Brave New Work
Ideas for changing everyday organisational practices, with the Operating System Canvas as a way to explore where to start.
Explore the Operating System Canvas ↗Give teams the room to improve how work gets done, one practice at a time.
People see every day where approvals, meetings, rules and routines get in the way of great work. Too often, they have little room to change them.
This approach gives teams the authority and support to test better practices. They share what they learn, while leaders remove barriers that prevent useful changes spreading. Repeating this cycle makes improving the organisation part of everyday work.
In essence, we change how we change. Most classic change programmes fail. Why? A typical system-wide, engagement-survey-style diagnosis does not lead to actionable insight. It gives the impression that problems can be fixed from above and is slow, with top-down solutions typically facing resistance.
Worse, the bureaucracy that well-intended change often aims to address is familiar, complex and systemic. It is well defended and self-replicating, and it serves a purpose, however poorly. Changing these patterns calls for continuous, participatory change, change that is:
Trust, autonomy and transparency guide how change happens.
Start small and use what happens to decide the next step.
People learn together and help useful practices spread.
Build learning and improvement into everyday work.
Lasting change is difficult: in McKinsey’s 2021 survey, fewer than one in three respondents reported that their transformation had both improved performance and sustained the gains. Read the survey ↗
Milk in coffee is a better metaphor than the widespread notion of seeing change as a journey from here to there.
Before teams begin, leadership commits to the principles and practical leadership roles needed for continuous, participatory change.
Invite people to share obstacles, ideas and examples of what already works. Bring the input together on a shared grid so teams can see patterns and choose where to act.
Gather teams in a workshop or ask for individual input through the company’s Teams or Slack channel dedicated to organisational improvement. Ask: “What is preventing you from doing great work?” Make the blocker concrete: what happened, what made the work harder and what the consequence was. Also ask what already works: the bright spots to be protected or spread.
AI consolidates similar contributions and places the blockers and bright spots in the relevant organisation categories on the grid. Participants can correct the grouping.
Every contribution receives a visible response: being explored, selected for a test, awaiting a decision, or closed with an explanation. Contributors can see who owns the next step and when to expect an update.
Teams prioritise using the effect on the work and the scope for a safe experiment.
The grid illustrates typical contributions we might receive. Participants share their own blockers and bright spots, grounded in real situations, and can add issues beyond these examples. Links to practices are suggestions to explore.
Our purpose is unclear.
Explore linked practicesPeople do not feel that their work is meaningful.
Explore linked practicesShareholders are prioritised over customers and employees.
Explore linked practicesA team can explain how its work helps customers.
It is not always clear who has the authority to make decisions.
Explore linked practicesBottlenecks in decision making.
Explore linked practicesToo much consensus.
Explore linked practicesPeople have to ask for permission to take action.
Explore linked practicesOpinions matter more than data.
Explore linked practicesEveryone needs to be involved in everything.
Explore linked practicesPolitics and turf wars.
Explore linked practicesWe are a culture of who can get closest to the leader.
Explore linked practicesTeams know what they can decide for themselves.
We work in silos.
Explore linked practicesRoles are not clear.
Explore linked practicesTeams are not cross-functional or cross-disciplinary.
Explore linked practicesOur structure inhibits collaboration.
Explore linked practicesToo many layers.
Explore linked practicesMisalignment between our strategy and our structure.
Explore linked practicesLack of accountability and ownership.
Explore linked practicesPeople do not do what they say they are going to do.
Explore linked practicesWe marvel at our own complexity.
Explore linked practicesColleagues can organise around a shared outcome.
No agreement on strategic priorities.
Explore linked practicesPriorities are unclear.
Explore linked practicesWe waste time on the wrong things.
Explore linked practicesWe spend too much time trying to predict the future.
Explore linked practicesStrategy is driven from the top rather than from the edge.
Explore linked practicesWe do not know how to say no.
Explore linked practicesWe prioritise the short term over the long term.
Explore linked practicesTeams can explain what they will stop or decline.
