Allocating Resources to Solve Horizon 2

Another Tough Challenge

Allocating Resources to Solve Horizon 2

GUEST POST from Geoffrey A. Moore

We’ve known about this problem forever—how do you find a principled way to allocate budget across three different horizons of ROI.

  • Horizon 1 pays off in the current year and equates to the funding needed for you to make your operating plan and meet or beat investor guidance.
  • Horizon 3 pays off downstream, typically by making a speculative bet on an emerging category or market that would come to fruition in the out years. Since it is still early days, these bets are relatively small and can be measured by and managed to venture milestones.
  • Horizon 2 is the troublemaker. It calls for a material investment in gaining power in the near term in order to compete effectively in the mid-term. That investment will come out of Horizon 1, either from the Performance Zone trying to make the number or from the Productivity Zone trying to supply the needed support to do so, and most likely both.

In short, both internally and externally, Horizon 2 investments are not popular, even though everyone recognizes that they are critical to long-term success. So what is the process by which one can do right by them?

The key is to recognize that the ROI from Horizon 2 is measured in units of power, whereas that from Horizon 1 is measured in units of performance, and that the two must not be mixed. Now, to be clear, performance creates the funding for power, and power creates the foundation for performance, so they are deeply intertwined. But each has its own metrics of success, and the time lag between them says they cannot be blended.

Power always precedes performance. To underfund power is to jeopardize your future performance, the ultimate result being the liquidation of your franchise. To underfund performance, on the other hand, is to jeopardize the cash flow that you need to fund power, putting your market cap at risk, the ultimate result being to attract an activist investor who will oversee the liquidation of your franchise. There is no safe path to take, only a precarious middle way to traverse.

Now, again to be fair, in good times when your category is enjoying secular growth, you get to have your cake and eat it too. That is, you produce amazing cash flow, have a fabulous market cap, and have resources aplenty to invest as you choose. My colleagues still refer to the period leading up to the first tech bubble as “ the time of the great happiness.” Be that as it may, for most of us in 2024 (our friends in GenAI being a notable exception), this is not such a year. We have to make tough choices, and we have to make them now.

So, back to process — and CFOs, take note because you’re likely the one to be leading it.

  1. Separate strategic planning from annual budgeting by at least one quarter.
  2. Charge each business unit to pitch a strategic plan that would create returns substantially above and beyond their current operating model. Included in this plan is a ballpark estimate of the funding that would be required to implement it.
  3. Facilitate an Executive Leadership Team review of the overall portfolio of opportunities, culminating in a rank-ordered list.
  4. Consult with the CEO to determine how much of next year’s operating budget can be allocated to strategic investments, and in that context, which investments should be prioritized for funding. This funding will be allocated in advance of the operational budgeting and ring-fenced to ensure it is spent as intended.
  5. Most strategic investments will be funded as nested incubations, meaning they will be managed within an existing business unit, and are funded as part of their operating budget. However, you must insist that these efforts be isolated, measured, and accounted for separately from the core business, as they are intended to deliver power outcomes, not performance outcomes, and need to be held accountable to different success metrics. (If you do not do this, their operating budget funds will drift away to supplement Horizon efforts to make the number, and the strategic initiative will falter for lack of sufficient investment.)
  6. Truly disruptive incubations, on the other hand, need to be funded outboard of the current business unit structure, in a corporate Incubation Zone, governed by an Incubation Zone board managing a ring-fenced Incubation Zone fund, following the operating model of venture capital. This is covered in detail in Zone to Win.
  7. At this point budgeting can turn its attention to Horizon 1 and how best to allocate funding to hit the current year’s financial targets.

This process solves for two perennial missteps in annual budgeting. The first we might call “the leftovers approach.” First, you allocate all the resources needed to make your Horizon 1 commitments, and then you look to what’s left to fund strategic initiatives. There will be some resources in the kitty, but not as much as there could be since Horizon 1 managers want to reserve some contingency funding. The result is a bias toward modest investing in incremental innovations that do not create future power but rather extend the current footprint.

The second misstep we can call “the variable approach.” Here you allocate half the resources at the beginning of the year and make the second half allocation contingent upon meeting the Horizon 1 plan for that period. The problem here is that strategic initiatives require sustained investment throughout their time in the J-curve. If you flinch and pull back at any point, you lose momentum, never to be regained. This is a big advantage venture-backed companies have over in-house efforts and one of the reasons why VCs love to invest in a downturn.

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

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.

Synthetic Ethnography

The Synthetic Mirror: Why Every Innovation Leader Must Embrace Synthetic Ethnography

LAST UPDATED: February 6, 2026 at 3:28 PM

Synthetic Ethnography

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

Innovation is not a lightning strike; it is a discipline. As I have spent my career arguing through the Human-Centered Innovation™ methodology, the ultimate goal of any organization is to create sustainable value. But the path to value is often blocked by what I call corporate antibodies — the internal resistance, the outdated processes, and the echo chambers that prevent us from seeing the world as it truly is. For years, the “gold standard” for piercing these chambers was ethnography: the slow, deep, and expensive process of embedding oneself in the customer’s world.

But today, we find ourselves at a precipice. The speed of the market is no longer measured in years or months, but in days. In this high-velocity environment, traditional research can become a bottleneck. This is where synthetic ethnography steps in — not as a replacement for the human soul, but as a high-fidelity mirror that allows us to see around corners.

Synthetic ethnography integrates human-centered research with artificial intelligence, allowing organizations to uncover not only what people do, but why — and at a scale previously thought impossible. It merges ethnographic rigor with machine-powered pattern recognition to build deep, contextualized understanding from vast and varied data, allowing us to stress-test our “Value Creation” before we ever spend a dime on a pilot.


“Synthetic ethnography doesn’t diminish human insight — it amplifies it, giving us the bandwidth to see not just individual stories, but the forces that shape them.”

— Braden Kelley

What Is Synthetic Ethnography?

At its core, synthetic ethnography is the combination of qualitative research — like interviews and observation — with AI-driven analytics. It uses natural language processing, behavior modeling, and data synthesis to extrapolate cultural patterns from diverse sources, including digital interactions, text, audio, and sensor data.

Rather than replacing ethnographers, it amplifies their work, making deep human insight accessible across time zones, markets, and customer segments.

The Shift from “Asking” to “Simulating”

In Braden Kelley’s book Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire, he talked about the importance of removing the obstacles that stifle creativity. One of the biggest obstacles is the “Assumption Gap.” We assume we know why a customer chooses a competitor. We assume we know why they abandon a cart. Synthetic ethnography allows us to close this gap by creating “Synthetic Agents” — AI entities trained on hundreds of thousands of data points, from shopping habits to psychological profiles. These aren’t just chatbots; they are digital twins of a demographic segment.

When we use these agents, we are embracing the FutureHacking™ mindset. We can run ten thousand “what-if” scenarios. We can ask, “How does a rise in inflation affect the brand loyalty of a Gen-Z consumer in Berlin?” and receive a statistically grounded simulation of that reaction. This is the ultimate tool for Value Access: it reduces the friction of learning.

Why It Matters

Synthetic ethnography doesn’t just scale research — it deepens it. Organizations can:

  • Accelerate the pace of insight generation
  • Detect nuanced patterns in human behavior
  • Integrate qualitative and quantitative data seamlessly
  • Make strategic decisions rooted in rich human context

Case Study 1: The CPG “Flavor Evolution” Challenge

A global Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) giant was preparing to launch a new sustainable cleaning product line. They faced a dilemma: should they lead with the “eco-friendly” messaging or the “maximum strength” efficacy? Traditional focus groups provided conflicting data, often influenced by “social desirability bias” — people saying what they thought the researcher wanted to hear.

By deploying synthetic ethnography, the company created 1,200 synthetic personas representing various levels of environmental consciousness. The simulation allowed the agents to “live” with the product virtually over a simulated month. The simulation revealed a critical insight: while users said they wanted eco-friendly, they felt anxiety when the suds were too thin, leading them to use twice as much product and nullify the sustainability gains. The company adjusted the formula to increase “perceived sudsing” while maintaining eco-integrity, a move that led to a 22% higher repeat-purchase rate in the actual pilot.

