Design people into the operating model

People belong in the operating model from the beginning. A process diagram can describe an orderly sequence while the employees expected to perform it lack time, training, or authority. The resulting difficulty is often described as an adoption problem even though the design never established the conditions required for adoption.

My strategy implementation coursework brought this issue into focus. Changes to structure, routines, information, and performance expectations also change people’s work. Leaders need to examine that effect explicitly. Otherwise, a new operating model can rely on extraordinary individual effort to make its ordinary process function.

Describe the work a role must perform

A role title is too broad to establish readiness. I would identify the decisions, tasks, and handoffs the role will perform in the future process. Which require new knowledge? Which require access to information? Where will the person need to exercise judgment, and what authority supports that judgment?

Consider a planner asked to use a new readiness review. The task may require interpreting demand, checking material status, identifying constraints, and recommending a sequence. Training someone to navigate a dashboard covers only part of that work. They may also need clearer definitions, coaching in exception analysis, and a dependable route to resolve conflicting priorities.

The design should include employees who already understand the work. Their experience can reveal tacit knowledge that a formal procedure misses. It can also show which old tasks should disappear when the new process begins. Adding a new routine while preserving every previous report and workaround can make adoption unnecessarily difficult.

Budget time for learning and transition

Training takes capacity, and learning often continues after a formal session. Employees need opportunities to practise, ask questions, and receive feedback on actual cases. Supervisors need time to coach and correct the process. These activities should be included in the transition plan rather than left to whatever time remains after production demands are met.

Role changes also create handoffs. When a person moves, the organisation must transfer knowledge, open commitments, and working relationships. A rapid reassignment may solve an immediate staffing problem while creating uncertainty in two areas. A deliberate transition can preserve the benefit of the move while reducing that avoidable disruption.

I would look for roles where too much depends on one individual. That dependence can indicate a need for clearer procedures, cross-training, better information, or additional capacity. The aim is to make expertise available to the organisation while preserving the judgment that experienced employees bring. Writing a procedure alone will not capture every difficult decision.

Examine performance in its working conditions

When a new process struggles, leaders should examine whether expectations, skills, information, authority, and workload are aligned. This does not remove individual accountability. It makes accountability more meaningful by distinguishing a capability gap from a design condition that would make consistent performance difficult for anyone.

Employee feedback should be considered alongside operating measures. Repeated confusion, dependence on informal help, or work consistently carried outside the agreed routine can reveal a fragile process before it causes a visible failure. These observations deserve investigation and a practical response.

An operating model becomes sustainable when ordinary performance can produce the required result. Designing the work around realistic human capability and capacity is therefore a strategic responsibility. It is how leaders make the organisation’s expectations achievable.