This article reports the results of an analysis of 13 business transformation case studies. Some were successful, some failed and the rest were partly successful. It shows how the BTM2 (Business Transformation Management Methodology) disciplines influence the outcomes and explains why some are more successful than the others. By John Ward and Axel Uhl

1. 3030
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
To remain competitive in increasingly
global markets, many businesses need
to transform either what they do or how
they do it or both. Economic turbulence
and uncertainty can also make the need
to change more urgent but, at the same
time, make it more difficult to accomplish
successfully. Given these challenges, it
is not surprising that studies show that
only about 30% of transformation pro-
grams are completely successful, while
30% fail completely. Our study of 13
business transformation cases of differ-
ent types in large European corporations
is consistent with this pattern of success
and failure:
–– four of the transformations were very
successful achieving all the main ob-
jectives,
–– five were partially successful as some
expected benefits were achieved, but
not all,
–– four were unsuccessful, achieving
none of the transformation objec-
tives, or they were not completed.
Most incurred substantial costs.
Every business transformation is differ-
ent but not unique and lessons can be
learned from the experiences of others.
Because these cases showed the same
pattern of transformation success and
failure as other studies, they were valu-
able in developing and testing the BTM
methodology.
The cases were developed through inter-
views with those involved in the transfor-
mation and reviews of relevant documen-
tation. They were carried out, analyzed
and written up by teams consisting of ex-
perienced academics, consultants and
senior company managers. Some have
already been published in the BTA “360°
– the Business Transformation Journal”
and others will be in future. Each case
SUCCESS AND FAILURE
IN TRANSFORMATION
Lessons from 13 Case Studies
by John Ward and Axel Uhl
This article reports the results of an analysis of 13 business transformation case
studies. Some were successful, some failed and the rest were partly successful. It
shows how the BTM2 disciplines influence the outcomes and explains why some
are more successful than the others.
Abstract
In developing the BTM methodology, we carried out 13
case studies of different types of business transformation in
large European corporations. Of these 30% were success-
ful, 40% partly so and 30% were unsuccessful. Each case
was assessed against the BTM methodology disciplines to
understand why they were more or less successful. Many
of the failures were due to lack of alignment with the busi-
ness strategy, lack of clarity of the expected benefits and
inadequate risk assessment. In implementation, the IT and
process changes were often performed more successfully
than the organizational changes, resulting in some benefits
being delivered, even in some of the less successful cases.
But this rarely was enough to enable the transformation
to achieve its strategic objectives and the majority of the
benefits. Overall the organizations whose approach to man-
aging transformations included attention to the majority of
the BTM component disciplines were more successful than
those that did not.

2. 3131
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
was analyzed in terms of how extensively
and how well the BTM component disci-
plines were performed. The results were
compared to identify significant aspects
which appeared to affect the level of suc-
cess achieved. Analyzing these transfor-
mations of varying degrees of success
shows that those organizations whose
approach to managing transformations
paid attention to the majority of the BTM
disciplines were more successful than
those that did not.
The case studies were in the following
industries: automotive, pharmaceuticals,
construction (see case study in issue 1
of this journal, page 38), food, oil (issue
2, page 46) and chemicals, financial ser-
vices (issue 1, page 52), telecommunica-
tions (issue 2, page 54) and IT. The cases
included transformations to develop new
products and services as well as restruc-
turing and reorganizing core business
functions and introducing global process-
es and systems. All involved changes in
organization structures and individuals’
roles, responsibilities and behaviors, in-
cluding, in a few cases, large scale staff
relocations and redeployments. All the
cases included new and significant in-
vestments in IT to enable the business
changes, but, in all except one of the
cases, IT benefits were not the main ra-
tionale for the transformations.
The BTM Methodology Disciplines
An overview model of the methodology
components and relationships is shown
in figure 1. Figure 2 shows an example of
what have become known as ‘transfor-
mation heat-maps’ of the BTM discipline
components and how well they were
performed (in this example: for a partially
successful case). These maps were used
to analyze all the cases.
As would be expected, the successful
cases were largely green with some am-
ber and even a few red. In the unsuccess-
ful cases, the boxes were mostly red and
amber, but there were also always a few
that were green!