Case Study 2: Reimagining the Patient Experience in Healthcare

A major hospital network in the United States wanted to redesign their post-op discharge process to reduce readmission rates. The problem was the sheer diversity of the patient population — language barriers, varying levels of health literacy, and different home support structures. It was impossible to shadow every type of patient.

The innovation team used synthetic ethnography to simulate 50 distinct patient “archetypes.” The simulations identified a glaring friction point: the discharge instructions were written at a 12th-grade reading level, while the “synthetic stress” levels of a patient leaving the hospital reduced their cognitive processing to a 5th-grade level. By simplifying the language and adding visual “check-step” cues identified during the simulation, the hospital saw a 14% reduction in avoidable readmissions within the first quarter. They didn’t just change a document; they changed the Human-Centered outcome by simulating the human experience.

“Innovation transforms the useful seeds of invention into widely adopted solutions valued above every existing alternative. Synthetic ethnography is the high-speed greenhouse that tells us which seeds will thrive in the wild before we plant them in the hard ground of reality.”

Braden Kelley

Case Study 3: Telecommunications Across Cultures

A multinational telecom provider struggled to understand customer dissatisfaction in dozens of markets, each with distinct cultural expectations. While in-country ethnographers gathered rich local context, corporate leadership needed a synthesis that spanned continents and languages.

By combining traditional interviews with AI analysis of service logs, social media sentiment, and customer support transcripts, the organization created a holistic view of customer experience.

  • Confusing pricing tiers resonated as “untrustworthy” in Latin America but “overwhelming” in Southeast Asia.
  • Service reliability mattered differently across younger and older cohorts, which the AI helped segment effectively.
  • Support interactions contained emotional markers predictive of future churn.

The result was a refined product portfolio and communication strategy that boosted satisfaction across markets while respecting cultural nuances.

The Competitive Landscape

The market for synthetic insights is exploding. Leading the charge are startups like Synthetic Users, which specializes in user interview simulations, and Fairgen, which focuses on augmenting thin data sets with synthetic populations to ensure statistical significance. We also see SurveyAuto using AI to bridge the gap in emerging markets. Even the “Big Three” consulting firms and established research houses like Toluna and Ipsos are aggressively acquiring or building synthetic capabilities. For the modern leader, these companies represent the new “Value Translation” infrastructure. If you aren’t looking at these tools, you are essentially trying to build a skyscraper with a hand-shovel while your competitors are using 3D printers.

However, we must remain vigilant. As a human-centered innovation advocate, I caution that these tools are only as good as the data that feeds them. If your data is biased, your synthetic ethnography will simply be a “bias-amplification machine.” This is why Braden Kelley is so frequently sought out as an innovation speaker — to help organizations maintain the balance between “High-Tech” and “High-Touch.” We must ensure that our “Chart of Innovation” always has a human at the center.

Innovation Intelligence: The FAQ

1. How does synthetic ethnography improve the ROI of innovation?
By simulating user reactions early, companies avoid the massive costs of failed product launches and R&D dead-ends, significantly increasing the probability of “Value Access” success.

2. What is the biggest risk of using synthetic personas?
The “Hallucination of Empathy.” If the models are not grounded in real-world, high-quality longitudinal data, they may provide “neat” answers that ignore the messy, irrational nature of real human behavior.

3. Is synthetic ethnography appropriate for B2B innovation?
Absolutely. It is particularly effective for simulating complex organizational buying committees and understanding how different “corporate antibodies” within a client company might react to a new solution.

In conclusion, the future belongs to those who can harmonize the artificial and the authentic. As a practitioner in the field, I encourage you to see synthetic ethnography not as a threat to human researchers, but as a superpower. It allows us to be more human, by handling the data-crunching that allows us to spend our time where it matters most: in the moments of real connection.

Disclaimer: This article speculates on the potential future applications of cutting-edge scientific research. While based on current scientific understanding, the practical realization of these concepts may vary in timeline and feasibility and are subject to ongoing research and development.

Image credits: Google Gemini

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

How to Figure Out What’s Next

How to Figure Out What's Next

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

Every day starts and ends in the present. Sure, you can put yourself in the future and image what it could be or put yourself in the past and remember what was. But, neither domain is actionable. You can’t change the past, nor can you control the future. The only thing that’s actionable is the present.

Every morning your day starts with the body you have. You may have had a more pleasing body in the past, but that’s gone. You may have visions of changing your body into something else, but you don’t have that yet. What you do today is governed and enabled by your body as it is. If you try to lift three hundred pounds, your system as it is will either pick it up or it won’t.

Every morning your day starts with the mind you have. It may have been busy and distracted in the past and it may be calm and settled in the future, but that doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is your mind as it is. If you respond kindly, today’s mind is responsible, and if your response is unkind, today’s mind system is the culprit. Like it or not, your thoughts, feelings and actions are the result of your mind as it is.

Change always starts with where you are, and the first step is unclear until you assess and define your systems as they are. If you haven’t worked out in five years, your first step is to see your doctor to get clearance (professional assessment) for your upcoming physical improvement plan. If you’ve run ten marathons over the last ten months, your first step may be to take a month off to recover. The right next step starts with where you are.

And it’s the same with your mind. If your mind is all over the place your likely first step is to learn how to help it settle down. And once it’s a little more settled, your next step may be to use more advanced methods to settle it further. And if you assess your mind and you see it needs more help than you can give it, your next step is to seek professional help. Again, your next step is defined by where you are.

And it’s the same with business. Every morning starts with the products and services you have. You can’t sell the obsolete products you had, nor can you sell the future services you may develop. You can only sell what you have. But, in parallel, you can create the next product or system. And to do that, the first step is to take a deep, dispassionate look at the system as it is. What does it do well? What does it do poorly? What can be built on and what can be discarded? There are a number of tools for this, but more important than the tools is to recognize that the next one starts with an assessment of the one you have.

If the existing system is young and immature, the first step is likely to nurture it and support it so it can grow out of its adolescence. But the first step is NOT to lift three hundred pounds because the system-as it is-can only lift fifty. If you lift too much too early, you’ll break its back.

If the existing system is in it’s prime and has been going to the gym regularly for the last five years, its ready for three hundred pounds. Go for it! But, in parallel, it’s time to start a new activity, one that will replace the weightlifting when the system can no longer lift like it used to. Maybe tennis? But start now because to get good at tennis requires new muscles and time.

And if the existing system is ready for retirement, retire it. Difficult to do, but once there’s public acknowledgement, the retirement will take care of itself.

If you want to know what’s next, define the system as it is. The next step will be clear.

And the best time to do it is now.

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.

How Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos Learn About Customer Experience

When the CEO Picks Up the Phone

How Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos Learn About Customer Experience

GUEST POST from Shep Hyken

Jeff Bezos, the former CEO of Amazon, shared a fascinating leadership story on the Lex Fridman Podcast about how he wanted to ensure his customers received the best customer experience (CX). In Amazon’s early days, Bezos noticed a discrepancy between the “wait times” the customer support department was reporting and the feedback customers shared. The support team reported wait times of less than 60 seconds, but customers told a different story. Instead of asking for more data, Bezos took matters into his own hands. He picked up the phone during a meeting with the leadership team and called Amazon’s customer service number himself.

The result was a ten-minute wait!

That one phone call did more than just expose a problem. It demonstrated the kind of leadership that sets the tone for others to follow. When the CEO is willing to experience what customers experience, it sends a clear message: customer service and CX are more than a department or a strategy. They are everyone’s responsibility.

Frontline Experience

When Leaders Get Out of Their Offices

This story illustrates the importance of leaders getting out of their offices and experiencing what’s happening in the field or on the front line. Reading reports and analyzing data are part of the job, but when it comes to customer experience, nothing beats getting firsthand information.

