• Tweet

  • Mail

  • Share

  • Salvage

  • Become PDF

  • Purchase Copies

  • Print

The Idea in Brief

Traditional approaches to strategy assume a relatively stable world. They aim to build an enduring competitive reward by achieving dominant scale, occupying an bonny niche, or exploiting certain capabilities and resource.

But globalization, new technologies, and greater transparency have combined to upend the business organisation environment. Sustainable competitive advantage no longer arises from positioning or resources. Instead, information technology stems from the 4 organizational capabilities that foster rapid accommodation:

  • The ability to read and act on signals of change
  • The ability to experiment speedily and frequently—non only with products and services merely also with business models, processes, and strategies
  • The power to manage complex and interconnected systems of multiple stakeholders
  • The ability to motivate employees and partners

We live in an era of risk and instability. Globalization, new technologies, and greater transparency take combined to upend the business environment and give many CEOs a deep sense of unease. Just expect at the numbers. Since 1980 the volatility of business operating margins, largely static since the 1950s, has more than doubled, as has the size of the gap between winners (companies with high operating margins) and losers (those with low ones).

Market leadership is even more than precarious. The per centum of companies falling out of the elevation three rankings in their industry increased from 2% in 1960 to 14% in 2008. What's more than, market leadership is proving to be an increasingly dubious prize: The in one case stiff correlation between profitability and manufacture share is at present virtually nonexistent in some sectors. According to our calculation, the probability that the market share leader is as well the profitability leader declined from 34% in 1950 to just 7% in 2007. And information technology has get virtually incommunicable for some executives even to conspicuously identify in what industry and with which companies they're competing.

All this dubiousness poses a tremendous challenge for strategy making. That'southward because traditional approaches to strategy—though often seen as the answer to change and uncertainty—actually presume a relatively stable and anticipated world.

Recall most it. The goal of nigh strategies is to build an enduring (and implicitly static) competitive reward by establishing clever market positioning (dominant calibration or an attractive niche) or assembling the right capabilities and competencies for making or delivering an offering (doing what the company does well). Companies undertake periodic strategy reviews and set up management and organizational structure on the basis of an analysis of their industry and some forecast of how it will evolve.

But given the new level of incertitude, many companies are starting to ask:

  • How tin we apply frameworks that are based on scale or position when we tin can go from market leader 1 yr to follower the next?
  • When it's unclear where 1 manufacture ends and another begins, how practice we even measure position?
  • When the environment is and so unpredictable, how can we utilise the traditional forecasting and assay that are at the centre of strategic planning?
  • When we're overwhelmed with changing information, how tin our managers option up the right signals to understand and harness change?
  • When change is so rapid, how can a one-twelvemonth—or, worse, five-year—planning cycle stay relevant?

The answers these companies are coming up with signal in a consequent direction. Sustainable competitive advantage no longer arises exclusively from position, scale, and get-go-order capabilities in producing or delivering an offering. All those are essentially static. So where does information technology come up from? Increasingly, managers are finding that it stems from the "2d-lodge" organizational capabilities that foster rapid adaptation. Instead of being really good at doing some item affair, companies must be really adept at learning how to do new things.

Those that thrive are quick to read and human action on signals of change. They have worked out how to experiment chop-chop, frequently, and economically—non only with products and services but as well with business models, processes, and strategies. They accept built up skills in managing circuitous multistakeholder systems in an increasingly interconnected earth. Perhaps about important, they take learned to unlock their greatest resource—the people who work for them. In the following pages nosotros'll await at how companies at the leading edge are using these iv organizational capabilities to achieve adaptive advantage. We'll also discuss the implications of this fundamental strategic shift for large, established corporations, many of which have built their operations around scale and efficiency—sources of advantage that rely on an essentially stable environs.

The Ability to Read and Deed on Signals

In social club to suit, a company must have its antennae tuned to signals of modify from the external environment, decode them, and quickly act to refine or reinvent its business model and even reshape the data landscape of its industry.

Think dorsum to when Stirling Moss was winning Formula One car races: The car and the commuter determined who won. Simply today the sport is as much about processing complex signals and making adaptive decisions equally about mechanics and driving prowess. Hundreds of sensors are built into the cars; race teams continuously collect and process data on several grand variables—ranging from weather and road atmospheric condition to engine rpm and the angles of curves—and feed them into dynamic simulation models that guide the drivers' split-second decisions. A telemetric innovation by one squad tin instantly enhance the bar for all.

