Execution Finds Its Rhythm: Making the Ordinary Less Extraordinary
Updated: Oct 29
Some organisations run on capability. Others run on effort.
At first glance, they can look remarkably similar. Customers are served, problems are solved and the business delivers results. What isn't always visible is the effort required to produce them.
I've seen successful organisations where the hours were long, the people were committed, and everyone seemed to be carrying something important that nobody else could easily pick up. People continually stepped in to resolve uncertainty, connect activities and keep work moving, often without recognising how much the organisation depended on their intervention.
There was no shortage of capability. The commitment and technical competence of those individuals were among the organisation's greatest strengths. But as the business grew, so did the demands placed upon them.
Growth can increase the load faster than individual effort can sustainably carry it. What was once manageable through personal commitment begins requiring greater coordination, shared understanding and established ways of working. Yet growth doesn't always expose these dependencies. Sometimes it rewards them, allowing the business to continue expanding while relying increasingly on the people who know how to keep its different parts connected.
There is a difference between a business that performs well because its people continually compensate for the way it operates, and one that performs well because its ways of working allow those people to be effective.
Both can be successful. The difference is that one becomes increasingly difficult to scale.
I've come to believe that one of the most valuable things leaders can do is make the ordinary business of running an organisation less extraordinary.
Judgement and exceptional effort will always have their place. The challenge arises when extraordinary effort becomes business as usual, and what once helped the organisation succeed gradually becomes something it cannot function effectively without.
The question for leaders is how to preserve the commitment and capability that made the business successful while developing ways of working that allow those strengths to deliver more, without continually demanding more from the same people.
A well-calibrated operating rhythm is one of the ways to achieve that.
How Capability Becomes Collective Performance
Every organisation has responsibilities that recur. Financial performance needs reviewing, customer commitments need attention, risks and resources need monitoring, and decisions need to be followed through.
These activities are predictable and necessary, yet organisations can spend considerable effort simply bringing the right information and people together. That's time and capacity that could otherwise be directed towards delivering for customers.
Someone remembers a decision that others have forgotten. A problem resurfaces because the underlying issue was never properly resolved. Two functions pursue their responsibilities independently, only to discover that each understands the situation through a partial lens.
An effective operating rhythm provides regular opportunities to understand performance, coordinate decisions, review commitments and recognise where attention is needed. It establishes a dependable way to consider what matters, when it matters and who needs to be involved.
That doesn't mean bringing everyone together for every decision. Part of the discipline is knowing which matters can be handled locally, which require collaboration and which have consequences that warrant broader organisational attention.
As businesses grow, that judgement becomes increasingly important. Frontline teams need sufficient understanding and authority to respond effectively, while executives require enough visibility to recognise patterns, govern risk and maintain direction. A useful rhythm helps maintain those connections without relying on individuals to continually recreate them.
The benefits should also flow through to customers, who experience the combined result of the organisation's activities rather than its internal divisions. When functions work together more coherently, customers are less likely to encounter the problems that arise between them.
Over time, the organisation begins making better use of the capability it already possesses. Routine activities require less unnecessary coordination, duplication and clarification, allowing more attention to be directed towards customers and the challenges that will move the business forward.
What the Organisation Learns to Retain
I've introduced operating rhythms into organisations where the initial response was lukewarm at best. People were already busy, and the prospect of additional reviews, reporting requirements and commitments wasn't immediately welcomed.
Some resistance was understandable. Establishing a rhythm takes effort, and its value isn't always apparent in the early stages. The transition can be bumpy as different parts of the organisation learn to work together in a more consistent way.
But I've also seen what happens when it begins to earn its place.
In the early reviews, considerable time can be spent establishing the facts, reconciling different interpretations and clarifying responsibilities. People are still learning what information matters, how their activities connect and what is expected of them.