Bezos, in effect, mystery shopped his company, pretending to be a customer. What he was really doing was trying to get to the truth. Sometimes the truth can be experienced directly, or it can be observed.

For example, as I wrote about in my book I’ll Be Back: How to Get Customers To Come Back Again and Again, Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, visited the company’s product support center and talked to customers. He sat down at a desk in a cubicle, put on a headset, picked up the phone and said, “Hello, this is Microsoft Product Support, William speaking. How can I help you?”

The beauty of these simple strategies, which provide firsthand information about what customers are experiencing, what they’re asking or what they’re complaining about, is that, for the cost of a little time and effort, they’re incredibly revealing. You don’t need surveys. You need to be willing to see your company through your customers’ eyes.

One other thought about what Bezos and Gates did. They didn’t keep their efforts a secret. When your team sees you personally calling your company or taking customer support calls, they understand that customer service and CX are a priority that starts at the top.

So, take a page from the Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates playbooks. Pick up the phone. Visit a store. Experience your website. Spend time on the front line. Experience and learn about your business as your customer would. You might be surprised by what you discover, and your customers are sure to appreciate the changes that follow.

Image credits: 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.

Do You Have What It Takes to be a Visionary?

Do You Have What it Takes to be a Visionary?

Exclusive Interview with Mark C. Winters

Visionaries are often celebrated for their ideas, their intensity, and their ability to see what others can’t. But what’s far less understood — and far more consequential — is how Visionaries actually win over time. Not just by dreaming bigger futures, but by building the clarity, structure, and self-awareness required to make those futures real without burning themselves or their organizations to the ground.

In this wide-ranging interview, we explore what it truly means to be a Visionary inside a growing organization. From the essential partnership between Visionary and Integrator, to the hidden blind spots that slow progress, to the role of health, self-knowledge, and what “winning” really looks like, this conversation goes well beyond mythology. It offers a grounded, experience-tested look at how Visionaries can amplify their impact, reduce chaos, and create the kind of freedom they were chasing in the first place.

Today we dive deep into the characteristics and interactions of the Visionary with our special guest.

From Vision to Reality: What It Really Takes to Lead What’s Next

Mark C. WintersMark C. Winters is an entrepreneurial leader with 30-plus years building and advising companies, from startups sketched on a napkin to global enterprises like Proctor & Gamble and BP.

This range of experience helps him spot patterns fast and apply what works to almost any business scenario. Author of Visionary, co-author of Rocket Fuel, founder of Rocket Fuel University, and host of the Rocket Fuel podcast, Mark helps visionary entrepreneurs get unstuck and expand their unique freedom — exponentially.

He’s delivered 1,000+ full-day EOS® workshops with clients from around the world.

Below is the text of my interview with Mark and a preview of the kinds of insights you’ll find in Visionary: How Driven Entrepreneurs Get What They Want Without Doing It All Themselves presented in a Q&A format:

1. What is a Visionary and why does every successful organization have one?

A Visionary is the person who sees the future before it arrives. Endless ideas to help us get there. Big external relationships.

They live in the world of possibility. They connect dots others don’t yet see. They define where the organization is going and why that matters.

Every ambitious organization has one, whether they acknowledge it or not. Progress doesn’t come from squeezing more out of what we have… It comes from seeing a future that doesn’t yet exist. Absent a Visionary, organizations tend to stay pretty much where they are. Maybe they do more of the same. Or maybe they do the same stuff a little better. But they’re unlikely to actually change the game.

That said, here are two important notes:

  1. Every organization doesn’t require the same amount of Visionary. There’s actually a range that we call the “visionary spectrum.” It needs to be a match.
  2. Visionaries don’t win by themselves. Vision alone, without execution, is merely hallucination. And that’s quite often the biggest challenge.

2. How does the Visionary differ from the Integrator and why do you need both?

The Visionary sees the future. They “make it up.”
The Integrator “makes it real.”

Visionaries think in leaps. Integrators think in projects, processes, and systems. Visionaries are energized by what could be. Integrators are energized by what must get done.

You need both because they solve different problems. Visionaries break through ceilings. Integrators remove friction and create traction. When they’re aligned, you get clarity, momentum, and leverage. When they’re not, you get chaos, burnout, and frustration.

This is an intentional pairing of two very different capability sets. When surrounded by the right structure (which we call the 5 Rules), the friction of these polar differences gets blended into a powerful positive force. Thus the name of our first book, ROCKET FUEL (with Gino Wickman).

3. What are the key elements of the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS) that make it so powerful?

EOS works because it does three things exceptionally well:

  1. It creates clarity and focus: vision, priorities, roles, and expectations are no longer fuzzy.
  2. It instills discipline: weekly pulses, data, and accountability replace good intentions.
  3. It strengthens the leadership team. They get healthy. Important issues get surfaced and solved – instead of avoided.

For Visionaries, a “business operating system” such as EOS is powerful because it aligns the energy of all the people in the organization. It’s very powerful when all those arrows are pointed in the same direction.

4. Why is it so important for a Visionary to understand themselves — and what are they trying to understand?

Because “Knowing Thyself” is the big multiplier.

It all starts with figuring out who you are now, and where you want to go.

From there, you must understand how this business is going to help you make that happen.

And then become aware of how your behavior is either helping or hurting that process.

Visionaries don’t need to become different people. They need to become clearer versions of who they already are.

They’re trying to understand:

  • What truly energizes them
  • What drains them
  • Where they create the most value
  • Where they unintentionally cause damage

Without that clarity, Visionaries tend to overstep, under-delegate, or send mixed signals. With it, they make better decisions, build better teams, and experience more freedom.

5. Why is the crashing together of the wellness and biohacking trends so important for entrepreneurs?

Because Visionaries are high-output humans running long races. This demands that you maintain “Warrior Shape.”

You can’t separate performance from health anymore. Energy, focus, emotional regulation, and recovery all directly impact leadership effectiveness.

The danger is chasing hacks instead of fundamentals. Biohacking without the proper foundation can become another form of self-sabotage.

Elite performance starts with basics: sleep/recovery, fitness/movement, nutrition, and boundaries. Get those right first. Then optimize from there.

6. What are some of the most common blind spots for visionaries?

Visionary book coverA few show up again and again:

  • Thinking out loud without context
  • Changing direction too quickly (or too often)
  • Holding onto too much for too long (becoming the bottleneck)
  • Confusing passion with priority
  • Underestimating the impact of their words

These blind spots don’t come from ego or bad intent. They come from the very natural instincts and habits of people who are wired as Visionaries. However, left unchecked, they slow everything down. In turn, slowing the Visionary themselves from getting what they want.

7. Tell us more about Intrinsic Genius and why it matters.

Intrinsic Genius lives at the intersection of three things:

  • Competence – what you’re naturally good at
  • Joy – what energizes you most
  • Drive – the purpose and cause that propel you forward

When Visionaries operate inside that zone, their impact compounds. When they drift outside it, everything feels heavier than it should.

Understanding Intrinsic Genius isn’t about self-indulgence. It’s about tapping fully into the unique contribution you were built to make. And your maximum impact.

Intrinsic Genius

8. Are all Visionaries the same?

Not even close.

I talked earlier about the Visionary Spectrum. And that’s one way to think about it – as a defined function of the business that requires a certain set of capabilities.

While the Visionary patterns are similar, they certainly show up in different ways. Some are bold and extroverted. Others are quiet and introverted. Some thrive on disruption. Others on pulling things together. What they share isn’t style, it’s their orientation toward the possible future.

9. Besides partnering with an Integrator, what other roles should surround a Visionary?

Visionaries need what I call a “shield wall” to surround them. Protecting them from dangerous external threats, and preparing them to engage the world from their most powerful base.

A great shield wall is made up of 7 unique “posts” that support the Visionary by providing 7 special “forces.”

That includes:

  • Truth-tellers who challenge their thinking
  • Operators who translate ideas into action
  • Coaches who help them see patterns
  • Peers who can relate to the journey

Isolation is a common feeling for a Visionary. Having the right people around them can stabilize and amplify their signal.

