Category Archives: Leadership

Do You Have an Empty Tank?

Do You Have an Empty Tank?

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

Sometimes your energy level runs low. That’s not a bad thing, it’s just how things go. Just like a car’s gas tank runs low, our gas tanks, both physical and emotional, also need filling. Again, not a bad thing. That’s what gas tanks are for – they hold the fuel.

We’re pretty good at remembering that a car’s tank is finite. At the start of the morning commute, the car’s fuel gauge gives a clear reading of the fuel level and we do the calculation to determine if we can make it or we need to stop for fuel. And we do the same thing in the evening – look at the gauge, determine if we need fuel and act accordingly. Rarely we run the car out of fuel because the car continuously monitors and displays the fuel level and we know there are consequences if we run out of fuel.

We’re not so good at remembering our personal tanks are finite. At the start of the day, there are no objective fuel gauges to display our internal fuel levels. The only calculation we make – if we can make it out of bed we have enough fuel for the day. We need to do better than that.

Our bodies do have fuel gages of sorts. When our fuel is low we can be irritable, we can have poor concentration, we can be easily distracted. Though these gages are challenging to see and difficult to interpret, they can be used effectively if we slow down and be in our bodies. The most troubling part has nothing to do with our internal fuel gages. Most troubling is we fail to respect their low fuel warnings even when we do recognize them. It’s like we don’t acknowledge our tanks are finite.

We don’t think our cars are flawed because their fuel tanks run low as we drive. Yet, we see the finite nature of our internal fuel tanks as a sign of weakness. Why is that? Rationally, we know all fuel tanks are finite and their fuel level drops with activity. But, in the moment, when are tanks are low, we think something is wrong with us, we think we’re not whole, we think less of ourselves.

When your tank is low, don’t curse, don’t blame, don’t feel sorry and don’t judge. It’s okay. That’s what tanks do.

A simple rule for all empty tanks – put fuel in them.

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

VC-Backed Firms in Regulated Industries

The Times They Are A-Changin’

VC-Backed Firms in Regulated Industries

GUEST POST from Geoffrey A. Moore

This week I have had conversations with executive teams of VC-backed firms working in three different regulated industries: Healthcare, Telco, and Financial Services. All of them reported that their sales pipelines were around 3X what they were a year ago. We didn’t dig into why, although I expect that it means the incumbent providers are under increasing pressure to modernize their operating models and streamline their infrastructure models to meet customer demand and pricing pressure.

The reason we did not get to discuss why this is happening is that each of the teams was more focused on how — how do we adapt our playbook to this new development? You might not think an upsurge in demand would be a problem, but all three of these firms are at least an order of magnitude sub-scale to properly address the demands of their target customers. How do you ride such a wave demand without wiping out? How do you scale and not break your company?

Understanding the Dynamics of the Situation

The easiest way to see what is going on here is to examine it through the lens of the Hierarchy of Powers. Here’s how it plays out:

  • Category Power. The category is shifting from resisting the next wave to embracing it, albeit reluctantly, because the status quo is deteriorating, and it is clear something has to change. This leads to the upsurge in RFPs and RFIs that each company is now seeing. Budget is being created whereas before it had to be scrounged. This is great news for each enterprise, but it has its challenges.
  • Company Power. Compared to the Tier 1 prospects each of these companies is targeting, their own is tiny indeed. All of them lack the global reach and depth of personnel their customers require. Nonetheless, these are their most valuable prospects, so they must find a way to engage. That’s the core of the challenge.
  • Market Power. Each company has already focused on a single vertical—that is how they got as far as they have. Now they are going to have to focus even more rigorously in order to control their exposure to too much demand coming at them too fast and too soon. To secure market power, to become the go-to vendor for their category of offer for this vertical, they must prioritize the right subset of prospects and do whatever it takes to get them over the line.
  • Offer Power. This is where each company shines. It is why they are each attracting the attention of companies that a year ago were not returning their calls. Their products, however, are highly complex, and the implementations even more so, so they cannot support runaway growth. Moreover, the regulated industries they serve impose rigorous, one might even say onerous, demands, creating a whole series of hoops to jump through before they can get to the other side. How do you “catch the wave” when the sign on the beach says “proceed with caution”?
  • Execution Power. At the end of the day, this is the crux of the challenge. How can a subscale company with a world-class offer meet the demands of a regulated industry dominated by behemoth enterprises? How should it adapt its playbook?

Adapting the Playbook

Given this change in dynamics, here are the kinds of adaptions that are called for:

  • Control your destiny by narrowing your focus. The key for all three enterprises is to win a handful of Tier 1 accounts that the rest of the industry looks to for best practices. Winning these accounts will establish them as the go-to choice for the industry as a whole. This objective trumps all others, and every organization inside the company needs to reprioritize its workload accordingly.
  • Hold fast to your priorities. This is an internal transformation that requires strict discipline to execute. In the past, it was OK to step off the path to address an impromptu request because the demand for everyone’s time was less insistent. Now it is not. Use weekly commits as a way to make workloads visible, and intervene whenever they are drifting off course.
  • Stay very focused on your top-tier target accounts. Every one of them is a priority, even when they may not be giving you all the reception you want. Conversely, all other prospects are a distraction even when they are inviting you in.
  • Continue to serve your existing customer base. These are not the Tier 1 players we are targeting, but they are references that can help win those accounts. In addition, they are the early adopters who put their faith in you. You must do right by them.
  • Align with a big friend. Your target customers need you to bring many more resources to the table than you have inside your company. The good news is that these same customers work with global service providers who specialize in helping them on-board next-generation offers. You need to secure strong support from at least one of these, and you probably cannot easily support more than one, so pick one you think you can trust, and go all in with them on your go-to-market planning.
  • Let the big friend help you clear your regulatory hurdles. Time is your scarcest resource, and unfortunately, regulated industries are not good at moving swiftly. It’s a mismatch in operating models. VC-backed companies take risks to save time; regulated industries take time to reduce risk. This is not something you are well positioned to deal with. Global services firms, on the other hand, already have relationships with the regulatory authorities you must interface with, not to mention the bandwidth to work through the mandated processes. Do whatever you can to get their help in expediting whatever needs to be done.
  • Create the solution playbook that you and your GSI friend will co-deliver. Do not let the GSI take over the implementation. You know a lot more about what it takes to make your solution work than they do. But you can make sure that the work is profitable for them by giving them the playbook and letting them bill for their time. You don’t need the services revenue anywhere near as much as you need the Tier 1 account win.
  • Defer inbound requests that take you off strategy. You don’t have to say no. You just have to say, not yet. Given the amount of stress that any Tier 1 engagement will put on your firm, taking even one account that is off-script risks breaking your camel’s back.
  • Defer inbound interest around an acquisition. You are at an inflection point in value creation that is potentially extraordinary, the very outcome you and your investors have been preparing for. This is not the time to let go of the reins, particularly if they are going to get handed to an established enterprise whose culture is likely to clash with yours. Moreover, you cannot afford the distraction of all the due diligence that M&A discussions necessarily entail. M&A cannot solve your Tier 1 problem. You have to do that yourself.

