Now is not the time to shortcut your hiring process
.avif)
You may not think that organizations are hiring or adding headcount amid the COVID-19 pandemic, but some are—and they’re doing so in droves. At a time when much of the US is under shelter-in-place orders, organizations that keep us safe, fed, and supplied have seen surges in customer demand and, in turn, the need to hire. To keep up with this unprecedented demand, these organizations find themselves trying to screen and onboard people in as little as 24 hours with minimal or no face-to-face interaction. And guess what: there are lots and lots of candidates vying for these jobs.

Selecting and onboarding large influxes of candidates can drain what are already very limited resources, especially when processes are manual and are not virtual. At times like the present organizations simply want to get dependable people in the door who are willing and able to perform any number of tasks assigned to them from one day to the next.So, why not simply truncate the hiring process by eliminating pre-employment screening to get people onboard faster? Organizations need to add headcount, and there are plenty of candidates to fill these positions. If an employee does not work out, an organization can simply move on to the next candidate. Where’s the problem? Eliminating pre-employment screening is not the answer; instead, it creates a whole new set of problems.The wrong selection (i.e., hiring) decision can lead to massive consequences on overall organizational success. Consider the cost of a poor hire for your team or organization. What are the time and training consequences? While each case depends on the role, the cost of a bad hire can be upwards of three times the individual’s salary. Regardless of the specific dollar amount and human resource costs, negative outcomes result directly from poor selection decisions, most of which can be prevented with proper pre-employment screening and assessments.
Sub-par performance and results. When individuals are placed into jobs that require knowledge and skills that they lack, their performance will suffer. Even if the organization takes the time—which costs money—to train and onboard these individuals, how can the organization be certain that the training will “stick,” or that the individuals have the underlying capacity to learn the requisite knowledge and skills? Obviously, an organization is not going to place someone into a highly technical role if the individual does not have the proper background and training, but the learning curve—again, time and money—for any job will be shorter for some people than it will be for others. Properly screening candidates for the requisite knowledge, skill, abilities, motivation, drive, dependability, etc. required to be successful can reduce the risk of sub-par performance in spades.
Cancer to the team. We all know what it’s like to work with someone who is unable or unwilling to carry his/her weight on the team or has a poor attitude. These individuals can single-handedly lower the morale of the entire team at lightning speed. Screening candidates’ skills, abilities, attitudes, and behavioral tendencies can drastically reduce the likelihood of hiring caustic employees.
Liability to the organization. The liability of a bad hire on an organization can take on many forms. We’ve already talked about the performance implications of hiring people who lack important job skills and the impact of hiring the wrong people on team morale. These certainly present liabilities to the organization. But what about the risk of hiring reckless employees to work in environments where following safety protocols is a must? Or putting people who lack customer service skills in front of customers? Or asking people who have poor attention to detail to work in a warehouse picking parts or filling orders? Each of these situations has the potential to result in negative outcomes for the organization, including reputational risk and even safety risk. All of these liabilities can be reduced by screening candidates for the requisite knowledge, skill, and/or abilities required to perform the job.Regardless of whether an organization is filling 5 or 500 openings, or whether the organization has 10 or 10,000 candidates, proper pre-employment screening and assessment is a must. It is well worth the extra 20-25 minutes that it takes candidates to complete most pre-employment assessments. Selecting the wrong person for the job benefits no one and is a disservice to everyone involved. Instead, now more than ever, we recommend putting automated systems in place to screen candidates and help refine candidate pools to those most likely to be successful—ultimately adding the greatest value to your team and organization.
Related content

We have more tools, technologies, and data than ever, yet talent challenges are only growing more complex.
AI is reshaping how work gets done, shifting roles and the skills required. Remote and hybrid models continue to redefine how teams collaborate, lead, and build culture. Economic pressure is forcing organizations to do more with less, making talent efficiency a business necessity. And employee expectations are rising people want more purpose, growth, and flexibility than ever before.