10. People lionize Visionaries like Steve Jobs. How do Visionaries go off-track?

Usually in three ways:

  1. They start believing their own mythology
  2. They confuse intensity with effectiveness
  3. They stop listening

Visionaries go off-track when their strengths run unchecked. Greatness isn’t about being right more often. (In fact, intellectual humility is a healthy attribute.) Instead, it’s about building structure that creates clarity, alignment, and focus in everyone else, while you pursue what’s possible.

11. What is Visionary Chaos and how is it avoided?

Visionary chaos is what happens when ideas outpace clarity, alignment, and execution. They flood the system. They tamper.

It shows up as initiative overload, organizational whiplash, confused priorities, exhausted teams, uncertainty, and slow execution.

It’s avoided through structure, cadence, and restraint. Not by silencing the Visionary, but by sequencing their best ideas. Go slow to go fast.

12. Why is it dangerous for leaders to think out loud?

Because Visionaries don’t always realize how loud their voice is to the people around them .

What feels like a passing thought to a Visionary often feels like a directive to those who hear it. Thinking out loud creates false urgency, unnecessary work, and more whiplash.

This can be avoided by creating safe places to think out loud – where everyone present knows that’s what’s happening… and label the brainstorming. “No Action Needed.”

13. Is there a question you wish I had asked?

Yes.

How does a Visionary know if they’re actually winning?

In my experience, this question is not just about financial numbers, but about your Unique Freedom. Your definition of that is different than mine, is different than theirs, and is different than every other Visionary’s. It’s truly unique to you. So you must first solve for that. This is why I created the Exponential Freedom Model, and the 9 Domains of Freedom.

Clarify the future you want. Draw a line back to the present. Then focus on the near-term activities (and habits) that will increase the probability of making that future real.

“Clarity. Focus. Freedom.”
It’s that simple – just not easy.

To experience more of the Unique Freedom you seek, without being trapped by the business you built. That’s the real promise of becoming a great Visionary.

Conclusion

Thank you for the great conversation Mark!

I hope everyone has enjoyed this peek into the mind of the man behind the insightful new title Visionary: How Driven Entrepreneurs Get What They Want Without Doing It All Themselves!

Image credits: Mark C. Winters, ChatGPT

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.

Building Trust as a New Leader

Building Trust as a New Leader

GUEST POST from David Burkus

Most new leaders know they need to build trust with their team. But here’s where it gets tricky: what if it’s not your team — at least, not yet?

Imagine stepping into a leadership role where you didn’t get to pick the team. Maybe you were hired from outside the organization. Maybe you were promoted from another department. Either way, you’re the new leader, and the team you’re inheriting doesn’t know you yet. You don’t know if they’ve been burned before by a previous boss. You don’t know what scars or successes they carry. What you do know is that you need to build trust — and fast.

This is where most new leaders stumble. They try to shortcut the process. They launch a flurry of team-building exercises. They host lunches. They schedule marathon one-on-one meetings. These efforts come from a good place, but they often miss the mark. Because trust isn’t actually built. Trust isn’t even earned. Trust is reciprocated.

And if you’re serious about developing trust with a new team, you need to understand how that trust loop really works — and how to keep it moving forward.

Why Traditional Trust-Building Strategies Fall Short

When stepping into a new leadership role, it’s tempting to think that trust builds linearly — more lunches, more meetings, more smiles equals more trust. But that’s not how trust actually grows.

Trust moves in a loop, not a line. It starts with a small trust connection — maybe a conversation over coffee — and invites a tiny leap of faith from your team. Someone shares a new idea or dares to give you honest feedback. If you respond with respect — if you listen, appreciate, and show genuine curiosity — you complete the loop. You signal: It’s safe to trust me.

That small leap leads to slightly bigger risks. More candid conversations. More creative ideas. More vulnerability across the board. If you keep meeting those risks with respect, the trust loop keeps spinning faster and stronger. But if you miss those moments — or worse, get defensive — you stop the loop cold.

For a new leader, mastering this trust loop is everything.

Trust Loop

How a New Leader Can Truly Build Trust

Building trust with a team you didn’t pick requires deliberate, daily actions. Here are four research-backed strategies to get the trust loop turning — and keep it spinning.

1. Signal Vulnerability Early

Everyone already knows you’re new. They know you don’t have all the answers yet. Pretending otherwise just makes you seem insecure or out of touch. Instead, lean into your newness.

Say things like, “I’m still learning how this team works.” Then prove it by listening. Create a space where people feel safe to teach you. This early show of vulnerability sparks empathy — and empathy is the gateway to trust.

When a new leader admits they don’t have it all figured out, it invites others to open up, too. It shows that you’re not just here to impose your will — you’re here to learn and lead together.

2. Share Information Transparently

Eventually, as the new leader, you will need to drive change. That’s probably part of why you were brought in. But when you do, don’t operate behind closed doors.

Instead, treat your team like insiders. Pull back the curtain. Share early information about strategy shifts or organizational changes. Say things like, “This isn’t finalized yet, but here’s what I’m hearing and thinking — and I’d love your perspective.

Transparency builds belonging. It signals, I trust you with this information. And when people feel trusted, they’re much more likely to trust you in return.

3. Respond to Vulnerability with Respect

When your team members finally take a risk — whether it’s sharing a frustration, giving you feedback, or floating a bold idea — recognize it for what it is: a test.

They’re not trying to undermine you. They’re trying to see if you’re the real deal.

Your job isn’t to defend your decisions or your leadership history. It’s to listen. Ask clarifying questions. Thank them for being honest. Engage with their ideas sincerely — even if you don’t ultimately agree.

The way you respond to those early leaps of faith will define whether the trust loop accelerates — or seizes up.

4. Amplify Unheard Voices

One of the easiest ways to build trust with a new team is to ensure every voice is heard, especially the quieter ones. When historically quiet team members finally speak up, make it clear their input matters. Amplify their ideas in meetings. Circle back to them in discussions. Let the entire team see that contributions aren’t just tolerated — they’re valued. Without open communication, hierarchy and politics creep in fast. By contrast, when people feel heard and respected, they lean in with greater commitment and creativity.

Trust First, Change Second

Inheriting a team is tough. You’re stepping into a culture you didn’t create, with dynamics you don’t fully understand yet. And because you’re the new leader, it’s tempting to rush into action — prove yourself, make changes, shake things up. Resist that temptation.

The real work of a new leader is not about being liked. It’s about being vulnerable. Encouraging interpersonal risks. Meeting those risks with deep respect. That’s how you build trust. That’s how you turn a group of individuals into a committed team.

Because at the end of the day, you don’t want a compliant team that simply does what they’re told. You want a committed team that’s ready to go above and beyond — and commitment always starts with trust.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

The Greatest Inventor You’ve Never Heard of

Meet the Invisible Man of Innovation

The Greatest Inventor You've Never Heard of

GUEST POST from John Bessant

There’s a famous test, originally developed by psychologist J.P. Guilford, to give an idea of how ‘creative’ a person is. Ask them to think of as many uses as possible for an everyday object – a brick, a glass, a shoe, etc. The idea is that the more ideas you come up with (fluency) plus the number of different categories of idea (flexibility) gives an indication of your ability to think creatively.

If we tried the test with the simple safety pin it would certainly trigger some of the usual suspects – a nappy (diaper) pin, a clothes fastener, a medical device or an item of jewellery. Not so frequent a visitor to many peoples’ lists might be ‘a weightlifting aid’ – yet arguably that has been its most glorious moment so far. For one very good reason.

A $15 debt isn’t a big deal, even if it is incurred in 1849; its value would be around $600 in today’s money. An annoyance but not likely to bring on imminent bankruptcy if it remained unpaid. But for Walter Hunt there was a principle involved (he was, by all accounts a very moral man) and also the practical consideration that his relationship with his creditor (one J. R. Chapin) mattered. Chapin had helped him with a number of other projects as a draughtsman, providing the technical drawings needed for his patent applications. So Walter duly worried about how to repay the debt.

