What you don’t know can hurt you: why choosing your own coach is a bad idea

In recent years, the coaching market has continued to make major advancements in how to scale coaching for the many. It is commonplace to see small-group coaching, learning circles, peer to peer coaching, bot coaching, self-paced coaching, asynchronized coaching, and even instant coaching, with a live person at your fingertips. It’s easy to believe that innovation in the science of mindset and behavior change knows no borders.
So, what’s the problem here? With such advancement, what could possibly jeopardize the quality and integrity of coaching today? It might be different than what you think. Yes, much comes down to the coach themselves, their experience, and how they are resourced to do their work; but with more qualified and well-equipped coaches out there than ever before, this is less of an issue. The problem lies in the pivot towards selecting your own coach, and the challenge is ensuring you make an unbiased choice.
Swipe left to reinforce your bias
Today, choosing your coach is as simple as swiping left. Aided by apps modelled after unregulated dating platforms, employees can select their coach by scrolling or swiping through a list of options. These dating apps appeal to some of humanity’s most rudimentary motivators, such as physical attraction and affinity bias (defined below). Instead of matching with the best fit, Coach selection processes are becoming riddled with the same biases towards race, gender, and sexual orientations that most organizations are working hard to eliminate.
There are two main biases emerging in this approach to coach selection:
- Affinity Bias: Affinity bias, also known as similarity bias, is the tendency for people to connect with others who share similar interests, experiences, and backgrounds.
- Confirmation Bias: Confirmation bias is the inclination to draw conclusions about a situation or person based on your personal desires, beliefs, and prejudices, rather than on unbiased merit.
These biases lead to two common coaching traps:
Coaching Trap #1: Many scaled coaching organizations today use dating algorithms (think swiping left or right) to assist in coach selection. At first, an employee will only see a coach’s photo and would need to click on their image to see further details. While this is a fun and inventive way of enabling the employee’s speed to coach selection, as exposure to someone’s face only further reinforces basic biases; based on psychology, employees are more likely to choose the person that looks like them.
Coaching Trap #2: Across the globe, there is a strong bias towards both a specific set of educational institutions (the Ivy League) and certain levels of academic achievement (graduate degrees, whether in medicine, law, or other fields). Thus, graduates from lesser-known institutions and bachelor’s degree-holders may be considered less valuable. When selecting a coach, this bias frequently plays out with the perception that coaches with rarefied educational backgrounds will deliver better results.
By enabling coach selection in this way, employees are almost encouraged to reinforce their own biases, which include ageism, sexism, racism, name bias, beauty bias, cultural bias, and more. These biases are the ones that companies are working hard to disrupt via policies on rewards, hiring, employee lifecycle, and in society. Despite this, recent studies show alarming trends, even in early careers:
One study of high school students found that females considered to be attractive earned eight percent more than those who were not considered attractive, and men of below-average attractiveness made 13 percent less than other men who were considered attractive.1
In another study, White-sounding names received 50 percent more call backs for interviews than Black-sounding names. Even with a higher quality resume, there is still a strong bias towards White-sounding names, which elicit 30 percent more call-backs. For Black-sounding names, the increase is much smaller. Applicants living in better neighborhoods also receive more call-backs, but this effect is not impacted by race.2
So, here’s the problem: the coach you think you need could not be the one you actually need. Just because you feel comfortable with a person or “see yourself” in them doesn’t necessarily correspond to effective change. Many people reflect on their coaching experiences and find that the coaches or people in their life that they’ve learned the most from are very different from themselves.
In a time when everyone is working together to eliminate bias and encourage equity, this is one more area where we need to lead change.

What’s the alternative?
To ensure quality coach selection, you need to follow a few key principles in your approach:
- Make sure your coaching approach and initiative are aligned to strategic outcomes, a change agenda, and your organization values. This can be used to simplify and focus your pool of coaches based on experience, industry knowledge, specialties, and organizational or individual need.
- Ahead of time, ask your employees to reflect on what they believe is important to them in a coach. This will normally result in them naming some of the higher order needs based on past experiences, current needs, and context.
