When You Need Both at Once

Photo by t Penguin

You're sitting with your team. The conversation turns to AI, sustainability, what clients are increasingly asking for. Someone says, "This doesn't fit how we work now." Another responds, "But we can't change everything at once—we still need to deliver."

Both are right. And that's exactly the tension many service providers experience—the space between what you do now and what's becoming possible, between the operational excellence clients count on and the strategic evolution the future demands.

The Context We're Seeing

We're seeing a pattern among service providers. Those AI challenges landing on your desk—do they still fit within your current governance? Sustainability is shifting from a CSR report to something that touches your value proposition. Clients aren't just asking what you deliver anymore, but how you collaborate. The meaning of value is evolving—from transaction to partnership, from delivering to creating impact together.

We described earlier eight shifts organizations make in this transition. But that transition also asks something of how you function as an organization, of how you change. And that's where the tension emerges.

Where the Tension Shows Up

Your operational excellence—that reliability clients depend on—you can't let that go. At the same time, you see that partnership a client is proposing, that AI application that could change everything, that sustainability ambition that touches your value proposition. They don't fit the same logic.

There are really two questions asking for answers simultaneously: how do we do this better, more efficiently, more reliably? And what becomes possible if we approach this fundamentally differently? Both are legitimate, both are needed.

To understand why that's so difficult, it helps to distinguish four forms of change. They differ in what you change: your configuration (systems, processes, structures) and your paradigm (mindset, assumptions, values).

Improving is change within your current configuration and paradigm. You make what you already do better—more efficient, higher quality, more reliable.

Renewing changes your configuration but keeps your paradigm intact. New systems, different processes, different structures—but within the same way of thinking about what value is and how you create it.

Those two—you have years of experience with them. Lean initiatives, process redesign, system implementations. You plan, you analyze, you execute. The rhythm is familiar, the methodologies are proven. That works, and organizations have gotten good at it.

But increasingly, challenges arise that demand a different approach. Transition—where your paradigm shifts while your configuration (for now) remains. Your mindset changes, your assumptions about what value means evolve, but your systems and processes are still the same. How do you help professionals let go of what was successful while they're still delivering?

Innovation—where you change both. New paradigm and new configuration. You develop something genuinely new with clients, something that requires thinking differently and working differently. How do you create space for experimentation when the schedule is packed?

And here's where it gets complicated—you can't choose. Let go of operational excellence? Clients leave, targets aren't met, the foundation shakes. Ignore strategic evolution? You miss the boat, competitors move ahead, those partnerships clients are asking for get developed by others.

You need both. Simultaneously. But how do you let both exist without them suffocating each other?

What We See Working

Some organizations develop both capabilities by letting both exist simultaneously instead of choosing. They discover that operational excellence and strategic evolution can reinforce each other.

What stands out: two operating modes running in parallel. One mode—often the existing hierarchy—ensures operational excellence. This is where daily operations run, where expertise lives, where you deliver what clients count on. This is where improving and renewing belong: analysis, planning, execution. The rhythms you know, the processes that work, the quality that stands firm.

Another mode—often organized as a network—creates space for strategic evolution. This is where transition and innovation emerge: experimenting with clients, exploring new partnerships, developing meaningful impact. Exploring, discovering, learning. Asking questions instead of providing answers, making things possible instead of planning them.

John Kotter describes this as a dual operating system. As certified partner of Kotter Training , we see how organizations work with this, and what makes the difference: both modes reinforce each other instead of competing.

The hierarchy provides stability—so the network has room to experiment. Without that reliable foundation, no one dares to explore. Clients give you trust because they know operations will keep running. Teams feel safe to think differently because they know the foundation is solid.

The network brings new insights—that help the hierarchy evolve. That exploration with clients shows what becomes possible. Those experiments reveal where value lies. Those discoveries give direction to where operational excellence can grow.

It's not a choice between stability and evolution, but one organization that can do both.

Look at a concrete example. A healthcare organization was in crisis with rising turnaround times, dissatisfied clients, and teams feeling pressure. The usual response—analyze, plan, improve—didn't work because the complexity was too great and the causes too intertwined.

What stands out: daily care kept running. Had to—clients count on it. Professionals delivered, systems operated, operational excellence was under pressure but didn't collapse. But in parallel, something else emerged. Teams that started building together—literally, with LEGO—how processes worked. Not to analyze who was wrong, but to discover: when does it actually go well?

They discovered that their knowledge of client needs was deeper than they realized, that connections between roles existed but weren't visible, that success experiences had patterns that were repeatable. The strength was already there—just not connected.

Turnaround time dropped from 6 days to 1 day, not because someone imposed it but because the team discovered what was possible. First-time-right increased, clients gave higher ratings, teams felt more connected.

What made the difference: operational excellence provided stability to explore. Teams dared to think differently because the foundation kept running. That reliability created trust to experiment. And simultaneously, that exploration brought insights that improved operations. The network of people discovering together helped the hierarchy evolve. New ways of working emerged not despite but because of operational excellence.

Both reinforced each other.

The Invitation

A few questions to take with you: which capability are you developing now—operational excellence or strategic evolution? Do you see room for both in your context? What would shift if they start reinforcing each other instead of competing?

If you're curious where your organization stands, we've developed a brief reflection. A few questions that help sharpen which form of change is at hand now—and what that asks of your organization.

Some organizations navigate this themselves, with the capabilities they have. Others discover along the way an appreciation for guidance—someone who walks alongside them while both develop, who helps create space where both can exist, who guides through the tension that inevitably arises.

The question isn't what you should do. The question is what fits for you, now, in your situation.

If tomorrow a client asks for partnership instead of transaction—are you ready for that?