A period of hand wringing and fiddling which lasted about three hours, during some of which he picked up a piece of wire to keep his hands busy. And came up with the basic and still powerful principle behind the mechanism of the safety pin. Most pins up to that point were either simple and sharp with a point at the end or loops which came undone easily. These hadn’t changed much since the days when Roman legionaries pinned their cloaks with a fibula, a kind of simple brooch clasp pin.

By coiling the wire on itself he created a simple spring mechanism and by providing a catch at one end he was able to make the safe closure mechanism which we have come to know and love.

Quite a lot of us, in fact; estimates put the number of safety pins produced and sold per year around the world at around one billion, with specialised machines capable of turning out millions per day.

Walter Hunt was not a fool; he recognized that this idea could have value. And he was not inexperienced; he already had a healthy track record of successful innovation behind him and knew how to work the patent system. So he duly filed and was awarded patent number US6281A; he then offered this (and the accompanying rights it conferred) to the W R Grace company who snapped it up (excuse the pun), paying Hunt $400, enough to enable him to settle his debt and have some spare capital. And to lift a small but annoying weight from his shoulders…

It turned out to be a good deal for them; on an initial outlay of $15,000 in today’s money they secured profits running into millions over the next years.

Safety Pins

Image: U.S. Patent Office, public domain via Wikimedia

This kind of thing was second nature to him; he had a gift for seeing and solving problems in a practical way. By 1849 he’d already built a legacy of (mostly) useful items which he had (mostly) patented and had a growing reputation as an inventor. Though not necessarily an innovator – as in someone who can create value from their ideas. Hunt seems to have had a second ‘gift’; in addition to being a visionary inventor he seems to have been cursed with the inability to profit from his inventions.

The man who was labelled a ‘Yankee mechanical genius’ was born in 1796 in Lewis County, New York to a Quaker family. The eldest of thirteen children he was lucky to receive an education and went on to earn a master’s degree in masonry at the age of twenty-one. Although a practical skill much needed in a rural farming community masonry also involves a way of thinking which is much more than simply piling stones on top of each other. Arguably his understanding of interdependence and systems derived in part from this early experience – and enabled him to approach widely differing problems with a sense of their underlying similarities.

Yet if you look back at his track record of inventions he rapidly emerges as a serious contender for being the greatest inventor you’ve never heard of.

For example:

The repeater rifle, in 1848 – up there as a symbol of ‘how the West was won’ in a thousand cowboy movies and the undoubted making of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company with their Winchester rifle. Hunt not only developed the original idea for a ‘volition repeating rifle’ but also the ammunition it might use (his ‘rocket ball’) which was revolutionary in putting the powder charge in the bullet’s base. His designs weren’t very workable and he sold the patents; these changed hands a number of times in the growing armaments industry before being bought by Messrs Smith and Wesson who used them as the basis for a new company. The biggest investor in the new Volcanic Repeating Arms Company was one Oliver Winchester….

Think fountain pens and writing implements and the transition from goose quills to refillable devices and you may well think of the companies which made their name with the innovation. But whilst companies like Parker Pen created the market the foundations were laid by, amongst others, Walter Hunt who predated their work by decades. In 1847, he patented a fountain pen (U.S. Patent 4,927) combining inkstand and pen into one unit, “convenient for the pocket.”

Knife sharpening ? Nail making? Rope making? Castors to help move furniture around? Disposable paper collars? A coal burning stive which would radiate heat in all directions? A saw for cutting down trees? A flexible spring attachment for belts and braces? An attachment for boats to cut through ice? An inkstand? A non-explosive safety lamp? Bottle stoppers? Hunt turned his hand and imagination to hundreds of challenges across an almost impossibly wide spectrum. Leonardo da Vinci would have been proud of him, not least in his ability to draw together ideas and inspirations from many different fields.

His first patented invention was for an improved flax spinning machine in 1826. He worked as a farmer in a region dominated by textile milling and most of his family and friends were in the business of spinning wool and cotton. Faced with rising costs and falling product prices the local mill owner, Willis Hoskins, wanted to reduce wages; Hunt persuaded him to hold off and offered instead to develop a more efficient flax spinning machine. He patented this on June 22, 1826 and its contribution to improving productivity saved the jobs.

His motivation was often underpinned by a social concern. Another early invention (1827) was for a coach alarm system. Visiting New York to try and raise funds for developing the falx spinning machine further he witnessed an accident where a horse-drawn carriage ran over a child. The driver, his hands fully occupied with the reins of the team, had been unable to sound a warning horn in time. Hunt was shaken by this and the fact that this was not a rare occurrence; he began thinking of ways to help prevent these accidents. He came up with the idea of a metal gong with a hammer that could be operated by foot; his “Coach Alarm” was patented on July 30, 1827. Facing an uphill struggle he sold the rights to the stagecoach operators Kipp and Brown; the invention became a standard feature on streetcars across the United States, saving countless lives.

Late in life, Hunt addressed the laundry problem. In 1854 a crisp white collar was a mark of status, but keeping linen white required constant starching and ironing. Hunt invented the ‘paper shirt collar’ (U.S. Patent 11,376) which offered the advantage of looking like linen but being disposable after use.

Some of his ideas were, shall we say, a little fanciful though the prototypes proved their point. Inspired by the way flies negotiated ceilings his ‘antipodean apparatus’ was designed to help circus performers (and anyone else mad enough) to walk upside down. Although this one wasn’t patented it was still in use by performers a hundred years later!

antipodean apparatus

Altogether he was responsible for hundreds of patents and about two dozen of Hunt’s inventions are still used in the form in which he created them over one hundred years ago.

Including, of course, the really big one that got away – the sewing machine. The mid 19th century saw a flurry of inventive activity around trying to enable it, eventually converging on a dominant design which combined different elements for feeding, sewing with a lockstitch, holding the fabric, powering the feed, etc. Isaac Singer walked away with the prize in 1851 after a long and bitter battle with Elias Howe whose patent he liberally borrowed from and which predated his machine by several years.

What’s not always mentioned is that Howe’s idea wasn’t original; he’d based his 1846 machine on something he’d seen more than a decade before. In fact this ‘prior art’ was what Singer tried to use in his defence only to have the judge throw it out because the original idea, though clearly the core design for a working sewing machine, had never actually been patented.

The man who’d let this incredible opportunity slip through his fingers? Our very own Walter Hunt.

Sewing Machine

Image: National Museum of American History, public domain

In 1830, Barthelemy Thimonnier in France had patented a machine that used a hooked needle to make a chain stitch, but it was slow and fragile. Hunt’s experiments in the early 1830s led him to a new approach; he realized that a machine didn’t need to mimic a manual seamstress and in particular it didn’t need to pass the needle all the way through. Instead he designed a curved needle with the eye at the point; the needle would pierce the cloth, carrying a loop of thread with it and then a shuttle would pass a second thread through the loop formed by the needle. When the needle retracted, the two threads would lock together – lockstitch.

He kept it in the family, employing one of his many brothers, Adoniram, to improve on his wooden prototype by making a machine out of iron. It worked well, sewing straight seams with a durability and uniformity that manual sewing could not touch. By 1834 – twelve years before Elias Howe – Hunt had a working machine that could have made him one of the richest men in the world. But he held back from patenting it.

Not for want of experience or vision; he’d seen the possibilities which is why he’d been working on the idea. But his vision was partly shaped by his strong-willed and socially conscious daughter who saw it not as a labour-saving device but as a labour killer, threatening the livelihoods of women who worked as seamstresses to establish themselves and find a measure of financial independence. She persuaded Hunt to hold back from registering his patent though he had the working design ready a full twenty years before Singer’s successful entry.

Instead he allowed his invention to ‘slumber’, existing but not being patented or commercialised. He sold the rights to the prototype to George Arrowsmith, but Arrowsmith, the lack of a patent, also failed to commercialize it.