In this information-saturated age, when circuitous, varying signals may be available simultaneously to all players, adaptive companies must similarly rely on sophisticated signal-of-sale systems to ensure that they acquire the right information. And they must employ advanced data-mining technologies to recognize relevant patterns in it.

For example, a leading media company that was suffering from a high rate of customer churn revamped its analytic approach to customer data, applying "neural network" technologies in club to understand patterns of client loss. The visitor found hidden relationships among the variables that were driving churn and launched retention campaigns targeting at-chance customers. The accurateness charge per unit in predicting churn was an impressive 75% to 90%—a huge benefit, given that every percentage point in churn reduction added millions of dollars to the bottom line.

This chart shows changes over the past one-half century in the number of players in the U.S. media industry and their revenue rankings in relation to one some other. (Each line represents a company.) Comcast and Sirius XM Radio are among those that have adapted. Playboy and United Artists Theatre Circuit are amid those that haven't.

Click here for a larger image of the graphic.

A similar pattern can be observed in many other industries (see hbr.org/slideshows/turbulence).

Companies are also leveraging their signal-reading capabilities to brand operational interventions in real fourth dimension, bypassing slow-moving conclusion hierarchies. The UK-based grocery retailer Tesco continually performs detailed analyses of the purchase patterns of the more than than thirteen million members of its loyalty-card program. Its findings enable Tesco to customize offerings for each store and each customer segment and provide early alarm of shifts in customer behavior. They likewise supported the development of Tesco's hugely successful online platform, which has extended the visitor's business model, enabling Tesco to become a store without walls and to offer a broader range of products and services, including media and financial services. To put the icing on the cake, instead of beingness purely a cost centre, the rich databases and analytical capabilities produce a stream of direct revenue: For a fee, Tesco allows other enterprises to access its technologies and insights.

Google is another instance. Information technology uses algorithms to update the position of an advert on the basis of the ad'southward relevance to an individual search or website also as the advertiser's bids on key words. The more relevant an advertising, the higher the click-through rate—and because advertisers pay per click, this ways more revenue for Google. By linking its advertising data directly to its operations, Google tin can respond to changing advertizing conditions on a split up-2d basis, without the intervention of human conclusion makers.

The Ability to Experiment

That which cannot be deduced or forecast can oft be discovered through experimentation. Of class, all companies use some form of experimentation to develop and test new products and services. Nonetheless the traditional approaches tin exist costly and time-consuming, and may saddle the organization with an unreasonable burden of complexity. Furthermore, research based on consumers' perceptions is often a remarkably poor predictor of success. The existent earth is an expensive medium for experimentation, and failed marketplace-facing tests and pilots may jeopardize a company's make and reputation.

To overcome these barriers, a growing number of adaptive competitors are using an array of new approaches and technologies, especially in virtual environments, to generate, exam, and replicate a larger number of innovative ideas faster, at lower cost, and with less hazard than their rivals can. Procter & Hazard is a case in indicate. Through its Connect + Develop model, it leverages InnoCentive and other open-innovation networks to solve technical pattern problems. It uses a walk-in, 3-D virtual shop to run experiments that are quicker and cheaper than traditional market tests. And past employing Vocalpoint and other online user communities, it tin can introduce and test products with friendly audiences earlier a full launch. In 2008 alone, 10 highly skilled employees were able to generate some 10,000 blueprint simulations, enabling the completion in hours of mock-ups that might in one case have taken weeks. More than lxxx% of P&1000's new-business initiatives now make use of its growing virtual toolbox.

In one year 10 highly skilled P&G employees generated some x,000 design simulations, enabling the completion in hours of mock-ups that might once have taken weeks.

In add-on to changing the manner in which they conduct experiments, companies need to broaden the scope of their experimentation. Traditionally, the focus has been on a company'southward offerings—essentially new products and services. But in an increasingly turbulent environment, business concern models, strategies, and routines tin can also become obsolete quickly and unpredictably. Adaptive companies therefore utilise experimentation far more broadly than their rivals practise. We've seen that Tesco illustrates the power of experimenting with business organization models too equally with product range.

Ikea, similar Tesco, leverages existing assets and capabilities to experiment with business organisation models. After the company entered Russian federation, managers noticed that whenever it opened a store, the value of nearby existent estate increased dramatically. And so Ikea decided to explore 2 business models simultaneously: retailing through its stores and capturing the appreciation in real estate values through mall development. It now makes more turn a profit in Russia from developing and operating malls than from its traditional retail concern.

