The Growth vs. Control Dilemma: What Does Your Company Design For?
A profound insight I learned from a mentor, Stephen Graves (who heard it from one of his mentors!), taught me something critical about organizational dynamics: a company can either design for growth or design for control, but rarely both at the same time.
This isn't about one being inherently better than the other. It's about understanding the fundamental tension at play in every organization and knowing what season your business is in. So, what does this mean for your company, and how are you calibrating your approach?
Organize for Growth: The Agile Innovator
When you design for growth, your organization prioritizes agility, innovation, and rapid expansion. It means:
Agility: Decisions are made quickly, often closer to the front lines.
Calculated Risk-Taking: There's a willingness to experiment and even fail fast, seeing it as part of the learning process.
Empowered Teams: Teams have significant autonomy and ownership, driving initiatives forward.
Rapid Iteration: Products, services, and processes are continuously refined based on feedback and market changes.
Embracing Ambiguity: Leaders and teams are comfortable with less certainty, focusing on direction rather than rigid plans.
Example: Crumbl Cookies A great example of a mid-sized company designed for rapid growth and agility is Crumbl Cookies. Their weekly rotating menu, heavily promoted on social media, allows them to constantly innovate and capture new trends. This agility has fueled their meteoric rise and expansion into numerous franchises, demonstrating how a focus on speed and adaptability can lead to explosive growth.
Organize for Control: The Stable Steward
Designing for control prioritizes stability, predictability, and efficiency. This looks like:
Strict Hierarchies & Clear Processes: Decision-making paths are well-defined, and operations follow established, often repeatable, procedures.
Risk Aversion: The focus is on minimizing errors and ensuring consistent quality, even if it means slower adoption of new ideas.
Predictability: The organization values stable outcomes and consistent performance.
Efficiency: Optimizing existing systems to reduce waste and maximize output.
Example: Desert Financial Credit Union While many financial institutions lean towards control, Desert Financial Credit Union is a mid-sized example that balances stability with a strong focus on employee well-being and community impact, indicating a well-managed "control" environment. Their focus on long-term stability, robust employee programs, and community engagement points to a company that prioritizes strong internal structures and consistent service delivery—hallmarks of an organization designed for control and reliability.
The Critical Calibration: Knowing When to Pivot
The challenge for leaders isn't just choosing one path; it's discerning the right season and having the courage to pivot quickly when needed.
A young startup might naturally organize for growth, prioritizing speed to market over established processes.
A mature company in a regulated industry might prioritize control to ensure compliance and consistent service.
However, market shifts, new technologies (like AI!), or unexpected crises demand the ability to calibrate rapidly. A company that once needed tight control might need to loosen its grip for a burst of innovation, or a rapidly growing company might need to inject more discipline and structure to sustain its expansion.
True leadership means discerning the season you're in, embracing the necessary risk (whether that's the risk of rapid growth or the risk of slowing down to gain control), and being able to quickly adjust your organizational design. It's about mastering the art of the pivot, ensuring your company is always optimized for its current reality and future aspirations.
What season is your company in right now? Are you designed for growth or control, and what's your next strategic calibration?
P.S. Anytime you are ready to elevate your leadership you can send me a message.