In the infamous ‘Sewing Machine Wars’ of the early 1850s the two big antagonists were Howe and Singer; as part of his campaign Singer discovered Hunt’s ideas and pressed him to search for any evidence of the earlier machine which might help invalidate Howe’s lockstitch-based patent. Eventually they found the rusty remnants of the 1834 machine and Hunt rebuilt it to working status, enabling Singer to argue that Howe was not the first inventor.

In 1854, Patent Commissioner Charles Mason issued a ruling that became a cornerstone of patent law; he acknowledged that Hunt had indeed invented the machine first. However, he ruled against Hunt based on the doctrine of laches (abandonment), writing that “…. When the first inventor allows his discovery to slumber for eighteen years, with no probability of its ever being brought into useful activity, and when its only resurrected to supplant and strangle an invention which has been given to the public… all reasonable presumption should be in favour of the inventor who has been the means of conferring the real benefit upon the world”.

The ruling forced Singer and other sewing machine manufacturers to settle their differences and operate a patent pool with each paying relevant royalties to the others for use of particular intellectual property. Hunt received a small payment from Singer for his testimony, but he missed out on the royalties that built the fortunes which came to Singer and Howe.

He was granted a patent for another improvement to the sewing machine dealing with feeding of material into the machine without jamming it. Singer eventually agreed in 1858 to pay Hunt $50,000 for this design – but Hunt didn’t live long enough to collect his due.

He died on June 8, 1859 of pneumonia in his workshop in New York City. His grave in Green-Wood Cemetery is marked by a modest granite shaft, a stark contrast to the massive monuments of other ‘Gilded Age’ entrepreneurs.

Although Hunt died without a fortune to his name he was no fool. His name might be missing from the pantheon of great inventors who changed the world through steel and steam – creating the products and the markets which defined a new industrial age. Yet anyone who could twist a piece of wire into a global success in three hours in order to settle a debt deserves a closer look.

His life reveals a complex man of high principles – a ‘benevolent Quaker’ – and possessed of an internal motivation owing much more to a fascination with solving problems and puzzles than the inspiration of a possible fortune. Someone who found joy in the quest rather than the goal, the ultimate ideas man.

An obituary published in the New York Tribune on June 13th, 1859 captured a little of this restless spirit. “For more than forty years, he has been known as an experiment in the arts. Whether in mechanical movements, chemistry, electricity or metallic compositions, he was always at home: and, probably in all, he has tried more experiments than any other inventor.”

Sometimes the quest is more exciting than the destination, sometimes the act of creating something new is its own reward.


You can find my podcast here and my videos here

And if you’d like to learn with me take a look at my online courses here

And subscribe to my (free) newsletter here

All images generated by Google Nanobanana or Substack AI unless otherwise indicated

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.

Temporal Agency – How Innovators Stop Time from Bullying Them

LAST UPDATED: February 2, 2026 at 4:12 PM

Temporal Agency - How Innovators Stop Time from Bullying Them

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

We live in an age where time feels like a relentless tyrant. Deadlines loom, inboxes overflow, and the constant hum of connectivity creates an illusion of urgency that often masks a deeper problem: our lack of agency over our most precious resource. We’ve been conditioned to believe that speeding up is the only solution, when in reality, the answer lies in a more profound re-engineering of our relationship with time itself.

This isn’t about magical thinking or finding shortcuts; it’s about deeply understanding the mechanisms of time perception, leveraging neuroscience, and consciously crafting environments that enable us to reclaim temporal agency. It’s about moving from being victims of the clock to becoming its conductors.

Innovation rarely fails because of insufficient intelligence or ambition. It fails because time is weaponized against the very thinking it requires. Urgency crowds out curiosity. Speed displaces sense-making. Motion replaces meaning.

The result is a paradox: organizations move faster while understanding less.

“The real superpower isn’t bending time. It’s designing conditions where time stops bullying us.”

— Braden Kelley

Time as an Environmental Problem

Most discussions about time focus on individual discipline. This framing is incomplete. Time pressure is largely environmental.

Every unnecessary meeting, notification, and premature deadline fragments attention. Each fragment shrinks perceived time. Over time, this creates a persistent sense of acceleration, even when output stagnates.

Innovators do not need to work harder. They need environments that allow thinking to breathe.

Designing Conditions That Stretch Time

Stretching time means increasing the quality of attention per moment.

Innovative organizations intentionally design for:

  • Subjective time expansion through focused engagement
  • Reliable flow states by aligning challenge and capability
  • Lower perceived urgency through clearer prioritization
  • Greater present-moment bandwidth by reducing cognitive clutter

These conditions transform how time is felt, even when clocks remain unchanged.

Case Study 1: A Product Team Slows Down to Speed Up

A digital product team consistently missed deadlines despite aggressive schedules. Workdays were filled with context switching.

Leadership eliminated status meetings and replaced them with a shared visual dashboard updated asynchronously. Teams gained uninterrupted blocks of time.

Perceived time pressure dropped immediately. Delivery speed improved within one quarter, and employee burnout declined.

Flow as Infrastructure

Flow is often treated as a personal peak experience. In reality, it can be operationalized.

Organizations that enable flow:

  • Limit work-in-progress
  • Clarify decision rights
  • Align incentives with learning, not visibility

Flow-friendly systems create temporal elasticity—time feels abundant because it is used coherently.

Case Study 2: A Research Organization Redesigns Urgency

A research organization found that “urgent” requests dominated scientist schedules.

Leaders introduced explicit urgency criteria and delayed non-critical decisions by default. Scientists regained long stretches of uninterrupted inquiry.

Breakthrough insights increased, not because more time was added, but because time was no longer under constant assault.

From Time Management to Time Relationship

Time management asks individuals to cope. Temporal agency asks leaders to design.

When innovators command their relationship with time, they:

  • Think more clearly
  • Learn more quickly
  • Create more meaningfully

Time does not need to be conquered. It needs to be respected.

When time stops bullying us, innovation finally gets the space it deserves.


The Myth of Speed and the Reality of Felt Time

Our objective measurement of time – seconds, minutes, hours – is immutable. But our subjective experience of time is incredibly fluid. Think of those moments when an hour flies by in a blur of deep work, or when five minutes waiting for a delayed flight feels like an eternity. This discrepancy is our greatest lever for change. Innovators and creatives, especially, must learn to manipulate this subjective experience, not to work longer, but to work smarter, deeper, and more meaningfully.

Altering Subjective Experience of Time

This isn’t about wishing time away or making it go faster. It’s about enriching the present moment to reduce the *felt* pressure of time. When we are deeply engaged, focused, and present, the anxiety associated with time pressure dissipates. This requires conscious effort to minimize distractions and cultivate environments conducive to concentration.

Entering Flow More Reliably

The concept of “flow state,” popularized by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, is the ultimate expression of temporal agency. In flow, time ceases to exist, and our productivity skyrockets. To enter flow more reliably, we need to design for it: clear goals, immediate feedback, and a balance between challenge and skill. It’s about creating rituals that signal to our brains: “It’s time to deeply engage.”

Reducing Felt Time Pressure

A significant portion of our “time crisis” is psychological. The constant fear of missing out (FOMO), the pressure of endless notifications, and the expectation of immediate responses create a chronic state of urgency. Reclaiming agency means consciously unplugging, setting boundaries, and understanding that not all demands are created equal. Prioritization isn’t just about what to do, but what not to do, and when.

Increasing Present-Moment Bandwidth

In our hyper-connected world, our attention is constantly fragmented. We’re often performing tasks while thinking about the next five things. This multitasking illusion significantly degrades our present-moment bandwidth. Practicing mindfulness, single-tasking, and deep work techniques expands our capacity to engage fully with the task at hand, making each unit of objective time more potent and less stressful.


Practical Ways to Reclaim Temporal Agency

1. The “Temporal Audit”

Before you can optimize, you must understand. Conduct a rigorous audit of how you spend your time, not just objectively, but also subjectively. Where does time drag? Where does it fly? What activities genuinely recharge you versus those that drain your energy and create more pressure?

