Why the best direction for an organization only comes into view one horizon at a time, and why that is good news.
When leaders ask me where their organization should be in five years, I usually answer with a question of my own: how much can you actually see from where you’re standing today?
It isn’t meant to be a clever answer. Most organizations I work with know they want to be stronger, clearer, and more capable. The people who do the work are often aware of where that work stalls, feels ineffective, or requires more time than it seems like it should. What they can’t yet see is exactly what their desired state looks like. The information they would need to see that future state doesn’t exist yet. The reports don’t reconcile. The systems don’t talk to each other. The people closest to the work are compensating for gaps that leadership can’t see. From that vantage point, any picture of the distant future is mostly guesswork, and feels unattainable.
A direction, not a destination
I use the phrase Optimal Horizon for the point toward which an organization is intentionally building: a state where its people, processes, technology, data and financial systems work together to provide a clear, reliable view of how the organization is performing and what it needs to do next.
It isn’t a promise of perfection, and it isn’t necessarily reached all at once. It gives change a direction. And like any horizon, it moves as you do.
See the horizon. Reach the horizon. See farther.
Why you have to climb to see
Sometimes you have to reach the next horizon before you have enough visibility to understand what comes after it. Reliable data reveals which programs are really growing. Clear processes reveal where capacity is actually being lost. Stronger financial visibility reveals which opportunities the organization can afford to pursue. None of that was visible from the starting point.
This is why I’m wary of plans that try to map every step from here to the far distance. How many organizations have spent money on strategic plans that gather dust without a grounded implementation plan? They ask leaders to make decisions with information they don’t have yet, or to move toward a future without an actionable map. A better question is smaller and more honest: what is the next horizon, what becomes possible when we reach it, and how does it move us closer to where we ultimately want to be?
Why this is good news
Not being able to see the whole path can feel like a failure of planning. I think it’s the opposite. It means the organization is allowed to learn as it goes. It means the organization is encouraged to evolve and adapt. Each horizon creates meaningful improvement on its own, and each one gives you a clearer view than the last.
The goal isn’t to arrive at a final version of the organization. The goal is to build an organization capable of continually becoming what its purpose requires.
So when you’re asked where you’ll be in five years, it’s fine to say you can’t see it all yet. Then name the next horizon, and start walking.