Limited resources.
Explore linked practicesWe do not use talent across our system.
Explore linked practicesThe budgeting process is slow and unresponsive.
Explore linked practicesTeams can access a small amount of time or funding to test an idea.
We are addicted to planning.
Explore linked practicesWe plan and predict rather than test and learn.
Explore linked practicesWe change more slowly than the outside world.
Explore linked practicesRigid structures prevent experimentation.
Explore linked practicesFailure is unacceptable.
Explore linked practicesGood ideas get lost in bureaucracy.
Explore linked practicesWe do not take risks.
Explore linked practicesLearned helplessness.
Explore linked practicesWe use good or bad results as an excuse not to change.
Explore linked practicesTeams share what an experiment taught them.
No time in the day for actual work.
Explore linked practicesOutdated technology tools.
Explore linked practicesOur technology and tools are not making the most of our potential.
Explore linked practicesOur processes get in the way of the work.
Explore linked practicesWe operate as though everything is a crisis.
Explore linked practicesWork/life boundaries are not used or respected.
Explore linked practicesWe drive constantly.
Source wording retained. Clarify what this means with participants.Explore linked practicesWork and bottlenecks are visible across the whole flow.
We have meetings to prepare for meetings.
Explore linked practicesOur meetings are theatre.
Explore linked practicesMeetings do not lead to decisions or action.
Explore linked practicesOnly the loudest voices get heard.
Explore linked practicesToo many meetings.
Explore linked practicesEvery meeting has a purpose and ends with clear commitments.
Not enough transparency.
Explore linked practicesInformation is shared only on a need-to-know basis.
Explore linked practicesLack of visibility between teams.
Explore linked practicesToo much email.
Explore linked practicesThe reasoning behind decisions is not always clear.
Explore linked practicesColleagues share work and explain their decisions.
Lack of trust.
Explore linked practicesLack of honesty and candour.
Explore linked practicesRelationships across functions are strained.
Explore linked practicesPeople talk behind others’ backs.
Explore linked practicesLack of vulnerability.
Explore linked practicesOur “professionalism” gets in the way of being authentic.
Explore linked practicesWe favour executing over relating.
Explore linked practicesWe are unable to attract and retain top talent.
Explore linked practicesWe avoid tough conversations.
Explore linked practicesGender balance is off.
Explore linked practicesDiversity is not valued.
Explore linked practicesPassive-aggressive culture.
Explore linked practicesWe are a culture of fear.
Explore linked practicesLots of effort goes into protecting and stroking egos.
Explore linked practicesTeams make working expectations explicit and discuss disagreements early.
We reflect infrequently.
Explore linked practicesLack of feedback.
Explore linked practicesOur people do not have the skills we need.
Explore linked practicesWe are not self-aware.
Explore linked practicesCareer paths are unclear.
Explore linked practicesColleagues learn from each other while doing the work.
Individuals over teams.
Explore linked practicesNot enough recognition or rewards.
Explore linked practicesWe recognise and reward individuals instead of teams.
Explore linked practicesRecognition supports the outcomes and cooperation the organisation needs.
The 12 areas and their short descriptions follow The Ready’s Operating System Canvas. The 78 blockers and 78 practices are adapted from the Brave New Work extracts, with wording lightly edited for clarity and UK spelling. B01 to B78 and P01 to P78 identify the separate source items. Categorisation, suggested connections, experiment prompts and bright-spot examples are developed by IntotheNXT.
Teams choose a practice that might address the obstacle, agree a bounded experiment and review whether it helps. Start with a change close enough to the work to learn from it.
Explore the rule or habit behind the difficulty before choosing a practice. A slow decision might result from unclear authority, missing information or a risk that needs specialist input. Each calls for a different experiment.
Use ideas from colleagues and other organisations, as well as sources such as Brave New Work and Daniel Coyle’s The Culture Playbook. Adapt the practice to the situation and agree how to tell whether it helps.
