Introduction: What a Target Operating Model Really Is

Introduction: What a Target Operating Model Really Is

Target operating model design

1.1 Why Your Company Needs a Target Operating Model

A target operating model (TOM) is the blueprint for how your company will actually run in the future to deliver its strategy. Most leadership teams are very clear on their strategic intent—growth, cost competitiveness, customer experience, risk posture. Where things often fall apart is in the translation from intent to day-to-day reality: who does what, how work flows, how decisions are made, what capabilities and systems are needed, and how performance is managed.

That translation gap is what a TOM is designed to close.

You can think of the TOM as the integrated design of your future “machine”:

  • How value is created end-to-end (processes and customer journeys)
  • How people and units are organized and governed
  • How technology and data support and accelerate work
  • How sourcing, locations, and partners are configured
  • How performance, risk, and compliance are managed

Without a clear TOM, organizations tend to drift into a set of local, incremental fixes. Functions optimize for themselves. Regions build their own ways of working. Technology landscapes get accreted rather than designed. Over time, you end up with operational debt: complexity, fragmentation, and cost that make every new strategic move slower, more expensive, and riskier than it ought to be.

A well-designed TOM gives your leadership team:

  • A shared, explicit view of how the company will work three to five years from now.
  • A basis for coordinated investment decisions—what to fund, in what sequence.
  • A touchstone for day-to-day trade-offs (“Does this initiative move us toward the TOM or away from it?”).
  • A roadmap for capability building, hiring, and technology choices.

It is not an academic exercise, and it is not a thick binder. Used well, the TOM becomes the North Star for how your company evolves its operations to keep pace with its strategy.

A quick way to test whether you need a TOM (or a refresh) is to look for symptoms rather than theories. Typical symptoms include:

  • Strategic initiatives consistently run into organizational or process roadblocks (“We can’t get the regions to do the same thing”, “Legal and Risk get involved too late”, “IT can’t support what the business wants”).
  • Multiple functions claim ownership of the same decisions, or no one clearly owns them.
  • Customer journeys cross so many silos that nobody feels accountable for the entire experience.
  • Technology and data investments are fragmented, with limited reuse and frequent duplication.
  • Performance is managed primarily by functional metrics, with weak end-to-end visibility.

If several of these resonate, you don’t just have “execution challenges”; you have an operating model design problem.

1.2 Strategy vs. Operating Model: Drawing the Line

Executives often ask, “Where does the strategy stop and the TOM start?” It is a fair question, and confusion here can stall or distort the entire effort.

A simple distinction:

  • Strategy answers:
    • Where will we play? (markets, segments, geographies)
    • How will we win? (value proposition, differentiation)
    • What is our ambition and financial profile?
  • Target Operating Model answers:
    • How will we actually deliver that, day in, day out?
    • Who will do what, with which capabilities, using which systems, in what locations?
    • How will we make decisions, manage performance, and control risk?

Strategy is about choices in the external arena. The TOM is about configuring your internal engine to deliver on those choices reliably.

For example:

  • Strategy might say: “We will become the leading provider of integrated digital solutions for mid-market customers, with a differentiated experience built on speed and simplicity.”
  • The TOM must then specify:
    • Which customer journeys will be redesigned first (e.g., onboarding, issue resolution).
    • How sales, service, and product teams will be organized around those journeys.
    • What technology platforms (CRM, workflow, analytics) will be used and how.
    • What capabilities are required (e.g., product owners, journey managers, data scientists).
    • How performance will be measured (e.g., NPS, time-to-value, digital adoption).

If you find your TOM work drifting into re-debating the strategy, you have a problem: either the strategy is not clear enough, or the TOM team is trying to compensate for gaps that the executive team should resolve. Conversely, if your strategy slides are full of operating-model-like content (org charts, system maps, process flows), you may be trying to do TOM work without calling it that.

A practical rule of thumb:

  • If the question is mainly about external positioning, ambition, and portfolio choices, it is strategy.
  • If the question is mainly about internal configuration of people, processes, technology, and governance, it is operating model.

The two must be tightly linked, but they should be owned and debated in different ways. The executive team owns the strategy; the TOM design elaborates and supports it, without reopening fundamental strategic choices every week.

1.3 The 8 Core Design Dimensions of a TOM

While each company and industry has its own nuances, most robust TOM designs share a common backbone. A practical way to structure your thinking is around eight core design dimensions:

  1. Customer & Service Proposition
  2. End-to-End Processes & Journeys
  3. Organization & Governance
  4. People, Skills, and Culture
  5. Technology, Data, and Analytics
  6. Sourcing, Partnerships, and Location Footprint
  7. Performance Management, Metrics, and Incentives
  8. Risk, Controls, and Compliance

You do not need eight separate workstreams, but you do need to ensure your design choices are coherent across all eight.