Finally, experimentation necessarily produces failure. Adaptive companies are very tolerant of failure, even to the point of celebrating information technology. For example, the software company Intuit, which has been extremely successful at using adaptive approaches to grow new businesses, launched a marketing campaign in 2005 to accomplish young taxation filers through a website called rockyourrefund.com. The site offered discounts at Expedia and Best Purchase and the opportunity to get tax refunds in the form of prepaid gift cards. The campaign was a flop, and practically no one used the site. The amount of money involved was negligible—"almost a rounding error," says Rick Jensen, the vice president of product management for Intuit'due south consumer tax partitioning. But the marketing squad documented what it had learned from the failure and won an award from company chairman Scott Cook, who said, "It is only a failure if we fail to get the learning."

The Ability to Manage Complex Multicompany Systems

Betoken detection and experimentation require a company to think across its ain boundaries and peradventure to work more closely and smartly with customers and suppliers. This flies somewhat in the confront of the unspoken supposition that the unit of measurement of analysis for strategy is a unmarried company or concern unit.

With an increasing corporeality of economic activity occurring beyond corporate boundaries—through outsourcing, offshoring, value nets, value ecosystems, peer production, and the like—we need to think about strategies not but for individual companies just besides for dynamic concern systems. Increasingly, industry structure is better characterized as competing webs or ecosystems of codependent companies than equally a scattering of competitors producing like goods and services and working on a stable, distant, and transactional footing with their suppliers and customers.

In such an environment advantage will flow to those companies that can create constructive strategies at the network or system level. Adaptive companies are therefore learning how to push button activities outside the visitor without benefiting competitors and how to blueprint and evolve strategies for networks without necessarily existence able to rely on strong command mechanisms.

Typically, adaptive companies manage their ecosystems by using mutual standards to foster interaction with minimal barriers. They generate trust among participants—for example, by enabling people to interact frequently and past providing transparency and rating systems that serve as "reputational currency." Toyota's automotive supply pyramids, with their kanban and kaizen feedback mechanisms, are early examples of adaptive systems. EBay'south circuitous network of sellers and buyers is another; the visitor relies on seller ratings and online payment systems to support the online marketplace.

If the experience curve and the scale bend were the key indicators of success, Nokia would still be leading the smartphone market. But it was attacked past an adaptive ecosystem.

If the experience curve and the scale bend were the key indicators of success, Nokia would nevertheless be leading the smartphone market place; it had the advantage of existence an early mover and the market share leader with a stiff toll position. But Nokia was attacked by an entirely dissimilar kind of competitor: Apple tree's adaptive system of suppliers, telecom partnerships, and numerous independent application developers, created to support the iPhone. Google's Android operating system, too, capitalized on a broad array of hardware partners and application developers. The ability to bring together the avails and capabilities of so many entities allowed these smartphone entrants to leapfrog the experience curve and become new market leaders in record time. Equally Stephen Elop, Nokia'southward CEO, wrote in a memo to his staff, "Our competitors aren't taking our market place share with devices; they are taking our marketplace share with an unabridged ecosystem." Through broader signal detection, parallel innovation, superior flexibility, and rapid mobilization, multicompany systems can enhance the adaptiveness of individual companies.

The Ability to Mobilize

Accommodation is necessarily local in nature—somebody experiments first at a particular place and fourth dimension. It is also necessarily global in nature, because if the experiment succeeds, it will be communicated, selected, amplified, and refined. Organizations therefore need to create environments that encourage the noesis menses, diversity, autonomy, run a risk taking, sharing, and flexibility on which adaptation thrives. Opposite to classical strategic thinking, strategy follows organization in adaptive companies.

A flexible structure and the dispersal of conclusion rights are powerful levers for increasing adaptability. Typically, adaptive companies have replaced permanent silos and functions with modular units that freely communicate and recombine according to the state of affairs at hand. To reinforce this framework, it is helpful to accept weak or competing power structures and a culture of constructive conflict and dissent. Cisco is i company that has fabricated this transformation. Early, it relied on a hierarchical, customer-axial organisation to become a leader in the market place for network switches and routers. More recently the CEO, John Chambers, has created a novel management structure of cross-functional councils and boards to facilitate moves into developing countries and 30 adjacent and diverse markets (ranging from health care to sports) with greater agility than would previously have been possible.

As they create more-fluid structures, adaptive companies bulldoze determination making down to the front lines, allowing the people most likely to notice changes in the environment to respond apace and proactively. For case, at Whole Foods the bones organizational unit is the team, and each store has almost eight teams. Team leaders—not national buyers—decide what to stock. Teams have veto power over new hires. They are encouraged to buy from local growers that run into the visitor's quality and sustainability standards. And they are rewarded for their functioning with bonuses based on store profitability over the previous four weeks.

