Why (?) efficiency turns into a game of Tetris !

A must-read before outsourcing the blame.

Many companies pursue efficiency the way one plays Tetris: reacting under pressure, moving organizational pieces in real time, and hoping the right configuration will eventually emerge. CEOs rotate between Marketing, Sales, Product, and Customer Success, diagnosing each function separately in an attempt to unlock quick wins. What follows is usually a costly loop of trial and error that optimizes local performance while damaging the system as a whole.

This article argues that the real failure is not execution - it is diagnosis. Before reorganizing teams or bringing in external consultants, companies need a structured, internal way to understand how their business actually works end to end. The practical solution is to establish a short-term, internal task force that acts as a preliminary consulting and audit team. Its sole purpose is to create clarity, surface the real constraints, and prepare the organization for focused, high-confidence decisions - whether those decisions are executed internally or with external help.

The problem

When efficiency becomes a top priority, CEOs often act quickly - and understandably so.

They examine departments one by one. Marketing is asked to improve lead quality. Sales is asked to close faster. Product is pushed to simplify. Customer Success is told to reduce cost-to-serve.

Each move is logical on its own.

But the organization is treated like a puzzle board rather than a living system. Changes are made without a shared diagnosis of how value flows across the business. Dependencies between teams are overlooked. Fixes in one area quietly create friction in another.

What feels like leadership and decisiveness is often just structured guessing.

The impact on the business

This fragmented approach creates hidden damage:

• Reorganizations that solve symptoms, not causes

• Tool replacements that add complexity instead of removing it

• Conflicting priorities across GTM teams

• Employees adapting to constant change without understanding “why”

Most importantly, leadership confidence erodes. When multiple initiatives fail to move the needle, the conclusion is often that execution is weak - when in reality, the diagnosis was incomplete.

Efficiency efforts stall not because people resist change, but because the change was aimed at the wrong target.

Why this pattern is everywhere right now

Three forces make this behavior extremely common today.

• Pressure for immediate efficiency - Capital is tighter. Investors expect visible impact fast. There is little patience for long diagnostic phases.

• Disappointment with AI as a shortcut - AI promised instant leverage. Instead, it exposed fragmented data, unclear ownership, and broken workflows. Without fixing the system, automation only magnifies inefficiency.

• Lack of a safe way to slow down - Most CEOs know they need a deeper understanding of the business - but slowing down feels risky. There is no lightweight, internal mechanism to do it without committing to a long consulting engagement.

  
  

So leaders default to what feels actionable: departments, headcount, budgets, tools.

Why external consulting often comes too late or too early

At some point, many organizations bring in consultants.

The challenge is timing and setup.

Proper consulting requires time to learn the organization. But CEOs are under pressure for fast results. Consultants are asked for answers before the groundwork exists. The result is often a generic diagnostic based on surface-level signals.

External consultants also lack full visibility into internal constraints:

• What talent is realistically available

• Which processes are politically or culturally sensitive

• Which tools are “bad but sticky”

• Where historical decisions limit optionality

This is not a critique of consulting—it’s a critique of how it’s used.

The core recommendation: Build an internal Diagnostic Task Force

The most practical alternative is not to avoid consulting, but to prepare for it properly.

Before reorganizing teams or hiring external advisors, establish a temporary internal task force that acts as a preliminary consulting and audit unit.

This is not a new department. It is not a transformation office. It is a focused, time-bound diagnostic effort.

What this Task Force is

• A cross-functional group reporting directly to the CEO or COO

• Mandated to understand the business end-to-end, not fix it yet

What this Task Force is not

• Not responsible for execution

• Not optimizing KPIs

• Not replacing leadership

Its only job is to create shared clarity.

How to assemble the Task Force (practically)

Include 4–6 people maximum:

• One GTM leader (Sales, Marketing, Enablement, RevOps)

• One Product or Engineering representative

• One Customer-facing leader (CS or Support)

• One Finance or Ops profile

• Optional: an external coach to guide the process, not own it

The key requirement: credibility and access, not hierarchy.

What the Task Force actually does (Week by Week)

Step 1: Start From the Book of Business

Analyze customers, not departments.

• Who expands, renews, and requires minimal effort?

• Who churns, stalls, or consumes disproportionate resources?

• What behaviors repeat across top-performing customers?

This immediately grounds the discussion in reality.

Step 2: Map the Full GTM Journey

From first touch to renewal:

• Where do deals slow down?

• Where do handoffs break?

• Where does context get lost?

Most inefficiencies live between teams - not inside them.

Step 3: Measure Cost-to-Serve alongside revenue

Revenue alone is misleading.

The task force should ask:

• Which customers look good on ARR but bad on effort?

• Which motions scale cleanly, and which don’t?

This reframes efficiency as a business problem, not a performance issue.

Step 4: Identify Signal vs. Noise

Audit dashboards and metrics:

• Which metrics actually influence decisions?

• Which exist only because they’re easy to measure?

If a metric doesn’t change behavior, it’s noise.

Step 5: Surface constraints - not solutions

Document:

• Talent gaps

• Tooling debt

• Process bottlenecks

• Cultural or political limits

The output is not a plan. It’s a clear problem definition.

What Happens After the Diagnosis

Once this groundwork exists, the CEO has real options:

• Proceed internally with confidence

• Bring in external consultants with a precise mandate

• Focus investment on the few areas that actually matter

Consulting becomes faster, cheaper, and more relevant - because the organization already understands itself.

The Bottom Line

Most efficiency efforts fail because companies start rebuilding before they understand what they’re rebuilding.

Instead of playing Tetris under pressure, create a pause with structure.

A small, focused internal task force gives leaders something rare: the ability to see the whole board before making the next move.

From there, execution finally has a chance to work.

---

Avner Baruch Founder, Author, Auditor www.ProjectMoneyball.com