Now, to be clear, there are exceptions that could overrule any one of the prescriptions above, so each team needs to review them in light of its own history and circumstances. The key point is that when the market is shifting from a state of scarcity to one of abundance, there is a short time window to catch that wave. The large competitors cannot move fast enough to do this themselves — that is why they are interested in making an acquisition. You are agile enough to do so, but you are painfully subscale — hence the need for the somewhat drastic prescriptions above. Navigating this part of the journey is tricky, but if you stay focused on winning (and keeping!) a handful of Tier 1 accounts, you are making the best bet.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Image Credit: Google Gemini

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Top 10 Human-Centered Change & Innovation Articles of February 2026

Top 10 Human-Centered Change & Innovation Articles of February 2026Drum roll please…

At the beginning of each month, we will profile the ten articles from the previous month that generated the most traffic to Human-Centered Change & Innovation. Did your favorite make the cut?

But enough delay, here are February’s ten most popular innovation posts:

  1. Three Myths That Kill Change and Transformation — by Greg Satell
  2. Why a Customer Experience Audit is Non-Negotiable in 2026 — by Braden Kelley
  3. Innovation Lessons from the 50 Most Admired Companies of 2026 — by Braden Kelley
  4. Is Your Customer Experience a Lie? — by Braden Kelley
  5. Important or Urgent? — by Stefan Lindegaard
  6. The Greatest Inventor You’ve Never Heard of — by John Bessant
  7. 5 Simple Keys to Becoming a Powerful Communicator — by Greg Satell
  8. Do You Have What It Takes to be a Visionary? — Exclusive Interview with Mark C. Winters
  9. Temporal Agency – How Innovators Stop Time from Bullying Them — by Art Inteligencia
  10. Causal AI – Moving Beyond Prediction to Purpose — by Art Inteligencia

BONUS – Here are five more strong articles published in January that continue to resonate with people:

If you’re not familiar with Human-Centered Change & Innovation, we publish 4-7 new articles every week built around innovation and transformation insights from our roster of contributing authors and ad hoc submissions from community members. Get the articles right in your Facebook, Twitter or Linkedin feeds too!

Build a Common Language of Innovation on your team

Have something to contribute?

Human-Centered Change & Innovation is open to contributions from any and all innovation and transformation professionals out there (practitioners, professors, researchers, consultants, authors, etc.) who have valuable human-centered change and innovation insights to share with everyone for the greater good. If you’d like to contribute, please contact me.

P.S. Here are our Top 40 Innovation Bloggers lists from the last five years:

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Why Change Doesn’t Have to Start at the Top

Why Change Doesn't Have to Start at the Top

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

In 2004 I found myself running a major news organization during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. It was one of those moments when the universe opens up, reveals a bit of itself and you realize the world doesn’t work the way you thought it did. What struck me at the time was that nobody with any conventional form of power had any ability to shape events at all.

One of the myths that is constantly repeated is that change needs to start at the top. Clearly that is not true. It wasn’t true of the Color Revolutions that spread across Eastern Europe. Nor was it true of social movements like the fight for LGBT rights. Despite what you may have heard, it doesn’t hold true for organizations either.

What is true is that if you are going to bring about genuine change you need to influence institutions and that means you need, at some point, to involve senior leaders, but it rarely starts with them. The myth that change has to start at the top is a copout — a reason to do nothing when you can do something. Make no mistake. Change can come from anywhere.

Weaving Webs of Influence

Movements, as the name implies, are kinetic. They start somewhere and they end up somewhere else. That’s one reason why why so many successful change efforts become misunderstood. People look back at an event like the 1963 March on Washington and think that’s what made the civil rights movement successful. Nothing could be further from the truth. That wasn’t what built the movement, it was part of the end game.

Consider that the first “March on Washington,” the Woman Suffrage Procession of 1913, was a disaster. None of the others since 1963 did much either. The civil rights march came after nearly a decade of boycotts, sit-ins, Freedom Rides and other tactics that built the movement before it finally found its moment. Still, it’s the moment that people remember.

In much the same way, whenever we see a successful transformation we look to the actions of leaders. We see a CEO who gave a speech, a marketer who came up with a big product idea or an engineer who took a project in a new direction. These events are real, but they rarely, if ever, appear out of nowhere. They are products of webs of influence.

When we look more closely, we inevitably find that the CEO was inspired to give the pivotal speech from a conversation he had with his daughter. The marketer got the initial idea for the campaign from a junior team member. Or the engineer changed the direction of the project after a fateful encounter he had in the cafeteria.

Our decisions are the product of complex systems. Anything can start anywhere. Don’t let anyone tell you differently.

Going to Where the Energy Is

Transformations, in retrospect, often seem inevitable, even obvious. Yet they don’t start out that way. The truth is that it is small groups, loosely connected, but united by a common purpose that drives transformation. So the first thing you want to do is identify your apostles — people who are already excited about the possibilities for change.

For example, in his efforts to reform the Pentagon, Colonel John Boyd began every initiative by briefing a group of collaborators he called the “Acolytes,” who would help hone and sharpen the ideas. He then moved on to congressional staffers, elected officials and the media. By the time general officers were aware of what he was doing, he had too much support to ignore.

