Operating Models Need Experimentation, Not Imitation

Operating models like Spotify’s Agile structure, Toyota’s production system, and Netflix’s culture deck have become quasi-legendary. Leaders admire these companies and often try to copy their models, hoping to replicate their success. 

But here’s the problem: while inspiration works, imitation doesn’t.

Operating models aren’t templates. They’re contextual, shaped by unique goals, challenges, and environments. 

What works for Spotify or Toyota might not work for others. Instead of imitating, companies must embrace a process of continuous experimentation and evolution, aligning their models with their definition of winning and their specific win-conditions.

Defining “Winning” and Win-Conditions

Start with this question: What does “winning” mean for our company?

Winning looks different for every organization:

• Market dominance and being the #1 player in your category.

• Serving a specific niche with exclusivity and high margins.

• Delivering breakthrough products that redefine industries.

• Achieving steady quarter-to-quarter financial growth.

Then identify your win-conditions: what you need to be great at above all else. For Pixar, it’s creativity. For UPS, efficiency and operational optimization. For OpenAI, speed of innovation. And for Louis Vuitton, the allure and exclusivity of the brand are everything.

Your operating model must support your unique win-conditions and where you are on your journey. This requires thoughtful, deliberate work—not shortcuts.

The Danger of Imitating

Take Toyota’s production system as an example. When General Motors partnered with Toyota in the 1980s at their NUMMI plant, GM leaders became eager to adopt Toyota’s methods. They sent teams to observe the processes and bring back new practices to implement in their factories.

But most of these efforts failed. Why? Because the Toyota’s model wasn’t just about practices. It was underpinned by a philosophy: a belief that frontline workers were smart, capable, and a key source of innovation.

Toyota empowered these workers to identify and implement process improvements. GM lacked this foundational trust and empowerment, so the practices alone didn’t deliver the same results.

The same is true for Spotify’s Agile model. It’s often celebrated for its innovative approach to scaling teams, but what many miss is that Spotify itself has continued evolving. The model documented in 2012 was a snapshot in time. Copying it today means copying a relic of the past, not the living, adaptive system Spotify uses now.

Blindly adopting another company’s model skips the critical step of understanding why it works and how it could adapted to your company’s needs and context.

Learning from Nature: Intentional Evolution

Nature offers a powerful analogy for how operating models should evolve. Evolution in nature occurs through random mutations and natural selection. Some changes help a species thrive in its environment, while others fade away.

Over time, the process drives adaptation and survival. But the key difference is that evolution in nature is blind and random.

Companies, however, can—and must—take a deliberate approach. Instead of relying on random mutations, they must embrace intentional evolution:

• Targeted Experimentation: Design experiments to address specific challenges or opportunities. For example, if speed of innovation is a win-condition, experiment with more autonomous cross-functional teams or shorter feedback cycles.

• Selection Based on Results: Keep what works and discard what doesn’t, based on actual outcomes. Avoid clinging to ideas because they’re popular or align with preconceived notions.

• Continuous Refinement: Treat your operating model as a living system. Circumstances change, and your model must adapt in response.

Deliberate and continuous evolution allows companies to evolve faster and more effectively.

Avoid Reorganizations, They Don't Work

Many companies struggle to evolve their operating models. Reorganizations, a common tool for driving change, often fail because they try to solve too many problems at once. They’re typically top-down, driven by people who may not fully understand the day-to-day realities of the teams they are reorganizing.

The result? Resistance, misalignment, and “change antibodies”—cultural pushback that makes future changes even harder.

Instead, companies should embrace incremental change through experimentation. By testing and iterating, they can build momentum and reduce resistance.

Think About Your Company as a Product

Employees are the users, and leaders are the product managers. As a product manager, your job is to:

• Understand your users’ needs (employees’ challenges and win-conditions).

• Design systems and processes that support those needs.

• Continuously gather feedback and iterate.

Operating models are not static frameworks—they’re dynamic systems that evolve with your company. The CEO, as the ultimate product leader, must champion this process, ensuring the operating model remains aligned with the company’s goals and context.

The real question

Are you deliberately designing and evolving your company’s operating model based on how you want to play the game? Or are you hoping it will work itself out?

Remember, there’s no shortcut. Look for inspiration, not blueprints. Experiment, learn, and adapt—continuously. 

Play your own game and win on your own terms.