TL;DR
Most business transformations fail because they focus too much on efficiency. Instead, prioritising simplicity leads to sustainable change and agility.
Introduction: The Complexity Trap in Business Transformation
Many organisations launch transformation programmes with the primary goal of maximising efficiency. They automate processes, implement advanced systems, and create complex workflows, all in the name of speed and productivity. However, this obsession with efficiency often backfires, leading to bloated processes, difficult-to-maintain systems, and frustrated employees.
The key to a successful transformation isn’t just efficiency—it’s simplicity. Simplifying processes, decision-making, and technology ensures that transformation efforts are sustainable, scalable, and adaptable to future challenges.
In my 34+ years of experience leading global business and IT transformations, I’ve seen first-hand that the organisations that focus on simplifying their operations—not just making them more efficient—are the ones that thrive.
Why Efficiency-Driven Transformations Fail
1. Complexity Leads to Fragility
Many efficiency-driven transformations introduce layers of automation, integrations, and interdependencies that make systems difficult to maintain. Instead of streamlining, these efforts often introduce fragility—where a small failure in one area cascades into a larger issue.
For example, in a global ERP transformation I led, a company attempted to centralise and automate all procurement processes across 10 regions. While it seemed efficient on paper, it resulted in a rigid system that couldn’t handle local regulatory differences. The result? Increased manual workarounds and a loss of agility.
2. Employee Resistance and Change Fatigue
People resist change when it complicates their work. A common mistake in efficiency-driven transformations is overloading employees with new systems, new workflows, and new KPIs, without considering usability.
I once worked with a retailer that implemented AI-driven demand forecasting to reduce inventory waste. The system was highly accurate but overly complex. Store managers struggled to override forecasts when local events impacted sales, leading to stockouts and missed revenue.
3. The False Promise of Automation
Automation is often seen as a silver bullet for efficiency. But automating a bad process doesn’t fix it—it just makes bad results happen faster. Before automating, businesses must simplify and optimise their workflows.
Take invoice processing, for example. A company I advised automated its invoice approval process without first addressing inconsistencies in vendor terms. The result? Automated errors that created more work for the finance team.
How to Design for Simplicity
1. Start with First Principles Thinking
Rather than refining existing complex systems, start from scratch by asking: What is the simplest way to achieve this outcome?
I once helped a manufacturing firm redesign its supply chain. Instead of optimising each stage separately, we stepped back and redesigned the entire process with a "minimum viable complexity" mindset. The result? A 30% reduction in lead times and significantly lower operational costs.
2. Reduce Decision Layers
Many organisations suffer from decision bottlenecks due to excessive approval layers. Simplifying decision-making hierarchies speeds up execution and empowers employees.
For instance, in an M&A integration project, I worked with a company that reduced its approval process for procurement from five levels to two. This change alone cut procurement cycle times by 40% and improved supplier relationships.
3. Standardise, Then Optimise
Before looking for efficiency gains, focus on standardisation. Having multiple ways to complete the same task creates confusion and inefficiencies.
At a global logistics firm, I led an IT transformation where multiple regions had different warehouse management systems. By standardising on a single cloud-based WMS, we reduced IT overhead, improved data accuracy, and made future enhancements easier.
4. Design for Flexibility
Simplicity doesn’t mean rigidity. The goal is to create structures that are easy to adapt as needs change.
For example, instead of a single monolithic ERP system, many companies now adopt modular, API-driven architectures that allow for incremental upgrades without massive overhauls.
Real-World Example: The Success of Simplicity-First Thinking
One of the best real-world examples of designing for simplicity is Apple. Steve Jobs famously focused on creating intuitive, easy-to-use products rather than feature-heavy, complex devices. This simplicity-first mindset has made Apple products widely adopted and easy to integrate across ecosystems.
The same principle applies to business transformation. A well-designed, simple process will always outperform a highly optimised but overly complex one in the long run.
FAQs
Q: Is simplicity the same as minimalism?
No. Minimalism focuses on reduction, while simplicity focuses on clarity and ease of use. A simple system may have many components, but they should work together seamlessly.
Q: How do you balance simplicity with innovation?
Innovation thrives in environments where change is easy to implement. A simple, well-structured foundation allows for more agile innovation than a complex, rigid system.
Q: Isn’t efficiency still important?
Yes, but it should be a by-product of simplicity. When processes are simple, efficiency naturally follows.
Conclusion: Transformation for the Future
If your transformation programme is struggling, ask yourself: Are we prioritising efficiency over simplicity?
A simple organisation is an agile organisation. It can adapt, scale, and innovate without being weighed down by unnecessary complexity. When you design for simplicity, efficiency follows naturally—but more importantly, so does long-term success.
Richard Keenlyside is a Global CIO for the LoneStar Group and a previous IT Director for J Sainsbury’s PLC.
Comments