These shifts aren’t just complicating the landscape; they’re rewriting the rules. For years, talent operated one step removed, supporting strategy, but not shaping it. That worked when business was linear and predictable. Strategy was set at the top, cascaded down, and talent filled the gaps. But that world is gone. Today, strategy shifts in real time. You can’t launch a new go-to-market plan, integrate an acquisition, or drive cultural change without people who are aligned, capable, and ready to deliver. And that readiness can’t be an afterthought, it has to be future-back.
That’s why a new kind of talent leadership is emerging, one that moves beyond standalone programs and focuses instead on building integrated systems. It’s a shift from reacting to problems to anticipating what the business will need next; from patching broken processes to designing for performance from the start. In this model, talent strategy is no longer fragmented. It becomes a connected ecosystem where hiring, development, performance, and culture work in sync, aligned to business priorities and built to deliver results. In this environment, integrated talent strategy isn’t just good HR, it’s how business gets done.
The AI revolution and its real-world talent application
AI is revolutionizing how organizations attract, develop, and retain talent. From automating performance reviews and job descriptions to enabling personalized career path development, the promise of AI is clear. However, many warn of a trough of disillusionment. Reality often falls short due to insufficient data, immature infrastructure, and misaligned objectives between business leaders, talent leaders and across functions. Without a clear problem definition, technology risks accelerating misalignment instead of solving meaningful challenges.
Organizations must first define the outcomes they seek whether efficiency, insight, engagement, or growth before deploying technology solutions. As AI adoption expands, success will depend on whether organizations match the right tools to the right problems. Having the discipline to make this evaluation will be game-changing when it comes to delivering impact.
Skills-based organizations: substance or semantics?
The rise of skills-based models reflects both a desire for innovation and a rebranding of long-standing HR practices. While the framing may have shifted, the underlying work—job analysis, development planning, and performance alignment remains constant. Many of today’s talent challenges aren’t new; they’re longstanding issues being reframed under new labels.
To move the conversation forward, leaders must avoid fixating on language and instead focus on what truly drives performance when it comes to talent models: clear role expectations, relevant development paths, and contextualized application of skills. Prioritizing the right core activities will deliver the talent performance you need, regardless of what it’s called.
Manager capability as the linchpin
The most innovative talent strategies still rely on a critical success factor: the people manager. Whether it’s performance enablement, development conversations, or cultural reinforcement, execution hinges on manager capability. The success of most talent initiatives ultimately depends on whether managers are equipped to implement them effectively. Manager enablement is the operational layer that determines whether talent strategies deliver impact or stall. Managers also shape the day-to-day experiences that influence engagement, growth, and retention.
Investing in scalable, practical, and embedded manager development is essential to unlock the potential of any talent system. Currently this remains a challenge to plan and execute in many companies, while some at the leading edge have leaned into this and are making progress. Looking forward, organizations that prioritize preparing their managers for delivering what’s next will yield more rapid results for the business.
Integrated talent management: moving from silos to systems
Gone are the days when talent functions could operate in isolation. Today’s organizations require an integrated approach that connects succession planning, workforce strategy, learning, performance, and employee experience. For business leaders, the structure of HR functions is secondary to receiving actionable guidance that accelerates hiring and performance outcomes.Achieving true integration means moving beyond siloed initiatives and building a connected system where talent strategies reinforce one another across data, design, and delivery. It’s not about where each piece sits, but how well they work together to deliver consistent, business-relevant outcomes.
For example, when identifying successors for executive roles, the best organizations take a systemic approach. They leverage business leader input to nominate high-potentials based on a consistent set of standards. They add rigorous assessment of people and business capability (often using external support) to reduce bias, confirm potential for more complex roles, and identify gaps. They then employ tailored development, run in partnership among the business, talent, and learning with external support, to address identified gaps. This multi-faceted approach incorporates perspectives from the business and HR while leveraging best practices from inside and outside the company, and ties outcomes to business imperatives.