Findings for each of the eight methodol-
ogy disciplines are now discussed, start-
ing with the three direction disciplines,
before considering findings regarding
the enablement disciplines and the ‘Meta
Management’ aspects.
1) Strategy Management
A transformation needs to be driven by
a clear strategic rationale – a rationale
which should be easy for every employee
to understand, otherwise there will be lit-
tle motivation to change. All the success-
ful ones had imperatives to transform the
business, not just one function. It was
also clear that in all the unsuccessful
cases the need for transformation was
relatively low; either there was no press-
ing strategic need or it was not seen as a
business priority at a senior level.
In three of the four successful transfor-
mations the need for change was en-
dorsed at executive level and then time
and effort was spent to gain the buy-in of
the rest of the organization and develop
the ability to undertake the changes. In
most of those that were partially success-
ful, the readiness to transform appeared
to be ‘high’, as well as the strategic need.
They were not entirely successful mainly
due to over ambition, or even over enthu-
siasm; too many ‘positive’ assumptions
were made with little assessment of the
potential risks.
Fig. 1: The
direction and
enablement
disciplines
(source: BTA)
Competence
&
Training
Mgmt.
Program/
Project
Mgmt.
IT
Management
Process
Management
Organisa8onal
Change
Mgmt.
Value
Mgmt.
Risk
Management
Strategy
Management
Business
Transformation
Management
Direc8on
Enablement
-­‐
Leadership
Meta-­‐Management:
-­‐
Communica1on
-­‐
Culture
and
Values

3. 3232
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
Having a clear vision of the intended fu-
ture business and organizational mod-
els and then allowing compromises and
trade-offs in the detail of how they are
implemented, is most likely to achieve
stakeholder commitment. However, in
some cases, when the drivers demand
urgent action, a top down, mandated ap-
proach to implementation can also work,
but it tends to achieve stakeholder ac-
ceptance rather than positive commit-
ment.
Most transformations involve at least
two distinct phases – to create a new
capability and then to deploy it. In most
of the cases the capability was created,
but not (yet) always exploited; hence the
benefits achieved were often less than
those originally envisaged. Creating a
new capability can be done separately
from business as usual, but deploying it
usually competes with other operational
priorities.
2) Value Management
In the unsuccessful transformations the
objectives and business cases were of-
ten vague, based on a ‘benefits vision’
rather than evidence based benefits and
an understanding of how to realize them.
This made it difficult for some stakehold-
ers to believe the transformation was
worthwhile and commit the required time
and resources.
There was also often confusion between
‘changes’ and ‘benefits’: for example in-
troducing common global processes is
a change, not a benefit, although it may
Enablement
Program/Project
Management
Program
Planning and
Governance
Program & Proj.
Integration
Mgmt
Program &
Project Scope
Mgmt
Program &
Project Time &
Cost Mgmt
Program
Quality Mgmt
Program
Human
Resource Mgmt
Program
Procurement
Mgmt
Risk
Management
360° Strategic
Risk
Assessment
Deep dives for
strategic risk
areas
Assess
transformation
business case
Define risk
strategy
Risk
Management
Execution
Risk Monitoring
Identify
additional
improvement
Risk Mgmt. as
part of Board
Governance
Competence &
Training
Management
Competence
strategy
Training need
analysis
As-is analysis
Gap analysis
Curriculum
development
Training
preparation
Training
Evaluation &
improvement
Program
Reporting
Organizational
Change
Management
Set-up &
governance
Stakeholder
management
Change
agent
network
Communica1on
management
Performance
Management
-­‐
Project
Team
Performance
Management
-­‐
Business
Change
readiness
assessment
Change
Monitoring
Process
Management
Determine
scope of
analysis
From template
to bespoke
inventory
Identify
improvements /
add attributes
Map selected
processes
Plan process
implementation
Implement
processes
Evaluate
processes
Establish CIP
Meta
Management
Part of Global IT project: HR Excellence function established and many further benefits have been identified.