- Your coaching partner should have a “Coach Talent Director” role or similar. This person should know all there is to know about how to maximize their coaches’ talent and match it to yours. Invest in this relationship, carefully scoping out how this person can you be your guide on the side in getting the fit right for your organization.
- Allocate a coach to each employee based on their stated needs. Take pulse checks along the way from both parties to check in on how the match is going.
- If the coaching match isn’t working, or the chemistry isn’t there, make it easy for people to change without judgement or impediment.
- If choice is a key requirement, introduce the coach selection only after working with the Coach Talent Director to select the information that is critical for employees to know. This information should be designed to help employees make an unbiased choice – qualities such as coaching style, approach, experience, and industry background are appropriate, but photographs and names should be avoided.
So much effort to reduce bias has been implemented into hiring, promotion, succession, and performance management processes that it would be a mistake to ignore biases in coach selection. To continue moving the needle on equity and inclusion – which not only delivers business results, but also makes our society better as a whole – it’s essential to take a critical look at your coach selection process. You just might be accidently helping to reinforce bias by encouraging employees to swipe left on a coach in an app.
References
- Gordon, R. A., & Crosnoe, R. (2013, December 10). In school, good looks help and good looks hurt (but they mostly help). Council on Contemporary Families. https://contemporaryfamilies.org/good-looks-help-report/.
- Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2003, July 28). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor Market Discrimination. NBER. https://www.nber.org/papers/w9873.
Related content

Last night I started reading a book by Irvin Yalom, a psychiatrist who has written several novels that I’ve loved. But right now I’m reading something different—a book of short lessons he’s learned from many years of working with patients.
Early in his career, Yalom was inspired by something he read. The gist of it was that all people have a natural tendency to want to grow and become fulfilled—just an acorn will grow up to become an oak—as long as there are no obstacles in the way. So the job of the psychotherapist was to eliminate the obstacles to growth.
This was a eureka moment for Yalom. At the time, he was treating a young widow. Suffering through grief for a long while, she wanted help because she had a “failed heart”—an inability ever to love again.
Yalom had felt overwhelmed. How could he possibly change someone’s inability to love? But now he looked at it differently. He could dedicate himself to identifying and eliminating the obstacles that kept her from loving.
So they worked on that—her feelings of disloyalty to her late husband, her sense that she was somehow responsible for his death, and the fear of loss that falling in love again would mean. Eventually they eliminated all of the obstacles. Then her natural ability to love—and grow—returned. She remarried.
Reading this story made me think of the responsibility of leaders toward the people they need to develop—and for the growth and learning that leaders themselves require to be the best that they can be.
Many leadership development challenges seem overwhelming—even impossible. The leaders that we coach usually have a list of areas where they want to get better, but how? How do you “build better relationships with your peers and direct reports”? How are you supposed to “get out of the weeds and demonstrate enterprise-wide thinking” or “build executive presence”? All of these goals are as abstract as they are huge.
So the best approach is to not focus on the huge and fuzzy goal. What we try to do is to break these goals down into concrete actions through working on real-time business problems. To put it simply, though, we do just as Yalom does: We identify the obstacles and work toward knocking them off, one at a time.
Leadership development is not usually a quick fix. You’re not going to develop executive presence through a half-day workshop or a one-time meeting. If you’re interested in meaningful, lasting growth—whether for yourself or for those who work for you—it’s a commitment.
But don’t ever forget that we’re all capable of growth throughout life and our careers. The trick is to find the right coach or mentor who will guide you through that obstacle course.

Across industries, leaders agree: critical roles, those with outsized impact on organizational success on business success, deserve focused attention. And yet, most organizations still struggle to define them clearly, identify the right talent, and build the readiness needed to execute when it matters most. Despite years of investment in succession planning and high-potential pipelines, most organizations still lack the clarity and consistency needed to execute critical role strategy with confidence.
What are critical roles, really?
We define critical roles as those that disproportionately impact business outcomes and are hard to fill, often cross-functional, and deeply tied to strategic execution. They aren’t always the most senior roles, but they’re the ones that, if left vacant or poorly filled, slow down growth, innovation, or transformation. These roles often require capabilities that go beyond technical expertise like influence across silos, decision-making without full control, and the ability to navigate ambiguity.