In a similar vein, a massive effort to implement lean manufacturing methods at Wyeth Pharmaceuticals began with one team at one factory, but grew to encompass 17,000 employees across 25 sites worldwide and cut manufacturing costs by 25%. The campaign that overthrew Serbian dictator Slobodan Milošević started with just 5 kids in a coffee shop.

One advantage to starting small is that you can identify your apostles informally, even through casual conversations. In skills-based transformations, change leaders often start with workshops and see who seems enthusiastic or comes up after the session. Your apostles don’t need to have senior positions or special skills, they just have to be passionate.

There’s something about human nature that, when we’re passionate about an idea, makes us want to go convince the skeptics. Don’t do that. Start with people who want your idea to succeed. If you feel the urge to convince or persuade, that’s a sign that you either have the wrong idea or the wrong people.

“You have to go where the energy is,” John Gadsby, who built a movement for process improvement inside Procter & Gamble that has grown to encompass 60,000 employees, told me. “We’ll choose energy and excitement and enthusiasm over the right position, or the person at the right leadership level, or the person whose job it is supposed to be to do that.”

Mobilizing People To Influence Institutions

In the early 1990s, writer and activist Jeffrey Ballinger published a series of investigations about Nike’s use of sweatshops in Asia. People were shocked by the horrible conditions that workers — many of them children — were subjected to. In most cases, the owners lived outside the countries where the factories were located and had little contact with their employees.

At first, Nike’s CEO, Phil Knight, was defiant. “I often reacted with self-righteousness, petulance, anger. On some level I knew my reaction was toxic, counterproductive, but I couldn’t stop myself,” he would later write in his memoir, Shoe Dog. He pointed out that his company didn’t own the factories, that he’d worked with the owners to improve conditions and that the stories, as gruesome as they were, were exceptions.

The simple truth is that change rarely, if ever, starts at the top because it is people with power that create the status quo. They are attached to what they’ve built and take pride in their accomplishments, just like the rest of us. That’s why, to bring about genuine change — change that lasts — you need to mobilize people to influence institutions (or those, like Knight, who yield institutional power).

Eventually, that’s what happened at Nike. The protests took their toll. “We had to admit,” Knight remembered, “We could do better.” Going beyond its own factories, the company established the Fair Trade Labor Association and published a comprehensive report of its own factories. Today, the company’s track record may not be perfect, but it’s become more a part of the solution than a part of the problem.

Change Is Never Top-Down Or Bottom-Up

At a pivotal moment during the height of the civil rights movement, Robert Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States and brother to the President, would turn to the activist John Lewis and say, “’John, the people, the young people of the SNCC, have educated me. You have changed me. Now I understand.”

Lewis, just a young kid in his twenties at the time, was himself the product of webs of influence. He was shaped by mentors like Jim Lawson and Keller Miller Smith, as well as by peers such as Diane Nash, Bernard Lafayette and James Bevel. They, in turn, influenced others to get out, protest and shape the minds of people like Robert Kennedy.

As I explain in Cascades, transformation isn’t top-down or bottom-up, but happens from side-to-side. You can find the entire spectrum — from active support to active resistance — at every level. The answer doesn’t lie in any specific strategy or initiative, but in how people are able to internalize the need for change and transfer ideas through social bonds.

Change never happens all at once and can’t simply be willed into existence. The best way to do that is to empower those who already believe in change to bring in those around them. That’s what’s key to successful transformations. A leader’s role is not to plan and direct action, but to inspire and empower belief.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Unsplash

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Celebrate Your Small Team Wins

Celebrate Your Small Team Wins

GUEST POST from David Burkus

Progress is a powerful human motivator. But unfortunately, many teams mark progress only when projects are complete or big milestones are crossed. They don’t often celebrate small wins that build up to those big completions.

But recent research suggests that small wins celebrated regularly are a more potent way to keep teams engaged and motivated. In a landmark study from Teresa Amabile, participants were most energized and motivated not in the aftermath of a big celebration, but when they had little breakthroughs — when they found small wins to celebrate.

In this article, we’ll outline four keys to celebrate small wins on teams more powerfully, so that small wins can have a BIG effect on your team’s motivation.

1. Celebrate Daily

The first key to celebrating small wins on teams is to celebrate daily. It’s important to have a ritual on your team where wins are celebrated on a regular basis — preferably daily. Celebrating daily has two big effects on teams. The first is that it becomes something embedded in the culture and something that makes the day feel incomplete without the celebration moment. The second is that it reinforces the message that a win is a win no matter how small, and that gradually encourages the team to look beyond big milestones and appreciation smaller victories much more.

There are a few good ways to celebrate daily. You could end each day with a different member of the team sharing their win, with a new person every day. Or if you have the time, you could do one win per person every day. But you could also make it a game by trying to find three wins each day and seeing how long into the day it takes to get there. If you’re on site, hang a whiteboard where everyone can see it. If you’re remote or hybrid, make it a dedicated channel in Slack, Teams, or whatever communication tool you use. Regardless, celebrate daily in order to reiterate the concept that there is something worth celebrating every single day.

2. Celebrate Progress

The second key to celebrating small wins on teams is to celebrate progress. As reviewed above, progress is a powerful human motivator. Many teams only measure progress based on external markers like milestones or project completions. And that can be highly motivating and an easy way to connect small wins to progress. Even if it’s a very little victory, when it’s listed, you can talk about how that win brings the team closer to a significant milestone or to project completion.

But savvy leaders connect small wins to internal progress as well. Many individual victories listed during daily small win sessions will be more indicative of that person’s improved skills or career progress. So, make the effort to remind the person celebrating how that win never would have happened without the growth in a specific area that you’ve noticed over time — and even better if you can point to the future growth that win suggests. Between external and internal markers of progress, it should be simple to connect every victorious moment to the momentum of your team.

3. Celebrate Contributions

The third key to celebrating small wins on teams is to celebrate contributions. Work is teamwork. Most victories are a team effort — even small wins. It may have been volunteering to help on a specific project, or just handing off their work in a timely fashion so the next person could build upon it. Some people do have small wins in isolation, but more likely someone else’s effort contributed in some way to that person’s success. So, when one teammate is stating their win, make sure they’re also expressing gratitude to the teammates that helped them.

Ideally, teammates learn over time to use small win celebrations as a gratitude exercise as well. But as a leader you may need to model the way during your shares and ask specific questions that draw out the contribution when others share. Overtime, that should turn celebrating contributions into a regular habit on the team. And the team will internalize their interdependence upon each other — and celebrate their collaborations as well.