Bringing “Integrated Talent” to life in your organization
Integrated talent refers to the intentional alignment and coordination of all talent-related functions such as hiring, learning, succession, performance, rewards, and workforce planning under a unified strategy that directly supports business goals. Instead of fragmented programs running in parallel, integrated talent strategies are designed and executed as a cohesive system, with shared data, consistent language, and a focus on outcomes that matter to the organization. It’s about designing for the whole employee lifecycle, not just optimizing parts of it in isolation.
The most effective partnerships, including those with consultants and external experts, often blur internal and external boundaries, delivering seamless support to business leaders.
Key recommendations for talent leaders to move to an integrated talent approach
So what does it take to lead effectively in this environment? Several key priorities are emerging:
- Understand the evolving business context: Start with a clear understanding of the organizational environment, where the business strategy is going, and the role of culture in supporting growth, before proposing solutions.
- Customize with purpose: Balance tailored approaches with scalable standards to drive consistency.
- Build your internal base: Credibility is built by understanding internal politics, brand sensitivities, and cultural norms.
- Elevate the employee experience: Amid ongoing disruption, meaning, purpose, and psychological safety are essential stabilizers. Make this a priority, and the business will follow.
- Build meta-skills: Leadership development must focus on adaptability, resilience, empathy, and systems thinking; the capacities needed to lead through complexity.
- Develop an enterprise mindset: Today’s talent leaders must be business-centric, fluent in financial and strategic conversations, and capable of integrating disparate talent functions to construct a coherent whole. They must translate data into compelling narratives and foster strong partnerships both within HR and across the enterprise.
Most importantly, talent leaders must see themselves not just as HR professionals, but as organizational architects, designing the systems, cultures, mindsets and experiences that enable growth.
Conclusion: Talent strategy integration isn’t a trend. It’s your edge.
The world of work is not simply changing. It is being fundamentally redefined. Integrated talent strategy is no longer a future aspiration; it is a current imperative. To deliver on this mandate, talent leaders must: align their strategies tightly with business priorities; build managerial capability at scale; and use technology with precision and discipline. They must create strong, trusted partnerships across internal and external boundaries, and focus on clarity over complexity. The siloed HR model has reached its limits. The future belongs to those who embrace integrated talent strategy as a core business driver.

In a world where transformation often feels complex and distant, real progress is often sparked at the community level, through leaders who create change from within.
In Senegal, a partnership between BTS Spark and Tostan, a nonprofit dedicated to community-led development across Africa, is bringing this idea to life. It’s a reminder that sustainable leadership isn’t built by imposing new systems. It grows when people are equipped to lead themselves.
A ground-up approach to lasting change
Since 1991, Tostan—whose name means "breakthrough" in Wolof—has partnered with rural African communities to advance human rights, health, literacy, and economic development. Its Community Empowerment Program (CEP) weaves together practical knowledge and human rights education, enabling communities to define and pursue their own visions of progress.
Across eight countries and more than five million lives, Tostan’s approach has led to deep-rooted changes, including the voluntary abandonment of harmful traditional practices. Not by directive, but by choice.
It’s an approach that shows leadership capacity isn’t something to be delivered from outside. It’s something to be nurtured from within.
Meeting communities where they are
In 2024, BTS Spark deepened its collaboration with Tostan through an in-person leadership workshop, led by a BTS Spark consultant, following a year of virtual engagement.
The visit coincided with a leadership transition at the executive level—a pivotal moment requiring clarity, continuity, and resilience. Through targeted coaching and workshops, BTS Spark worked alongside Tostan’s leaders to support the transition and strengthen leadership capacity at every level of the organization.

The focus wasn’t on delivering a model. It was on listening, amplifying existing strengths, and equipping leaders to navigate complexity with confidence.
Practical tools for complex challenges
As part of the ongoing collaboration, BTS Spark also provided custom-designed micro-simulations focused on sectors vital to community sustainability: climate resilience, microfinance, and agriculture.
These micro-sims offer leaders a chance to engage with real-world decision-making challenges in a safe, practical environment—an approach that mirrors how leadership development increasingly happens: not through theory alone, but through repeated, real-world application.


