At Work with The Ready

Leaders often ask for a clear, immediate ROI on org design and transformation work—but that question can derail the conversation before it even starts. When ROI is framed purely as short-term financial return, it misses how organizations actually change and improve over time. In this mini Ask Us Anything episode, Rodney and Sam unpack how to approach ROI conversations in org design more productively. They explore why separate “transformation metrics” usually miss the point, how to anchor ROI to what leaders already care about, and why leading indicators like decision speed, cycle time, and meeting effectiveness matter more than tidy quarterly savings. Mentioned references: W. Edwards Deming Got a work question like this one you'd like us to answer? Email us at [email protected] -------------------------------- Ready to change your organization? ⁠⁠⁠⁠Let's talk!⁠⁠⁠⁠ Get our newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Follow us: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -------------------------------- Sound engineering and design by Taylor Marvin of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Coupe Studios⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

As 2025 comes to a close, AI hype is still everywhere, workers are feeling the strain of constant change, and organizations are quietly reorganizing who (or what) does the work. We’re ending the year with some big questions: What happens to the “middle” of organizations? How do humans fit into increasingly AI-driven systems? And where does real value—human and otherwise—get created? With only a few days left until the new year, Rodney Evans and Sam Spurlin look ahead to how AI, jobs, and organizational life will shift in 2026—from real white-collar displacement and the rise of internal org-design teams to employees quietly choosing AI over difficult human teammates. -------------------------------- Ready to change your organization? ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Let's talk.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Get our newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -------------------------------- Mentioned references: "⁠US military met recruiting goals ahead of schedule" "AI workslop" "Steam game marketplace, AI labeling" 00:00 Intro + Check-In: What’s a reflection you have on 2025? 03:44 Prediction 1: Hype cycle around AGI will break 05:03 Prediction 2: 2026 is tipping point for white collar AI job disruption 09:53 Prediction 3: Demand for internal OD teams increases 12:11 Prediction 4: People will start choosing AI over their coworkers for collab 15:04 Prediction 5: Divide between legacy orgs and AI-native micro orgs will grow 17:48 Prediction 6: New premium on human-crafted products and experience 21:57 Wrap up: Leave us a review, and see you in 2026 Sound engineering and design by Taylor Marvin of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Coupe Studios⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Many people who want to work in organizational change hit the same question: is it better to do this work from inside an organization, or from the outside as a consultant? In this AUA mini episode, Rodney Evans and Sam Spurlin respond to a listener who’s considering a career shift into org change and wrestling with whether internal transformation teams can really drive meaningful change—or whether outside consultants have more leverage. They unpack why internal org design teams are often constrained by design, where they can work when positioned well (hint: it’s probably not HR), and why external consulting offers faster learning through sheer volume of reps. They also explore how you can start doing work design and change work without holding a formal transformation title. Hear the episode this question was in response to: AWWTR Ep. 28 Got a work question like this one you'd like us to answer? Email us at [email protected] -------------------------------- Ready to change your organization? ⁠⁠⁠Let's talk!⁠⁠⁠ Get our newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Follow us: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -------------------------------- Sound engineering and design by Taylor Marvin of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Coupe Studios⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Everyone knows performance management is broken—but we keep doing it anyway. Why? For decades, organizations have poured time, money, and emotional energy into performance management—even though almost everyone agrees it’s broken. Annual reviews take hundreds of hours, distort real feedback, collapse development into compensation, and leave both managers and employees frustrated. Worse, they often lower performance rather than improve it. And yet most companies keep doubling down on a system that was never designed for how people actually grow, learn, or work today. In this episode, Rodney and Sam rethink performance management from the ground up. They unpack why traditional systems fail, which psychological dynamics make feedback so fraught, and what a truly useful approach would look like if we started from scratch. From separating the four conflated “jobs” of performance management and designing for real development, to using AI as a feedback partner rather than a faster paperwork generator—they explore practical ways to build a process that actually helps people get better at their work. -------------------------------- Ready to change your organization? ⁠⁠⁠⁠Let's talk.⁠⁠⁠⁠ Get our newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -------------------------------- Mentioned references: "performance management makes performance worse" ASSCATS ("Anything to Stop, Start, Continue After This Session?"), first discussed in BNW Ep. 65 with Alastair Steward "stress-performance curve" "Meta performance management with AI" "Josh Bersin episode" Granola 00:00 Intro + Check-In: Why is Sam still on the podcast when he left The Ready? 03:01 The Pattern: Performance management SUCKS, but we keep doing it 06:10 It’s trying to do too many jobs 07:54 We’re lied to about the purpose 11:19 It’s time consuming 14:10 The charade causes psychological harm and stunts growth 17:00 Rethinking PM from the ground up 18:14 Center the user 20:30 Easier process more frequently 23:15 Vary the size and type of feedback 26:09 Actually define what good ACTUALLY looks like by outcomes 29:21 Feedback in the context of an individual’s journey 32:59 AI’s role in future of performance management 46:02 AI’s role in the performance management of teams 50:30 Wrap up: Leave us a review and share the show with a coworker! Sound engineering and design by Taylor Marvin of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Coupe Studios⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Every organization eventually hits the same wall: central teams aren’t responsive enough, federated teams reinvent everything, and the result is a messy tug-of-war between alignment and autonomy. IT organizations feel this pain especially acutely. In this mini Ask Us Anything episode, Rodney Evans and Sam Spurlin unpack why centralized vs. decentralized is a false binary, why organizations swing endlessly between the two, and what it actually takes to design a federated model that works in the real world. Got a work question like this one you'd like us to answer? Email us at [email protected] -------------------------------- Ready to change your organization? ⁠⁠Let's talk!⁠⁠ Get our newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Follow us: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -------------------------------- Sound engineering and design by Taylor Marvin of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Coupe Studios⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.