4. Celebrate Impact

The fourth key to celebrating small wins on teams is to celebrate impact, as in celebrate the impact that this win is going to have not on the team but on the people who that team serves. Progress is a potent motivator but it’s even more potent when combined with a sense of purpose. And the clearest, more powerful way to help employees feel purpose in their work is to connect their work to an act of service — the more specific the connection the better. Leaders ought to provide a concise answer to the question “who is served by the work that we do.” The “who” could be customers or end users, or stakeholders, or even other teams inside the organization who are enabled by the work your team does.

So, when teams celebrate small wins, help them connect the win to how it serves those beneficiaries. Hopefully, they notice the connection on their own but if not, you may need to ask specific questions that draw that connection out. Ending each celebration session with a connection to impact and purpose reminds people that their work matters—and hence their wins matter as well.

In the end, that’s what most individuals and teams need to be motivated by their work. They need to know their work matters. And a daily ritual of celebrating small wins (and the contributions, progress, and impact of those wins) becomes a daily reminder of what matters. And that should motivate everyone on the team to do their best work ever.

Image credit: Pexels

Originally published at https://davidburkus.com on March 6, 2023.

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

The Architecture of Organizational Agility

Beyond the Pivot

LAST UPDATED: February 24, 2026 at 5:22 PM

Architecture of Organizational Agility

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

I. Introduction: The Agility Imperative

Beyond Reactive Maneuvering toward Proactive Orchestration

The Stability Paradox

In my work with global enterprises, I often observe a recurring struggle: The Stability Paradox. Legacy organizations often possess the “fixedness” required for massive scale but lack the fluidity to respond to market shifts. Conversely, startups possess “flexibility” in spades but often collapse under their own weight due to a lack of foundational structure.

Defining True Agility

Many leaders mistake speed for agility. Speed is simply high-velocity movement in a single direction. True Agility is the architectural capability to change direction at speed without destroying the engine. It is the move from “reactive maneuvering” — constantly putting out fires — to “proactive orchestration,” where the organization anticipates the flame and adjusts its posture before the heat is even felt.

Thesis: Organizational agility is not about being liquid or formless; it is about strategic architecture. It requires knowing exactly which parts of your foundation must remain fixed to provide a stable spine, so that the rest of the enterprise can remain infinitely flexible.

Braden Kelley Flexibility Quote

II. The Human Side of Agility (Human-Centered Change)

Fueling the Adaptive Machine with Mindset and Culture

Psychological Safety as a Fuel

An agile architecture is useless if the people within it are too terrified to move. Psychological safety is the essential fuel for change. If employees fear that a “failed” experiment or a missed pivot will result in professional retribution, they will default to the status quo every time. To be truly agile, the organization must celebrate the learning gained from failure as much as the success of a win.

Shifting the Mindset: Adaptability Over Efficiency

For decades, management science focused on “Efficiency-First” — doing things right through rigid optimization. In a volatile world, we must pivot to “Adaptability-First” — ensuring we are doing the right things as the market shifts. This requires a cultural “unlearning” where we value the ability to pivot just as highly as the ability to execute.

Radical Transparency and Communication Loops

Agility requires that the “edges” of the organization — the people talking to customers and witnessing market friction — have a direct line to the “center.” By creating radical transparency and shortened communication loops, we ensure that institutional knowledge flows at the speed of the internet, allowing for collective intelligence rather than top-down bottlenecks.

The Human Truth: You cannot mandate agility; you can only design an environment where it is safe to be agile. Change doesn’t happen in the boardroom; it happens in the hearts and minds of the people on the front lines.

III. The Braden Kelley Organizational Agility Framework™

Navigating the Strategic Tension Between Flexibility and Fixedness

Introduction to the Framework

In my research and consulting, I developed the Organizational Agility Framework™ as a diagnostic tool for the modern enterprise. It moves away from the idea that everything in a business should be “fluid.” Instead, it focuses on identifying the necessary friction and structural integrity required to support rapid movement.

The Core Tension: Flexibility vs. Fixedness

The secret to sustained agility lies in the deliberate management of two opposing states:

  • The Fixed: These are your non-negotiables. They include your core values, organizational purpose, and essential guardrails. These elements provide the “stable spine” and the psychological certainty employees need to take risks.
  • The Flexible: These are your “modular” components. They include business processes, resource allocation models, and team structures. These must be designed to be disassembled and reconfigured in real-time as market conditions evolve.

Organizational Agility Framework

Managing the Equilibrium

The framework teaches leaders how to prevent “Fixedness” from decaying into Rigidity (where you become a dinosaur) and how to prevent “Flexibility” from dissolving into Chaos (where you lose your brand identity). Agility is the active, daily management of this equilibrium.

Insight: If you try to make everything flexible, you create an organization with no memory and no identity. If you keep everything fixed, you create a monument to the past. Agility is the art of knowing what to hold onto and what to let go.

IV. Designing for Modular Change

Architecting the Reconfigurable Enterprise

Loose Coupling and Micro-Structures

In a truly agile organization, we must abandon monolithic, deeply intertwined departmental silos. Instead, we move toward “Loose Coupling.” By organizing into small, cross-functional squads with clear interfaces, we ensure that one part of the business can pivot or fail without bringing down the entire system. This modularity allows for “plug-and-play” innovation.

Resource Fluidity: Escaping the Annual Budget Trap

You cannot have an agile strategy if your capital is locked in a 12-month fixed cycle. Resource Fluidity is the ability to shift talent and funding dynamically as opportunities arise. Agile organizations treat budgets as “living documents,” allowing leadership to pull resources from declining initiatives and inject them into high-growth “breakthrough” experiments in real-time.

Rapid Prototyping for Organizational Structure

We often prototype products, but we rarely prototype structure. Before committing to a company-wide reorganization, agile leaders run small-scale organizational experiments. By testing a new reporting line or a new collaborative workflow within a single “pilot” team, we can validate the human impact of the change before scaling it.

The Design Rule: Complexity is the enemy of agility. If your organizational chart requires a map and a legend to navigate, you aren’t built for speed — you’re built for bureaucracy. Simplify to amplify.