It’s a reminder that growth is rarely linear. It’s built through practice, reflection, and adaptation over time.
Building leadership that endures
The work between BTS Spark and Tostan reflects a broader truth:
Leadership isn’t confined to titles, industries, or regions. It emerges where people are given the tools, trust, and space to act.
Sustainable change, whether in communities or organizations, happens when leadership capacity is strengthened closest to where challenges are lived every day.
The partnership also highlights the power of investing in local capability: focusing on what’s already working, building resilience from within, and preparing leaders not just to meet today’s challenges, but to shape tomorrow’s opportunities.
Moving forward: Scaling with purpose
The work in Senegal is continuing to evolve. BTS Spark and Tostan are exploring ways to extend leadership development to more communities, deepen their impact, and continue supporting transformation through shared expertise and partnership.
It’s a model rooted in respect, collaboration, and the belief that leadership is most powerful when it reflects the realities and aspirations of the people closest to the work.

AI is reshaping how work gets done—automating tasks, accelerating decisions, and raising expectations for speed and precision. Strategy is shifting faster than structures can adapt, leaving many leaders operating in systems that weren’t built for what’s being asked of them now. Employees are asking more of their managers—while the business is asking more of them, too. And leaders are stuck navigating it all with development priorities, operating norms, and support systems that weren’t designed for this level of speed, ambiguity, or stretch.
As expectations rise, leadership capability is under scrutiny.
But are development efforts evolving fast enough to meet the moment?
Where priorities and expectations diverge
Most leadership development programs today emphasize foundational strengths:
- Executive presence
- Personal purpose
- A growth mindset
- Empowering others
- Stretching others
In contrast, senior executives in the BTS study identified a different set of capabilities as most critical for leaders right now:
- Accountability
- Transparency
- Enterprise thinking
- Divergent thinking
The contrast reveals a disconnect between what development programs are building—and what executives believe their organizations need most from their leaders today.
How did we get here?
The expectations placed on leaders—especially at the middle—have always evolved alongside the business landscape.
In the 1990s, leadership development focused on emotional intelligence and team empowerment. The 2000s brought globalization and lean operating models, with a sharper focus on efficiency and agility. Then came digital transformation, agile ways of working, and flatter, more matrixed structures.
Each wave expanded the leadership mandate—asking leaders to become connectors, coaches, and change agents.
What’s different now is the pace and proximity of change. Strategy no longer shifts annually—it flexes monthly. And mid-level leaders are no longer simply executing someone else’s vision. They’re expected to interpret it, shape it, and deliver results through others—in real time.
At the same time, the psychological contract of work has changed. Employees want more meaning, flexibility, and support—and they often look to their managers to provide it. Add in the rise of AI and the frequency of disruption, and the expectations placed on leaders have outpaced what many development efforts were designed to support.
What’s driving the disconnect?
What we’re seeing isn’t disagreement—it’s a difference in vantage point, shaped by the distinct challenges each group is solving for. This isn’t about misaligned intent—it reflects different priorities and pressures.
Talent and learning teams often prioritize foundational capabilities because they’re proven, scalable, and critical to developing confident, human-centered leaders. These programs are designed to grow potential over time.
Executives, meanwhile, are focused on the immediacy of execution—strategy under strain, shifting priorities, and the need for alignment at speed. Their focus reflects where progress is stalling now.
Both perspectives matter. But when they remain disconnected, development risks falling out of sync with business reality—and the gap is most visible at the middle, where expectations are rising fastest.
What’s the takeaway for talent leaders now?
This moment offers more than a gap to close—it offers insight into how leadership needs are evolving.
What if the differences between these two capability lists aren’t in conflict, but in sequence? Foundational strengths help leaders show up with purpose and empathy. Enterprise capabilities help them lead across systems and ambiguity. The opportunity isn’t to choose between them—it’s to connect them more intentionally.
