A Five-Stage Pathway for Organisations Navigating Persistent Disruption
Crises no longer arrive one at a time. They increasingly overlap, accelerate, and reinforce each other, creating what many scholars and practitioners describe as polycrisis environments. These conditions emerge from extreme complexity, ambiguity, and persistent uncertainty, often captured through frameworks such as VUCA or BANI.
Across industries, organisations that endure and outperform over time tend to share a common characteristic: they have developed what I call disruption-fitness, the systematic capability to navigate, absorb, and, in some cases, leverage disruptions as strategic inputs rather than purely existential threats.
This article introduces a maturity framework that synthesizes patterns observed across multiple organisations over several years of research, advisory work, and executive dialogue. It does not claim universal predictability; rather, it offers a practical lens for understanding how organisations progressively build disruption maturity.
Understanding Disruption Maturity: A Strategic Framework
Since the publication of the articles "Is VUCA the end of strategy and leadership" and "The Disruption-Fit Leader" with IMD Business School (2015, 2019), I have continued to study how organisations respond when disruption becomes persistent rather than episodic. Over this time, I have studied many institutions through my consulting work, discussed the topic with leaders across industries, and tested different approaches.
This work draws on:
- Longitudinal observations across organisations of varying size and sector
- Executive interviews and leadership workshops
- Iterative testing of strategic and organisational interventions
From this, five recurring maturity patterns emerge. These stages reflect a progressive evolution from reactive crisis management to proactive disruption shaping. While organisations rarely fit perfectly into a single stage, the model helps surface dominant mindsets and capabilities.
The Five Stages of Disruption Maturity
1. Disruption-Adverse - Defensive Resistance
Organisations at this stage primarily respond to disruption through denial or defensive rigidity. Observable signals typically include:
- Over-bureaucratised structures or, conversely, a lack of decision clarity
- Strong risk-avoidance cultures prioritising stability over relevance
- Change initiatives triggered only after visible damage occurs
Such organisations remain highly vulnerable when environmental conditions shift faster than internal adaptation mechanisms.
2. Disruption-Aware - Vigilance
This stage marks a cognitive shift from denial to recognition, often concentrated at executive level. Common characteristics include:
- Leadership acknowledgment of external pressures
- Updated risk maps and initial mitigation efforts
- Early monitoring of weak signals
However, awareness frequently outpaces execution. A gap emerges between strategic intent and organisational behaviour, a phenomenon widely described as strategic disconnect.
3. Disruption-Prepared - Forward Action
Disruption-Prepared organisations extend their focus beyond isolated events to broader context alteration.
Context here includes:
- Macro-environmental forces (PESTEL)
- External ecosystems (industry dynamics, competitive forces)
- Internal ecosystems (culture, governance, decision rights)
Capabilities typically observed:
- Structured strategic scanning
- Scenario planning and simulation
- Early-warning mechanisms embedded across multiple levels
At this stage, leadership response improves, though full cultural alignment is often still in progress.
4. Disruption-Ready - Contextual Adaptation
Disruption-Ready organisations demonstrate structural and cultural adaptability. Disruption is no longer treated as exceptional but as a recurring condition.
Observable traits include:
- Real-time adjustment of processes and structures
- Institutionalised learning from disruptions and transitions
- Integrated continuity frameworks across people, processes, and technology
These organisations tend to recover faster and maintain stronger employee engagement during periods of instability.
5. Disruption-Fit - Transformational Mastery
At the highest level of maturity, organisations move beyond absorption toward intentional exploitation of disruption.
Key characteristics include:
- Situational intelligence enabling timely strategic acceleration
- Decentralised decision-making aligned with a clear strategic intent
- Leadership models that enable initiative at operational levels
- Transitions treated as value-creation moments
Disruption-Fit organisations do not eliminate risk; they develop the capability to engage earlier, adapt faster, and learn continuously.
Introducing the "The Disruption-Fit Maturity Model (DFMM)":
Progression across these stages is supported by eight interdependent integrities. These integrities are not sequential checklists; they form a coherent system. Strength in one cannot sustainably compensate for weakness in another.
The first four primarily enable strategic agility:
The next four strengthen organisational fluidity:
- Governance Integrity - Fit-for-purpose organisational structure
- Elevation Integrity - Shadow-Art leadership capabilities
- Systemic Integrity - Balanced ecosystem relationships
- Transition Integrity - Shared-value-generating transition and change mastery
When one integrity develops in isolation—such as advanced cognitive insight without decisive governance—the organisation often experiences friction rather than performance gains.
A Note on Application and Limits
This maturity model is not a predictive tool. It is a strategic lens designed to:
- Support leadership reflection and development
- Identify dominant constraints
- Guide prioritisation of capability development
Industry context, organisational scale, and regulatory environments significantly influence how stages manifest and how quickly progression occurs.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1. How do organisations become Disruption-Fit ? Organisations become disruption-fit by building, cultivating and leveraging 8 essential integrities.
- Intention Integrity - Crystal-clear mission, vision, values & strategy
- Cognitive Integrity - Weak signal detection, context understanding & critical thinking
- Decisional Integrity - Informed decision-making & strategy design
- Action Integrity - Continuous "fit-to-context", yet steady implementation
- Governance Integrity - Fit-for-purpose organisational structures
- Elevation Integrity - Shadow-Art leadership capabilities
- Systemic Integrity - Balanced ecosystem relationships
- Transition Integrity - Shared-value-generating transition and change mastery
Q2. Can an organisation leap directly from Stage 1 to Stage 5? Leapfrogging is exceptionally rare because it demands far more than upgraded processes—it requires deep cultural transformation and organisation-wide, supportive leadership. That said, enterprises may fast-track to Stage 5 after a severe shock forcing full reinvention. When a disruption threatens the institution’s very existence, the urgency can catalyze the radical shifts characteristic of Disruption-Fit mastery.
Q3. How long does it take to progress from Stage 1 to Stage 5? Timelines vary by size and complexity, yet two factors dominate:
- Cultural Baseline: How change-ready is the current culture?
- Leadership Commitment: How resolute is the executive team in resourcing and modelling new behaviours?
With strong alignment on both cultural baseline and leadership commitment, some mid-sized organisations have been observed to progress rapidly, occasionally within one to three years—particularly when disruption creates a strong imperative for change.
Q4. Do organisations always fit neatly into a single stage ? Many companies exhibit the majority of traits from one stage while simultaneously developing capabilities linked to the next. Think of the DFMM as a continuum, not a pigeonhole. Overlap is normal, especially during periods of active transition.
Q5. Why “integrities”? The reason for labelling those eight pillars “integrities” is that each one functions as a self‑contained, value‑driven foundation that must be whole and internally consistent before it can reliably support the rest of the framework. The term evokes both wholeness and ethical rigour, underscoring that true disruption maturity isn’t merely a collection of technical skills but a set of deeply rooted principles that keep the organisation anchored while it flexes and adapts. By treating each pillar as an integrity, you highlight its inter‑locking nature, if any single integrity (for example, Cognitive Integrity without a solid Intent Integrity) is weak, the overall structure becomes vulnerable.
Originally posted on LinkedIn