V. Measuring What Matters: Agility Metrics

Quantifying the Velocity and Resilience of Change

Time-to-Insight vs. Time-to-Action

In a traditional enterprise, the gap between identifying a market shift (Insight) and actually deploying a response (Action) can be months or even years. Agility is measured by the shrinkage of this gap. We must track our Latency of Decision — the speed at which data travels from the front lines to the decision-makers and back into the field as an executed strategy.

Learning Velocity

Success is a lagging indicator; Learning Velocity is a leading one. How quickly can your organization ingest new information, test it, and turn it into institutional knowledge? By measuring the number of validated experiments per quarter rather than just “project completions,” we shift the focus from output to outcomes.

The Resilience Score

Agility is as much about defense as it is offense. A Resilience Score assesses how much of a “shock” your organization can absorb — be it a supply chain disruption or a competitor’s surprise launch — without a significant drop in service levels or employee engagement. An agile organization doesn’t just bounce back; it “bounces forward” into a new, more relevant state.

The Measurement Shift: If you only measure efficiency, you will optimize yourself into extinction. You must measure your capacity to change, for that is where your future revenue lives.

VI. Conclusion: The Agile Organization as a Living System

Sustaining Competitive Advantage in a Volatile World

Beyond the Project Mindset

We must stop viewing “agility” as a transformation project with a start and end date. True organizational agility is a continuous practice — a state of being. It is the transition from seeing your company as a static machine to viewing it as a living system. Like any organism, your business must constantly sense, respond, and evolve to its environment to survive.

The Polymath Leader

The leaders of tomorrow must be comfortable with the “Whole-Brain” approach. They must be part scientist, using data and the Agility Framework to maintain the stable spine of the company, and part artist, using empathy and human-centered change to inspire the flexibility of the workforce. This balance is the only way to navigate the tension between what must remain fixed and what must remain fluid.

Your Sustainable Advantage

In an era where technology can be copied and capital is a commodity, your ability to change is your only sustainable competitive advantage. By architecting an enterprise that embraces both the comfort of fixed values and the excitement of flexible processes, you don’t just survive disruption — you become the disruptor.

Final Thought: Agility is the ultimate expression of confidence. It is the belief that no matter how the world changes, your organization has the structural integrity and the creative spirit to meet the moment. Let’s stop fearing the pivot and start building the platform that makes it possible.

Implementation Checklist: Activating the Agility Framework

Practical First Steps for the Human-Centered Leader

Moving from theory to practice requires a deliberate focus on the Fixed/Flexible balance. Use this checklist to audit your current state and begin the transition.

  • Identify Your “Stable Spine”:
    Document the 3-5 core values and the overarching purpose that must remain Fixed. Do your teams know these are the non-negotiable guardrails?
  • Audit for “Rigid Decay”:
    Locate one process that exists “because we’ve always done it that way” but no longer serves the customer. Mark it as Flexible and schedule a redesign.
  • Establish a “Safe-to-Fail” Zone:
    Designate one small-scale project where the team is explicitly rewarded for Learning Velocity rather than just the final ROI.
  • Assess Communication Latency:
    Track how many days it takes for a customer insight from the field to reach a decision-maker. Aim to reduce this Time-to-Insight by 20% this quarter.
  • Beta-Test a “Squad” Structure:
    Select one departmental silo and “loosely couple” a cross-functional team (e.g., Marketing, Tech, and Customer Success) to solve a single specific friction point.

Braden’s Tip: Don’t try to change the whole organization at once. Agility is built through fractal change — successful small pivots that create a blueprint for the larger enterprise to follow.

What is a Stable Spine Audit?

In my Organizational Agility Framework, a Stable Spine Audit is a strategic exercise used to identify the permanent, non-negotiable elements of an organization that provide the structural integrity required to support rapid change elsewhere.

Think of it this way: for a human to move with agility — to sprint, jump, or pivot — the spine must remain strong and aligned. If the spine is “mushy,” the limbs have no leverage. In a business, if everything is up for grabs, you don’t have agility; you have chaos.

The Core Components of the Audit

When I lead an organization through this audit, we look for three specific types of “Fixedness”:

  • 1. Core Purpose and North Star: Why does the organization exist beyond making a profit? This should be fixed. If your purpose pivots every six months, your employees will suffer from “change fatigue” and lose trust.
  • 2. Values and Ethical Guardrails: These are the behavioral non-negotiables. They define how we work. These provide psychological safety because employees know that even in a crisis, the “rules of engagement” won’t shift.
  • 3. Essential Architecture: This identifies the critical systems or data standards that must remain centralized and standardized to allow for “plug-and-play” flexibility in the branches or squads.

How to Conduct the Audit

The audit is essentially a filtering process for every major component of your business. You ask your leadership team: “Is this a Spine element or a Wing element?”

Category The Stable Spine (Fixed) The Flexible Wings (Fluid)
Strategy Long-term Vision & Purpose Quarterly Tactics & Experiments
Structure Governance & Core Values Cross-functional Squads & Roles
Process Essential Compliance & Quality Daily Workflows & Tools
People Cultural DNA & Talent Standards Specific Skills & Resource Allocation

Why It Matters for Innovation

I often see teams that are “frozen” because they don’t know what they are allowed to change. By conducting a Stable Spine Audit, you explicitly tell your team: “These five things are fixed. Everything else is a variable you can experiment with.”

This clarity actually increases the speed of innovation because it removes the “permission bottleneck.” When the spine is stable, the wings can flap as fast as they need to.

Diagnostic Questionnaire: Activating the Organizational Agility Framework

A Leadership Workshop Guide to the Stable Spine Audit

To help you activate the Organizational Agility Framework, here is a diagnostic questionnaire designed to be used in a leadership workshop. The goal is to reach a consensus on what belongs to the “Spine” (Fixed) and what belongs to the “Wings” (Flexible).

Phase 1: Identifying the Fixed (The Stable Spine)

Ask your leadership team to answer these questions individually, then compare notes. Discrepancies here usually indicate where organizational friction is coming from.

