I enjoyed this article, thanks.

For several reasons. In section 1. you also advocate the ‘Ends vs. Means’ method that has a group first surface and agree on what outcomes they want to produce before jumping into what to do – (which is where most prefer to talk – actions). In SchellingPoint, users model this as Financial Outcomes and Non-Financial Outcomes.

Regarding the changes, section 2, we found across the 118 business topics we’ve currently templated that the average number of change types is 17; roles, skills, processes, technology, services, culture, governance, structure, finances, and many others.

One item I would add, to round this out as three pieces of comment :-), is that our users also calculate their Alignment Index – their ‘leading indicator of the group’s likelihood of coordinated action.’ As a predictive analytic, this enables program and change managers to proactively ‘maximize alignment’ before inaction, delayed action, conflicting action, or errant action can occur.

Best,
Michael.