Creating decentralized, fluid, and fifty-fifty competing organizational structures destroys the big advantage of a rigid hierarchy, which is that everyone knows precisely what he or she should be doing. An adaptive organization can't expect to succeed unless it provides people with some substitute for that certainty. What's needed is some simple, generative rules to facilitate interaction, help people make trade-offs, and gear up the boundaries within which they can make decisions.

For example, Netflix values 9 core behaviors and skills in its employees: judgment, communication, impact, curiosity, innovation, courage, passion, honesty, and selflessness. The company's executives believe that a great workplace is full of "stunning colleagues" who embody these qualities; thus the Netflix model is to "increase employee freedom every bit we grow, rather than limit information technology, to go on to attract and nourish innovative people, so nosotros have a meliorate chance of long-term continued success." Consistent with this philosophy, Netflix has simply ii types of rules: those designed to prevent irrevocable disaster and those designed to prevent moral, ethical, and legal issues. It has no vacation policy and does no tracking of fourth dimension—the company'due south focus is on what needs to get washed, non how many hours or days are worked. As the Netflix "Reference Guide on Our Freedom & Responsibility Civilization" puts information technology, "Avert Chaos as you grow with E'er More High Performance People—not with Rules."

The Challenge for Big Business

Condign an adaptive competitor tin be difficult, peculiarly for big, established organizations. Typically, these companies are oriented toward managing scale and efficiency, and their hierarchical structures and fixed routines lack the diversity and flexibility needed for rapid learning and change. Such management paradigms die hard, especially when they have historically been the ground for success.

However, several tactics have proved constructive at fostering adaptive reward even in established companies. To the managers involved, they may look similar nil more than an extension of business equally usual, simply in fact they create a context in which adaptive capabilities can thrive. If yous are the CEO of a large company that wants to exist more adaptive, claiming your managers to:

Look at the mavericks.

Fast-changing industries are characterized by the presence of disruptive mavericks—often entirely new players, sometimes from other sectors. Inquire your managers to shift their focus from traditional competitors' moves to what the new players are doing and to recollect of ways to insure your visitor against this new competition or neutralize its result. They should also wait at what's happening in adjacent or analogous industries and markets and inquire, "What if this happened in mine?" Although blueprint recognition is harder in an uncertain environs and tin easily be obstructed by entrenched beliefs and narrow industry definitions, it has tremendous competitive value.

Identify and address the uncertainties.

Get your managers to put aside the traditional single-concern forecast and instead examine the risks and uncertainties that could significantly affect the visitor. This uncomplicated extension of the familiar long-range strategy exercise can forcefulness people to realize what they don't however know and to address it. Your organization needs to distinguish "fake knowns" (questionable but firmly held assumptions) from "underexploited knowns" (megatrends you lot may recognize and perhaps have even acted on, merely without sufficient speed or emphasis) and "unknown unknowns" (intrinsic uncertainties that you can set for simply by hedging your bets).

Put an initiative on every risk.

Nearly companies have a portfolio of strategic initiatives. Information technology should get the engine that drives your organization into adaptability—and it can, with a couple of simple enhancements. First, every pregnant source of uncertainty should be addressed with an initiative. Depending on the nature of the uncertainty, the goal of the initiative may exist responding to a neglected business trend, creating options for responding to it downwards the line, or simply learning more than virtually information technology. In managing these initiatives, your company should be as disciplined with metrics, time frames, and responsibilities equally it would be for the product portfolio or the operating plan.

Examine multiple alternatives.

In a stable environment it is sufficient to better what already exists or to examine single change proposals. The simple pace of requiring that every change proposal be accompanied by several alternatives not only surfaces a more varied and powerful set of moves, only also legitimizes and fosters cognitive multifariousness and organizational flexibility.

Increase the clock speed.

The speed of adaptation is a part of the cycle time of determination making. In a fast-moving environment, companies demand to accelerate modify by making annual planning processes lighter and more frequent and sometimes by making episodic processes continual.

The adaptive arroyo is no universal panacea. If your industry is stable and relatively predictable, you lot may exist better off sticking to the traditional sources of advantage. Simply if your competitive reality is uncertain and rapidly changing, as is true in an increasing number of industries, you demand a dynamic and sustainable way to stay alee. Your survival may depend on building an organization that tin can exploit the 4 capabilities backside what we think of as adaptive advantage.

A version of this article appeared in the July–Baronial 2011 issue of Harvard Business Review.