A Progress Tracker isn’t a Performance Review
The first time I saw a progress tracker also happened to be the first time I saw an all-green one. “Wow,” I thought, “they must have it all together.” In the years since, despite seeing probably hundreds of all-green progress trackers, I’ve never seen a perfect transformation – so why the disconnect?
The typical traffic light system—Red, Amber, Green (RAG)—is a common way to assess the health of transformation initiatives. Green indicates everything is going according to plan; Amber suggests some risks or issues are present, but they’re manageable; and Red signals that there are significant problems or that an initiative is off track. Teams are often permitted (as they are with stratsuma) to self-report the status of their own initiatives.
All-green trackers often hide more than they reveal. They look promising on the surface, but they may also signal that teams aren’t feeling safe enough to report the reality of their challenges, or aren’t close enough to the detail that they spot issues in the first place. Many of these teams struggle to differentiate their performance from the health of their initiative. Imagine an emergency room doctor doing the same thing – marking all their patients as Green to try and show their leaders that they’re a good doctor, despite the health of several patients clearly being Amber or Red.
Too often we assume that a Green status is the ultimate indicator of success. It’s easy to think that if our initiative is green, our leaders will think highly of us. But in reality, the absence of reported issues can be a red flag in itself. When teams feel safe to mark their initiatives as Red or Amber, leaders can take immediate action to mitigate risks and help solve problems to get the initiative back on track.
Research from Bain & Company supports this. Their study, which analyzed data from 24,000 transformation initiatives, revealed a startling truth: 50% of initiatives that were underperforming reported a Green status throughout the entire process. Conversely, a third of initiatives that were flagged as Red (off track) showed improvement in performance over time. This suggests that teams who report honestly—even when things are going wrong—are more likely to get back on track and achieve the desired outcomes.
Leaders who treat Red and Amber statuses as signs of failure discourage their teams from raising early warnings, leading to delayed responses to emerging issues, ultimately costing time and resources. Conversely, Leaders should promote a culture where it’s safe for teams to report challenges honestly, without fear of repercussion. Red and Amber shouldn’t be seen as a reflection of failure; they are indicators of active problem-solving.
The most successful transformations aren’t those that stay perpetually green; they’re the ones that allow for honest conversations about what’s going wrong and what needs to be fixed. As a leader, it’s crucial to foster an environment where Red and Amber are seen not as negative indicators, but as opportunities to uncover deeper insights and address potential risks early on. By embracing transparency and creating a culture where teams feel safe to report the truth—no matter how uncomfortable—you’re setting the stage for more resilient, successful transformations.