Start Organizational Reform with a “Reversible” Experiment

The Essence of Organizational Reform from a “Reversible Management” Perspective

When we hear “organizational reform,” many managers feel the pressure that “once decided, there’s no turning back.” Changes in personnel allocation, departmental mergers and abolitions, and the introduction of new evaluation systems—once implemented, reverting to the original state often comes at a significant cost.

But is that really the case? We should be able to design “reversibility” into organizational reform as well. This time, we explore hints for “reversible organizational design” through the case of the Vietnam Chess Federation, which undertook organizational reform in response to questions from the International Chess Federation (FIDE).

Organizational Reform Triggered by External Feedback

The Vietnam Chess Federation implemented a major organizational reform after receiving questions from FIDE. External feedback served as the catalyst, prompting a review of their existing organizational structure and operational methods.

What’s noteworthy in this case is that the “trigger” for reform came from outside. Even without internal momentum to “change,” external pressure or questions can often become an opportunity to reassess an organization.

However, many small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) managers tend to respond to such external feedback with a “reactive stance.” An attitude of “we changed it because we were told to” halves the effectiveness of the reform. Instead, it’s crucial to view external feedback as a “chance for experimentation.”

Treat Reform as an “Experiment,” Not a “Decision”

The first key lesson from the Vietnam Chess Federation case is to treat reform as an “experiment” rather than a “decision.”

When managers think, “We must implement organizational reform,” they tend to strive for a perfect plan. However, no perfect plan is as irreversible as it seems. Once committed to a set policy, it becomes difficult to make course corrections along the way.

Therefore, I propose starting organizational reform as a “limited-time experiment.” For example, consider the following designs:

• Treat the new departmental structure as a 3-month trial.
• Implement changes to the evaluation system as a 6-month pilot program.
• Clearly label personnel changes as “temporary assignments.”

By positioning it as an “experiment,” it becomes easier to “revert” if the results are unfavorable. If employees understand it’s a “temporary state,” their resistance to change will also soften.

Three Factors That Make Organizational Reform Irreversible

There are three main reasons why organizational reform becomes “irreversible.”

1. Fixing People’s Roles and Expectations

Creating a new organizational chart and assigning people to each position fixes their roles. Once you decide, “You are the Sales Manager,” it becomes difficult to later say, “Actually, let’s move you to a different department.”

To avoid this, start with temporary roles like “project leader.” Instead of a permanent position like “Manager,” using a title like “3-month Team Leader” leaves room for reversal.

2. Blurring Responsibilities Through Contracts and Systems

Introducing new contracts and systems alongside organizational reform makes it harder to revert. For example, if you incorporate a new evaluation system into the employment regulations, you’ll need to change the regulations again to revert.

It’s effective to initially operate it as a “special measure” or “provisional rule,” and only formalize it after confirming results.

3. Proceeding Without Understanding the Actual Situation

The most dangerous approach is to proceed with reform without grasping the current operational reality. Introducing a new organizational structure because “other companies are doing it” or “it’s a trend” can lead to a reform that is disconnected from the actual situation on the ground.

Before reforming, first set aside a period to observe “who is actually doing what right now.” This observation period is a crucial process for preserving the possibility of reversal.

Three Design Principles for “Reversible Organizational Reform”

So, how can we specifically design a “reversible organizational reform”? Here are three principles.

1. Decide the Evaluation Period First

Before starting organizational reform, decide “when to evaluate it.” Set specific evaluation periods, such as “verify the effects after 3 months” or “decide whether to continue after 6 months.”

It’s important for the manager themselves to adhere to this evaluation period. Postponing with “let’s wait and see a bit longer” can cause you to miss the window for reversal.

2. Clarify the Points to Observe

Predetermine the indicators for measuring the reform’s effectiveness. Set evaluation points from multiple perspectives, not just financial indicators like sales and profit, but also employee satisfaction and operational efficiency.

In the Vietnam Chess Federation case, having specific observation points on how to respond to FIDE’s questions likely clarified the direction of the reform.

3. Decide How to Revert in Case of Failure

Predetermine “how far to revert if the reform fails.” Prepare multiple reversal scenarios, such as “completely revert to the original organizational structure” or “maintain only some changes.”

This process reduces the psychological burden on the manager. With the reassurance that “at worst, we can just go back,” you can confidently embark on bold reforms.

“Reversible Reform” is Possible, Especially for SMEs

Unlike large corporations, SMEs have the advantage of being smaller organizations. Decision-making is faster, and it’s easier to start experimental initiatives.

For example, instead of creating a new department, try launching a “project team.” Instead of establishing a new position, assign tasks as a “person in charge.” By actively utilizing these “temporary states,” you can achieve highly reversible organizational management.

Personally, when I experienced a business transformation as a director during the COVID-19 pandemic, I didn’t aim for a perfect organizational structure from the start. Instead, I set a rule to “review every 3 months.” This rule allowed us to respond flexibly to changing circumstances and, as a result, minimized damage to the organization.

Conclusion: Reform is an “Experiment,” Not a “Decision”

The case of the Vietnam Chess Federation’s organizational reform demonstrates the effectiveness of reviewing an organization triggered by external feedback. However, if you turn that reform into an “irreversible decision,” the damage from failure will be significant.

View organizational reform as an “experiment” and incorporate reversibility into the design. Decide the evaluation period, clarify the observation points, and predetermine how to revert. By following these three principles, managerial decision-making becomes significantly easier.

“Reversible management” is not about never failing; it’s about being able to recover even if you fail. Before embarking on organizational reform, first think about “how far you can revert.” This mindset will make your company stronger and more resilient.