Delivery, leadership and scaling / Lesson D07

Stop changing priorities before the team can execute

Change priorities only for clear reasons, such as a material customer or safety issue, a changed assumption, a legal requirement or a better opportunity backed by evidence, and say what pauses when something new comes in. Strategy can change, but people can't deliver three different versions of 'urgent' at the same time.

By the end, you should be able to

  • Tell the difference between a necessary change from priority churn
  • Make work-in-progress trade-offs explicit
  • Use a change log to protect accountability and learning

The hidden cost of another urgent idea

A team can appear slow when the target changes faster than work can be completed. Each change may require new context, rework and revised handovers. If the original work remains on the list, the team inherits incompatible commitments.

The issue is not that leaders should never change their minds. New evidence can justify a different decision. The issue is changing direction without explaining the evidence or adjusting the work.

Define what earns a priority change

Use a few explicit reasons: a material customer or safety issue, a changed assumption, a legal or contractual requirement, or a genuinely better opportunity supported by evidence. The exact criteria depend on the business.

A competitor's new post or a leader's enthusiasm may prompt investigation, but should not automatically displace committed work. Ask what decision the new information actually changes.

Worked example (illustrative): the weekly campaign reset

A marketing team tests a specific offer. After three days, the owner sees a different tactic online and asks for a new campaign. The first test stops before enough appropriate people have seen it. A week later, both are judged unsuccessful.

The team introduces a test brief with an explanation to test, minimum observation period, budget and early-stop conditions. New ideas enter a queue unless a stop condition is met. At the review, the owner can change direction with a documented reason rather than leaving two unfinished experiments.

The lesson is not to continue a harmful test for the sake of consistency. It is to define what would justify stopping before the test begins.

Continue learning, free

Unlock the rest of this lesson

You're halfway through. Enter your email to read the full lesson, use the exercises and quizzes, and unlock the rest of The Business of Growth library.

We use your email to record your free library access. Marketing emails are optional. Read the privacy notice.

Already signed up through The Business of Growth? Use the existing signup to return and unlock this browser. No payment required.