The Business Model Reconfiguration Trap: Why the Right Amount of Change Determines Growth

July 21, 2026

The Business Model Reconfiguration Trap: Why the Right Amount of Change Determines Growth

Business Strategy / Growth Strategy / Executive Leadership / Innovation Management / Business Model Transformation

21. July, 2026

A company can redesign its business model, launch new offers, rewrite its revenue logic, and reshape its value chain — and still fail to improve performance. That is the uncomfortable reality many executives face: business model change is not a growth guarantee, and too much change can destroy the very fit that made the company successful in the first place.

The latest research on business model reconfiguration makes one message especially clear: the breadth of change matters. Leaders do not win by changing everything. They win by changing the right things, in the right combination, at the right moment. For C-level teams, that distinction is not academic. It is the difference between strategic renewal and expensive confusion.

Why This Issue Matters Now

Executives today are under pressure to transform faster than ever. Artificial intelligence, shifting customer expectations, digital channels, new competitors, and margin pressure are forcing companies to rethink how they create, deliver, and capture value. In that environment, “business model transformation” has become a common boardroom phrase.

But transformation is not the same as performance. A firm can make multiple changes and still underperform if those changes are not internally coherent, strategically aligned, and operationally absorbable. Business models are interdependent systems. When one element changes, others often need to move too. That means reconfiguration is not a simple upgrade. It is a coordinated redesign of the operating logic of the company.

The Hidden Sweet Spot

Research shows that the relationship between business model change and performance is not linear. On average, broad business model reconfiguration does not automatically improve results. In many cases, the value curve looks like a sweet spot: too little change creates inertia, too much change creates complexity, and somewhere in between lies the zone where value is created.

That zone is not fixed. It depends on two critical conditions: the firm’s prior performance and its level of innovation. A highly successful company may actually need a more radical reconfiguration to keep growing, because minor changes can disrupt a finely tuned system. By contrast, a company with weaker performance may benefit from more incremental adjustments before attempting a full-scale redesign.

This is a powerful lesson for executives: the right breadth of reconfiguration is not determined by ambition alone. It is determined by the firm’s current position on the performance landscape.

Why Strong Performers Need Different Logic

One of the most important findings is counterintuitive. Firms with strong prior performance do not necessarily benefit from small business model tweaks. In fact, small changes may weaken their existing fit. A successful business model is often a carefully balanced system of complementary choices. If leaders alter only one or two elements, they may break that balance without creating a new one.

That means high-performing firms often face a paradox. The better the current model works, the more dangerous superficial change becomes. If a company wants to renew itself from a position of strength, it may need to move more boldly and reconfigure a broader part of the business model. Otherwise, it risks falling into the trap of “safe” change that is strategically ineffective.

For boards and CEOs, this is a crucial message: protecting past success can become the biggest barrier to future success.

Why Innovation Changes the Equation

The research also shows that business model change and innovation cannot be managed separately. When firms introduce new products, new services, or new processes, those innovations need a business model that can absorb and monetize them.

If innovation is high but business model change is too limited, the company may fail to capture the value of its own innovation. The technology or offering may be strong, but the company does not redesign how it reaches the customer, structures the economics, or coordinates the ecosystem around it.

At the same time, too much business model change combined with heavy innovation increases complexity sharply. The organization must manage more interdependencies, more decisions, more stakeholder expectations, and more execution risk. That is why the research suggests a medium level of business model reconfiguration is often most effective when innovation activity is high.

The practical takeaway is clear: innovation without business model alignment is incomplete. But broad transformation without execution discipline is equally dangerous.

What Executives should Watch

For leadership teams, the biggest mistake is to treat business model change as a generic solution. It is not. It is a targeted strategic instrument. Before changing the model, leaders should ask whether the company actually needs a broad redesign or whether more focused adaptation would be enough.

They should also separate three questions that are too often blended together:

Is the current business model still fit for purpose?
Is innovation demanding a new value capture logic?
Is the organization capable of absorbing the level of change being proposed?

A company may need to move its pricing model, customer segment, delivery logic, partnerships, or profit structure — but not all at once. The best leaders understand sequencing. They know which elements must move together and which should remain stable while the transformation unfolds.

A strategic Lens for Boards and CEOs

From a strategic leadership perspective, business model reconfiguration should be treated like a portfolio decision. Every change creates both upside and downside. Some changes unlock scale, speed, and relevance. Others create internal friction, weaken coordination, or confuse the market.

