Nobody blinks when a multi-billion-dollar merger prompts the creation of an integration management office (IMO). In fact, it’s expected. The IMO becomes air traffic control — aligning people, processes and technology to orchestrate synergy capture and value creation. So why does business transformation, which demands the same cross-functional choreography, often proceed without a similar structure or urgency?
If anything, large-scale transformation is a merger, just without the press release and EBITDA add-backs.
The case for transformation-as-integration
Consider the merger between Starwood Preferred Guest (SPG) and Marriott, or another high-profile merger that captured headlines. The union didn’t just require backend alignment. It demanded a unified customer experience across two tech stacks, cultures and product sets. Surely, dedicated teams — backed by real budgets — were mobilized to deliver a seamless journey, define the target architecture and drive change management at scale.
Now, contrast that with a transformation effort inside a global enterprise where two business units, each generating billions in revenue, are asked to stop operating independently and start delivering holistic solutions that span the full customer value chain. No less complex. No less consequential. Yet often, there’s no centralized team guiding the integration of strategy, architecture and execution. Why?
Because in transformation, accountability is often distributed. And when everyone’s in charge, no one is.
Breaking the cycle of siloed execution
Despite shared objectives, legacy org structures tend to reinforce autonomy. Business units prioritize their own roadmaps, KPIs and budgets. Even when transformation requires convergence — of product strategy, customer experience or technical systems — teams revert to what’s familiar.
This is where transformation efforts stall: not because the strategy is wrong, but because no one’s orchestrating the “missing middle” — the space between boardroom vision and front-line execution.
Enter the transformation office: your internal integration management function.
Playing the orchestra
Like an IMO, a transformation office serves as the conductor — setting the tempo, aligning initiatives and resolving portfolio-level tensions before they turn into performance issues. It defines the “music” everyone should be playing: a unified vision for experience, business architecture, technology design and most importantly, change management.
It also builds connective tissue. It doesn’t just write the blueprint — it stays close to initiative or project leads to ensure adherence, adapts when necessary and surfaces interdependencies that might otherwise go unnoticed.
It’s not governance for governance’s sake. It’s dynamic orchestration in service of strategic cohesion.
Where should it sit?
Too many transformation efforts fixate on where this function reports instead of how it operates. While reporting lines matter — we’ve seen transformation offices sit under the CIO, CDO, CTO, strategy office and even directly under the CEO — the real unlock is in how it draws power from across the business.
A successful transformation office is cross-functional by design. It’s led by a senior executive — typically a VP or SVP — and supported by a council of domain leaders. These leaders form centers of excellence that set and steward the transformation guardrails:
- Experience. Often led by marketing or customer insights teams — those closest to shifting customer expectations.
- Business architecture. Ideally staffed by experts with a deep grasp of operational processes, whether embedded in business units, internal consulting or tech.
- Technical architecture and engineering. Drawn from the digital or IT function, where dedicated product teams are already mobilized around change rather than maintenance.
- Change management. A critical lever — often overlooked — that ensures hearts and minds move with the roadmap.
Strategic ownership, not just functional expertise
What makes the transformation office truly effective isn’t just the caliber of its domain leaders — it’s the steering committee of cross-functional VPs from core business units and corporate functions that provides strategic direction and enterprise-wide accountability. This group sets the course, breaks ties and ensures that transformation efforts reflect shared priorities rather than siloed agendas. Together, they co-develop and maintain a multi-year roadmap that articulates what capabilities the enterprise needs, when and in what sequence. Crucially, they’re empowered to make decisions that span the legacy seams of the organization — the gray areas where most transformations falter. In this way, the transformation office becomes more than connective tissue; it becomes an engine for enterprise decision-making.
It’s time to treat transformation like the merger it is
Transformations and mergers share a common truth: they require structural change, architectural design and deep investment in change management. Yet, all too often, only one gets an army of dedicated resources.
It’s time we stop treating business transformation like a part-time job. The next time you’re asked to unite two business units or reinvent a go-to-market model to enable a new strategy, ask yourself: if this were a merger, how would we be resourcing it?
And if the answer looks different, ask why.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
Read More from This Article: The secret weapon for transformation? Treating it like a merger
Source: News