Evolving Industry
Every company has its quirks, but some problems run deeper than isolated issues, which can start a freefall into a dysfunctional organizational archetype.
According to Scott Wozniak, CEO of Swoz Consulting, these persistent breakdowns often show up as recognizable patterns.
In this episode of Evolving Industry, Scott explains how identifying an organization’s archetype, or its dominant dysfunction, can clarify where the real problems lie and what practical steps can be taken to move forward.
Scott talked with us about:
- Why most successful organizations are just as nuanced as people
- The eight organizational archetypes and their core dysfunctions
- Why customers are bad at delivering their own solutions
- The “over-entrepreneur” and leadership malpractice
Eight Organizational Archetypes: Patterns of Dysfunction
Scott walked us through eight common organizational archetypes, each one shaped by people, culture, and sometimes, industry norms.
“Every organization is just as unique as every human being,” he said. “But it’s disingenuous to pretend that there aren’t clusters.”
He pointed out that, just like in popular personality tests, certain “traits” tend to pop up in particular fields.
“There are unique things, just like in humans,” he explained. “But there are some things you're dealing with that might be normal, fundamental problems for your type as a person in your industry.”
1. The Fortress
These organizations are deeply risk-averse, often operating in highly regulated or asset-heavy industries.
“ Usually, they're in an industry with a lot of entrenched things where shifting materials or physical stuff is going to be expensive,” Scott said. “Then you stack on that a personality type that is cautious, detailed, and precise.”
Decision-making is slow, and change is rare, usually because the cost of getting it wrong is too high.
“It comes down to your certainty quotient,” Scott argued. “How certain do you have to be before you make a decision?”
2. The Franken-Org
A “franken-org” is born when rapid growth, mergers, or acquisitions outpace integration.
Scott suggested that the result is often a stitched-together system of disjointed tools, competing platforms, and siloed teams that don’t (or can’t) talk to each other.
“Especially in larger companies, if you grow through acquisitions and you don’t have a strategy on the backend… then everybody’s got their own app and lingo, and none of the things actually feed each other.”
Fixing a Franken-org is expensive and time-consuming, which is why many choose to live with the mess until the cost of inefficiency becomes impossible to ignore.
“We had a major project with a Fortune 100 company. They had done a ton of acquisitions,” Scott recalled. “And they were like, ‘Yeah, we’re not fixing that… It’ll kill us in the short term.”
Over time, those sloppy implementations can stymy a company’s growth.
“Financially, they’re killing it,” Scott said. “But they have this massive tech debt, and they could be doing so much better.”
3. The Cargo Cult
These companies mimic the surface-level behaviors of innovation without doing the deep work required to change how they operate.
It’s transformation theater — installing tools, launching “AI initiatives,” and hiring consultants without real follow-through.
“The ‘flavor of the month,’ Scott called it. “The CEO checks the box because everyone had the training, and then they move on to their next shiny object.”
4. The Shadow Bureaucracy
Official org charts often don't reflect reality.
Decisions are made by informal power structures, be it family members, legacy employees, or political influencers, rather than people with defined accountability.
“I probably [work with] a disproportionate amount of family enterprises,” Scott said. “There’s an entirely other decision structure that’s not on the books.”
He pointed out that in these environments, trust often erodes as leaders operate in ambiguity, and authority is constantly undermined.
“ You’ve got your own internal Illuminati running things from behind the scenes.”
5. The Firefighting Factory
Perhaps the most common archetype, these organizations thrive on chaos.
Work doesn’t get done unless it’s an emergency, and the loudest voice in the room determines the day’s priorities.
“You are addicted to being the hero who swoops in and saves the day,” Scott said.
He calls it a “culture of cortisol” — an adrenaline-fueled way of working that exhausts teams and derails long-term progress.
The irony? These companies often have a strong customer focus, but end up creating new crises by constantly diverting from the plan.
“You’ve got to pull back and let your team solve it,” Scott explained. “Say, ‘Customer, we care. But we’re going to solve your problem on schedule.’”
He implied that by implementing stable systems and processes, companies can get ahead of these catastrophes altogether.
“That sucker scales. And then, what do you know? There never was a fire.”
6. The Hollow Matrix
Here, collaboration is so emphasized that no one really owns anything.
Roles are ambiguous, decisions are slow, and accountability is diffused.
“If everyone owns it, it’s not going to get done consistently,” Scott said.
He emphasized the importance of tools like RACI to define ownership clearly, even in flat, collaborative cultures.
Without it, progress stalls and initiatives drift.
“Six project leaders? You’re not going to get anywhere fast.”
7. The Zombie Enterprise
In a zombie enterprise, employees are disengaged, change feels impossible, and new initiatives are met with apathy or passive resistance.
“They've given up. It’s quiet quitting,” Scott said. “I'm here, but I don't believe in it.”
But even zombie cultures can be revived.
Scott believes people want to be part of forward momentum. They just need proof that leadership is serious about it.
“ Measured change is the best working environment for all of us. We thrive when we see growth and steady progress.”
8. The Ivory Tower
Strategy is developed in isolation, without input from frontline employees or real customers.
These companies are often led by successful executives or well-funded teams who believe their big idea is too good to test.
“They raise a bunch of money, climb up into their ivory tower, and spend two years building the perfect ‘fill-in-the-blank,’” Scott exclaimed. “But they’re not willing to put it out in the market and test it.”
The result? Missed consumer signals, wasted investments, and delayed product-market fit.
“Real-world feedback is more valuable than anything [else] we’ve seen,” Scott said.
Knowing Your Archetype Is a Leadership Advantage
Scott’s message isn’t about labeling companies as broken but about making the hidden patterns visible.
Once you understand which archetype you’re operating under, transformation becomes more attainable.
“If you’ve done any of these personality [tests]… when you read that report, it actually is an empowering experience. You're like, ‘Oh, that explains why I keep having this fight reoccurring.’”
Regardless of which archetype your org may fall into, hope isn’t lost.
Getting unstuck starts with an honest assessment, which includes talking to customers, surveying staff, and building a shared understanding of what’s actually working.
“You don’t have to lose who you are,” Scott left us with. “You just need to be the mature version of who you are.”
Craving more? You can find this interview and many more by subscribing to Evolving Industry on Apple Podcasts, on Spotify, or here.