is powerfully influenced by the four elements of organizational architecture, as well as by leadership behaviors. The implication is that to change the culture, you need to change the architecture as well as reinforce what you’re trying to do with the right leadership. One example is changing the metrics by which you judge success and then aligning employees’ objectives and incentives with those new measures.

If, like most new leaders, you inherit a group of direct reports, it is essential to build your team to marshal the talent you need to achieve superior results.

The most important decisions you make in your first 90 days will probably be about people.

Avoiding Common Traps

Criticizing the previous leadership.

Keeping the existing team too long.

STARS situation you confront; it may be shorter in a turnaround, and longer in a realignment situation.

Not balancing stability and change.

not want to try to change too much too fast and sink the ship.

Not working on organizational alignment and team development in parallel.

Not holding on to the good people.

Undertaking team building before the core is in place.

approach poses a danger;

Trying to do it all yourself.

Assessing Your Team

Establish Your Evaluative Criteria

Competence.

Judgment.

Energy.