At the review, decide whether to keep, adapt or stop it. Record what changed and what was learned, including any unexpected costs or harm. A practice earns a wider trial through evidence from its use.
Each source practice has its own entry. Start with an area, search the collection or follow a blocker’s suggested links. The experiment and review prompts are IntotheNXT suggestions. Some practices need decisions by owners of shared policies, budgets or rewards; agree the scope and authority for the trial.
Draft the organisation’s purpose with colleagues and test it against several real decisions.
Does it explain who benefits and help choose between options?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Let a team draft its purpose, then ask each role to explain its contribution.
Are the team’s purpose and each role’s contribution clear?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Ask a team to state the result it intends to achieve over a chosen period within 6 to 24 months.
Can colleagues explain the intent and use it to guide current work?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Choose a small set of measures for one team and use them in its next review.
Do the measures lead to useful decisions and reveal unintended effects?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Recognise a well-designed attempt that failed and discuss what it taught the team.
Did recognition help people report and learn from unsuccessful attempts?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use the safe-to-try question on one reversible proposal, with clear boundaries and a review date.
Did the team learn something useful without exceeding its agreed limits?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Trial an agreement allowing a team to choose when, where and how it works within its service commitments.
Check delivery, coordination and the effect on people’s work/life boundaries.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Map who can decide what for one recurring decision and test the arrangement.
Track decision time, ownership gaps and avoidable escalations.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Define a waterline: decisions below it stay local; decisions that could materially harm the wider organisation need agreed advice or consent.
Were the boundaries understood, and did they protect the wider organisation?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Move one decision closer to the colleagues with the relevant customer or operational knowledge.
Check speed, decision quality and effects on other teams.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Invite colleagues to nominate an obsolete rule, then agree a bounded removal trial with its owner.
Did removing the rule help, and did its original purpose still need protection?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Choose one meeting, process or habit to stop for a defined trial period.
Compare time released with any missed decisions, confusion or harm.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use a decision journal, independent initial judgements or a structured challenge to assumptions on one decision.
Which assumptions or biases surfaced, and did the decision improve?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use an Integrative Decision Making process for one collective decision, with someone who can facilitate it.
Did the process address objections and produce a decision people can act on?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Classify upcoming decisions by reversibility and agree different approval and review requirements.
Did reversible decisions move faster while irreversible ones received sufficient scrutiny?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree a spending threshold below which a team can act without approval or advice.
Check decision time, spending and compliance with the agreed boundary.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Give one decision an owner who seeks advice from affected colleagues and relevant experts, then decides.
Was relevant advice sought, and did it improve the decision?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use consent for a bounded set of decisions, with a clear way to raise and resolve reasoned objections.
Did decisions progress while material objections were addressed?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Form a small multidisciplinary team around a critical outcome, with clear autonomy and an ambitious brief.
Review the outcome, team independence and dependencies on the wider organisation.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree with a central function to move one activity or decision to a team closer to the work.
Compare responsiveness, quality and any duplication or inconsistent treatment.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Break one set of job descriptions into explicit roles that people can combine.
Did the role mix improve ownership and make better use of people’s capabilities?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Map roles and accountabilities around a real piece of work with the team.
Look for fewer gaps, duplicated tasks and ownership disputes.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Invite a team to propose and test changes to its own roles with affected colleagues.
Did the revised roles help the work and remain clear to others?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree a consent or election process for a suitable leadership role and trial it with the relevant authority.
Was the choice understood, and could the selected person fulfil the mandate?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Let a colleague hold two defined roles across teams, with explicit capacity and priorities.
Did sharing the colleague’s contribution help without creating overload or conflicting commitments?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Trial a visible marketplace for a bounded set of roles or projects that people can join.
Check matching, continuity, workload and the ability to meet commitments.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Create a searchable skills directory for a participating group and use it to find help.
Could teams find and use expertise that was previously difficult to locate?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Review a portfolio for both dependable investments and uncertain bets, then agree a deliberate mix.
