When Best Practices Become the Definition of Worst Practices
In a bright conference room in Silicon Valley, a product manager stands before her staff, explaining why a new idea won’t work because it conflicts with a company-adopted “best practice.”
“That’s not best practice,” she says, ending the discussion.
Across the country, a manufacturing supervisor shuts down an employee’s suggestion for improving the production line with similar words.
These scenes happen daily in organizations worldwide, where “best practices” have transformed from helpful guidelines into innovation-killing dogma.
The Prevention Exception: When to Apply “Best Practices”
Before we proceed, let’s clarify what we are not addressing: essential practices—procedures that genuinely safeguard lives and prevent disasters—must be upheld.
A few examples include:
- Nuclear power plant safety protocols that prevent meltdowns
- Medical sterilization practices that prevent infections
- Aircraft maintenance checks that ensure safe flights
- Food handling processes that prevent contamination
Such practices are not subject to debate or disruption. They stem from hard lessons, often learned through tragedy, and have been validated by rigorous benchmark testing and experience.
The term “best practice” highlights a fundamental flaw in this thinking. “Best” implies finality—a mountain climbed, a summit conquered. Yet, how can any practice be defined as “best” in a world of constant change and innovation? What works today may be obsolete tomorrow, especially as so-called thought leaders strive to remain relevant with “fresh ideas” and “bold insights.” The issue is that the organizations scramble to be included when new jargon emerges—a phenomenon we call buzzword stuffing. When this occurs, practices that do not align with the term’s true intent are often misclassified.
There is a significant difference between these essential standards and the “best practices” that high-ticket consultants and self-named thought leaders promote as universal solutions. Practices designed to safeguard health and save lives are essential. Industry best practices, however, are based on our current understanding and are expected to evolve as new discoveries emerge. Most professionals would acknowledge that these best practices will eventually change, although often prompted by a well-known thought leader introducing a “new way of thinking.” The purpose of this message is to point out that opinion-based practices can sometimes do more harm than good, especially when they hinder creativity and true innovation.
The High Cost of Implementing Best Practices
Nokia’s “Best Practices” Net Worst Outcomes
Nokia is a stark example of how rigid “best practices” can harm an organization. In 2007-2008, while Apple revolutionized smartphones, Nokia remained committed to its “best practice” waterfall development methodology. This strict adherence to traditional software development practices and a complex matrix organizational structure that Nokia viewed as “best practice” resulted in slow decision-making and delayed product launches. By the time Nokia finally transitioned to a more agile approach in 2011, it had lost significant market share, ultimately leading to the sale of its mobile phone business to Microsoft.
Nokia’s decision to remain stuck in its “best practice” procedures cost the company huge market share and customer confidence.
Here’s the irony: Nokia’s practices were adopted to improve efficiency and quality.
The Manufacturing Lesson
The NUMMI (New United Motor Manufacturing Inc.) plant in Fremont, California, illustrates the danger of blindly following “best practices.”
When Toyota and GM established their joint venture in 1984, GM executives anticipated they could easily replicate Toyota’s production system, renowned as the gold standard of manufacturing best practices. However, the initial implementation failed spectacularly.
Workers were required to follow procedures they did not understand, leading to reduced productivity and increased quality issues. Only when NUMMI’s leadership started adapting Toyota’s methods to their specific workforce and local conditions did the plant begin to succeed. By 1986, the same plant that had been one of GM’s worst was producing cars with some of the highest quality ratings in America.
Sometimes the best practice is to rid one’s business of best practices.
Problem Solving: Changing Wasteful Best Practices In Retail
Consider the retail sector. For decades, the “best practice” was to maintain large inventories to ensure product availability. Amazon completely transformed this approach with its data-driven just-in-time (JIT) strategy. Companies that stuck to outdated “best practices” filled their warehouses with obsolete stock while more agile competitors thrived.
The transformation of inventory management in retail serves as another compelling example. While traditional retailers like Sears and JCPenney adhered closely to the long-standing best practices of placing large seasonal orders and maintaining extensive warehouses, Zara radically disrupted the landscape. Instead of following the fashion industry’s norm of designing and ordering clothes months in advance, Zara developed a system of small-batch production and rapid responsiveness to customer preferences. The company could design, produce, and deliver new garments to stores within three weeks, whereas traditional retailers took up to six months to adhere to their best practices. By 2000, this shift away from norms enabled Zara to achieve a 25% annual growth rate while traditional retailers suffocated under unsold inventory and declining sales.
The Innovation Killer
However, for every essential practice, numerous so-called “best practices” do little more than stifle innovation. A striking example arises in the technology sector, where a prominent social media company once enforced a “best practice” of never changing its user interface without extensive testing and committee approval. In contrast, a smaller competitor introduced rapid innovations, quickly adapted to user feedback, and ultimately dominated the market.
