It’s common for large companies to embark, every few years, on an organizational redesign in pursuit of better performance. Leaders design the new structure intending to change how people work. In the hope of creating meaningfully better business results, they put in place new reporting lines and move boxes on organizational charts, confident that the company will garner the full benefits of the redesign.

Many in the organization don’t share their leaders’ optimism, however. Only 36% of people working in new structures believe the redesign will meet all expectations—vs. 88% of leaders—according to our recent survey of nearly 1,000 global executives and employees who have recently undergone such a change.

The disconnect highlights the reason why so many new models eventually fall short: an insufficient focus on how the organization will “live” the new design long term. This is especially critical now, as many organizations reinvent their operating models to capture the benefit of generative AI. Making that shift stick requires more than structure—it demands new habits and new ways of working.

Unlike merger integrations, in which business continuity planning is standard, in reorganizations, leaders often assume details will get sorted out as they go. Without a plan to work differently, however, their companies slide back into old patterns before the ink on the new org chart is dry.

Three common traps

Despite good intentions, most redesigns fall into three predictable traps that prevent people from working differently:

1. Believing the boxes and lines are enough. Leaders tend to overemphasize the organizational design itself and shortchange planning for the transition to the new model and how people will work differently in it. Most leaders in our survey were satisfied with their design. When asked the main reason transformations fall short of expectations, design flaws were the factor cited least often. The issues they did identify relate to how the organization lives with the new model day to day, including concerns that their people will resist the redesign because they lack a clear handle on the changes to their work and the way they work with others (see Figure 1).

2. Mistaking change management for transformation. More than 80% of leaders believe they effectively communicate, train, and support those most impacted by a reorganization, but only 57% of the middle managers who must execute the reorganization agree.
3. Over-communicating about structure and under-communicating about making it work. Even when leaders effectively convey key structural changes and implementation milestones, workers are left struggling. “How will we operate in the new environment?” they wonder. And the middle managers tasked with helping them adapt are just as confused.

Figure 1

Planning to “live the model”

Most organizations “announce and train,” but few equip people to actually operate in the new model. Planning to “live the model” focuses on preparing them for what they will actually do.

Managers need to:

• Clarify how day-to-day work changes. Which work processes change and how? How will decisions be made differently? Whose work changes the most?
• Engage people in understanding and adopting new ways of working. What are the points in time when choosing a certain behavior will have an outsized influence on the success of the new model—the “moments of truth”? How can management enable, inspire, and reinforce new habits?

In short, people want to do a good job: Managers need to help them do their jobs differently. That’s what it means to “live the model.”

The 20/200/2000 team

In our experience, the only way to truly “live the model” is to mobilize the entire leadership spine:

• the “20” senior leaders who design and sponsor the new operating model;
• the “200” middle managers who redefine key workflows and help new routines take root; and
• the “2000+” employees whose day-to-day behaviors must shift.

A 20/200/2000 framework is a useful tool for clarifying where to invest the time and support needed to ensure the new structure is lived consistently across the organization.

Addressing the confidence gap

As the “20” leaders map out the future state and their plan to get there, it’s important to address a number of striking disconnects between leaders’ perceptions and employees’ reality (see Figure 2). First, the fact that nearly 90% of leaders surveyed believe the change process was well organized, while less than one-third of employees agree. Second, the fact that the “200” middle managers have much less confidence in employees’ understanding of their new roles and decision rights than the “20” top leaders have. 

From employee responses, it’s clear that the “2000” generally understand what is changing—but not how to succeed in the new model. Only 22% say they received sufficient support in training, coaching, or tools.

When this group raises concerns, they’re not resisting change—they’re signaling where they need help to make it work.

Figure 2

The linchpin “200”: middle management

Middle managers sit at the center of this challenge, expected to translate the new model into day-to-day execution while their own jobs change as well. They’re supposed to champion the new model, but without clear guidance on decision rights, processes, and expectations, they become overwhelmed. Ninety percent of middle managers we surveyed report experiencing considerable shifts in their own work, yet many don’t feel equipped to lead others through it.

Because employees take their cues from these managers, any uncertainty at this level cascades across the organization.

Indeed, structural changes can only succeed with genuine buy-in from this critical group. Supporting these leaders with clarity, practical tools, and consistent coaching is the single best investment executives can make to ensure the redesign sticks.

How one company succeeded

Recently, a major energy company launched an operating model redesign that shows what it takes to make change stick. Rather than stopping at structure, leaders appointed executives to identify “hot spots” where work would be most disrupted. They mapped priority workflows in detail and clarified decision rights and required behaviors, ensuring the design would translate into daily behavior. Targeted training and feedback loops helped more than 3,000 employees transition into new roles—embedding new behaviors and faster decision making across the enterprise. Leaders were trained to model the new ways of working. And to ensure adoption and prevent backsliding, the company tracked progress with KPIs and health checks.

Leaders equipped every people manager to answer a series of essential questions:

1. What is the new business unit? What’s the new structure, its purpose, and key features?
2. What is my business segment? What outcomes and processes are we responsible for, and how do we interact with other business segments?
3. What does my team do? How do I support people on my team through clarity and coaching on their roles, workflows, decision rights, key performance indicators?
4. What role do I play? How do I work in the new model, where do I spend my time, how do I interact with others?

The announcement of a redesign isn’t the finish line; it’s the starting gun. Leaders who plan for and help their people live the new model will unlock results others never reach.