  • The “North Star” Test: If we changed our product line entirely tomorrow, what is the one reason for existing that would stay exactly the same?
  • The Value Constraint: What are the three behaviors that, if an employee violated them, would result in immediate dismissal regardless of their performance?
  • The Architectural Anchor: What is the single source of truth (data, brand guideline, or compliance rule) that every department must use to remain part of the collective whole?
  • The Non-Negotiable Promise: What is the one promise we make to our customers that we would never “pivot” away from, even for a massive short-term profit?

Phase 2: Identifying the Fluid (The Flexible Wings)

Now, look at the areas where the organization feels “slow.” These are likely things that are currently “Fixed” but should be “Flexible.”

  • The “Shadow” Processes: Which of our current “standard operating procedures” (SOPs) were created more than two years ago and haven’t been updated since?
  • The Permission Bottleneck: Who has the authority to spend $5,000 to test a new idea? If the answer is “The VP,” that process is too Fixed.
  • The Role Rigidity: Are our job descriptions based on tasks (Fixed) or outcomes (Flexible)? Can we move a person from Project A to Project B in 24 hours without a HR mountain to climb?
  • The Budgeting Cycle: If a massive market opportunity appeared tomorrow, how long would it take to reallocate 10% of our budget to pursue it?

The Audit Tally

Once you have these answers, map them out:

  1. Green Zone: Elements everyone agrees are Fixed. These are your strengths.
  2. Red Zone: Elements everyone agrees are Fixed but should be Flexible. These are your targets for immediate “unlearning.”
  3. Grey Zone: Elements where the team disagrees. This is where your cultural friction lives.

Closing the Audit

As an innovation speaker, I always remind leaders: The Spine is for Support, not for Strangulation. The goal of this audit isn’t to create more rules, but to create the clarity that allows for more freedom.

Organizational Agility: Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the difference between organizational speed and organizational agility?

Speed is the velocity of movement in a single direction. Agility is the architectural capacity to change direction at speed without breaking the organization. While speed is about execution, agility is about reconfigurability.

2. Why does the “Stable Spine” actually help an organization move faster?

A “Stable Spine” (fixed core values, purpose, and guardrails) provides psychological safety and clarity. When employees know exactly what is non-negotiable, they no longer need to seek permission for everything else, effectively removing the “permission bottleneck” that slows down innovation.

3. How do you identify if a process should be ‘Fixed’ or ‘Flexible’?

Use the Stable Spine Audit. If a process protects your core DNA, ethical standards, or brand promise, it is “Fixed.” If a process is simply a method for delivery, resource allocation, or internal workflow, it should be “Flexible” and modular to allow for rapid adaptation to market shifts.

Image credits: Braden Kelley (1,100+ FREE quote posters at http://misterinnovation.com), Google Gemini

Content Authenticity Statement: The topic area, key elements to focus on, etc. were decisions made by Braden Kelley, with a little help from Google Gemini to clean up the article and add citations.

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Capitalizing on Disruptive Innovations

Capitalizing on Disruptive Innovations

GUEST POST from Geoffrey A. Moore

In Silicon Valley, we are in love with disruptive innovations, largely because we make a lot of them and have profited exceedingly well from so doing. But for anyone on the receiving end, the relationship is not so rosy. Yes, the potential for gain is extraordinary, but the path to getting there is strewn with attempts that have fallen far short of the hype. How can one engage responsibly with this sort of opportunity? Here’s a framework that can help.

Capitalizing on Disruptive Innovations Stairway to Heaven Framework

There are four proven ways to capitalize on disruptive innovation, and they are organized here in terms of escalating risk and reward. Each stair appeals to a different persona in the Technology Adoption Life Cycle, the bottom one attracting conservatives, the second, pragmatists in pain, the third, pragmatists with options, and the fourth, visionaries. Each stair can be managed to its targeted reward, but it is very hard indeed to manage two or more stairs in tandem. Most failures occur because management is not decisive about which gains it is committed to achieving and in what priority order it should be served. Needless to say, there is a better way.

The first use of this framework is to explore the possibilities of each stair for your enterprise. That is, if you were to prioritize this stair, what would success look like, how would you expect to measure it, and what costs and risks would be entailed? You want to talk this through as a team, ensuring everyone gets heard. Specifically, you want to make sure that the adoption personas of the most powerful people in the room do not dominate this part of the dialog. They are likely going to make the call in the end, but it is critical that they hear everyone out before they do.

Let’s try this out with everyone’s latest favorite example—generative AI. Imagine you are a member of the executive team at a pharmaceutical corporation, and you have charged your IT team to come up with a GenAI strategy. Wisely, they have come back to you with an array of options, arranged in a stairway to heaven. Here’s what they might say:

  • Automate. There is a whole series of regulatory compliance obligations that today we outsource overseas to be serviced by a lower-waged workforce. Not only would automating these tasks reduce our costs, it would also lower the error rate and continuously improve performance as more and more machine learning is put to work. This is a low-risk, modest-return option. There would be no disruption to any of our other operations, and we in IT could learn a lot about a technology that is mutating far faster than anything we have ever seen before.
  • Reengineer. Our proteomics research scientists are having a real problem with the combinatorial explosion of all the possible 3D configurations a given 2D sequence of amino acids might adopt. By focusing our generative AI models on just this one problem, we can vastly accelerate our discovery phase, transforming our problem set from completely intractable to continuously improving. This is a medium-risk, high-return opportunity that is confined to a single department, thereby minimizing disruption to the rest of our value chain.
  • Modernize. Our go-to-market teams are competing for smaller and smaller slices of time from the physician offices they call upon. We need relevant messaging to get the appointment and highly personalized content to get buy-in from both the doctors and the nurses. Today we rely on experience and anecdotal data, which works OK for our long-tenured members but makes recruiting, onboarding, and ramping a nightmare. By focusing our Large Language Model on all the data in our CRM systems, combined with all our data from the labs, clinical trials, patent submissions, as well as the patient records we have access to, we can arm our GenAI with more information than any one human could process. We still will have humans in the loop to monitor and adapt this material throughout the sales process, but they will be much better equipped to compete than ever before. This is a high-risk, high-return opportunity that will impact a large portion of our workforce, so we plan to stage the implementation to capture learnings as we go.
  • Innovate. Deep Mind’s AlphaGo program taught itself to play go at the highest level by playing against itself millions and millions of times. We think we can take a similar approach to drug discovery. It’s a moon-shot idea, and our data scientists are still in their own discovery phase, but this could be a game-changer for the industry. We’d like to take a VC approach to funding this effort, ring-fencing the funding across several years, but holding ourselves accountable to meeting material milestones along the way.

