top of page
Search
Writer's pictureEdgar Kraychik

The problem with McKinsey's 3 Horizons

Updated: Nov 8, 2019

Okay, I am not going to claim that I disagree with the key principle of the 3 Horizon framework. Briefly, the 3 Horizon theory states that a company, in order to sustain its revenue stream, has to dedicate ~70% of the efforts to its core product and services (Horizon 1), while, simultaneously building next disruptors on Horizon curves 2 & 3. Horizon2 embraces emerging opportunities, natural product evolution and extensions. Horizon3 (requiring ~10% of investment) is a forward looking timeline that is completely entrepreneurial and presents a gamble that requires a considerable investment.

To me that, on its surface, sounds a lot like a Kano Model packaged in a language adored by management consultants. Sounds cool, forward looking and insightful! However, there is a real-life problem with this. And it it is not that, on its surface, this concept sounds "waterfallish" - it is is not. The real problem with the 3 Horizon is not the concept, it is this:



Yes, the problem is the real world, real people, short-term objectives, and an overriding pursuit of operational efficiency. First of all, unless it is mandated by a guy in the blue chair, it is impossible to find investment resources for H3 in the course of a typical business budget planning. The evidences are abound, as very few companies are well-prepared to react to an inevitable disruption point.


Few examples of successful transition from H1 to H3 are MSFT with XBOX, Apple with iPod and iPhone, IBM with as switch to services, Sony with.... What?! Sorry!


Lack of internal investment and innovation is why companies hire consultants to prepare them for the next point of decreased growth on the S curve (which is what, basically H1, H2 and H3 curves are). I am not, for a minute saying that McKinsey, Bain, Accenture and others do not play an important role in providing an external viewpoint and expertise to the C-Suite. However, most of the responsibility for successful (and rare) H1->H2->H3 hoping is responsibility of the company. It's Leaders and Visionaries, to be more precise. In my mind, to create a strategy that supports the 3 Horizon framework, a leader has to foster the following 5 principles:

  1. cultural tolerance to failure at all levels;

  2. right balance between management alignment and team's autonomy

  3. team empowerment and free time to experiment

  4. abandoning obsession with project cost and loosening grip of an annual budgeting exercise at a micro-level. The investment to H2 and H3 at respective 20%-10% should be protected as much as the core product expenditures.

  5. adoption of experimental product development

Each of these points deserves a separate discussion, time permitting.

62 views0 comments

Comentários


bottom of page