After a few cycles, the conversations begin to change. People arrive better prepared, know their business more comprehensively and develop greater confidence in discussing performance. Routine matters begin falling into place more easily, allowing discussions to move beyond reporting what has happened towards addressing emerging risks, resolving problems and making decisions that will take the business forward.
Over time, people become more willing to raise challenges before they grow into larger problems. They begin recognising patterns across successive reviews, understanding the implications of decisions and taking greater ownership of commitments.
The rhythm develops a history. Previous discussions inform current decisions, commitments can be revisited and lessons are less likely to disappear when the people involved move on. Gradually, more of the organisation's understanding becomes shared rather than residing with particular individuals.
That has consequences beyond operational efficiency.
Transitions that would ordinarily be disruptive, such as a leader leaving, a key person being absent or someone new joining, become easier to navigate when an established rhythm provides continuity and a path forward. People understand the recurring responsibilities and decision processes that keep the organisation moving, while an incoming leader has a structured way to learn how the business works.
There is something reassuring about that familiarity during periods of change. The organisation has established ways to understand its circumstances and make decisions, even when the people involved or the challenges confronting them are changing.
When the Operating Rhythm Becomes the Burden
My advocacy for operating rhythm has become more qualified over time because I've also experienced what happens when it becomes excessive.
I've seen environments where management arrangements had grown so onerous that maintaining them consumed more effort than the value they produced. Meetings, reporting requirements and reviews had accumulated, and it wasn't always clear who needed the information or what decisions it was intended to support.
These arrangements rarely become burdensome overnight. A report is introduced to address a concern, an additional review provides assurance, or a process is established in response to something that went wrong. Each may be reasonable in isolation, but their combined effect can become difficult to manage.
Yet excessive management activity isn't always simply a matter of too many meetings or reports. Sometimes the problem lies in the organisational system around them.
Where organisational structures are excessively complex or unclear, accountabilities overlap, or decision rights are poorly understood, the operating rhythm can become bogged down in matters that should already have been resolved. Issues circulate between forums, decisions are revisited and additional reporting is introduced to compensate for uncertainty about who is responsible for what.
The rhythm begins carrying weaknesses in the wider organisational system rather than connecting its capabilities effectively.
This is particularly difficult to unwind in larger organisations, where established practices can take on a life of their own. People continue doing things because they're expected, even when the original purpose is no longer understood. The organisation begins arranging its work around the requirements of its management system rather than using that system to support the work.
An almost invisible hand begins determining the organisation's workload and pace.
This is why calibration matters. Leaders need to examine whether established activities remain useful, whether the right people are involved and whether the effort required is proportionate to the value created. They also need to consider whether the organisational structures, accountabilities and decision rights supporting the rhythm are sufficiently clear.
Otherwise, simplifying the rhythm may provide temporary relief without addressing the reasons it became burdensome.
Some practices will need strengthening as the business grows. Others should be simplified or removed because the organisation has outgrown their original purpose.
An operating rhythm is something to lead and maintain, not something to inherit unquestioningly.
The Capability That Remains
Organisations will always need people willing to step forward when circumstances demand more than the ordinary. Their judgement, commitment and willingness to take responsibility are among the qualities that make businesses successful.
Those qualities are better used responding to genuine challenges than repeatedly compensating for avoidable weaknesses in the way the organisation operates.
A well-calibrated operating rhythm helps capable people work together more effectively, makes recurring responsibilities more dependable and gives the organisation opportunities to retain what it learns. As the business grows or circumstances change, it provides a familiar way to maintain coordination and direction without requiring the same people to continually hold everything together.
The objective isn't to eliminate extraordinary effort. It's to ensure that extraordinary effort is available when circumstances genuinely require it, rather than being consumed by the ordinary demands of running the business.
The rhythm should help the organisation carry the load, rather than become another load for its people to carry.
About the Author
Tracey Harris is the founder of BackPack Executive, working alongside founders, CEOs and boards to restore clarity, strengthen organisational rhythm, and help businesses scale without losing coherence.