Does the portfolio support current commitments and learning about future opportunities?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Run a short iteration on a real task, then change the approach using what happened.
Did the cycle produce useful learning and a better next attempt?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Write an “X even over Y” priority statement and test it against actual competing requests.
Did it clarify choices while acknowledging what the team was giving up?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Explore several plausible futures and agree preparations that would help across them.
Did the exercise change a current decision or preparation?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Trial a relative performance measure using an appropriate peer, benchmark or changing context.
Did it improve judgement and behaviour compared with the fixed target?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
With the budget owner, trial more frequent resource decisions for a defined area.
Did resources respond to changing needs without weakening financial discipline?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Invite colleagues to choose among a bounded set of projects, with capacity and delivery commitments visible.
Which projects attracted support, and were essential commitments still met?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use a zero-based allocation exercise and virtual investment for the next planning period.
What did independent allocation choices reveal, and did they inform real decisions?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Set aside a defined quarterly fund and let a team agree how to allocate it.
Review participation, allocation choices and what the funded work achieved.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree a trial allowing people 20 per cent of their time for work they find worth pursuing.
Review what emerged, what was learned and the effect on other commitments.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Run a piece of work in short sprints, with a useful result and review at each interval.
Did the rhythm shorten feedback time and expose problems earlier?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Set a limit for active work and finish or stop something before starting another item.
Track completion time, ageing work and overload.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Within an agreed scope, remove status updates and project reviews that do not support a decision or coordination need.
Check time released and whether essential decisions, visibility or coordination suffered.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Review a one-to-one that centres on permission or politics and trial a clearer purpose or a pause.
Did the change improve useful support and reduce unnecessary permission seeking?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Schedule a short governance meeting where a team can revise its working agreements and roles.
Were changes made, documented and understood by the people affected?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Let a team elect a facilitator and scribe for its next cycle of meetings.
Did facilitation improve participation and did records lead to clearer follow-through?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree a temporary meeting moratorium for a bounded area and rebuild only the meetings it needs.
Compare time used with decision quality and coordination after the rebuild.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Choose a meeting structure suited to one recurring purpose and trial it for several sessions.
Did it improve the decision, coordination or learning the meeting exists for?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Hold a retrospective after a work cycle and choose one change before the next review.
Did the agreed change happen and did the recurring problem improve?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Begin an existing meeting with a brief, voluntary human check-in.
Did it help people become present and understand one another?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Reserve the final few minutes of a meeting to identify one improvement for the next meeting.
Was the adjustment tried, and did it help?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use a speaking round before open discussion so everyone has an initial turn.
Did different concerns surface and influence the discussion?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Build one meeting’s agenda from participants’ current needs at the start.
Were important needs addressed within the available time?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Create a shared dashboard for one team’s work and relevant performance measures.
Did it help colleagues act and reduce duplicate reporting?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree how to share a team’s financial information and explain it in a working session.
Could colleagues understand the figures and use them in decisions?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Design a compensation-transparency pilot with the relevant owners and people affected, agreeing information, access and timing.
Review understanding, perceived fairness and issues that require attention.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
For an agreed area, make information open unless there is a stated reason to restrict it.
Could people find what they needed, and were legitimate restrictions maintained?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Create a searchable home for a defined body of information and test it with its users.
Could people find accurate information without asking around?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Share a simple view of work, owners, progress and dependencies with other teams.
Did dependencies surface earlier and did avoidable duplication fall?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Move one shared task into a live collaborative workspace with clear ownership.
Did colleagues work from the same current information with less version confusion?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Document a team’s agreements and roles in a shared place, with a clear process for changing them.
Could people find, understand and revise the agreements that shape their work?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Move one internal email flow into an agreed shared collaboration channel.
Check whether information became easier to find and whether interruption levels changed.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Hold an open ask-me-anything session and record answers and follow-up commitments.
Did useful questions receive candid answers and visible follow-through?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Identify perspectives or capabilities missing from a team and use them in its next hiring or formation decision.
