Moving from the current mix to the target mix without confusing ambition with priority.
Key distinctions
Three conditions before calculating.
Observable state
Current and target must use the same unit, the same scale and dated evidence. "Offer not premium enough" is unusable; adoption rate of the higher tier, willingness to pay and service compliance make the gap measurable.
Value unlocked
The impact of a correction includes its direct contribution and the value it makes possible elsewhere. Improving availability can look less visible than a campaign, yet condition conversion, repeat purchase and media effectiveness.
Transition path
The target mix is a future state, not a single action. Irreversible or strongly coupled changes must be preceded by pilots. The sequence reduces risk and creates options to stop.
Method
Turning a diagnostic gap into a transition portfolio
- 01Define the same frame of reference
Describe current and target by offer, segment, channel, area, period and indicator; justify the target by economics, customer evidence or a constraint, not by an average of competitors.
- 02Quantify the adjusted gap
Compute normalised amplitude × economic value × confidence; subtract cost, lead time and disruption risk; add the value of the dependent decisions genuinely unlocked.
- 03Map the dependencies
Identify prerequisites, conflicts and threshold effects; a price increase can depend on product evidence, a distribution extension on service capacity and availability.
- 04Sequence through gates
Create batches with an entry signal, a capped budget, expected evidence and an exit decision; recompute the target mix when learning invalidates an initial assumption.
The value × dependency matrix of gaps
Six gaps are compared by size, expected value, confidence and number of dependent decisions.
Availability comes before the campaign despite a smaller gap
A brand targets 90% availability, a net price of €104 and 60% media coverage. It observes 78%, €96 and 42%. The estimated gross annual values are €520k, €410k and €350k, with confidences of 80%, 60% and 70%.
Adjusted values: availability €416k, price €246k, media €245k. Availability costs €140k and unlocks 35% of the media value, that is €85.8k; total net value €361.8k. The price costs €70k but depends on product evidence that is not ready. The campaign costs €210k and would lose about 22% of its return under current availability.
Availability is handled first, product evidence in parallel, then the price is steered before the media extension. The visual size of the gap did not dictate the order.
Acceptance conditions
What must be true to act.
- 01
Current and target share the same unit and dated evidence.
- 02
The target is justified by value or constraint, never by aspiration alone.
- 03
Dependencies and unlocked value enter the priority.
- 04
Every batch has an entry gate and a stopping rule.
Limits
What this analysis does not prove.
- The value of a target state remains uncertain before experimentation.
- Normalised scores can create false comparability between dimensions.
- A competitive change can make the target obsolete during the transition.
References
Works cited.
- Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (2008), The Execution Premium.
- Keeney, R. L. (1992), Value-Focused Thinking.
- Cooper, R. G. (2008), “Perspective: The Stage-Gate Idea-to-Launch Process”, Journal of Product Innovation Management.