When to Target, When to Tinker - Ops Leader’s Dilemma

Leaders often default to setting targets on every metric and then demanding why numbers are not met. This works fine when problems are linear, where cause and effect are clear, solutions are standardized, and scaling the fix yields predictable results. Targets and dashboards work beautifully in these cases.

However, there are also complex problems, where outcomes do not follow a straight line. Taleb, in Antifragile, reminds us that such problems should be approached differently. He points to the idea of right convexity, where the downside of an action is limited but the upside is open-ended. In these cases, small experiments can add up to massive gains. In operations, this shows up in places like retention, morale, or NPS. Instead of relying on rigid targets, tinkering with inputs reveals what sticks and sometimes delivers results far greater than expected.

This is where many operations teams go wrong; they use linear tools to attack complex problems. The better approach is dual. Treat linear problems with discipline, standardization, and clear targets. For complex ones, focus on low-cost experiments, allow some randomness, and scale up what works.

As Taleb would remind us, linear problems are not necessarily easy, and complex problems are not unsolvable. They simply demand different playbooks. One rewards discipline and scale, the other rewards tinkering and experimentation.

The real skill of an operations leader lies in knowing when to tighten control and when to allow wiggle room. Keep the North Star clear, but give teams the space to tinker. That is how uncertainty turns from a threat into an advantage.