We'll Fix It In Post: The Marvelization of Change Work

This summer, prepare for an onslaught of cinematic superheroes. Blockbuster after blockbuster will hit the screens, promising epic battles, stunning visual effects, and — let's be honest — likely more than a few plot holes we’re all expected to overlook. “We’ll fix it in post” has become the mantra of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a production joke that’s morphed into an operating model. Studios greenlight billion-dollar films without finished scripts, patching plots in reshoots and overworking VFX teams to cover the cracks left by rushed production. The results? Spectacle over substance. Easter eggs over emotional arcs. Burnout behind the scenes, and audience fatigue on the other side of the screen.

Sound familiar?

In organizations, we do the exact same thing. We kick off major transformations with vague goals, squishy timelines, and the blind optimism that we’ll course-correct as we go. Strategy decks are light on detail. The change team isn’t staffed. Communications are TBD. Still, we launch—because we’re out of time, out of patience, or out of political capital.

We hit “record” without a script.

Agile or Aimless?

“Agile” is often the justification we reach for when we start without structure. But real agility is intentional, disciplined, and user-centered. What we’re often doing instead is tap-dancing—improvising our way through each scene, hoping the final edit looks better than the raw footage.

In the business world, “we’ll fix it in post” can show up as:

• Starting implementation before leaders are aligned: Imagine filming a scene where the main characters have no idea why they're there or what their motivations are. That's what happens when key stakeholders aren't on the same page from the beginning.
• Launching a tool before training or support is in place: This is the equivalent of releasing a superhero movie where the audience has no idea what the hero’s powers are or how they work. Confusion reigns, adoption plummets.
• Deferring communication until “we have something solid”: When communication is an afterthought, it leaves a vacuum that gets filled with rumors and assumptions. This is like a movie with vital plot points revealed only in the director’s cut, long after the audience has left the theater scratching their heads.
• Burning goodwill with stakeholders because we promised certainty but delivered chaos: Every time we launch a half-baked initiative, we erode the trust of those we rely on most. It’s like a film franchise that consistently disappoints its loyal fans—eventually, they stop showing up.

The myth is that this kind of improvisation leads to innovation. Sometimes it does. But more often, it leads to rework, confusion, and a storyline no one buys into. It’s not about being rigid; it’s about having a strong foundation. You wouldn’t build a skyscraper without architectural plans, even if you intend to iterate on the interior design. Why, then, do we treat organizational change with less rigor than a construction project?

The True Cost of Post-Production Thinking

When Marvel films underperform, they often get another shot—audiences have short memories, streamers can recoup costs, and the next tentpole is always on the horizon. But in business, the stakes are different.

Every rushed rollout, every half-baked pilot, every last-minute pivot chips away at trust. Employees disengage. Customers churn. Leaders stop listening to the very teams trying to guide change. And the people asked to “fix it in post”? They’re exhausted. They’re the VFX artists pulling all-nighters, the editors desperately trying to piece together disparate footage, and the marketing teams spinning chaos into compelling narratives.

Here’s what post-production thinking often costs you:

• Lost momentum: The time spent fixing preventable issues saps energy from what’s next. Think of all the resources—human and financial—diverted from strategic initiatives to patching up avoidable problems. This isn’t just about wasted effort; it’s about missed opportunities.
• Credibility gaps: Stakeholders remember the mess, not the patch job. When you consistently deliver messy, reactive change, your internal clients start to view the change function as problem-solvers for self-inflicted wounds, rather than strategic partners guiding successful transformations.
• Burned teams: Rework is rarely resourced—someone always ends up eating the pain. The burden disproportionately falls on your change teams, project managers, and front-line employees who are left to make sense of the chaos and deliver despite the lack of initial clarity. This leads to burnout, turnover, and a culture of cynicism. People become hesitant to champion new initiatives because they’ve been burned too many times by the “fix it in post” mentality.