As you can see, there is a case to be made for each stair, but there is only so much time, talent, management attention, and working capital to go around, so it is critical that the executive team prioritize these four options and sequence them appropriately. Different teams will come up with different priorities. You are not looking for the “right answer.” You are looking for the one that will yield the best risk-adjusted returns for your enterprise under current conditions.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Image Credit: Geoffrey Moore, Google Gemini

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Values Always Cost You Something

That’s What Makes Them Different From Platitudes

Values Always Cost You Something

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

When I was in Panama a couple of years ago for a keynote I had the opportunity to speak with Erika Mouynes, the country’s former Foreign Minister, about the war in Ukraine. Her ministry had strayed from its traditionally neutral stance by calling for “respect for the sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine based on international law.”

She told me that when she later met with Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, he asked her why she cared about a country thousands of miles away where Panama has no tangible interests. What did she expect to gain? She told him that sometimes you need to make decisions based on values that are important to you.

Her position was not without risk. Panama depends on broad international support for its canal. Yet many of the executives at the event told me how proud they were of her support for sovereignty, an issue that Panama has sometimes struggled with in its history. The truth is that, to mean something, values always cost you something. Otherwise they’re just platitudes.

Gandhi’s Ahimsa

Today, many dismiss Mohandas Gandhi as guileless and quixotic. He himself once said, “Men say that I am a saint losing myself in politics. The fact is I am a politician trying my hardest to be a saint.” He was, in truth, a master strategist, luring opponents into a dilemma that would put them in an impossible position of choosing either surrender or damnation.

One of the first principles of his philosophy of Satyagraha was ahimsa, or nonviolence, which was rooted in the quest for truth. If no one could claim to have absolute knowledge of the truth, then it followed that using violence—or any other means for that matter—to compel people to accede to your will would be to undermine, rather than support truth.

To the modern ear, Gandhi’s views seem idealistic at best, if not completely naive, yet there was much more to his philosophy than met the eye. His aim was to undermine his opponents’ legitimacy. He sought to back them into a corner in which both action and inaction would yield essentially the same result —an upending of the existing order.

As General Jan Smuts, Gandhi’s chief adversary in South Africa, put it, “It was my fate to be the antagonist of a man for whom even then I had the highest respect… For me—the defender of law and order—there was the usual trying situation, the odium of carrying out the law, which had not strong popular support.” Smuts had not only been defeated; he had been won over and lost any rationale to keep fighting.

Gerstner’s Devotion To The Customer

When Lou Gerstner took over as CEO of IBM in 1993, the company was near bankruptcy. Many thought it should be broken up. Yet Gerstner saw that its customers needed the firm to help them run their mission-critical systems and the death of IBM was the last thing they wanted. He knew that to save the company, he would have to start with its values.

“At IBM we had lost sight of our values,” Irving Wladawsky-Berger, one of Gerstner’s chief lieutenants, told me. “IBM had always valued competitiveness, but we had started to compete with each other internally rather than working together to beat the competition. Lou put a stop to that and even let go some senior executives who were known for infighting.”

Gerstner had been a customer and knew that IBM did not always treat him well. At one point the company threatened to pull service from an entire data center because a single piece of competitive equipment was installed. So as CEO, he vowed to shift the focus from IBM’s “own “proprietary stack of technologies” to its customers’ “stack of business processes.”

Yet he did something else as well. He made it clear that he was willing to forego revenue on every sale to do what was right for the customer and he showed that he meant it. Over the years I’ve spoken to dozens of IBM executives from that period and virtually all of them have pointed this out. Not one seems to think IBM would still be in business today without it.

“Lou refocused us all on customers and listening to what they wanted and he did it by example,” Wladawsky-Berger, remembers. “We started listening to customers more because he listened to customers.”

The World’s Debt To Katalin Karikó

In the early ’90s, Katalin Karikó was trying to solve a tough problem. A young researcher at the University of Pennsylvania, she had been working on an idea to hijack the protein manufacturing machinery in our cells (called ribosomes) to directly produce things that could help our bodies fight disease. Yet despite her best efforts, she was making little progress.

To understand the problem, imagine you want to hijack someone else’s factory to make your own product. Because the factory is automated, it is just a matter of installing software at the factory, but to do that you need to get past security. Replace “software” with genetic instructions and “security” our body’s immune system and, in a nutshell, that is what Katalin had to overcome.

By 1995, things came to a head. Unable to secure grants to fund her work, the university told her that she could either direct her energies in a different way, or be demoted. “I thought of going somewhere else, or doing something else,” Katalin would later recall. “I also thought maybe I’m not good enough, not smart enough. I tried to imagine: Everything is here, and I just have to do better experiments.”

She decided to stick it out and eventually struck up a partnership with Drew Weissman, an immunologist who had some ideas about how to slip the genetic instructions past the cell’s natural defenses. Their work led to a breakthrough and, when the Covid pandemic broke out in 2020, the mRNA technology they invented led to life saving vaccines in record time.

Today, mRNA is being used to develop a number of therapies beyond vaccines, including cures for cancer and other diseases. Sticking to her values certainly cost Katalin Karikó, but the rest of us benefited enormously.

Values Are How An Organization Honors Its Mission

Values are essential to how an enterprise honors its mission. They represent choices of what an organization will and will not do, what it rewards and what it punishes and how it defines success and failure. Perhaps most importantly, values will determine an enterprise’s relationships with other stakeholders, how it collaborates and what it can achieve.

When we sit down with executive teams to help them drive transformation and change, one of the first things we ask them is to define their values. Usually, they can easily rattle off a list such as, “the customer,” “excellence,” “integrity,” and so on. Then we ask them what those values cost them and we get blank stares.

The problem is that values are often confused with beliefs. When you’re sitting around a conference table, it’s easy to build a consensus about broad virtues such as excellence, integrity and customer service. True values, on the other hand, are idiosyncratic. They represent choices that are directly related to a particular mission.

