BTWS 2027 | The Transformation Value Test: How to Know When to Invest, Adapt, or Stop

Chapter headingChapter subheadingStephan Blasilli, Head of Business Process Excellence at EDP Renewables North America and Advisory Board Member, shares a four-step framework for maintaining capital discipline while turning transformation investment into measurable business valueContents

Thank you for reading Infographics | Landing Page Template

25-27 January 2027 | Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista

Exclusive Interview with

Stephan Blasilli

Head of Business Process Excellence

EDP Renewables North America

THE TRANSFORMATION VALUE TEST:

How to Know When to Invest, Adapt, or Stop

Introduction

Transformation leaders are being asked to do more with tighter capital discipline – while navigating the ever-expanding world of AI, automation, and process technologies.

But the pressure to adopt new technology can create a dangerous starting point: choosing the solution before proving the problem.

For Stephan Blasilli, Head of Business Process Excellence at EDP Renewables North America and BTWS Advisory Board Member, disciplined transformation starts somewhere else: with the business outcome.

In this interview, Stephan outlines a four-step framework covering:

Strategic Outcome Mapping
Process Intelligence
Flexible Technology
Agile Adoption

When transformation budgets are under increasing scrutiny, how can leaders make sure they are solving a genuine business problem rather than simply finding a reason to use new technology?

I think the first step is to be clear about what type of transformation you are trying to do. Are you trying to reduce cost in the existing business? Are you trying to create new revenue? Or are you trying to build a new business model? Those are very different journeys, and they need very different business cases.

If the goal is cost reduction, then the questions are quite practical: What is not working today? Who is affected by it? What outcome needs to improve? And what is the problem costing us?

The important thing is that the key decision-makers need to be aligned on those answers. If people describe the problem differently, or cannot explain the value in simple terms, then the organization is probably not ready to invest.

Transformation Scope	Business Model	Example
Efficiency and Cost Saving	Existing	Today's Focus
New Revenue Streams	Existing	AWS
Disrupting	New	Uber

Designed to help leaders identify genuine opportunities, prove value early and make better decisions about where to invest, scale or stop.

Your framework starts with Strategic Outcome Mapping and securing quick wins to help self-fund the transformation journey. How should leaders identify those early opportunities – and what makes a quick win valuable enough to build momentum for the next stage?

Find a quick win that produces measurable value. My rule of thumb is that the quick win should pay for itself within 6 months. But savings alone are not enough.

The win should also prove the approach, build trust with employees, and create skills that can be reused. That combination of value, speed, and learning helps fund and support the complete journey.

1st: Strategic Outcome Mapping

Solve for the problem, not for the process
Start with the “quick win” to self-find the journey
If it doesn't pay for itself in 6 months, you're mapping the wrong outcome

Before automating or applying AI, you need to understand how work actually gets done. How can process intelligence help leaders distinguish between routine, repetitive work that can be automated and complex knowledge work that still requires human judgement?

Process intelligence helps because it shows how work really happens, not how we think it happens. You can see where people wait, repeat steps, create workarounds, make decisions, or deal with exceptions. That is important because not every process should be automated in the same way.

If the work has clear inputs, clear rules, high volume, and very few exceptions, then it is usually a good candidate for automation.

But if the work changes depending on context, risk, experience, or new information, then you still need human judgment. In those cases, technology should not replace the person; it should guide the work, make the process easier to manage, and help people make better decisions faster.

There is no shortage of AI, automation and process technologies promising to transform operations. How can organizations avoid technology-led transformation and instead choose the right technology for the process – particularly when flexibility and speed are critical?

Before selecting any technology, understand the process. Stable, repetitive tasks may suit simple automation. Structured processes with clear steps may need workflow tools.

Work that changes by case may need flexible case management, with automation supporting specific steps.

More complex tools should only be used when the work truly requires them. I also favor technology that can be changed quickly as we learn. The best solution is not the most advanced one.

It is the simplest option that delivers the outcome and can adapt over time.

2nd: Use Flex-Tech Approach to Tailor Solutions the Way Your Employees Work

	Unstructured Processes	Rigid Processes
Desired Outcomes	Gather knowledge Resolve problem	Efficiency Transaction volume
Solution-Focus	Provide context Collaboration	Assign Automate
Process Example	Issue resolution	Onboarding
Tech Example	BMP Platforms Agentic AI	RPA

AI investment is accelerating, but so is the pressure to prove it is actually creating value. At what point does an AI use case stop being a compelling business case and become an expensive experiment – and how should leaders make that call?

An AI use case becomes an expensive experiment when it only proves that the tool can produce a result. The real test is whether people can work differently because of it.

Does it improve how they make decisions, take action, or handle exceptions? If the way of working does not change, the technology will not create meaningful value, at least while people remain part of the process.

In short: Leaders should stop or redesign the use case when it demonstrates technical capability but no measurable change in decisions, actions, or outcomes.

Your final step is Agile Adoption, with frontline teams involved early through MVPs, actionable metrics and exception-based processing. Why is this involvement so critical – and what can happen when organizations design transformation from the top down?

Frontline teams know where the real delays, exceptions, and workarounds are. Involving them early helps us build a small first version, test it in real work, and improve it quickly.

It also gives employees a role in shaping the change rather than having it imposed on them.

When transformation is designed only from the top, it often reflects how leaders think work happens, not how it actually happens.

The result may look good in a presentation but creates extra steps, poor adoption, and limited value.

Looking across transformation programs, where do you see organizations most often losing capital discipline: choosing the wrong problem, investing in technology too early, underestimating adoption, or failing to measure value?

I believe the biggest loss usually happens at the start: choosing a weakly defined problem and then committing to technology too early.

Once money has been spent, teams feel pressure to continue even when the value is uncertain. Underestimating adoption and weak measurement make the problem worse because leaders cannot see whether the change is working.

Capital discipline requires decision points throughout the journey: prove the problem, test the value, confirm real usage, and measure the outcome. If the evidence is not there, leaders must be willing to stop or change direction.

What made you want to be part of Business Transformation World Summit 2027, and why do you think it is important for transformation and operational excellence leaders to be in the room?

What do you hope attendees will take away from the conversations at the event?

I have a special relationship with this summit because I have the privilege of being part of the Advisory Board. Over the years, I have learned a lot from the conversations, the speakers, and the people who come into the room with real transformation experience.

For me, there is no other event on US soil that brings together this many transformation and operational excellence leaders in one place.

That matters because transformation is becoming more important, but also more difficult, especially as organizations try to understand what AI really means for the way they work.

I hope attendees leave with practical ideas, honest lessons, and a stronger sense of how to transform organizations in a way that is both ambitious and realistic.

25-27 January 2027 | Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista

Stephan’s framework highlights a fundamental challenge facing transformation leaders today: ambition is not enough. Organizations need to know where transformation will create value, how that value will be measured and when the evidence justifies the next investment.

That is the conversation at the heart of the Business Transformation World Summit, 25-27 January 2027, Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista.

Across the Agentic AI, Operational Excellence & Continuous Improvement, Change & Transformation and Chief Transformation Officer summits, transformation leaders will come together to examine how organizations can turn technology investment into measurable business outcomes – while navigating the practical realities of adoption, process change, workforce capability and capital discipline.

As Stephan puts it, the value of being in the room comes from hearing practical ideas and honest lessons from people with real transformation experience.

Join Business Transformation World Summit 2027 to challenge your assumptions, learn from leaders navigating transformation in practice and leave with ideas you can put to work in your own organization.

DOWNLOAD THE 2027 AGENDA

BECOME A SPONSOR