1. Customer & Service Proposition

 Even though this is close to “strategy territory,” you cannot design an operating model without being precise about who you are serving and what you are promising them. This dimension clarifies:

  • Priority customer segments and channels.
  • The service levels and experiences you commit to (e.g., response times, customization, self-service).
  • How much variation you will tolerate across regions, segments, and products.

These choices drive operational requirements. For instance, a promise of “same-day resolution for priority clients” implies specific staffing levels, escalation paths, and technology enablement.

2. End-to-End Processes & Journeys

 This is the operational backbone of the TOM: how value actually flows. Here, you define:

  • The main end-to-end value streams (e.g., “Acquire customer”, “Deliver order”, “Resolve issue”).
  • Owners for each journey or value stream.
  • Standardized process patterns and where local variation is allowed.

The goal is to simplify and rationalize your operating flows so that most work runs through a small number of well-owned, well-designed journeys, rather than a proliferation of local one-offs.

3. Organization & Governance

 This dimension covers the formal structure and the decision architecture. It is not only about boxes and lines; it is about who is accountable for what, and how they work together.

Typical topics include:

  • Macro-structure: how to organize by product, segment, geography, function, or platform.
  • Role of shared services, platforms, and central versus local units.
  • Decision rights and governance forums: who decides, who advises, who executes.

If your strategy requires more horizontal collaboration (e.g., integrated solutions, end-to-end journeys), this is where you encode that into real roles and forums, not just slogans.

4. People, Skills, and Culture

 A TOM is only as good as the people and capabilities that operate it. This dimension defines:

  • Critical roles and skills for the target state (e.g., product owners, data engineers, risk specialists, customer success managers).
  • How many people you need in which roles and locations.
  • The cultural shifts required (e.g., from “local autonomy at all costs” to “global standards first”; from “opinion-driven” to “data-driven”).

You should emerge with a capability roadmap: what to build, what to hire, what to redeploy, and what to phase out.

5. Technology, Data, and Analytics

 Here you define how technology and data will enable and accelerate the operating model, rather than simply automating today’s fragmentation.

Key questions:

  • What are the core platforms needed (e.g., ERP, CRM, workflow, data platforms)?
  • How will they connect (integration patterns, APIs, data hubs)?
  • Who owns data domains and data quality?
  • What priority analytics use cases will shape how you work (e.g., next-best-action, predictive maintenance, risk scoring)?

A good TOM keeps the technology view at the right altitude: clear enough to guide major investments and dependencies, but not so detailed that it becomes a technical architecture document.

6. Sourcing, Partnerships, and Location Footprint

 This dimension determines where work is done and by whom:

  • Which activities are core and must remain in-house.
  • Which can be centralized into shared services or centers of excellence.
  • Which can be outsourced or done with strategic partners.
  • Where to locate teams (onshore, nearshore, offshore; hubs vs satellites).

The goal is to align cost, risk, talent availability, and proximity to customers and stakeholders. Many of the large economic impacts of a TOM come from getting this configuration right.

7. Performance Management, Metrics, and Incentives

 If you do not change what you measure and reward, your TOM will remain theoretical.

This dimension covers:

  • Enterprise-level KPIs that reflect your strategy (e.g., growth, ROIC, NPS, risk losses, cost-to-serve).
  • End-to-end and functional metrics that support the TOM (e.g., journey lead times, first-time-right, automation rates, digital adoption).
  • Performance review rhythms and management routines.
  • Incentive structures that encourage collaboration and end-to-end outcomes, not just silo performance.

You are designing the nervous system that keeps the operating model aligned and adaptable.

8. Risk, Controls, and Compliance

 Finally, the TOM must embed a practical, effective risk and control framework into the way work gets done.

Typical design decisions include:

  • How risk ownership is allocated (e.g., first/second/third line of defense).
  • How key controls are built into processes and systems.
  • How regulatory changes are translated into operational updates.
  • How incidents, breaches, and near-misses are detected, escalated, and learned from.

The goal is to move from a world where risk is “checked at the end” to a world where the operating model itself is designed to be safe and compliant by default.

1.4 Typical Triggers for a TOM Redesign (and When Not to Do One)

Organizations rarely wake up one morning and decide to redesign their operating model out of curiosity. There is usually a trigger, or a combination of them, that makes the current way of working clearly unsustainable.