What Good Looks Like (Even When It’s Messy)

Here’s the twist: post-production isn’t the enemy. The problem is thinking you can skip pre-production and still get a great result.

In healthy organizations, “fixing it in post” means:

• Running real retros and integrating what you learn: This is where you genuinely embrace continuous improvement, using feedback loops to refine and adapt based on actual outcomes, not just assumptions.
• Pressure-testing communications with actual users: Just like a film studio holds test screenings, you should be getting your communications in front of your audience before a full rollout. This ensures clarity and resonance.
• Building feedback loops into rollout and adoption: This isn't about scrambling to fix a broken launch; it's about proactively gathering data and insights to ensure successful adoption and address emerging issues with agility, not desperation.
• Holding space for iteration without skipping initial alignment: True iteration happens within a defined framework. You can pivot on specific scenes, but you need an agreed-upon plot.

In film, the best directors know the magic happens in editing—but only if you shot good footage in the first place. In change, the best leaders build clarity before momentum. They understand that a well-defined script, even if it’s a working draft, provides the necessary guardrails for creative improvisation.

Write the Script. Then Improvise.

Change work always involves uncertainty. No amount of planning eliminates emergence. But that’s not a free pass to wing it. You wouldn’t expect a director to show up on set with no script, no cast, and no idea of the story they’re trying to tell.

Practitioners should push back on “we’ll figure it out later” logic by asking:

• Who’s in the cast—and do they know their roles? Are the right people involved? Do they understand their responsibilities and how they contribute to the overall narrative?
• What’s the plot—and are we aligned on the arc? Is there a clear, shared understanding of the problem we’re solving, the desired future state, and the journey to get there?
• What scenes are non-negotiable—and where can we adapt on the fly? What are the core elements that must be in place, and where do we have flexibility to improvise and innovate?

Improvisation has its place. So does editing. But neither can save a story that was never coherent to begin with. You can have the most brilliant actors and the most skilled editors, but if the underlying script is fundamentally flawed, the final product will suffer.

Real Talk from the Set

Over the years, I’ve been called in more times than I can count to salvage projects already deep in “post.” Change was treated as the clean-up crew, not the co-director. We were handed vague storyboards, untested characters, and a half-built set—and expected to win an Oscar anyway. We were the emergency VFX team, frantically trying to render a coherent story out of disjointed scenes.

If you’re a change leader, don’t accept that role. Get in early. Ask hard questions. Demand a script, even if it’s a working draft. Insist on clarity and alignment up front. Your value isn't just in fixing problems; it's in preventing them. You are the architect of the narrative, the script doctor, the production designer—all before the cameras even roll.

Final Thought

You don’t need a 200-page plan. But you do need a plot. Stakeholders can handle complexity. What they can’t handle is chaos disguised as creativity. So, before you roll cameras, ask yourself:

Are we building something with intention, or just hoping the edit will save us?

Because great outcomes don’t happen in post.

They start on page one.

ChangeGuild: Power to the Practitioner™

Frequently Asked Questions

What does “We’ll fix it in post” mean in a business context?
It refers to the habit of launching initiatives without clear plans, assuming problems can be solved later during implementation. While it may work in film, it often leads to confusion, rework, and burnout in change efforts.

Isn’t flexibility a good thing in change work?
Yes—but flexibility without structure is just improvisation. Strategic agility involves planning for adaptation, not skipping foundational steps like alignment, stakeholder engagement, and communication readiness.

What are the risks of starting a change without a clear plan?
Common risks include lost credibility, disengaged stakeholders, scope creep, and costly rework. The longer decisions are deferred, the harder they become to resolve without breaking trust or momentum.

How can I balance agility with structure?
Start with a clear script (purpose, goals, and roles), then build in checkpoints for iteration. Early alignment and feedback loops allow for flexibility without chaos.

What’s the role of a change leader in these situations?
Change leaders should advocate for clarity before momentum. If the “script” isn’t ready, they can ask tough questions, engage stakeholders early, and co-create the narrative to prevent rework later.