What’s uniquely now is the acceleration. The stretch. The pressure to reduce friction and support faster alignment. Talent leaders aren’t just being asked to build capability—they’re being asked to build momentum. That means designing development experiences that reflect complexity, enable cross-functional thinking, and help leaders decide and adapt in real time.
It also means listening more closely. The capabilities executives are calling for aren’t just wish lists—they’re signals. Signals of where transformation slows, and where leadership must evolve for strategy to move forward.
This isn’t about shifting away from what works—it’s about expanding it. To connect what leaders already do well with what the business needs next—and to do it in ways that are grounded, human, and built for today’s pace.
Shifting momentum
Leadership development isn’t just a pipeline priority. It’s a strategic lever for how your organization adapts, aligns, and accelerates through change.
This research doesn’t just reveal a skills gap—it surfaces a systems opportunity. The disconnect between talent priorities and executive expectations highlights where momentum gets lost, and how leadership development can close the space between vision and execution.
Talent leaders are uniquely positioned to reconnect the dots—between individual growth and enterprise outcomes, between what leaders learn and how they lead, between what the business says it needs and how that shows up in behavior.
So the next question isn’t just: What should we build?
It’s: How do we enable leaders to build it into the business—faster?
Every organization is navigating this differently. If you’re revisiting your development priorities or rethinking what leadership looks like in your context, let’s connect. We’re happy to share what we’re seeing—and learning—with others facing the same questions.
Related content

É possível mudar a cultura de uma organização?
Hoje em dia, poucas organizações não estão envolvidas em um (ou vários) processos de transformação cultural. Novas formas de trabalhar em organizações mais horizontais e adaptativas, melhorias na cultura de segurança, orientação ao cliente, transformações nas áreas comerciais e excelência operacional, entre outros.
E é aqui que surge uma das grandes perguntas:
É possível mudar a cultura de uma organização? E, se sim, como fazer isso?
Para ajudar a responder a essas perguntas—frequentes entre nossos clientes e amplamente discutidas—gostaria de compartilhar o que aprendemos na BTS ao longo dos últimos 38 anos sobre o que funciona e o que não funciona (até agora, pois em transformação cultural estamos sempre aprendendo).
A boa notícia é que a resposta é sim.
A dificuldade está na segunda pergunta: como fazer isso?
Um projeto? Uma iniciativa?
Um ponto importante é que a transformação cultural não é um projeto com início e fim, mas sim um processo contínuo e em evolução. Isso muitas vezes gera tensão em organizações acostumadas a uma lógica de projetos.
O que é crítico e frequentemente ignorado?
Existem elementos que, quando considerados e aplicados corretamente, tornam a transformação muito mais eficaz. No entanto, muitas vezes são ignorados.
Esses elementos são:
- Envolver as pessoas. Quanto maior o envolvimento em todos os níveis, maior a probabilidade de implementação das mudanças.
- Tornar a mudança tangível e vivida no dia a dia, conectando teoria e prática. Transparência é fundamental.
- Toda mudança tem impactos positivos e negativos — ambos devem ser comunicados com clareza.
- Mudança cultural exige tempo e transformação de mindsets e estruturas organizacionais.
- A cultura deve estar conectada à estratégia.
Como estruturamos a transformação cultural?
Nosso modelo se baseia em quatro etapas: definir resultados, criar líderes de mudança, incorporar mudanças e sustentar novas formas de trabalho.
1. Definir resultados
O primeiro passo é estabelecer resultados claros e alinhamento executivo. É necessário conectar propósito, visão e objetivos organizacionais.
Ações:
- Coleta de dados (entrevistas, focus groups, visitas)
- Diagnósticos culturais
- Definição de expectativas (Leadership Profiles
2. Criar líderes de mudança
Todos os líderes devem atuar como agentes de mudança. É fundamental engajá-los emocional e racionalmente.
Ações:
- Programas de liderança
- Playbooks
- Feedback contínuo
3. Incorporar mudanças
É essencial transformar mentalidades e sistemas organizacionais.
