[RBM] - Transformation Committee
Hello, today's post continues our RAPID-based Modernization series, addressing popular questions you've raised. This time, we'll explore how to incorporate a single successful change proposal into an ongoing transformation process.
Many of you share my experience that one successful project doesn't guarantee lasting change. It often becomes a one-time effort without follow-through. With this awareness, you can use your first proposal to build what I call the Transformation Committee. Let's examine what it is, how to build it, and how to manage its work.
So what is the Transformation Committee? The name matters less than the function—you can call it whatever works for your organization. I've seen it labeled as the Transformation Team, Chief Transformation Office, or Transformation Specialized Group. Whatever you call it, this group functions as an interdisciplinary, cross-divisional, virtual team. Understanding this group's role and decision-making authority is crucial. I previously shared an article about the Decision Factory, and your committee should operate like that factory—efficiently processing decisions to drive transformation forward.
Let's consider the role of such a group. This committee should plan a modernization strategy, validate it, and prepare for the next steps to make it happen. This group won't just make transformation proposals. Instead, it validates these proposals within the context of strategy execution. It also speeds up proposal preparation and facilitates discussions. When we use this approach properly, we can introduce new initiatives and make final decisions more quickly.
Given this role description, who should be included in such a group? For me, it mirrors the steps in our RAPID model. We need at least one recommender with broad knowledge of company needs - ideally someone from the C-level who has visibility across the entire organization and understands strategic priorities. The CTO or CIO often fills this role perfectly, as they typically have both technical depth and business acumen to guide major transformation initiatives.
Next are the Performers - from my perspective, we need people from finance, compliance, law, and IT departments who will roll up their sleeves and handle most of the actual transformation work. These are the individuals who will be executing day-to-day tasks, managing project timelines, and ensuring deliverables are met. It's particularly helpful to include someone with an in-depth understanding of what currently works within the company - someone who knows the existing systems, processes, and workflows inside and out. This person should have knowledge or responsibilities related to R&D so they can quickly gather all the needed information about current capabilities, identify potential roadblocks, and assess what resources are already available.
We also need minimum representation from critical groups among the Acceptors and Decision makers - which we'll likely have covered from other groups we've already identified. This includes some C-level people plus representatives from finance and compliance who can provide final approval and ensure alignment with organizational goals and regulatory requirements. This way we can build a well-rounded team of 7–8 people minimum that covers all the essential functions and perspectives.
From my experience, do everything possible to keep this core group under 10 people. Larger groups become unwieldy, decision-making slows down, and you risk losing focus and momentum. When you require external help - whether that consultants, specialists, or additional subject-matter experts - absolutely use it, but don't include it in the core group. Keep external resources as advisors or contributors who can be brought in as needed without diluting the core team's effectiveness.
For building this group, the simplest approach would be to include it in the initial proposal and engage these people to form it from the start. I'm also thinking we should get the decision-makers' approval for this group and their blessing to make these decisions independently. We need explicit buy-in from leadership that this group has the authority to move forward without constant oversight. This way, we won't have to circle back for lengthy decision discussions every time we need to make a call or pivot our approach. Having that upfront autonomy will streamline our workflow significantly and prevent the bottlenecks that typically slow down cross-functional initiatives. It'll also give the team members confidence that their recommendations and decisions will be respected and implemented without unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles.
And last, but not least, is how we can make this group's work as efficient as possible while maximizing our collective impact. My first task will be putting together a comprehensive, formal roadmap and establishing clear, measurable goals for the committee. This roadmap will serve as our north star, clarifying exactly what needs to be done, when it needs to be accomplished, and who's responsible for each deliverable. Without this foundation, we'll just be spinning our wheels and wasting everyone's valuable time.
The key is also including regular group meetings and structured brainstorming sessions to keep things fresh, active, and collaborative. These shouldn't be boring status updates where people zone out—they have to be dynamic working sessions where we tackle real problems together and generate innovative solutions. I'm thinking weekly check-ins for accountability, plus monthly deep-dive sessions where we can really dig into the meaty challenges we're facing.
The final piece, and perhaps the most critical, is carving out dedicated time within this group—maybe not 100% of everyone's bandwidth, but a significant chunk, like 60-75%—to work exclusively on group topics and priorities. This means moving from the high-level roadmap to the concrete, nitty-gritty details of what needs to be done, creating tangible proof of concepts that demonstrate our value, and properly coordinating work that's already started but might be scattered or duplicated. Group members have to focus on the group's work and resist the temptation to get pulled back into their other day-to-day responsibilities and competing priorities. Otherwise, this becomes just another side project that never gets the attention it deserves.
This way, you can build an effective change factory in your company and ensure that transformation actually happens. From my perspective, it's also critical to remember that transformation isn't a one-time effort—a team that has evolved should remain part of your company permanently.
What do you think of this approach?