Common triggers include:

1. A Significant Strategy Shift
You are entering new markets, launching new business models, or repositioning your value proposition. For example:

  • Moving from product sales to recurring services or subscriptions.
  • Pivoting from purely physical channels to an omnichannel or digital-first model.
  • Shifting from a local champion to a global or regional platform player.

If the strategy changes materially, the operating model that supported the old strategy is very unlikely to be fit for purpose without redesign.

2. Rapid Growth or Scaling Challenges
The company is growing quickly, but the operating model is held together by heroics:

  • Leaders and critical experts are overloaded.
  • Decisions are slow because everything escalates.
  • Processes rely heavily on spreadsheets, emails, and manual workarounds.

Here, the TOM is about designing for scale and repeatability, so that growth does not break the system.

3. Mergers, Acquisitions, or Carve-Outs
In M&A, you are trying to combine two or more operating models into something coherent and value-creating. In carve-outs, you are creating a standalone operating model from scratch.

In both cases, there are fundamental TOM questions:

  • What will be global vs local?
  • Which processes and systems will be harmonized?
  • How will we integrate or separate teams and decision rights?

Treating these as purely technical or HR questions, without an explicit TOM design, is a reliable way to leave value on the table.

4. Large Technology or Digital Transformations
You are implementing a new core system, moving to the cloud, or rolling out digital tools at scale. Technology alone does not create value; it must be accompanied by changes in:

  • Processes and roles (who does what in the new system).
  • Controls and data ownership.
  • Performance measures and behaviors.

If you are about to invest heavily in technology without a clear TOM, you risk automating today’s inefficiencies and fragmentation.

5. Persistent Underperformance or Structural Cost Issues
When margins, service levels, or risk outcomes are structurally worse than peers, the root cause is often how work is organized and executed, not just the effort level of your people.

A TOM redesign allows you to:

  • Simplify and standardize complex process landscapes.
  • Consolidate or reconfigure fragmented operations.
  • Clarify accountabilities and remove duplicative activities.

In these situations, the TOM is both a cost and effectiveness lever.

6. Regulatory or Risk Events
Major regulatory changes, fines, or risk incidents can expose weaknesses in your current operating model:

  • Inadequate segregation of duties.
  • Poor data lineage or traceability.
  • Weak escalation and governance mechanisms.

A TOM redesign can embed risk and compliance much more deeply into business-as-usual operations.

When Not to Do a TOM Redesign

Equally important is knowing when a full TOM effort is not the right tool.

You should pause or reshape a TOM initiative when:

  • Strategy is not settled.
    If your strategy is still being fundamentally debated (markets, segments, business model), freeze the TOM design at the principle level only. Detailed configuration without a stable strategy will lead to rework and confusion.
  • The problem is actually narrow and local.
    If a single function or process is underperforming but the overall operating model is coherent, you may need a target process redesign or a focused functional transformation, not a company-wide TOM.
  • There is no real sponsorship or capacity.
    A TOM redesign requires sustained involvement from the senior team and a meaningful time commitment from strong business leaders. If this is not available, you are better off with a narrower, well-sponsored effort than a broad but weak TOM program.
  • You are primarily seeking a cosmetic reorg.
    Changing reporting lines without addressing processes, technology, governance, and metrics is not an operating model redesign. It usually creates disruption without sustainable benefit.
  • The organization is in acute crisis mode.
    In situations of immediate survival (e.g., liquidity crisis), the priority may be short-term actions: cash preservation, emergency restructuring, triage. A TOM can be designed once basic stability has been restored.

A useful executive checklist before you launch a TOM program:

  • Is our strategy clear enough to derive concrete operating requirements?
  • Do we see symptoms that point to structural operating model issues, not just local execution gaps?
  • Are we willing to make and stick to design choices that may be politically sensitive?
  • Do we have the leadership attention and capacity to see this through?
  • Can we credibly link the TOM work to tangible value (cost, growth, risk, experience)?

If the honest answer to most of these is “yes,” then a TOM redesign is not only appropriate, it is likely necessary. If several answers are “no,” you may still proceed—but with a narrower scope, more limited ambition, or a preparatory phase focused on clarifying strategy and building sponsorship.

How to get started

1

arrow-down-blue

Tell us about your project

2

arrow-down-blue

Interview candidates

(We’ll provide bios within 48 hours on average)

3

Select your consultant and start work

Find a Consultant

or email us at: [email protected]