IT
Management
Business and
IT Capability
Assessment
To-be analysis
Gap analysis
IT roadmap
plan
Solution
architecture
design
IT Deployment
plan
IT Operations
& Service
Optimization
IT Lifecycle
Management
Strategy
Management
AS-ISData
Collection
Analysis of
needs &
maturity level
Design
business vision
Design
Business Model
Integrated
transformation
plan
Business Case
Organizational
model
Risk analysis
Direction
Value
Management
Baseline
analysis
Value
estimation
Detailed
business case
Agree
ownership for
realization
Plan benefit
realization
Execute benefit
realization
Review and
evaluate results
Establish
potentials for
further benefits
Fig. 2: Example
pattern for a
partially success-
ful case (source:
SAP)
(see also journal
issue 1, page 25)
performed and performed well
performed either only to some extent or not particularly well
either not performed or performed poorly
evidence about the sub-discipline was not available

4. 3333
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
create the potential for benefits, such
as reducing costs or higher service lev-
els. Too often business benefits were
overestimated, while the risks and the
problems in making the changes were
underestimated – perhaps deliberate-
ly, otherwise it would be difficult to get
funds and resources?
3) Risk Management
Risk management was often glossed
over, but given the high failure rate it
makes obvious sense to identify and
anticipate what could go wrong, before
it happens! As a result many risks only
became apparent during implementa-
tion, leading to increased costs, delays,
scope reductions and even abandon-
ment. This reluctance to explore the
risks earlier may have been influenced
by executive instigation of the transfor-
mation, which can discourage negative
feedback, making it inadvisable, even
career limiting, to point out the potential
risks!
To maximize the probability of delivering
the intended benefits, the transformation
should be planned in short deliverable
stages, if possible. This also reduces
vulnerability to changing business con-
ditions and makes it easier to adjust the
transformation to retain strategic align-
ment.
In essence, the outcome of the transfor-
mation could be predicted from the pre-
dominant ‘color’ in the assessment of
the directional disciplines. How clearly
and comprehensively the transforma-
tion strategy, value and risks have been
understood and communicated provides
a strong indication of likely success. Had
the organizations undertaken this analy-
sis early in the transformation, some fail-
ures and the significant resulting waste
of money and resources could have
been avoided.
Having considered how the direction
disciplines affect the level of success of
a transformation, our attention turns to
the enablement disciplines and how well
they were performed in the cases.
4) Process Management
The IT and process changes are usually
performed more successfully than or-
ganizational changes, resulting in some
benefits being delivered, even in some of
the less successful cases. But this was
not enough to enable the transformation
to achieve its objectives and the majority
of the benefits.
In some of the cases IT or process meth-
odologies dominated the overall transfor-
mation approach, making the implemen-
tation of other changes more difficult.
In two of the unsuccessful cases the IT
function tried to satisfy all the expressed
user needs, which increased the scope
and consequently the costs considerably
outweighed the benefits.
5) Program and Project Management
Transformations cannot be fully planned
in advance and have to adapt to both
changing business conditions and pro-
gram achievements. This is not neces-
sarily a comfortable position for senior
management and requires an empow-
ered governance group to oversee and,
as necessary, adapt the program. Effec-
tive management of the change content
and benefits delivery is more important
than the efficiency of the process.
In some unsuccessful cases the organi-
zation relied heavily on the knowledge
and capabilities of a third party supplier
throughout, which changed aspects of
the transformation towards what the sup-
plier could do, rather than what was re-
quired.
The transformation manager should have
expert knowledge in the area that is be-
ing changed and also how to manage
change in the organization. A key skill is
being able to reconcile the differing views
of the change and resource implications
between senior managers and operation-
al line management. The priority early in
the program should be to gain agreement
between senior and line management as
to what changes the transformation in-
volves, before ‘negotiating’ for the funds
and resources required. In some of the
less successful cases the ‘contract’ be-

5. 3434
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
tween the program team and senior man-
agement was agreed before the views of
line managers had been taken into ac-
count.
6) IT Management
The transformations whose main benefits
were seen as IT cost reduction or ratio-
nalization or were led by IT were not suc-
cessful. Some business transformations
become ‘IT replacement projects’, as the
first phase is about replacing old technol-
ogy and systems and IT methodologies
and approaches are used with little busi-
ness involvement. It then usually proves
very difficult to regain business interest
when the IT part is completed.