That is why the question is not, “Should we transform?” The better question is, “How broad should the transformation be for this company, in this market, at this moment?”

This is especially relevant for firms facing digital pressure, margin compression, or international expansion. In those situations, executives often assume that more change signals more progress. Yet the evidence suggests the opposite can happen. A broad transformation can overwhelm the organization, slow decision-making, and create strategic drift if it is not anchored in a clear logic of fit.

Questions for Leadership Teams

Before launching the next transformation, senior leaders should ask:

Which parts of our business model are genuinely outdated, and which are still creating advantage?
Are we making enough change to unlock new value, or just enough to create disruption?
Does our current performance position call for incremental adaptation or a more fundamental redesign?
Are our innovation efforts supported by the right business model logic to capture value?
Do we have the organizational capacity to manage multiple interdependent changes at once?
Are we transforming because strategy demands it, or because change has become a management reflex?

What This Means In Practice

The strongest companies do not reconfigure their business model simply because transformation sounds compelling. They do it because the economics, the market, or the competitive landscape has changed enough to require a new fit. They also know that successful reconfiguration is rarely about one big move. It is about designing the right set of changes so that the company’s value proposition, revenue logic, operating model, and market position work together again.

For executives, this is where the real opportunity lies. Business model reconfiguration can absolutely be a growth lever. But only when it is deliberate, coordinated, and proportional to the challenge the company is facing.

The companies that get this right do not just change faster. They change more intelligently.

Ready to Drive Sustainable Growth?

Partner with International Growth Solutions to unlock sustainable growth through strategic insight, transformative leadership, and commercial excellence—across every stage of your business journey.

Strategic Consulting: Customized solutions for sustainable, measurable growth.

Interim Leadership: Experienced CxO and executive support to lead complex transformation initiatives and growth journeys.

Board Advisory: Trusted guidance on growth strategies, governance, and risk management in evolving global industrial markets.

Book your complimentary consultation today to explore actionable strategies tailored to your organization’s unique challenges.

Stay informed and inspired—subscribe to our LinkedIn newsletter, Unlocking Sustainable Business Growth, for exclusive research, best practices, and practical advice on building resilient, high-performing, digitally enabled organizations.

Share this article:

The Business Model Reconfiguration Trap: Why the Right Amount of Change Determines Growth Read More »

Why Industrial Digitalization Fails Without Ecosystem Orchestration

July 15, 2026

Digitalization Is Rewriting the Marketing-Sales Interface: What C-Level Leaders Must Do to Protect Growth

Digital Transformation / Revenue Growth / Marketing Strategy / Sales Leadership / Organizational Alignment

15. July, 2026

Marketing and sales are no longer just struggling to align. Digitalization is exposing a deeper issue: many companies have not redesigned the revenue interface for how customers actually buy today. What used to be a coordination challenge has become a leadership problem with direct impact on growth, speed, customer experience, and profitability.

For C-level executives, this is not a question of departmental preference. It is a question of whether the organization is built to convert demand efficiently in a digital environment. Research on marketing-sales relationships shows that poor alignment can weaken performance, while digital transformation has made the interface more complex, more data-driven, and more politically sensitive. The companies that thrive are not the ones with the most tools. They are the ones that turn digitalization into a shared operating model.

Digitalization Changes the Rules

Digital technology now shapes how companies create visibility, generate leads, manage customer data, and convert opportunities. It is no longer simply a support function for marketing or a productivity aid for sales. It influences strategy, execution, customer interaction, and internal coordination at the same time.

The research shows that leaders inside the organization often interpret digitalization differently. Marketing teams tend to see it as a strategic and communication lever. Sales teams tend to see it as a direct revenue engine. Consultants and external advisors often see both sides at once: digitalization as an operational system and as a coordination mechanism. That difference in perspective matters, because when functions define success differently, they also optimize differently.

A digital customer journey does not respect old internal boundaries. Customers move between search, content, social channels, websites, e-mail, CRM interactions, and direct conversations with sales. If the company has not aligned its internal responsibilities, the customer experience becomes fragmented. That fragmentation creates friction in the handover between marketing and sales, and friction slows growth.