Spotify‘s engineering culture provides a documented example of breaking away from “best practices.” While most large tech companies enforce standardized development methods across their departments, Spotify developed its “squad framework” in 2012. Each small team could choose its own development approach based on its specific needs. Some teams used traditional Scrum, others modified Kanban, and some created hybrid approaches. By 2015, this flexibility helped Spotify grow from 30 engineers to more than 600 while maintaining high productivity and innovation rates.
Breaking Free from the “Best Practice” Trap
The overarching issue with best practices lies in the mindset they create. Managers who believe they follow “best practices” stop seeking better solutions for tasks at any level.
A manufacturing plant supervisor illustrated this perfectly: “For three years, we faced quality issues with our assembly line. Everyone insisted we were adhering to best practices, so we kept looking for problems elsewhere. It turns out our ‘best practice’ was the issue. We were imitating a process designed for a completely different product type.”
The Cost of Conformity
A global bank learned this lesson the hard way. Customer satisfaction plummeted after it adopted “industry-standard best practices” in a number of ways, including strict call time limits and scripted responses. One wise branch supervisor decided to take a stand. She empowered her staff to handle calls naturally, without scripts or time limits. Within three months, her branch’s customer satisfaction scores went on toe produce optimal results. The branch led the company, and complaint rates dropped by 60%.
Here’s a cruel irony: Many of today’s “best practices” were once innovations that diverged from previous best practices:
- Henry Ford’s assembly line defied all manufacturing best practices of its time.
- Amazon’s online-only bookstore model shattered every retail best practice.
- SpaceX’s reusable rockets contradicted aerospace’s best practices.
The Power of Purpose Over Process
A Seattle-based software development and computer programming company exemplifies the wisdom of breaking free from established best practice constraints. Instead of enforcing a uniform development methodology across all departments, the company empowered each unit to choose its own approach. Some departments retained traditional methods, others created hybrid models, and some developed innovative working processes. As a result, overall productivity surged by 45%, and employee satisfaction dramatically increased.
The key is to focus on outcomes rather than procedures.
A healthcare startup called One Medical Group employed sound reasoning by challenging the conventional notion of scheduled doctor visits. Rather than sticking to the typical 15-minute model, the practice engaged a flexible format to assess patient needs. The result was a superior integrated system of virtual consultations, in-person visits, and ongoing monitoring. Patient outcomes improved significantly, costs decreased, and profits surged.
Creating a Culture of Intelligent Questioning
A manufacturing executive once remarked, “The moment someone says, ‘That’s a best practice,’ I ask, ‘According to whom, and under what circumstances?'” This simple question has saved his company millions by preventing the uncritical adoption of inappropriate procedures.
The automotive field exemplifies the importance of questioning. For years, the “best practice” was to build cars in large batches to achieve economies of scale.
However, when a small European manufacturer challenged this approach and shifted to a custom-order model with smaller production runs, it uncovered something surprising.
BMW’s Leipzig plant demonstrated how questioning “best practices” can foster breakthrough results. In 2005, while other automakers followed the traditional approach of fixed production lines, BMW implemented a dynamic manufacturing system where each vehicle could take different paths through the assembly process. Experts criticized this departure from established practices, but the results were undeniable: a 40% reduction in production time and a 50% increase in customer customization options. Despite higher per-unit production costs, overall profitability increased due to the absence of excess inventory, and customers were willing to pay more for customized vehicles.
Learning from Failure
It is said that true experts are those who have made all the mistakes. If this is true, then observing best practices should lead to wisdom. However, businesses cannot afford the expensive road to enlightenment, especially when common sense presents an alternative route. Yet, sometimes, the best lessons emerge from examining where “best practices” have faltered.
Progressive Insurance challenged “best practices” in claims handling with remarkable results. In 1994, while competitors adhered to the standard procedures of lengthy claim investigations, Progressive introduced its “Immediate Response” program. Claims representatives were empowered to visit accident scenes immediately and issue checks on the spot—a direct violation of insurance “best practices.” Despite predictions of disaster from industry experts, by 1998, Progressive’s approach had reduced claims costs by 15% while enhancing customer satisfaction by 80%.
The Technology Trap
The technology sector particularly suffers from “best practice” syndrome. A software development manager shared his experience: “We were so focused on following Agile best practices that we forgot to ask whether Agile was right for our project. Once we stepped back and designed our methodology based on our actual needs, development speed doubled.”
In 2008, when most tech companies rigidly followed the Scrum methodology, Microsoft’s Developer Division permitted its Visual Studio unit to develop a hybrid approach. The unit integrated elements from various methodologies tailored to their specific needs. This departure from strict “Agile” best practices led to a 45% reduction in development cycles and a significant enhancement in code quality, as illustrated in Microsoft’s 2009 development case studies.
