Blog by Gary Lancina

In today's volatile business environment, the answer to these questions could determine your organization's future trajectory. At CMG Consulting, we recently conducted a survey of organizational leaders across sectors to assess how they perceive their ability to navigate change compared to competitors. The results reveal insights that should give pause to leadership teams everywhere.

Market Volatility Demands Adaptive Response

‍Our survey was conducted against a backdrop of federal workforce reductions, inflation concerns, equity market declines, and new tariff implementations. This volatility has only intensified, with the Conference Board's latest Consumer Confidence Index showing a further significant tumble in March, bringing the Expectations Index to its lowest point in twelve years.

In this environment, how well do organizations really understand and respond to market shifts? We examined four critical dimensions of change management:

1. Anticipation of changes in the environment
2. Comprehension of the impact of these changes
3. Design of solutions to mitigate or benefit from changes
4. Implementation of these solutions effectively and efficiently

The Confidence Gap Widens with Action

‍Perhaps the most revealing finding is a "confidence gap"—the combined percentage of respondents who either felt their organization was worse than competitors or simply didn't know. This gap grows steadily as organizations progress from anticipation to implementation.  

When asked about anticipation of change, relatively few respondents (23%) felt their organization was behind the competition or were uncertain.  However, this proportion more than doubled to 50% when asked about implementation—indicating that half of the leaders surveyed believed their organizations lagged their competitors or were unsure how to benchmark their execution capabilities.

This progression suggests a troubling pattern: organizations become less confident in their capabilities the closer they get to actual execution. While many leaders feel reasonably assured in their ability to identify market changes, that confidence erodes significantly when it comes to putting solutions into practice.

The Design-Implementation Disconnect

‍Interestingly, the "design" phase shows the most positive self-assessment, with 38% of respondents believing their organization is better than competitors at generating solutions. Yet this optimism fades dramatically when asked about implementation, where only 23% feel they outperform their foes.

This pattern might be characterized as "solution design optimism" followed by "implementation pessimism." It's akin to enthusiastically making plans with friends at a party, only to have those intentions wither in the cold light of the next day's reality.  It also underscores the need for organizations to shift focus toward clear, pragmatic implementation plans over wishful but inoperable schemes.  An average concept executed exceptionally will generally outperform a brilliant concept poorly implemented.

Taking Time to Understand "What This All Means"

‍Our data further suggests some organizations may be suffering from an action bias—jumping too quickly from identifying changes to designing solutions without sufficient comprehension. Twice as many respondents felt their organization was worse at comprehending the impact of changes than at anticipating the changes themselves.  

While the percentage of leaders reporting that they are “better than competitors” remained consistent, equally as many leaders felt they were worse than their competition when it came to truly appreciating the implications of change.

This polarization points to a critical gap: the need for structured reflection processes. In the rush to "do something," leadership teams often miss the crucial step of collective sense making—taking time to fully articulate what market changes mean for their organization's strategic positioning, capabilities, and customer relationships.

Building Organizational Confidence Through Scenario Planning

‍One approach we've found effective for bridging this gap is structured scenario planning. By pre-considering multiple ways current conditions might evolve and defining corresponding action plans, organizations build both the analytical muscle to comprehend market shifts and the decisional agility to implement effectively when conditions change.

This methodology serves two purposes:

1. Creating space for the reflecting thinking needed to truly comprehend market changes
   ‍
2. Building organizational confidence in implementation by reducing uncertainty and preparation time when action is needed

Moving from Ideation to Implementation Excellence

‍Ultimately, our survey suggests organizations would benefit from rebalancing the relationship between ideation and disciplined implementation. This requires:

• Ruthless prioritization of initiatives based on strategic importance
• Disciplined resource allocation aligned with those priorities
• Clear accountability frameworks for execution
• Systematic monitoring of implementation effectiveness

The Competitive Advantage of Implementation

‍The data points to a substantial opportunity: when competing with organizations that struggle to execute their plans, advantage accrues to the team that excels in the implementation of strategic responses to market changes.

So, we ask again: how valuable would it be to feel confident your organization is better than competitors at understanding and responding to market changes? In today's volatile environment, that confidence—if well-founded—could be your most valuable asset.

CMG Consulting partners with organizational leaders to strengthen change management capabilities across all four dimensions: anticipation, comprehension, design, and implementation. Contact us to learn how we can help your organization not just weather market volatility but thrive within it.

‍