Many organizations assume they know their critical roles, but often these definitions are inherited, outdated, or driven by hierarchy, not business value. We encourage clients to pressure-test role criticality by asking: How does the law of supply and demand apply when the demand for this critical role is high, but the supply is limited due to how difficult it is to find, train, and develop ready leaders?
The maturity challenge: what the data shows
Despite prioritizing critical roles, most organizations are not where they want to be:
- Only 21% say successors for critical roles are truly ready1
- Just 25% have clear development plans for people in these roles2
- 50% are starting to expand beyond executive roles, but definitions are still narrow3
This results in a rise of business risk. Transitions stall. Significant business moments like product launches, market expansions, or leadership shifts get delayed or derailed. Even when roles are named and successors are listed, too often it’s the same few people rotating through stretch assignments without real role-level clarity or successor variety.
Three distinct talent needs we see
At BTS, we see three pivotal talent needs organizations must design for:
- The role has evolved, but the leader hasn’t. The strategy has shifted, but expectations haven’t been redefined.
- The pipeline is unclear. It hasn’t been clearly identified who belongs on the bench or whether the right people are even in it. Without visibility and targeted development, readiness remains more of a guess than a strategy.
- A decision needs to be made now, and it must be right. The risk of getting it wrong is high, and factual, objective evidence is needed.
Readiness isn’t a one-time conversation; instead, it’s a continuous discipline. The most advanced organizations are building systems, not just lists.
Seven enablers of a critical role strategy
In our work across industries, the most effective organizations are building discipline around critical roles, not just process. We’ve identified seven drivers that consistently separate high-performing strategies from reactive ones. These show up in different ways depending on where an organization is at on their journey:
- Strategic alignment: Roles are clearly tied to business goals and future priorities.
- Role definition: Roles are defined by impact, not hierarchy.
- Building profiles: The definition of success in role is based on the future, not the past.
- Wide-ranging talent pipelines: Bench strength reflects diversity of experience, geography, background, and perspective.
- Immersive development: Successors build real readiness through stretch roles, simulations, and job previews. Coaching enhances these experiences by helping leaders process feedback, build self-awareness, and apply learning to their context.
- Retention strategy: Incumbents are supported with personalized development and visible investment.
- Continuity planning: Institutional knowledge is captured and transitioned before it walks out the door.
What great looks like in practice
Most organizations rely on role titles, tenure, and intuition. But that’s not enough for roles that carry real risk. Organizations that are closing the readiness gap are doing more than refreshing succession charts. They’re investing in: custom success profiles, assessment-backed talent decisions, and development experiences that reflect the real demands of the role. Great organizations don’t just offer development; they also create role-specific experiences that build the judgment, fluency, and resilience required for the real pressures of the job. It’s not just about knowledge; it’s about role conditioning.
How future-ready is your approach? A quick checklist
Use this checklist to pressure-test the strength of your critical role strategy:
- Have you defined critical roles based on future business impact, not just titles?
- Are success profiles aligned with what the business will require tomorrow?
- Do you know who’s in your bench and how ready they are?
- Are your placement decisions based on structured assessment, not gut feel?
- Are your successors learning through stretch experiences and role previews?
- Are incumbents receiving targeted support that drives their retention and growth?
- Do you have a plan for knowledge transfer if someone in a critical role left today?
What you can do now
- Clarify what roles are truly critical by future impact, not just past precedent
- Be honest about readiness and measure it before placing someone in role
- Invest intentionally and build immersive, real-world development to match role demands
- Don’t confuse visibility with readiness; make decisions based on data, not familiarity
- Prepare leaders before they transition into a critical role so they’re ready to thrive from day one
Critical roles don’t just need names next to them. They need clarity, intention, and investment. Organizations that treat critical role strategy as a leadership capability, not just a process, are the ones driving growth and resilience in today’s market. This isn’t just about building a bench. It’s about building belief, from the front line to the C-suite, that the right people are leading in the moments that matter most.