IT is often in a weak position in the con-
text of a business transformation due to a
lack of real business knowledge, but with
a perception that they know how it works,
but they only know how the IT systems
work. These notions created conflict in
some of the transformations. When IT
‘won’ the argument the transformation
was unsuccessful, but when it was ‘busi-
ness-led’, any potential conflict was more
easily resolved.
7) Organizational Change
Management
These cases suggest that organizations
should manage business transformations
as orchestrated, continuous, incremental
sets of changes – co-evolving and co-
existing with business as usual priorities.
The successful transformations usually
addressed the organizational, people
and capability aspects first, then the pro-
cess and IT components. The less suc-
cessful tried to do the reverse.
Understanding and addressing stake-
holder issues and having a strategy for
accommodating or dealing with them
as early as possible in the transforma-
tion is vital. The longer the time avail-
able to transform, the more the stake-
holder views can and should be included
in how the transformation is conducted.
The methodologies used should enable
all the main stakeholders to directly con-
tribute their knowledge and plan their in-
volvement, instead of relying on experts
to interpret the stakeholders’ ‘needs’.
Stakeholder engagement is a critical suc-
cess factor in almost every transforma-
tion, and early alignment or reconcilia-
Fig. 3: The
transformation
experience curve
(source: SAP)

6. 3535
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
tion of multi-stakeholder interests is very
important in order to avoid, for example,
dominance by a minority of stakeholders
or destructive negotiations between dis-
senting groups.
The ‘transition curve’ (see figure 3), de-
scribing how people and organizations
experience major change should be
respected. A comprehensive and sus-
tained approach is needed to minimize
the period that people spend in the ‘val-
ley of tears’, which is characterized by
uncertainty and even disillusionment.
Figure 4 shows that different groups
reach this point at different times in the
transformation. Senior management in-
terests may have moved on, just when
many line managers and staff are under
stress, usually due to change and busi-
ness as usual pressures colliding.
8) Competence and Training
Management
Assessing existing competences as part
of the ’Readiness’ is important in order
to determine the strategy, because what
can be achieved is a function of two fac-
tors: first, the amount of work required
to make the changes and second, the
knowledge and skills that can be made
available at the required times. If some
essential competences skills are limited
or absent, a strategy for developing them
is needed early in the transformation.
In the successful transformations people
were informed and educated about what
the intended future business should look
like. This helped them apply their exist-
ing knowledge to determining how the
vision could be achieved, but it also
exposed where knowledge was inad-
equate. Where suppliers are providing
essential competences, those also need
to be appraised and managed – in case
they have over-estimated their capabili-
ties. Organizational and individual ex-
perience cannot always be transferred
from transformation programs in other
organizations.
In addition to the eight direction and en-
ablement disciplines discussed so far,
‘Meta Management’ considers themes
which influence the performance of any
type of organizational transformation.
From the case studies a number of les-
sons about leadership, communication,
culture and values can be learned.
Leadership
The successful transformations had
‘CEO’ sponsorship and a C level execu-
tive leading the transformation. Involve-
ment should be real and visible or other
Fig. 4:
Employees
experience the
effects of the
transformation
at different times
(source: SAP)
Fig.
4:
Employees
experience
the
effects
of
the
transforma9on
at
different
9mes
(source:
SAP)

7. 3636
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
Key Learnings
ᐅᐅ The transformation must have a clear strategic rationale
explained in a language which everyone can understand.
Otherwise there will be little motivation to change.
ᐅᐅ The outcome of most transformations depends on how
clearly and comprehensively the transformation strategy,
value and risks have been understood and communi-
cated at the start.
ᐅᐅ The successful transformations usually address the or-
ganizational, people and capability aspects first, then the
process and IT components. The less successful try to do
the reverse.
ᐅᐅ Most transformations involve at least two distinct phases
– creating a new capability and then deploying it. The
former can often be done separately from business as
usual, but the latter inevitably competes with other opera-
tional priorities, which can seriously delay or even prevent
its exploitation.
ᐅᐅ The transformation manager should have expert knowl-
edge in the area that is being changed and also how to
manage change in the organization.