Make no mistake. Real values always cost you something. They are what guides you when you need to make hard calls instead of taking the easy path. They are what makes the difference between looking back with pride or regret. Perhaps most importantly, they are what allows others to trust you.

Without genuine commitment values there can be no trust. Without trust, there can be no shared purpose.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Unsplash

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Innovation Lessons from the 50 Most Admired Companies of 2026

The Architecture of Admiration

LAST UPDATED: February 18, 2026 at 2:22 PM

Innovation Lessons from the 50 Most Admired Companies of 2026

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

Every year, the Fortune World’s Most Admired Companies list serves as a masterclass in reputation management. In 2026, the stakes have shifted. We are no longer just looking at who can build a better widget; we are looking at who can navigate the “perpetual pivot.”

“Innovation is no longer a department — it is a survival reflex built on human trust.”

— Braden Kelley

The 2026 All-Star Circle

  1. Apple
  2. Microsoft
  3. Amazon.com
  4. Nvidia
  5. JPMorgan Chase
  6. Berkshire Hathaway
  7. Costco Wholesale
  8. Alphabet
  9. Walmart
  10. American Express
  11. Delta Air Lines
  12. Netflix
  13. Coca-Cola
  14. Marriott International
  15. Walt Disney
  16. Goldman Sachs Group
  17. Eli Lilly
  18. FedEx
  19. Procter & Gamble
  20. Salesforce
  21. Home Depot
  22. BlackRock
  23. Toyota Motor
  24. Singapore Airlines
  25. Nike
  26. BMW
  27. USAA
  28. Starbucks
  29. Johnson & Johnson
  30. Morgan Stanley
  31. Bank of America
  32. IBM
  33. Accenture
  34. Caterpillar
  35. Visa
  36. Taiwan Semiconductor
  37. Samsung Electronics
  38. ServiceNow
  39. Danaher
  40. Mastercard
  41. L’Oréal
  42. Lowe’s Companies, Inc.
  43. UPS
  44. GE Aerospace
  45. Airbus
  46. Pfizer
  47. Lockheed Martin
  48. Advanced Micro Devices (AMD)
  49. Workday
  50. Publix Super Markets

The companies that stay on this list aren’t just “big”; they are masters of Human-Centered Innovation. They create environments where the cost of failure is lower than the cost of standing still.

Case Study: Walmart (No. 9)

The AI-Augmented Associate

Walmart has successfully rewired retail by treating its massive physical footprint as an innovation asset. In 2026, their “Agentic AI” assistant, Sparky, manages everything from grocery budgets to real-time meal planning.

The Human Shift: Rather than replacing staff, Walmart used AI to automate the “drudge work” of inventory scanning. This freed 1.5 million associates to focus on higher-value human interaction, proving that technology works best when it empowers people.

Case Study: Eli Lilly (No. 17)

Manufacturing the Future of Health

Eli Lilly’s rise into the top 20 is a story of manufacturing foresight. By partnering with Nvidia to build a DGX SuperPOD, they created the pharmaceutical industry’s most powerful AI supercomputer.

The Human Shift: Through “LillyDirect,” they bypassed traditional pharmacy friction. Innovation here wasn’t just the molecule; it was the Customer Experience of getting life-changing medication directly to those who need it.

Case Study: Nvidia (No. 4)

The Culture of Radical Openness

Nvidia’s meteoric rise to No. 4 isn’t just about GPUs; it’s about their organizational “operating system.” In 2026, CEO Jensen Huang has operationalized a culture where learning is a “group sport.”

The Human Shift: Nvidia avoids the “manager-as-gatekeeper” model. Feedback is a live, company-wide clinic where errors are dissected openly. By making it safe to fail in public, Nvidia accelerates the collective intelligence of the entire firm, ensuring they out-learn their competition every single day.

Case Study: Singapore Airlines (No. 24)

The Ultra-Long-Haul Experience

Ranking as the top airline and No. 24 overall, SIA has committed $1.1 billion to a massive retrofit of its Airbus A350 fleet, introducing Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite internet across all classes.

The Human Shift: SIA understands that in 2026, “luxury” means “continuity.” By providing broadband-speed Wi-Fi that allows for Zoom calls at 30,000 feet, they’ve solved the “digital isolation” problem of long-haul travel. They aren’t just flying planes; they are extending the passenger’s lifestyle into the clouds.

Why These Companies? The Innovation Multiplier

Innovation at the “Most Admired” level is about the Innovation Multiplier: the ability to apply new technology to old problems in a way that creates defensible value. Companies like Apple (No. 1) stay at the top because they wait until they can deliver the most human-centered version of a technology.

How the Rankings are Calculated:
To create the 2026 list, Fortune partnered with Korn Ferry to survey 3,700 executives, directors, and analysts. Starting with 1,500 candidates (the largest U.S. and Global 500 firms), respondents rated companies in their own industry on nine criteria: Innovation, People Management, Use of Corporate Assets, Social Responsibility, Quality of Management, Financial Soundness, Long-Term Investment Value, Quality of Products/Services, and Global Competitiveness. A company must score in the top half of its industry peer group to be listed.

Image credits: Google Gemini

Content Authenticity Statement: The topic area, key elements to focus on, etc. were decisions made by Braden Kelley, with a little help from Google Gemini to clean up the article and add citations.

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Dualism is Bunk – Emergentism Rules!

Dualism is Bunk - Emergentism Rules!

GUEST POST from Geoffrey A. Moore

Readers of The Infinite Staircase (who are not many but whom I highly esteem) will know that it describes reality as constituted not of two but rather of eleven separate levels. At the bottom of the staircase is physics, all matter, no mind. At the top is theory, all mind, no matter. But there are nine layers in between, and here is the amazing thing. Each one is not only distinctly separable from the one above and below it, it is also defined by what I will call a characteristic attribute.

Now, getting that characteristic attribute right is no small feat, so consider the following a first cut at something that undoubtedly can be improved upon. (Start at the bottom and work your way up the staircase.)

OK, I am not crazy about the word imitational, but setting that aside, this list specifies an amazing amount of structure in a relatively confined space. All the italicized words represent fruitful fields of study in themselves, and taken together might constitute a Masters Degree in Reality.

Needless to say, every one of these claims is debatable, so let me just close by saying,

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Image Credit: Geoffrey Moore

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.