1Gartner, 2023 report
2The Talent Strategy Group, Critical Roles Report, Apr 2025
3Korn Ferry, Revamping Succession Planning, Nov2023 report

Feedback is one of the most powerful tools a leader has, shaping both individual and organizational culture. Yet, despite its value, it’s often met with apprehension—seen as judgment rather than an opportunity. Instead of fueling growth, it can create tension, leaving recipients feeling exposed and defensive.
This reaction is natural. Feedback touches on identity, competence, and self-worth. When framed as a verdict rather than an insight, it sparks defensiveness instead of openness. But what if feedback wasn’t about judgment? What if it was a tool for gathering better data—both for the recipient and the leader?
When leaders make feedback a habit, not a performance review, they gain sharper insights, model continuous improvement, and create a culture where learning thrives. The shift from evaluation to empowerment turns feedback into fuel for growth. And at the heart of this shift? Curiosity.
Leading in a MESSY world: Why feedback matters more than ever
Leaders today operate in constant disruption and complexity. They must move beyond assumptions and seek new perspectives. At BTS, we call this operating in a MESSY world:
- M – Making sense of the broader ecosystem
- E – Establishing emotional connections to build trust
- S – Seizing momentum to stay ahead
- S – Sensing the future amid uncertainty
- Y – Yielding ego to create space for others to grow
Feedback is critical in helping leaders navigate these challenges. It’s not just a tool for correction but a catalyst for innovation and collaboration. But without structure, feedback can fall flat. That’s where the AFIRM Model comes in.
Reframing feedback: From evaluation to exploration
Great feedback moves beyond transaction into mutual discovery. When leaders model effective feedback, they foster deeper connections and unlock insights that drive performance.
Curiosity plays a crucial role in this transformation. When leaders approach feedback with genuine curiosity—asking open-ended questions and actively listening—they shift conversations from critique to shared learning. Curiosity also provides leaders with better data on how they show up, helping them refine their approach and model the kind of feedback culture they want to create.
Balancing feedback with efficiency is essential. The AFIRM Model provides a structured approach that makes feedback actionable and constructive while keeping curiosity at the center.
Structure feedback for impact with the AFIRM model
AFIRM enables structured yet flexible conversations—ensuring feedback drives results. It provides a roadmap for leaders to create meaningful, productive discussions that foster growth and accountability. Here’s how it works:
A – Agenda
Set clear intentions. Define the purpose and desired outcomes upfront. A prepared conversation leads to honest, productive dialogue and signals that feedback is a shared responsibility rather than a one-sided critique.
F – Facts, Observations, Evidence
Keep it objective. Base feedback on data and observations to minimize bias. Stay neutral and constructive. Providing fact-based feedback ensures conversations remain focused and prevents emotional reactions that derail progress.
Curiosity fosters deeper dialogue—ask questions, seek perspectives, and pave the way for growth. Instead of assuming why something happened, ask “What led to this?” or “What challenges were you facing?” to create space for honest reflection.
I – Impact
Clarify effects. Who was affected? What were the consequences? Centering feedback on impact builds trust and accountability. Highlighting the broader implications helps individuals understand why feedback matters and how their actions contribute to team success.
R – Request
Co-create a path forward. Define actionable, SMART next steps (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound). Encourage collaboration by asking “How do you think we can move forward?” or “What support do you need?” Keeping the dialogue open ensures accountability while fostering autonomy.
M – Mutuality
Feedback is a partnership. Success requires shared ownership and commitment to growth. A strong feedback culture thrives when both parties see feedback as a two-way street—leaders should also invite input on how they can better support and enable success. Take time to ask “What feedback do you have for me?” to reinforce that feedback is a mutual learning process.
Creating feedback-driven growth
Imagine an organization where feedback fuels engagement and connection. When framed as a tool for growth rather than judgment, conversations shift from evaluation to exploration. Everyone is on the same team, with the same goals.
Great leaders don’t just give feedback—they seek it, reflect on it, and use it to sharpen their approach. By modeling curiosity and making feedback a daily habit, they foster a culture where feedback is normal, constructive, and empowering.
Feedback isn’t about fixing. It’s about discovering what’s possible. By approaching it as a shared learning opportunity, we move from judgment to collaboration, growth, and transformation.
What’s one question you could ask today to spark a meaningful feedback conversation?
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.
.avif)