2. Deep Work Blocks

Inspired by Cal Newport, schedule dedicated, uninterrupted blocks for your most cognitively demanding tasks. Turn off notifications, close irrelevant tabs, and commit to single-tasking. These aren’t just work blocks; they are flow-creation blocks.

3. Strategic Procrastination (with a twist)

Not all tasks require immediate attention. Consciously defer non-urgent tasks to specific “batching” periods. This reduces the mental load of constantly switching contexts and allows for deeper focus on critical items. The “twist” is that this is a conscious decision, not an avoidance tactic.

4. The “No Meeting Wednesday” (or similar)

Create specific days or half-days entirely free of meetings. This provides an oasis for deep work, strategic thinking, and creative exploration without the constant interruptions that fragment our schedules and minds.

5. Digital Detox Rituals

Implement daily, weekly, or even monthly periods of disengagement from digital devices. This isn’t just about reducing screen time; it’s about allowing your mind to wander, to connect disparate ideas, and to replenish its creative reserves without the constant demand for attention.


Case Studies in Temporal Mastery

Case Study 3: The Biotech Founder’s “Un-Schedule”

A biotech startup founder was overwhelmed by the demands of fundraising, product development, and team management. Instead of trying to pack more into her day, she adopted an “un-schedule” approach. She scheduled only 3-4 hours of high-value, deep work each day, with the rest of her time dedicated to reactive tasks, strategic thinking, or even intentional white space. By consciously limiting her scheduled workload, she created mental breathing room, leading to more breakthroughs and less burnout. Her team also reported feeling less pressured, as her clarity translated into more focused direction. The result was a 25% reduction in project timelines due to improved focus and decision-making.

Case Study 4: The Creative Agency’s “Momentum Days”

A boutique creative agency struggled with project delays and artist burnout due to constant client revisions and internal meetings. They implemented “Momentum Days” twice a week where all internal meetings were banned, and external client communication was batched into specific windows. These days were dedicated solely to creative execution. By protecting this uninterrupted time, the agency saw a dramatic improvement in output quality, a 15% increase in client satisfaction due to faster turnaround, and a noticeable boost in team morale and creative satisfaction.

Reclaiming temporal agency isn’t about finding more hours in the day; it’s about making the hours you have more meaningful, more productive, and less stressful. It’s an act of conscious design, a rebellion against the tyranny of the clock. By understanding and manipulating our subjective experience of time, by fostering flow, and by implementing disciplined practices, we can cease being bullied by time and start truly commanding our relationship with it, unlocking unprecedented levels of innovation and well-being.


Frequently Asked Questions

What does Braden Kelley mean by “temporal agency”?

Temporal agency refers to our ability to influence our subjective experience of time and control how we allocate our attention, rather than feeling constantly dictated by the clock or external pressures. It’s about commanding our relationship with time.

How can innovators enter flow state more easily?

To enter flow more reliably, innovators should design their environment with clear goals, immediate feedback loops, and tasks that strike a balance between challenge and their current skill level. Minimizing distractions and creating dedicated “deep work” rituals are key.

What is the “Temporal Audit”?

A “Temporal Audit” involves rigorously tracking and analyzing how one spends time, both objectively (what tasks are performed) and subjectively (how one feels about that time), to identify patterns of engagement, disengagement, and areas where time pressure is most acute.

Disclaimer: This article speculates on the potential future applications of cutting-edge scientific research. While based on current scientific understanding, the practical realization of these concepts may vary in timeline and feasibility and are subject to ongoing research and development.

Image credits: ChatGPT

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






Three Myths That Kill Change and Transformation

Three Myths That Kill Change and Transformation

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

In 1975, more than 80% of US corporate assets were tangible assets, things like factories, equipment and real estate. When leaders in an organization made decisions about change, they tended to involve tangible, strategic assets, such as building a new factory, entering a new market or launching a new line of products.

So when the modern practice of change management arose in the 1980s, that’s what it was designed to address. Managers began to recognize the need to communicate changes to the rank and file, so that they could better understand it and contribute to its success. An entire cottage industry of consultants arose to fill that need.

But now that situation has flipped and more than 80% of corporate assets are intangible. When we talk about change today we are usually talking about changes in people themselves, in how they think and how they act. Clearly, that’s a very different type of thing and we need to approach change differently. Unfortunately, too many people are mired in the past.

Myth #1: If People Understand Change, They Will Embrace It

Leaders like to be seen at the cutting edge and, to be effective, they need to believe in themselves. That’s what makes transformational initiatives so attractive. They’re much more fun than the more mundane aspects of managing an enterprise, like improving operations or cutting costs. Change gives leaders a chance to dream.

That’s what the practice of change management was designed to support. Someone high up in an organization would get an idea to, say, launch a new product line for a new market and the consultants would be brought in to help communicate the idea so that everyone could understand just how brilliant the idea was.

Of course, even if employees thought the idea was stupid there wasn’t much they could do about it. If a CEO wants to launch a new product line, invest in new factories and equipment and hire new people, there’s nothing the rank and file can do about it. Leadership has full control over tangible, strategic assets.

But today, when the vast majority of corporate assets are intangible, transformation initiatives involve changes in how people think and what they do, which leadership does not control. People have the power to resist and you can be sure they will. That’s why change fails, not because people don’t understand it, but because they don’t like it and actively sabotage it.

The truth is that humans form attachments to other people, ideas and things. When they feel those attachments are threatened, they will often lash out. That’s why when you ask people to change how they think or what they do, you will invariably offend some people’s identity, dignity and sense of self and they will act out in ways that are dishonest, underhanded and deceptive. That doesn’t make them bad people—we all do it—it just makes them human.

Myth #2: You Have To Convince The Skeptics

There is something baffling about human nature. Whenever we have an idea we are passionately about we feel intense desire to convince skeptics. Our inner marketers want to identify specific objections and then devise airtight arguments to counter them. We envision ourselves being dazzlingly persuasive and making our case.

Change management consultants encourage this type of thinking. They advise us to “provide simple, clear choices and consequences” and “show the benefits in a real and tangible way.” They also suggest that we have “open and honest conversations” and “even make a personal appeal” in order to “convert the strongest dissenters.”

This may make sense if the objections are rational, but often they are not. In fact, the most visceral dissent almost invariably has more to do with how people see themselves. That’s why change so often offends people’s dignity, because their identity is so often wrapped up in what they think and what they do. You can’t ask people to stop being who they think they are.

The good news is that you don’t have to. Consider the scientific evidence:

  • Sociologist Everett Rogers‘ “S-curve” research estimated that it takes only 10%-20% of a system to adopt an innovation for rapid acceptance by the majority to follow.
  • Professor Erica Chenoweth’s analysis of over 300 political revolutions in the past century finds that it only took 3.5% of active participation in a society to succeed, and many campaigns prevailed with less.
  • Recent research by sociologist Damon Centola at the University of Pennsylvania suggests that the tipping point for change is getting 25% of people in an organization on board.

There’s no need to waste time trying to convince people who hate your idea and want to undermine it in any way they can. Any engagement is very unlikely to be successful and very likely to frustrate and exhaust you. You are much better off focusing your energies on empowering those who are enthusiastic about change to succeed, so that they can bring in others who can bring in others still. That’s how you build traction.

Myth #3: Things Will Get Easier After A “Quick & Easy” Win

Change management pioneer John Kotter, who first started writing books about organizational transformation in the 1970s, has long advised to establish short-term wins. He stressed that these must be unambiguously successful, visible throughout the organization and clearly related to the change effort.

The concept is problematic for a number of reasons. First, and this isn’t really Kotter’s fault, but the idea of a “short-term win” is often understood to be a “quick and easy win,” which can backfire. If a change isn’t meaningful and relevant, then touting it can make a leader seem out of touch, discrediting the transformation effort.