Where Friction Appears

The most common tensions are not abstract. They show up in the daily work of the commercial organization. Marketing needs more customer data, better reporting, and more feedback from sales. Sales needs ready-to-use content, faster support, better lead quality, and tools that help them sell rather than burden them with administration. Both sides have legitimate needs, but those needs are not always translated into a shared process.

One of the biggest sources of tension is CRM and data ownership. Marketing often sees CRM as essential for structure, segmentation, and precision. Sales often sees it as time-consuming unless it clearly supports selling. If the system is imposed without clear purpose, the result is resistance. If it is customized for how sales really works, it becomes a commercial asset. The difference lies not in the software, but in leadership discipline.

Another pressure point is social selling and digital content. Sales increasingly expects marketing to provide adaptable content, visuals, and arguments that can be used directly in the market. Marketing may still think in terms of campaigns, institutional communication, or brand consistency. That mismatch creates a predictable problem: sales wants speed and usability, marketing wants control and coherence. Without alignment, both sides feel the other is slowing them down.

The Hidden Organizational Shift

Digitalization is also changing the structure of responsibility. In some companies, especially smaller ones, e-commerce and digital customer management have led to a reallocation of responsibilities from sales to marketing. That may be commercially necessary, but it can also create a strong sense of loss inside the sales force, especially when customer portfolios move, priorities change, or digital customers grow faster than physical accounts.

This is where leaders need to be especially careful. When internal changes are introduced as a fait accompli, teams may comply but not commit. The research suggests that this can lead to frustration, passive resistance, and a quiet decline in collaboration. In other words, digital transformation may look successful on the outside while weakening trust on the inside.

The deeper issue is that many organizations still operate with different logics for different channels. Physical and digital customers are often managed differently, measured differently, and supported differently. That can be effective if designed intentionally. But if it emerges ad hoc, it creates confusion about who owns growth, who supports the customer, and how performance is judged.

Why the Old Model No Longer Works

Traditional alignment methods are no longer enough. Cross-functional meetings, shared goals, and communication routines still matter, but digitalization has added more complexity. Teams now need coordination across data, platforms, content, campaigns, lead management, and customer experience. They also need faster learning cycles because digital markets move quickly and customer expectations keep changing.

The research highlights that performance improves when organizations use coordination mechanisms such as teamwork, shared structures, cross-functional meetings, job rotation, and better information sharing. But in the digital context, those mechanisms need to be extended. Leaders must also ensure that digital tools are actually adopted, that skills are developed, and that the business has a clear operating logic for how digital work flows between functions.

This is why the problem is no longer just about alignment. It is about the design of the revenue system. If the operating model does not define how marketing and sales work together digitally, the organization will keep creating local fixes for a structural problem.

What Executive Teams Should Do

Executives should treat marketing-sales alignment as a strategic growth priority, not as a functional housekeeping topic. The first step is to define the revenue interface clearly. Who owns which part of the customer journey? Who qualifies the lead? Who creates and updates content? Who feeds the CRM? Who is accountable for conversion quality?

The second step is to choose tools based on commercial use, not on digital enthusiasm. A CRM system, collaboration platform, or social selling tool only creates value if it fits the actual workflows of the team. A tool that feels like surveillance or extra administration will not improve execution. A tool that simplifies work and strengthens shared visibility will.

The third step is to invest in capability. The research shows that many managers have had to train themselves in digital tools. That is not a sustainable model for scale. If digitalization is strategic, then training, adoption, and managerial support must be part of the transformation plan. Otherwise, the company buys software but never builds the capability to use it well.

The fourth step is to create common metrics. Marketing and sales need shared indicators that reflect both commercial outcomes and customer experience. If each function is measured only on its own short-term targets, the organization will keep optimizing locally instead of jointly. Shared metrics do more than improve reporting. They shape behavior.

Customer Experience as the Common Ground

One of the most useful findings from the research is that customer experience can become the shared language between marketing and sales. That matters because internal alignment becomes easier when the debate shifts from territory to value creation.

If the customer journey is the common reference point, then the questions change. Instead of asking who owns the lead, leaders ask how the lead is developed. Instead of asking who should control the content, they ask what the customer needs at each stage. Instead of asking who is right, they ask what creates the most consistent and persuasive experience for the customer.

That shift is powerful because it replaces internal friction with external focus. In a digital environment, the companies that can organize around the customer experience will outperform the companies that remain trapped in function-first thinking.

