The Temporary Fix That Quietly Became Your Operating Model

Your organization may be running on an operating model its leadership never approved. The original exception addressed a legitimate need. An authorized official approved an alternative arrangement to maintain delivery. Its scope was understood, its rationale documented and its duration expected to be limited.

Then it was renewed. Other offices introduced similar arrangements. Additional approvals, manual reconciliations and specialist interventions became part of routine delivery. Over time, temporary accommodations became institutional dependencies.

An exception can be sound in isolation while contributing to an unsustainable enterprise model.

For senior executives, the strategic issue is whether these decisions, taken together, have changed how the institution operates and whether that model remains fit for purpose.

Recognize the Operating Model Beneath the Organization Chart

Formal structures describe responsibilities. Recurring exceptions reveal how work actually gets done. Consider a hypothetical agency whose regional offices repeatedly seek alternative review arrangements because the standard process assumes specialist capacity they do not possess.

Each authorization preserves service delivery. Collectively, the arrangements may indicate a structural mismatch between the central service model and regional capabilities. Continued renewal leaves that mismatch unresolved. It can also conceal the full cost of delivery: additional coordination, duplicated effort, dependence on particular individuals and inconsistent service outcomes.

The executive question becomes: Which recurring exceptions reveal a strategic choice we have postponed?

Assess the Combined Exposure

An approval process establishes whether an individual exception is justified. Enterprise oversight examines how multiple arrangements interact. Several exceptions may depend on the same specialist. Different regions may introduce incompatible practices. Compensating measures that appear manageable locally may collectively consume substantial capacity.

HM Treasury’s Orange Book calls for a comprehensive view of organizational risk, with appropriate aggregation, escalation and delegation. Reviewing material exceptions together offers one practical application of that principle.

Executives should focus on patterns that could affect mission delivery; repeated renewals, concentrated dependencies, expanding scope and increasing effort required to sustain performance. Existing governance forums can examine these patterns without creating a separate approval structure.

Make an Explicit Design Choice

Repeated exceptions should lead to a deliberate choice among three responses:

• Restore the standard: Resolve the temporary constraint and close the arrangement.
• Authorize a durable variant: Establish a governed alternative where local conditions justify a different approach.
• Redesign the common model: Address a recurring mismatch affecting multiple parts of the institution.

These are operating-model decisions with implications for investment, workforce capacity, accountability, and service consistency. Across jurisdictions and international partnerships, legitimate differences in law, infrastructure and institutional capacity may require different delivery arrangements. Leaders should make those differences visible and govern them explicitly.

All choices remain subject to applicable legal obligations and delegated authority.

Make Operational Reality Safe to Surface

Leaders cannot assess dependencies that employees believe they must conceal. Ask what each arrangement enables, what effort sustains it, and what would happen if it ended tomorrow. This creates a more useful discussion than examining renewal paperwork alone.

The OECD’s Public Integrity Handbook connects internal control and risk management to safeguarding public-sector integrity. GAO’s Green Book similarly positions internal control as supporting effective operations, reliable reporting, and compliance. Neither substitutes for executive understanding of how delivery actually occurs.

The Next Executive Conversation

Select one critical service and identify the temporary arrangements renewed more than once. Ask:

If we were designing this service today, would we deliberately choose to operate this way?

Where the answer is yes, establish a durable, accountable arrangement. Where it is no, assign ownership for redesign while protecting continuity. Temporary flexibility can preserve performance. Executive scrutiny determines whether it strengthens the institution or quietly becomes its greatest dependency.

Dr. Rhonda Farrell is a transformation advisor with decades of experience driving impactful change and strategic growth for DoD, IC, Joint, and commercial agencies and organizations. She has a robust background in digital transformation, organizational development, and process improvement, offering a unique perspective that combines technical expertise with a deep understanding of business dynamics. As a strategy and innovation leader, she aligns with CIO, CTO, CDO, CISO, and Chief of Staff initiatives to identify strategic gaps, realign missions, and re-engineer organizations. Based in Baltimore and a proud US Marine Corps veteran, she brings a disciplined, resilient, and mission-focused approach to her work, enabling organizations to pivot and innovate successfully.