Ações:
- Coaching
- Sprints culturais
- Cascata organizacional
- Avaliações comportamentais
4. Sustentar o novo modelo
Garantir continuidade através de redes, dados e suporte contínuo.
Ações:
- Integração com processos de talento
- Uso de IA no dia a dia
- Monitoramento da transformação
- Comunidades de prática
A importância de ser paciente e impaciente ao mesmo tempo
Transformações culturais são complexas e não têm fórmula única.
Ser estrategicamente paciente e taticamente ágil é essencial para ajustar e evoluir continuamente.
Esse equilíbrio permite transformar a jornada em algo positivo e sustentável.
Este é apenas um resumo.
Se quiser aprofundar com exemplos e práticas:
Baixe o PDF completo e acesse todo o conteúdo.

Si può cambiare la cultura di un’organizzazione?
Oggi, poche organizzazioni non sono immerse in uno (o più) processi di trasformazione culturale. Nuovi modi di lavorare in organizzazioni più piatte e adattive, miglioramenti nella cultura della sicurezza, orientamento al cliente, trasformazioni delle aree commerciali e miglioramento dell’eccellenza operativa, per citarne alcuni.
Ed è qui che nasce una delle grandi domande:
Si può cambiare la cultura di un’organizzazione? E, se sì, come si fa?
Per aiutare a rispondere a queste domande—che i nostri clienti ci pongono spesso e su cui esiste molta letteratura—vorrei condividere ciò che in BTS abbiamo imparato negli ultimi 38 anni su ciò che funziona e ciò che non funziona (finora, perché nel cambiamento culturale non si smette mai di imparare).
La buona notizia è che la risposta alla domanda se si possa cambiare la cultura di un’organizzazione è sì.
La difficoltà sta nel rispondere alla seconda: come si fa?
Un progetto? Un’iniziativa?
Un aspetto importante da considerare è che i processi di cambiamento o trasformazione culturale non sono progetti con un inizio e una fine; sono processi in continua evoluzione. Questo spesso genera tensione nelle organizzazioni abituate a un approccio basato sui progetti.
Cosa è critico e spesso viene ignorato?
Esistono diversi elementi che, se considerati e utilizzati correttamente, rendono gli sforzi di trasformazione molto più efficaci. Purtroppo, spesso vengono ignorati.
Questi elementi critici sono:
- Coinvolgere le persone. Più le persone (a tutti i livelli) sono coinvolte nella trasformazione, maggiori sono le probabilità che implementino i cambiamenti richiesti.
- Per comprendere il cambiamento, bisogna renderlo tangibile e sperimentarlo. Ciò significa collegare il quadro teorico alle azioni quotidiane. Spiegare il quadro completo con trasparenza è fondamentale.
- Tutti i cambiamenti portano aspetti positivi, ma anche impatti negativi. Spiegare il quadro completo con trasparenza è fondamentale.
- Cambiare la cultura richiede tempo e implica identificare e modificare i “mindset” e le strutture quotidiane (simboli) che definiscono come si fanno le cose nell’organizzazione.
- La cultura deve essere fortemente connessa alla strategia.
Come consigliamo di strutturare i processi di cambiamento culturale?
Il nostro approccio si compone di quattro fasi: definire i risultati, creare leader del cambiamento, incorporare i cambiamenti chiave e sostenere i nuovi modi di lavorare.
1. Definire i risultati
Il primo passo in qualsiasi processo di trasformazione è stabilire risultati chiari. È fondamentale identificare i driver della trasformazione e definire i risultati desiderati in modo da ottenere un vero allineamento a livello esecutivo. Man mano che si procede, è necessario collegare lo scopo e la visione, comprendendo da dove si viene, dove si è e dove si vuole andare. Inoltre, è essenziale collegare la trasformazione agli obiettivi organizzativi.
