Most organizational change efforts fail not because of poor execution but because senior leaders fall into a false alignment trap —believing they agree on why, what, and how to change when they actually do not. Drawing on research, behavioral science, and a case study of the jewelry group Pandora, this article explains how false alignment arises from vague discussions, avoidance of disagreement, and pressure to move too quickly and shows how it leads to paralysis, wasted activity, misdirected progress, or watered-down compromises. The authors propose a disciplined process for reaching true agreement, emphasizing specificity, early and safe dissent, rigorous debate, clear decision rights, formal commitment, and unified communication. They argue that investing time up front to resolve disagreements ultimately accelerates execution and improves outcomes.
Leaders often behave as if they agree on why, what, and how to change—when they actually don’t. That’s why most transformation efforts fail. by Julia Dhar, Kristy R. Ellmer and Philip Jameson
Decades of experience and research have consistently shown that most organizational change efforts fail. In 1993 Michael Hammer, who launched the business-process-reengineering movement, somberly concluded in his book Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution that “as many as 50% to 70% of the organizations that undertake a reengineering effort do not achieve the dramatic results they intended.”