Did the difference contribute to the work and receive a fair hearing?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Rewrite one hiring brief around what would add to the culture and contribution of the team.
Did selection consider useful difference alongside the requirements of the role?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Write a short charter covering purpose, commitments, communication and disagreements, then use it.
Where did the charter help, and which expectations remain unclear?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Invite colleagues to write and discuss a short guide to their working preferences and needs.
Did it improve understanding without turning preferences into fixed labels?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Use an existing team moment for specific gratitude, recognition and celebration of contributions.
Did people feel their contributions were seen and understood?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
With the relevant owner, trial frequent feedback conversations as the basis for reviewing performance.
Did people receive timely support and clear expectations throughout the period?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Exchange specific feedback immediately after a shared sprint, event or milestone.
Could recipients understand the feedback and act on it in the next attempt?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Practise a repeatable feedback routine, including receiving feedback and agreeing an action.
Did feedback become easier to use, and were agreed actions followed through?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Bring colleagues with a shared discipline together to solve a recurring problem and exchange knowledge.
Did participants apply what they learned in their own teams?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
With the relevant reward owner, trial a collective reward for an agreed shared outcome.
Review cooperation, the outcome and any unintended incentives.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Review the portfolio together and explicitly choose what to start, stop and continue.
Did capacity move to the chosen work and did the stopped work stay stopped?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Make time for colleagues to share experiences and understand one another beyond task updates.
Did mutual understanding help the team work together?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Let a team choose a voluntary shared activity for enjoyment within its available time.
Did colleagues enjoy it and feel comfortable choosing whether to join?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree a forum for raising difficult issues, with clear expectations against reprisal and visible responses.
Did people raise issues earlier and receive a useful response?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Invite a colleague to teach a short session using a real problem and their own experience.
Could others apply the learning in their work?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Where suitable, trial video for a remote conversation that benefits from seeing people’s reactions.
Did it improve understanding, and did the format work for participants?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Trial a team or committee of fewer than nine people, with clear input routes for others.
Review participation, decision time and whether relevant perspectives were included.
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Agree and practise a conflict resolution process on a real disagreement, recognising useful challenge.
Was the issue addressed constructively and did the agreement hold?
Check the cause and context before choosing a practice.
Write enough to make the test clear, then get on with it.
Ideas for changing everyday organisational practices, with the Operating System Canvas as a way to explore where to start.
Explore the Operating System Canvas ↗A further source of practical ideas for building safety, trust and shared purpose. Teams can draw on it when choosing a practice to test.
Read about the book ↗A local experiment may work well and still struggle to spread. Make the learning visible, help other teams adapt it and change the conditions that stand in their way.
Make it easy to see the original blocker, what the team tried, what happened and where the practice was useful. Include the limits and unsuccessful attempts. Other teams can decide whether a similar trial makes sense for them.
Colleagues who have used the practice can coach the next team. Shared examples and short peer sessions help the learning travel.
Ask what would stop another team using the practice. It may be an approval rule, a funding restriction, a conflicting target, a system dependency or a shortage of time or skill.
Make removing barriers to adoption a standing item on the management team agenda. Review barriers raised by teams, decide what needs to change and give each barrier an accountable owner with the authority to resolve it. Track decisions and progress at subsequent meetings, and report back to the teams concerned. Check the effect on the wider organisation before changing a shared rule.
Build a regular rhythm for reviewing contributions, choosing experiments and sharing results. Keep contributors informed as their blocker moves through an experiment, a decision or a change to a shared rule. Close the loop with the outcome and its explanation, and retire practices that have stopped helping.
Start with easier changes that are safe to try and can show a useful result. As teams gain experience and trust in this way of working grows, experiments gradually spread across the grid to more difficult blockers and practices. What teams learn from one change helps them tackle the next.
Track whether obstacles are being resolved, experiments are producing useful learning and teams can adopt what works. New blockers and bright spots feed the next cycle.
Discuss how the approach could work in your organisation.
Discuss the approach with us