More problematic is the idea that we should be shooting for projects that are unambiguously successful. That level of success is exceedingly rare. If we are going to wait for perfect projects, we may be waiting a long time. What we want to do is start with a Keystone Change and then learn from whatever successes and failures we encounter on the way.

Perhaps most dangerous of all is the notion that early projects should be visible to large numbers of people. Remember, if a change is significant and has the potential for impact, there will always be people who want to undermine it in ways that are dishonest, underhanded and deceptive. Why would we want to broadcast early efforts so they can knock them down?

The truth is that things don’t get easier after initial successes. They often get harder because those who oppose change now see it is really possible. That’s why you need to build a plan to anticipate resistance and Survive Victory from the start.

Change for the World We Live In

In the early 20th century, the great sociologist Max Weber noted that the sweeping industrialization taking place would lead to a change in organization. As cottage industries were replaced by large enterprises, leadership would have to become less traditional and charismatic and more organized and rational.

He also foresaw that jobs would need to be broken down into small, specific tasks and be governed by a system of hierarchy, authority and responsibility. This would require a more formal mode of organization—a bureaucracy—in which roles and responsibilities were clearly defined. Weber’s model reigned for a full century.

Over the past few decades we’ve undergone a similar shift from bureaucratic hierarchies to connected ecosystems and that affects how we need to approach transformation. The changes we need to implement today have less to do with decisions made about strategic, tangible assets and more to do with how people think and act. That presents a very different set of challenges and we need to adapt.

What we can’t do is pretend that the world is the same as it was 30 or 40 years ago and continue with practices that are so obviously failing. Just as Weber dispelled myths about infallible leaders a century ago, we need to break free of outdated concepts that have led to unacceptably poor results.

It’s time to leave myths behind and take a more clear-eyed approach to leading change.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— 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.






Why a Customer Experience Audit is Non-Negotiable in 2026

An Analysis of ROI, Retention, and Brand Resilience

Why a Customer Experience Audit is Non-Negotiable in 2026

LAST UPDATED: February 7, 2026 at 8:20PM

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

In the current business landscape, the traditional boundaries of competition have dissolved. Pricing is transparent, product features are rapidly emulated, and global logistics have leveled the playing field for distribution. What remains as the final, most defensible frontier is Customer Experience (CX). However, many organizations operate on assumptions rather than evidence, relying on outdated journey maps that don’t account for the rise of generative AI, omnichannel complexity, and the heightened emotional expectations of the modern consumer.A Customer Experience Audit is not merely a “health check”; it is a rigorous diagnostic process designed to uncover the “silent killers” of conversion and loyalty. It bridges the gap between how a company thinks it is performing and how the customer actually feels at every touchpoint. By systematically evaluating the friction, flow, and emotional resonance of the brand journey, organizations can transform from being reactive service providers to proactive experience leaders. Below, we explore the ten most compelling reasons to initiate this audit, backed by the latest industry data.


Top 10 Reasons to Conduct a CX Audit

1. Identify and Eliminate Friction Points

An audit maps the real-world customer journey to find where users drop off. Small changes to these “micro-moments” can yield massive returns.

  • The Statistic: Simplifying a complex sign-up form can increase successful registrations by 20% (Reform).
  • The Insight: 53% of consumers say being kept on hold alone is reason enough to stop doing business with a brand (Webex/Futurum Group).

2. Improve Customer Retention and Reduce Churn

Acquiring a new customer is significantly more expensive than keeping an existing one. Audits identify the specific negative experiences that drive customers to competitors.

  • The Statistic: Resolving CX issues can reduce churn by 85% (Esteban Kolsky).
  • The Insight: 60% of customers will leave a brand after just one or two negative experiences (Zoom, 2025).

3. Maximize Revenue and Upsell Opportunities

Satisfied customers aren’t just loyal; they are less price-sensitive and more open to higher-value offers.

  • The Statistic: Companies that excel at CX see an average 80% increase in revenue (Zippia/Zendesk).
  • The Insight: 61% of customers will spend at least 5% more with a brand they know provides a good experience (Emplifi).

4. Optimize the Onboarding Experience

The first post-purchase interaction sets the tone for the entire relationship. Audits ensure your onboarding isn’t frustrating or confusing.

  • The Statistic: Effective onboarding makes customers 92% more likely to renew their subscriptions (TSIA/OnRamp).
  • The Insight: Interactive and engaging onboarding content can boost early product usage by 55% (Wyzowl).

5. Validate AI and Automation Strategy

Many companies layer AI over broken processes. An audit ensures your bots are actually helping rather than “getting stuck in loops.”

  • The Statistic: AI adoption can increase the number of issues resolved per hour by 15% (Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2025).
  • The Insight: 80% of customers expect bots to escalate to a human when needed, but only 38% say this actually happens (Zoom, 2025).

6. Align Internal Silos

Audits reveal when different departments (Sales, Marketing, Support) are providing conflicting information, which destroys customer trust.

  • The Statistic: 90% of customers expect consistent interactions across all channels (SDL/Renascence).
  • The Insight: 54% of organizations cite “fragmented or siloed data” as their biggest barrier to leveraging customer insights (Zendesk).

7. Benchmark Against Competitors

In 2026, CX is the primary differentiator as products and pricing become easier to replicate.

  • The Statistic: 89% of businesses are expected to compete primarily on CX this year (Gartner/OnRamp).
  • The Insight: Customer-centric brands are 60% more profitable than those that do not focus on CX (Deloitte).

8. Personalize with Purpose

Generic “Dear [Name]” emails no longer count as personalization. Audits help you use data to anticipate needs and determine the most authentic places to personalize customer interactions and experiences.

  • The Statistic: Brands with mature personalization are 71% more likely to report high customer loyalty (Deloitte).
  • The Insight: 80% of consumers are more likely to purchase from a brand that offers tailored experiences (Epsilon).

9. Enhance Employee Satisfaction

When customers are frustrated, frontline employees bear the brunt of that anger. Fixing the CX reduces agent burnout.

  • The Statistic: 62% of respondents identified a defined relationship between Ex and Cx, stating that the impact was “large” or “significant” and measurable. (Workstep).
  • The Insight: Companies with strong CX leadership are 2x more likely to have engaged employees (Temkin Group).

10. Turn Feedback into Action

Most companies collect feedback, but few act on it. An audit creates a structured roadmap for implementation.

  • The Statistic: Acting on customer feedback can lead to a 25% reduction in churn (Forrester/Renascence).
  • The Insight: 77% of customers view a brand more favorably if they proactively invite and act on feedback (Microsoft).

Summary Table of Audit Benefits

Benefit Impact Metric Source
Revenue Growth 80% increase Zippia/Zendesk
Retention 25-30% improvement Martin Newman
Profitability 60% higher than peers Deloitte
Operational Efficiency 10-15% cost savings Martin Newman

Conclusion: From Insight to Transformation

A Customer Experience Audit is the bridge between organizational intention and customer reality. In an era defined by rapid technological shifts and declining brand loyalty, the ability to see your business through the eyes of the consumer is your greatest competitive advantage. The statistics provided throughout this analysis make a clear case: companies that invest in understanding and optimizing their journey are not just surviving—they are significantly outperforming their peers in revenue, retention, and employee engagement.

However, an audit is only as valuable as the actions that follow (for more see Customer Experience Audit 101). The true power of this process lies in its ability to align internal silos, validate high-stakes investments in AI, and foster a culture of continuous improvement. As we move further into 2026, the question for leadership is no longer whether you can afford to conduct a CX audit, but whether you can afford to continue operating without the clarity one provides. By prioritizing the human-centered elements of your business, you secure not just a transaction, but a long-term piece of your customer’s future.

Customer Experience Audit ROI Flipbook
Download the ‘Top 10 Reasons to Conduct a CX Audit’ flipbook PDF

Looking for someone to conduct an independent customer, partner or employee experience audit? Braden Kelley specializes in conducting these kinds of audits, mapping the relevant journeys and benchmarking your performance against select competitors.

Book Your Experience Audit Today


Image credits: ChatGPT

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.