Vision to Velocity How Defining Your TOM Accelerates Sustainable Transformation

Too many transformation efforts start with a slogan: “We need to move from X to Y.” That statement is a direction, not a plan. Without a clearly defined Targeted Operating Model (TOM) — rooted in a shared aspiration, validated by a current-state assessment, and translated into a sequenced roadmap — the organization risks wasted investment, fractured efforts, and change that fails to stick. Defining the TOM up front aligns leaders, clarifies trade-offs, and creates the tangible blueprint that makes transition achievable rather than aspirational.

Why a Targeted Operating Model Is the Foundation

• Clarity of intent — A TOM describes how the business will operate once transformation succeeds: processes, roles, governance, technology, and how value flows.

• Decision filter — When trade-offs arise, the TOM tells you which choices move you closer to the aspiration and which diverge.

• Risk reduction — Early definition prevents costly rework and misaligned pilots that don’t scale.

• People alignment — A clearly articulated future state enables targeted change management, role redesign, and capability investment.

A Practical, Stepwise Approach

Below is a practical sequence to move from “we must change” to “we can operate this new way.” This sequence reflects a proven consulting approach: uncover aspiration, assess today, design the TOM, and build the roadmap to implement it.

1. Surface the aspiration

• Run leadership workshops and stakeholder interviews to capture the strategic intent and value expected from the change.

• Translate high-level goals into operating principles and outcomes the TOM must deliver (e.g., agility, cost to serve, customer intimacy).

2. Define the Aspirational Targeted Operating Model

• Co-create the TOM components: processes, organizational structure, governance, capabilities, information and technology, and performance measures.

• Use visual blueprints so everyone can see the future state and how parts connect.

3. Conduct a rigorous current state assessment

• Map existing processes, capabilities, systems, roles, and metrics to identify gaps against the TOM.

• Surface constraints, legacy dependencies, and quick-win opportunities that will shape sequencing and cost estimates.

4. Build the Blueprint and Engagement Plan

• Create a detailed blueprint that reconciles aspiration with reality — this is the “how” that bridges vision and execution.

• Tailor an engagement plan that defines governance, stakeholder communications, training needs, and the organizational sponsor network.

5. Develop a strong, sequenced roadmap

• Prioritize initiatives by value and dependency, and sequence work into deliverable waves that minimize disruption.

• Include explicit milestones, decision gates, required investments, and measurable KPIs tied back to the TOM.

6. Deploy activities and implement changes shoulder-to-shoulder

• Execute with cross-functional teams, using pilots to test assumptions and adapt before scaling.

• Maintain close stakeholder collaboration so ownership remains with the client organization, not the external partner.

7. Embed sustained adoption and continuous improvement

• Transition to client-owned governance and ongoing performance management to lock in benefits.

• Build capability handoffs, learning loops, and a cadence for incremental improvements.

Governance, Metrics, and the Role of Change Management

• Governance: Establish a steering committee and decision forums that use the TOM as the north star for prioritization and risk decisions.

• Metrics: Define leading and lagging KPIs tied to customer outcomes, process efficiency, and capability maturity to track progress against the TOM.

• Change Management: Design role transitions, training, and communications around the TOM so people understand what changes and why. Make adoption a deliverable in the roadmap, not an afterthought.

Common Pitfalls and How Defining the TOM Prevents Them

• Starting tactical pilots without a coherent TOM leads to siloed outcomes and integration headaches.

• Over-specifying technology before the TOM causes tool-driven designs that don’t fit the operating model.

• Under-investing in current-state discovery creates blind spots in capacity and culture that derail delivery. Defining the TOM first avoids each of these by aligning tech, process, and people decisions to a single, shared blueprint.

Quick Checklist to Validate Readiness to Transition

• Has the organization agreed the aspirational outcomes and operating principles?

• Is there a documented TOM showing processes, roles, governance, and technology needs?

• Has a current-state assessment identified gaps, constraints, and dependencies?

• Is there a sequenced roadmap with milestones, owners, and KPIs?

• Are governance and change plans in place to sustain adoption?

If the answer to any of these is no, pause and complete the TOM work before scaling the transition.

Closing

Movement from X to Y is only the conversation starter. The real work — and the real chance of success — lies in defining an aspirational TOM, assessing where you are today, and building a clear, governed roadmap to deliver the future state. When organizations take that disciplined path, transformation stops being a leap of faith and becomes a managed journey with measurable outcomes and lasting value.