Alcune azioni rilevanti in questa fase sono:
- Raccolta di informazioni (interviste, focus group, visite operative, …)
- Diagnosi culturali
- Definizione delle aspettative (Leadership Profiles
2. Creare leader del cambiamento
In BTS crediamo che tutti i leader siano anche leader del cambiamento. Adottare una mentalità da “leader del cambiamento” richiede che i leader sperimentino e vedano ciò che ci si aspetta da loro. Fin dall’inizio è fondamentale promuovere l’azione attraverso il “lavoro reale”, come stabilire nuove priorità e comunicare in modo trasparente ed efficace.
I leader devono essere coinvolti (emotivamente e razionalmente) nel cambiamento e devono capire come possono influenzare la cultura attraverso azioni concrete quotidiane.
Infine, è necessario fornire supporto continuo per i cambiamenti più difficili di mentalità e comportamento e raccogliere feedback su ciò che funziona e ciò che non funziona in questa fase.
Alcune azioni rilevanti in questa fase sono:
- Sviluppo di playbook per ruoli critici
- Implementazione di programmi di leadership e cambiamento
- Feedback loops con i livelli esecutivi
3. Incorporare i cambiamenti chiave
Per ottenere un cambiamento significativo, è essenziale identificare i modelli mentali attuali e introdurne di nuovi che supportino lo stato desiderato. Creare routine e simboli che rafforzino il cambiamento, così come identificare processi, pratiche, eventi o norme ancorate ai vecchi modi di lavorare, è fondamentale.
Co-creare nuovi modi di lavorare per un’attivazione immediata aiuta a consolidare questi cambiamenti. Con il progresso, modificare sistemi e processi che supportano e rafforzano i cambiamenti è essenziale per il successo a lungo termine.
Alcune azioni rilevanti in questa fase sono:
- Coaching per leader
- Cultural sprints
- Cascading del cambiamento nell’organizzazione
- Assessment per misurare i cambiamenti comportamentali
4. Sostenere i nuovi modi di lavorare
Il cambiamento non è solo uno sforzo individuale, ma anche un fenomeno sociale. Per questo è necessario creare reti sociali che supportino i cambiamenti di mentalità e comportamento. Interventi con supporto individuale per ruoli critici e momenti specifici, così come l’integrazione dei nuovi modi di lavorare, garantiscono la continuità del cambiamento.
Infine, è necessario utilizzare i dati per analizzare ciò che funziona e ciò che non funziona, permettendo di definire nuove azioni e interventi.
Alcune azioni rilevanti in questa fase sono:
- Integrazione dei playbook nel ciclo di talent management
- Pratica dei nuovi comportamenti con bot basati su IA
- Creazione di un ufficio per monitorare il cambiamento e definire nuove azioni
- Creazione e lancio di Comunità di Pratica (CoP)
L’importanza di essere pazienti e impazienti allo stesso tempo
I processi di trasformazione culturale sono tra i più complessi, poiché non esiste una ricetta unica.
Essere strategicamente pazienti (con risultati chiari ed evitando cambiamenti erratici), ma tatticamente impazienti (agendo nelle fasi descritte e adattando in base a ciò che funziona e ciò che non funziona) è fondamentale.
Questo approccio permette di trasformare questi percorsi in esperienze arricchenti per l’organizzazione, e non in processi dolorosi che lasciano cicatrici nella memoria collettiva.
Questo è solo un riassunto.
Se vuoi approfondire l’approccio completo, esempi e chiavi pratiche:
Scarica il PDF completo e accedi a tutti i contenuti.

Can an organization’s culture be changed?
Nowadays, there are few organizations that are not immersed in one (or several) cultural transformation processes. New ways of working in flatter and more adaptive organizations, improvements in safety culture, customer-centric transformations, changes in commercial areas, and improvements in operational excellence, to name a few.
And this is where one of the big questions arises:
Can an organization’s culture be changed? And if so, how is it done?
To help answer these questions—often asked by our clients and widely discussed—I would like to share what we at BTS have learned over the past 38 years about what works and what doesn’t (so far, since in cultural transformation one never stops learning).