ᐅᐅ Overall, It is clear from these cases that the organizations
whose approach to managing transformations included
careful attention to the majority of the BTM component
disciplines were more successful than those that did not.
executives will not see it as important.
The evidence from these cases suggests
that continuous personal involvement in
the governance of the transformation is
what is needed, but it is not always easy
for a busy executive to sustain this over
the extended period of most transforma-
tions.
But the cases also show that the early
transfer of ‘ownership’ to a coalition of
business managers, who will actually
deliver the changes and benefits, is the
best way to develop the capability to
change. One key decision that needs to
be taken is the mode of ‘change agen-
cy’ to be adopted. Either an ‘expert task
force’ or devolving change responsibili-
ties to operational managers can work,
but a lack of role clarity is likely to cause
fragmentation and even disintegration of
the initiative.
Communication
A common lesson from many of the
cases – even the successful ones – is
that no amount of communication is ever
enough! Informing everyone in the orga-
nization why change is necessary and
about the consequences of not changing
usually needs regular repetition. Equally
important is being open about what the
changes are going to mean, even if they
will be unpopular with some stakehold-
ers. Evasiveness builds distrust or sug-
gests ignorance, both of which reduce
credibility and hence commitment.
The communication must explain what
is going on and what the intentions are,
and it must be conveyed in the ‘language’
of the different stakeholder groups. De-
livering it at the appropriate times when
it is relevant to the working context of
the recipients is also critical if it is to be
effective. Also communication is a two-
way process; this is sometimes forgot-
ten – and in some of the less successful
cases little attention was paid to ques-
tions, concerns or feedback which the
transformation team (wrongly) felt to be
distracting or unimportant.
Culture and Values
All the transformations included signifi-
cant changes in organizational roles,
responsibilities, and behaviors, and in
many cases the changes were counter
to the prevailing culture. The successful
transformations recognized this was ei-
ther desired or inevitable and addressed
the organizational issues first to create a
new context within which to bring about
further changes.
In some cases the transformation also
demanded a change in the organiza-
tion’s values: for example, loss of au-
tonomy and reduced discretion for local
investment, consolidation to achieve cor-
porate control of resources or standard-
ization to achieve corporate rather local
business advantages. Inevitably these
changes created tensions and exposed
cultural and value differences across the
business units and functions, which had

8. 3737
METHODOLOGY | RESEARCH
to be either reconciled or over-ridden to
succeed with the transformation. In the
less successful transformations these
tensions were not addressed and exist-
ing power structures prevented or sub-
verted the changes.
The structure and mode adopted to bring
about the transformation should nor-
mally reflect the organization’s overall
management style. The ‘task force’ ap-
proach, which exercises the use of pow-
er, worked well in a situation when the
need to transform was urgent, the objec-
tives were very clear and the means of
achieving them were known. In the op-
posite situations, a more devolved ap-
proach enabled at least one successful
Service
AUTHORS
Professor John Ward is emeritus professor at the Cranfield University School of Man-
agement. John was Professor of Strategic Information Systems from 1992 to 2010 at
Cranfield and Director of the IS Research Centre from 1993-2005. He has a degree in
Natural Sciences from Cambridge, is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Management
Accountants and is a past-President of the UK Academy for Information Systems.
j.m.ward[at]cranfield.ac.uk
Professor Dr. Axel Uhl is head of the Business Transformation Academy at SAP. He
is a professor at the University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW)
since 2009. Axel Uhl received his doctorate in economics and completed his master
in business information systems. He started his career at Allianz and has worked for
DaimlerChrysler IT Services, KPMG, and Novartis. His main areas of research and in-
terest are sustainability and IT, leadership, and business transformation management.
a.uhl[at]sap.com
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank all those who were involved in developing the case studies. Without their
work this article would not have been possible.
organization to increase the scope and
ambition of the transformation, through
knowledge sharing across the organiza-
tion and individual managers learning
from experience as the program evolved.
As the transformation proceeds, it may
be necessary to change modes and in
turn the governance of the program. In
particular the creation of a new capability
can be carried out by a task force largely
separated from day to day operations.
However, deploying the new capability
usually competes with other business as
usual pressures, which can cause unex-
pected problems, delays or even unsuc-
cessful deployment.