娇色导航

The silent undercurrent behind transformation failures 

In most organizations, transformation is evaluated through activity and not through realized intent, because we measure what we launched but not whether it actually worked.  

Basically, we check project completion, meaning: features delivered, training sessions planned (and held) and if the dashboards are green, and yet…the business doesn’t change. 

By the time we sense something is odd, it’s often too late; the issue is already embedded. 

Failure rarely announces itself; it doesn’t show up as a missed deadline or a broken feature. In fact, projects/programs can be “on track”, everything seems to be OK and still we miss the point entirely. 

From what I have seen and experienced, the biggest risk in transformation isn’t failure. It’s a false sense of completion. 

How change slips quietly 

Very often, the problem begins with trade-offs, which can be reasonable and entirely harmful – Individually but dangerous collectively, for instance: 

• A team scopes a feature out “temporarily”
• A region modifies a workflow to “fit local needs”
• A delivery lead drops a requirement to hit a milestone

Each of these decisions, when taken alone, makes perfect sense, but when no one is watching, the cumulative effect can be quite harmful: 

• Soon, the product behaves differently than intended
• People adopt the tool, but not the behavior
• The original purpose gets buried under localized tweaks and deadline pressure

And most importantly, no one sounds the alarm because nothing looks wrong (broken), everything seems fine on the surface but what was essential (the purpose) has quietly been erased. 

Why it’s so hard to spot 

Most of today’s delivery frameworks are designed to maximize how quickly teams can move (speed), how clearly progress can be reported (visibility), and how efficiently projects can be wrapped up (closure), but they rarely pause to ask if the right things are being delivered in the first place. 

• Product owners focus on what can be built in a given timeframe, not always on why it matters.
• Project managers report on risk, scope, and timeline not whether the work is still solving the original business case. 
• Sponsors often disengage post-launch, trusting that delivery equals success. 

The result? Delivery is moving “blindly” with no formal role that monitors whether the change is still solving the problem it set out to solve. Even worse, post-launch measurement usually focuses on usage, not value. 

It’s easy to conflate usage with success, but the two aren’t always aligned. A system might be accessed daily, yet fail to influence decision-making or reshape workflows. High adoption can lull teams into believing change has occurred, when in fact, the status quo persists. Delivery might mark a milestone, but it doesn’t guarantee the transformation is real or lasting. 

When no one is tasked with staying aligned with the original problem we set out to solve, it becomes all too easy for delivery to disconnect. 

Familiar symptoms you might be missing 

This phenomenon shows up in nearly every large program. But few organizations call it out because the metrics don’t capture it, and the roles aren’t designed to own it. 

Here are the early signs: 

• Teams no longer agree on what success means
• Exceptions and workarounds quietly multiply
• Strategic KPIs flatten post-launch
• A new system is used, but the underlying habits remain
• “Rework” appears, not because of failure, but because nobody remembered what had to stay intact

These are not delivery issues. These are alignment decay signals. And if no one is tracking them, you’re mistaking motion for progress. 

Three moments that probably feel familiar 

Now, let’s bring this to a practical level. Hereby, three real-world-inspired use cases illustrate how this pattern manifests.  

Case 1: The ERP that backfired 

Context: A global ERP program excluded Region X from Phase 1 because of customs regulations. Then months later – and under internal pressure –  the region was quietly added back in, without any formal approval. 

What happened: 

• The system went live as planned.
• But the revalidation of compliance flags has been missing (forgotten).
• A couple of months later, a customs audit led to an $8M fine.

Why it was missed: 

• No one was tracking the rationale behind the exclusion and it was left untracked.
• The regional addition was treated as a local execution detail, and not as a strategic decision reversal. 
   

Case 2: The CRM that nobody trusted 

Context: A new CRM platform was rolled out to unify client visibility. 

What happened: 

• Sales teams logged calls, as trained.
• But key client decisions still happened in spreadsheets and private decks.
• Revenue opportunities were lost, and customer trust eroded. 

Why it was missed: 

• High usage metrics masked the behavioral gap.
• No one asked: Is this tool actually changing how we work? 
   

Case 3: The process that rebuilt itself 

Context: A global reimbursement automation system was implemented to reduce manual work. 

What happened: 

• Teams quietly recreated the old approval process in SharePoint.
• Visibility was lost, audits failed, and manual reviews returned. 

Why it was missed: 

• The automation didn’t handle edge cases. 
• No feedback loop flagged that users were reverting to old patterns. 

So why does this happen? 

Purely and simply due to a missing leadership attention to lasting business impact. Bad delivery isn’t the root cause. 

Most transformations assume that if you deliver according to the schedule, then the change will follow. But in reality, if no one is actively protecting the change, it will fade. And few organizations are designed for that kind of continuity. 

The incentives don’t help: 

• Delivery teams are measured on scope and timelines. 
• Sponsors are rewarded for launching, not sustaining. 
• Users are pressured to adopt tools, even if they don’t solve the real problem. 

When no one owns what must be preserved, execution takes over purpose 

What leaders should do 

Adding more processes — obviously — won’t solve the problem, but instead, making sure that intent stays connected to execution, even when things are moving fast. 

Here’s how leaders can shift the equation: 

1. Keep the original ‘why’ in the conversation 

Ask one critical question during delivery checkpoints: “Is this still solving the problem we set out to solve?” 

This question, asked regularly, can interrupt silent erosion before it becomes embedded. 

2. Ongoing engagement post-implementation 

Appoint someone (not a new role, just a real person) who is accountable for ensuring that what was intended actually shows up in reality. 
Make outcome reviews part of governance, not just closure reports. 

3. Define success in outcomes, not outputs 

Move away from “project done” as a finish line. Define success as: 

• Measurable behavior shifts 
• Business performance improvements 
• Alignment with strategic rationale 

These are harder to track but far more real. 

What’s at stake if you don’t 

Let’s be clear: this pattern isn’t just frustrating. It’s expensive. 

• research highlights that more than $900 billion in transformation value is lost annually due to failure in realizing outcomes, not execution breakdowns.  
• shows that 56% of failed transformations directly erode trust in leadership.  
• reports that only 12% of organizations fully achieve their transformation goals.  
• reveals that more than half of executives say they struggle to realize the value of their digital transformation efforts. 

But the real cost is cultural. When people stop believing that transformation works, they stop investing effort. They comply, but they don’t care and that is how momentum dies. 

The takeaway 

Every transformation slowly diverges from its original promise. The question is: Does anyone notice? 

Because it’s not delivery that determines success. 

It’s whether the outcome still reflects the intent that justified the effort in the first place

That final mile, the space between “we did it” and “it’s working,” is where the real transformation either happens…or disappears. 

This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network. 
Want to join?