Incremental change vs. transformation: does it matter?

Publish date:

The definition of “true” transformation is difficult and perhaps offers more of a guide to the project price tag rather than valuable insight on the overall result.




1.       A marked change in form, nature, or appearance.

Purists tend to be a little sniffy about what constitutes “true” transformation.

Just like purists in any walk of life.  The football purist who believes that the game should be played in the “right way;” the music snob who laments that kids don’t listen to complete albums anymore.

In fact, it’s variation that makes life interesting: Leicester City’s Premium League title win with low possession stats, a traditional 4-4-2 formation and a counter attacking style; the resurgence of vinyl in parallel with digital music services and wireless systems like Sonos.

And so it goes with transformation projects.  “Ah but is it a true transformation?” is a question that I’ve heard recently.  “Or is it actually just incremental change?”

The definition of “true” transformation is difficult and perhaps offers more of a guide to the project price tag rather than valuable insight on the overall result.

I have recently been working with some of our customers on projects that have broad similarities: dissatisfaction with suboptimal processes, a range of system pain points and inefficiencies across various work-streams, and a lack of system optimisation and automation.

The projects are in some ways characterised by their modesty.  There is no operating model change, no focus on central or regional functions, and the overall sourcing strategy remains the same.  In summary: fix the problems but make sure the changes are adopted in the business and sustained over time so that the business case can be achieved.

I actually think this is quite refreshing.  From a system perspective, you don’t need to throw everything away and start again.  And this type of project that can be seen as part of an evolution to new ERP, in-memory, and greater automation.

To put a label on it: EOAR.  No, it’s not a donkey braying, though that’s a good guess. Rather, it represents a flexible and modular approach to transformation:

·         “E” for eliminate

·         “O” for optimise;

·         “A” for automate

And the “R”?  Well, that’s “robotics”.  More on EOAR and the path to robots next time…!

Related Posts

Consumer Products & Retail

Smart supply chain in the intelligent enterprise

Jan Wouters
Date icon July 24, 2018

It’s time for a reset; to achieve transparency across all business functions related to...

Digital Leadership

Architecture at Capgemini and The Power of One

David Rutter
Date icon May 15, 2018

An insight into architects and architecture at Capgemini and its relevance to our clients,...

Application Services

Everything-as-a-Service – convenience and context through convergence

Gary James
Date icon May 11, 2018

I believe the IT market is ripe for a similar change to ensure that services continue to be...


By continuing to navigate on this website, you accept the use of cookies.

For more information and to change the setting of cookies on your computer, please read our Privacy Policy.


Close cookie information