Companies launch operational excellence programs with the intention that they will last for decades. They hope the significant resource investments will eventually pay off through continuous improvement of operational processes. Yet, while such programs are intended as lasting efforts, they often collapse, crumble, or change in other ways. What if there were a tool that helps foresee that evolution?
Now there is.
In our recent research, we studied the evolution of corporate lean programs. We sourced 17 multinational companies and documented 32 major program changes. The pattern that emerged was consistent: Programs move through long periods of stability, followed by shorter periods of significant change. Recognizing this pattern can help program managers understand and proactively steer their program development.
Why lean programs change
Most corporate lean programs spend years in a relatively stable “equilibrium” phase. In this phase, the programs evolve incrementally: Content undergoes small adjustments; lean assessments are refined; training initiatives continue; and organizational roles understood. So-called “deep structures” slowly emerge, making the program resistant to change. Program routines become “how we do things around here.”
But stability does not mean absence of pressure. Various forces continually shape how the program is perceived within the organization. For a long time, these forces can balance each other, keeping the program in equilibrium with only incremental upgrades. Eventually, though, the forces break the mold. The program enters a phase of significant change before settling into a new stable configuration.
In the research, we identified forces with a particular impact on a program’s position. As shown in Figure 1, they can be grouped into two axes: Program Need and Program Support.
The vertical axis describes the perceived need for the program. The horizontal axis describes the organizational support for the program.
Program Need reflects how important the initiative is seen to be for achieving the company’s goals. We identified 5 key forces affecting the perceived need for the program: (1) Financial pressure, changes in (2) senior leadership and (3) program management, (4) other initiatives competing for resources and attention, and (5) the pressure for alignment across the corporation.
Program Support is captured by 2 key forces. Even when a program is strategically important, it still requires (1) leaders and (2) employees to actively support it.
Importantly, all forces can either strengthen or weaken the program depending on differences in context. For example, financial distress can lead companies to strengthen their lean programs to double down on cost savings, reduce their programs to save on program costs, or not touch them. Which of the three outcomes is most likely to happen is best evaluated by the program team.
Four possible lean program changes
When the vector sum of Program Need and Program Support brings the program out of equilibrium, corporate lean programs move in one of four directions:
- Pivot (higher need but lower support): Companies redesign the program completely. This often happens when leaders see a strong need for improvement but believe the existing program is no longer effective. The company then launches a new framework or relaunches the program with a different scope.
- Boost (higher need and support): Companies expand the existing program. When both the need for improvement and organizational support are strong, the program grows. It may extend beyond manufacturing into office processes or integrate new capabilities, such as digital improvement tools or AI.
- Patch (lower need but higher support). The program still enjoys internal support but is perceived as less central to the company’s strategy. Program management responds by updating tools, refreshing branding, or introducing small changes while maintaining the program’s overall structure.
- Abandon (lower need and lower support). Programs are often abandoned when both need and support decline. This is not an unusual outcome for programs that have played their role but lost their relevance.
A practical workshop tool
Putting the above together provides a simple diagnostic tool that can help program managers assess the situation. Instead of only asking whether the program is “successful,” they should keep an eye on the forces affecting it today and tomorrow.
Going through the forces is a quick 10-minute exercise. Each force is drawn as a vector, with arrow direction and length indicating the force strength. For example, they can ask, “Are we getting a new senior leader? Is she likely to support our current program or deprive us of resources? To what extent? What could we do to affect her position?”
By discussing all forces, teams get a clearer view of whether the program still has a strong need and support. Or whether one of these dimensions is weakening. Drawing the vector sum indicates whether the program will stay in equilibrium, pivot, boosted, patched, or abandoned.
We have used the tool in workshops with companies. It’s easy to use and triggers reactions like, “Aha, now I see why our last program changed as it did.” And, “I really like the way it explains deep structures; it’s exactly my experience.”
Figure 2 shows how a large pharmaceutical company mapped the forces that led the old lean program to pivot. In this particular case, three events were essential. First, a new leader of the lean program came with new energy and ideas. Second, an external consultancy had been tasked with creating a broader, enterprise-wide improvement initiative. Third, employees had lost interest in the old lean program, seeing it as tool-focused and aged. Additionally, the company ran two different competing programs in different divisions; one based on lean, another on six sigma. This situation suggests that the program was heading toward a major redesign rather than a simple expansion. For better or worse, the result was pivoting into a new corporate lean program, building on the strengths of both existing initiatives.
Managing evolving lean programs
Lean programs are often described as long, steadfast journeys of continuous improvement. In practice, they behave more like evolving systems with long periods of stability, interrupted by shorter periods of significant change.
Programs instill routines that give them stability, but they are also shaped by leadership changes, strategic priorities, and organizational dynamics. What was once new and fresh can erode and disappear. For program leaders, understanding these dynamics can help them anticipate change, maintain support, and adapt their programs to stay relevant.
Change is healthy, but it’s better to lead it than be a victim of it. Are you involved in a corporate lean program? Give the tool a try.
Read the full paper: Netland, T., Grothkopp, M., Rossini, M., Friedli, T., and Portioli Staudacher, A. (2026) Why and how do corporate lean programs change? A Punctuated Equilibrium Perspective, International Journal of Production Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2026.109980
Download the tool template for your own workshop.
What's on your mind?