Questions for Executives

Do marketing and sales agree on what a qualified lead really is?
Are our digital tools solving business problems, or simply adding complexity?
Has digitalization clarified responsibilities between teams, or blurred them further?
Do we have one view of the customer journey, or multiple disconnected ones?
Are our KPIs encouraging collaboration, or reinforcing silos?
Do our teams have the skills and routines needed to use digital systems effectively?

These questions are not operational details. They are leadership questions. The quality of the answers often determines whether digitalization becomes a growth engine or a source of hidden waste.

If these questions reveal gaps in your current model, the next step is to examine how your revenue organization, processes, and digital capabilities can be aligned around one clear growth agenda.

Ready to Drive Sustainable Growth?

Partner with International Growth Solutions to unlock your company’s full potential through tailored strategic consulting, interim leadership, and board advisory services—customized to meet your unique challenges at every stage of your growth journey.

Strategic Consulting: Customized solutions for sustainable, measurable growth.
Interim Leadership: Experienced CxO and executive support to lead complex transformation initiatives and growth journeys.
Board Advisory: Trusted guidance on growth strategies, governance, and risk management in evolving global industrial markets.

Book your complimentary consultation today to explore actionable strategies tailored to your organization’s unique challenges.

Inna Hüessmanns, MBA

Share this article:

Why Industrial Digitalization Fails Without Ecosystem Orchestration Read More »

Why Industrial Digitalization Fails Without Ecosystem Orchestration

June 21, 2026

Why Industrial Digitalization Fails Without Ecosystem Orchestration

Industrial Digitalization / Change Management / Business Model Innovation / Digital Servitization / Revenue Model Innovation

21. June, 2026

The biggest mistake industrial leaders make is assuming digitalization is a technology problem. They invest in platforms, AI, analytics, connectivity, and automation, yet the business impact often remains far below expectations. Research across leading manufacturers shows that the real bottleneck is not the technology itself, but the ability to orchestrate the ecosystem around it: customers, distributors, service partners, software providers, connectivity players, and other stakeholders who determine whether digital value can actually be created, delivered, and captured.

For large manufacturers, this is now a strategic issue, not an IT issue. The winners are no longer the companies that simply digitize products. The winners are the companies that redesign their business models so that digital offerings can scale across a broader ecosystem. That requires leadership decisions on partnerships, roles, incentives, governance, and commercial logic — all at once.

The hidden reason digital programs stall

Many digital transformation programs fail because they are built inside the company, while the value is supposed to emerge outside it. Industrial firms often approach digitalization with a strong product mindset: build internally, optimize technically, then push it into the market. But digital business models do not work like that. They depend on interdependent actors who must align around a shared value proposition.

Research shows that manufacturers often get trapped by three legacy barriers:

Digital value myopia: leaders see digital as an add-on to the product, not as a new value logic.
Traditional value chain inertia: existing sales and service partners are organized for reactive product support, not proactive digital delivery.
Firm-centric value-capture logic: the company assumes it should keep the old revenue formula, even when the digital model requires new forms of sharing, risk, and reward.

These barriers are not technical. They are organizational, commercial, and cultural. That is why they persist even when the technology is available and the market demand is real.

Why product logic breaks digital growth

The first barrier, digital value myopia, is especially dangerous because it hides in plain sight. Many industrial companies are excellent at engineering, reliability, and product performance. But those strengths can create blind spots. Leaders may underestimate how much digital offerings depend on external capabilities such as data access, software design, analytics, cloud infrastructure, and AI-enabled applications.

The second barrier is just as costly. Existing value chains are often built around distributors, technicians, and local service partners whose routines were designed for a different era. In the analog model, a machine breaks, a technician responds, and everyone understands the role. In the digital model, the goal shifts to predicting problems before they happen, using data to intervene earlier, and coordinating action across multiple actors. That requires new responsibilities, new skills, and new habits.

The third barrier is the one many executives underestimate the most: value capture. Digital offerings often reduce the demand for spare parts, maintenance visits, or reactive service work. That can directly conflict with the profit logic of existing partners. If a distributor earns from breakdowns, how motivated is that partner to promote predictive maintenance? If a service network is compensated by parts and labor, why would it fully embrace a model that prevents both? Unless the financial model changes, the ecosystem may resist the new business model from within.