Practical Steps to Manage Change
Corning’s Innovation Edge program illustrates how to balance standardization with experimentation. In 2007, at its Kentucky plant, Corning established designated areas where teams could test new manufacturing processes while adhering to strict safety protocols. This structured approach to innovation, which contradicted manufacturing “best practices” of complete standardization, resulted in the development of Gorilla Glass. By 2015, the program had generated more than 100 patents and $1 billion in new product revenue while maintaining Corning’s excellent safety record.
The Fear Factor
At the heart of blind adherence to best practices often lies fear. A major consumer goods company marketing director admitted, “Nobody ever got fired for engaging in best practices. But to suggest something new? That’s risky.” This fear-based decision-making costs companies billions in lost opportunities and stifles innovation.
Consider how Merck’s dramatic shift in R&D strategy in 2011 challenged big pharma’s “best practices.” While competitors stuck to traditional closed research models, Merck opened its research to external partnerships through its “Open Innovation Drug Discovery Program.” Despite warnings from experts about intellectual property risks, the program resulted in 53 successful research collaborations within its first three years and lowered research costs by 25%. This approach contributed to the development of several breakthrough medications, including the cancer drug Keytruda.
Breaking the Usage Cycle
A technology company in Boston has discovered an innovative method to challenge conventional best practices. Each quarter, teams are required to identify one “best practice” to question and explore alternatives. There is only one rule: it cannot compromise essential safety or security protocols. This structured approach to questioning established wisdom has led to several breakthrough innovations in their software development process.
Another compelling example of successful innovation was Adobe’s 2012 decision to abandon annual performance reviews, which were considered an HR “best practice.” Despite warnings from HR experts, Adobe replaced traditional reviews with regular “check-ins.” The outcome led to a 30% reduction in voluntary turnover and an estimated 100,000 manager hours saved annually. The success of this approach prompted companies like Microsoft and Deloitte to follow suit, effectively altering the definition of “best practice” in performance management.
Leaders play a vital role in overcoming best practice paralysis. A manufacturing CEO shared his approach: “I never ask, ‘What’s the best practice?’ Instead, I ask, ‘What’s the best outcome we can achieve?’ This simple shift transforms our approach to problems.”
Learning from External Sources
The Cleveland Clinic‘s transformation under CEO Toby Cosgrove illustrates how departing from conventional healthcare “best practices” can enhance patient care.
In 2007, the clinic controversially appointed a former hotel executive to transform the patient experience, departing from traditional hospital management methods. They implemented concierge-style services and overhauled staff training based on hospitality sector standards. By 2013, patient satisfaction scores rose from the 55th to the 92nd percentile, and medical outcomes improved across various metrics. [xiii]
The Power of Small Experiments
Walmart launched a Neighborhood Market experiment in 1998, demonstrating how controlled testing can challenge retail “best practices.” While the industry standard demanded large-format stores, Walmart tested smaller formats in carefully selected locations. Despite criticism from retail analysts who deemed small-format stores unprofitable, these experimental stores proved to be highly successful. By 2020, Walmart operated over 800 Neighborhood Markets, with these smaller formats exhibiting higher per-square-foot profitability than traditional supercenters.
Moving Forward to the Real Best Practice
Our aim of challenging “best practices” is not to summarily dismiss them all but to examine each with thoughtful skepticism. In this lies the path to growth.
Perhaps the only genuine best practice is the readiness to question established methods. As one successful entrepreneur stated, “The moment you believe you’re following the best practice is the moment you stop seeking better alternatives.”
Organizations that thrive in today’s rapidly changing, globalized environment do not strictly adhere to best practices. They are the ones that maintain essential standards while constantly seeking better ways to achieve their goals. They understand that what is considered best practice today might become a cautionary tale tomorrow.
The path forward is clear: approach “best practices” with healthy skepticism. Ask questions, experiment carefully, and learn continuously. Remember, the best practice might be the one that has yet to be discovered.
In 2009, ING Direct Netherlands completely abandoned traditional banking structures in a quest to increase efficiency. They removed all management layers and reorganized into self-directed units, defying every so-called “best practice” in the banking industry. The results were comprehensive. Employee engagement rose by 20%, customer response times decreased by 60%, and the bank became a model of efficient innovation. By 2015, dozens of banks and many organizations worldwide studied ING’s approach, illustrating how yesterday’s radical departure from best practices can become tomorrow’s standard.
Innovation and improvement do not arise from perfectly following a method or technique that mirrors others’ footsteps; they emerge from the courage to forge new paths while maintaining a connection to proven essential practices. The future belongs to the determined and brave few who question the status quo yet are wise enough to recognize which standard way of doing things should not be compromised.