The good news is that the answer to whether an organization’s culture can be changed is yes.
The difficulty comes in answering the second: how is it done?
A project? An initiative?
An important point to consider is that cultural change or transformation processes are not projects with a beginning and an end; they are ongoing, evolving processes. This often creates tension in organizations that are used to a project-based approach.
What is critical and often overlooked?
There are several elements that, if considered and properly used, will make transformation efforts much more effective. Unfortunately, they are often overlooked.
These critical elements are:
- Involve people. The more individuals (at all levels) are engaged in the transformation, the higher the likelihood that they will implement the required changes.
- To understand change, it must be made tangible and experienced. This means connecting the theoretical framework with day-to-day actions. Explaining the full picture with transparency is key.
- All changes bring positive aspects, but also negative impacts. Explaining the full picture with transparency is key.
- Changing culture takes time and requires identifying and shifting mindsets and daily structures (symbols) that define how things are done in the organization.
- Culture must be strongly connected to strategy.
How do we recommend structuring cultural change processes?
Our approach consists of four stages: setting outcomes, creating change leaders, embedding key changes, and sustaining new ways of working.
1. Set outcomes
The first step in any transformation process is to establish clear outcomes. It is crucial to identify the drivers of the transformation and define the desired results in a way that achieves true executive alignment. As you move forward, you must connect the dots between purpose and vision, understanding where you come from, where you are, and where you want to go. Additionally, it is essential to link the transformation to organizational goals.
Some relevant actions in this phase are:
- Information gathering (interviews, focus groups, operational visits, …)
- Cultural diagnostics
- Definition of expectations (Leadership Profiles
2. Create change leaders
At BTS, we believe that all leaders are also change leaders. Adopting a “change leader” mindset requires leaders to experience and see what is expected of them. From the outset, it is vital to drive action through ‘real work’, such as setting new priorities and communicating transparently and effectively.
Leaders must be engaged (emotionally and rationally) in the change and shown how they can impact culture through concrete day-to-day actions.
Finally, it is necessary to provide ongoing support for the most challenging mindset and behavior changes and gather feedback on what works and what doesn’t at this stage.
Some relevant actions in this phase are:
- Development of playbooks for critical roles
- Deployment of leadership and change programs
- Feedback loops with executive levels
3. Embed key changes
To achieve meaningful change, it is essential to identify current mindsets and introduce new ones that support the desired state. Creating routines and symbols that reinforce change, as well as identifying processes, practices, events, or norms anchored in old ways of working, is crucial.
Co-creating new ways of working for immediate activation helps cement these changes. As progress is made, changing the systems and processes that support and reinforce key changes is essential for long-term success.
Some relevant actions in this phase are:
- Coaching for leaders
- Running cultural sprints
- Cascading the change across the organization
- Assessments to measure behavior changes
4. Sustain new ways of working
Change is not only an individual effort but also a social phenomenon. Therefore, it is necessary to provide the social networks needed to support mindset and behavior changes. Intervening with individual support for critical roles and specific periods, as well as embedding new ways of working, ensures the continuity of change.
Finally, data must be used to analyze what works and what doesn’t, enabling the creation of the next set of interventions and necessary support.
Some relevant actions in this phase are:
- Integration of playbooks into the organization’s talent cycle
- Practice of new behaviors in daily work with AI-powered bots
- Design of an office to monitor change and define new actions
- Design and launch of Communities of Practice (CoP)
The importance of being patient and impatient at the same time
Cultural transformation processes are among the most challenging elements, as there is never a single recipe.
Being strategically patient (with clear desired outcomes and avoiding erratic changes), but tactically impatient (taking action in the phases outlined above and observing what works and what doesn’t, in order to pivot and adjust) is key in transformation processes.
The 4-phase approach helps achieve this, enabling these journeys to become an enriching experience for the organization, rather than a painful one that leaves scars in the collective memory.
This is just a summary.
If you want to dive deeper into the full approach, examples, and practical insights:
Download the full PDF and access all the content.