The new executive playbook

The strongest manufacturers do not try to solve these issues in one leap. They move through two stages: revitalization and realization.

Revitalization is the foundation stage. It means building the ecosystem needed for digital business model innovation. Leaders identify the right digital partners, support existing partners in becoming more digital, and create incentives that make participation attractive. In practice, that often means scouting for startups, software providers, analytics specialists, and connectivity partners, while also helping distributors and service partners adapt to the new model.

Realization is the scaling stage. This is where the company turns digital potential into commercial performance. It means co-creating solutions with partners and customers, aligning delivery processes, and adapting the revenue model so that the ecosystem can grow sustainably. In other words, the company must not only launch digital offerings — it must make them work operationally and financially across the ecosystem.

What leading companies do differently

The research shows that leading industrial firms behave less like traditional product manufacturers and more like ecosystem orchestrators. They do four things consistently.

First, they initiate digital partnerships deliberately. They do not wait for the perfect solution to emerge internally. They map the ecosystem, identify complementarity, and build partnerships where each side brings something the other lacks — for example, data, customer access, analytics capability, or domain expertise.

Second, they catalyze partner digitalization. They do not assume the old ecosystem can simply “keep up.” They actively invest in the digital capability of distributors, service partners, and other actors who are crucial for delivery. This often includes training, shared tools, digital infrastructure, and access to operational data.

Third, they incentivize ecosystem partners. In the early phase, this may mean bearing costs, sharing data, or offering free access to infrastructure to stimulate adoption. That is not charity. It is ecosystem investment. Without it, the digital model has no base to grow from.

Fourth, they adapt profit formulas continuously. The most effective companies recognize that revenue sharing cannot be fixed once and for all. As the solution evolves, roles and contributions change. Pricing, risk, and upside must be revisited so that the ecosystem remains fair and commercially viable.

Why agile co-creation matters

A common mistake in industrial digitalization is to overdesign the solution before involving the ecosystem. The research shows a better path: co-create in agile cycles, solve one customer problem at a time, and scale based on learning. This approach reduces risk, builds trust, and allows the company to commercialize digital value faster.

It also shifts the leadership mindset. Instead of asking, “How do we build the entire solution ourselves?”, executives should ask, “Which specific customer problem should we solve first, with whom, and how do we scale the result?” That question is far more powerful because it links customer value, partner roles, and commercial execution.

For executives, this is the real strategic insight: digital transformation is not about owning every capability. It is about orchestrating the capabilities that make the business model work. That is a very different leadership challenge.

The role of leadership

Digital business model innovation requires more than a transformation slogan. It requires a governance model. Research highlights the importance of dedicated ecosystem roles, clear interfaces, and ongoing coordination across internal functions and external partners. In many companies, this means creating a leader or team responsible for ecosystem orchestration, not just digital strategy.

This role is especially important because the company itself is changing. A manufacturer that moves into digital services must evolve from a transactional, product-centric organization into a more relational, software-enabled, service-oriented business. That is not a cosmetic shift. It affects identity, incentives, decision rights, and performance metrics.

Leaders who treat digitalization as a portfolio of isolated initiatives will likely struggle. Leaders who treat it as an ecosystem business model will be better positioned to scale, monetize, and defend their growth.

Questions for executives

Where are you still trying to force a digital business model through an old product logic?
Which ecosystem partners are essential to your digital value proposition, and which ones are missing?
Are your distributors and service partners rewarded for accelerating digital adoption — or for protecting the old model?
What capability gaps inside your ecosystem are slowing down delivery, scale, or customer adoption?
Who in your organization is clearly accountable for orchestrating the ecosystem end to end?

The companies that win the next phase of industrial growth will not simply digitize faster. They will design ecosystems that can turn digital intent into recurring commercial value.

Ready to Drive Sustainable Growth?

Strategic Consulting: Customized solutions for sustainable, measurable growth.
Interim Leadership: Experienced CxO and executive support to lead complex transformation initiatives and growth journeys.
Board Advisory: Trusted guidance on growth strategies, governance, and risk management in evolving global industrial markets.

Book your complimentary consultation today to explore actionable strategies tailored to your organization’s unique challenges.

Inna Hüessmanns, MBA

Share this article:

Why Industrial Digitalization Fails Without Ecosystem Orchestration Read More »

Industrial Digitalization