Making Three-Horizon Thinking Operational

Part 3 of 4: Implementation Frameworks, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Real-World Success

Understanding the three-horizon framework is one thing. Actually implementing it in a fast-moving scale-up is something else entirely.

In Parts 1 and 2, we explored why roadmap-only thinking fails and how the three-horizon framework creates sustainable competitive advantage. Now comes the hard part: making it operational in your organization.

The challenge isn't conceptual understanding—most executives immediately grasp why portfolio thinking matters. The challenge is organizational: How do you maintain strategic discipline when everything feels urgent? How do you defend Horizon 2 and 3 investments when customers are demanding Horizon 1 features? How do you structure teams and metrics to support different horizons simultaneously?

After implementing this framework across dozens of scale-ups, we've developed a battle-tested approach that works even in high-pressure, resource-constrained environments.

The Four-Step Implementation Framework

Step 1: Portfolio Audit and Reality Check

Before you can rebalance your portfolio, you need to understand your current state.

Most leadership teams significantly overestimate their Horizon 2 and 3 investments. They remember the strategic initiatives they discussed in quarterly planning but forget how many got deprioritized for urgent customer needs.

Conduct a ruthless audit:

Map every active initiative—every engineering team's current focus, every product manager's roadmap commitment, every ongoing project—to one of the three horizons.

The classification rules:

  • Horizon 1: Improves core product for existing customer base and use cases

  • Horizon 2: Extends capabilities to new segments, use cases, or creates platform advantages

  • Horizon 3: Explores fundamentally new technologies, business models, or market opportunities

Then calculate actual capacity allocation by engineering time, not by number of initiatives. A Horizon 3 "exploration" that gets 5% of one engineer's time doesn't represent 10% of your portfolio.

What you'll discover: Most teams are running 85-90% Horizon 1, 10-15% Horizon 2, and 0-5% Horizon 3—regardless of what their quarterly plans say.

Hidden Horizon 1 work: Watch for "strategic initiatives" that are actually core product improvements disguised with ambitious language. If it's serving existing customers in existing use cases, it's Horizon 1 no matter how innovative it sounds.

Step 2: Define Strategic Target Allocation

Now that you know where you are, decide where you need to be.

Your target allocation should be based on:

Current market position: Early in your category? Heavy Horizon 1 to establish dominance. Mature market with entrenched competitors? More Horizon 2 and 3 to differentiate.

Funding runway and revenue growth: Limited runway demands Horizon 1 focus on revenue and retention. Strong position enables more strategic investment.

Competitive dynamics: Fast-moving competitive landscape requires more Horizon 2 platform building and Horizon 3 exploration.

Technical debt burden: High technical debt requires rebalancing toward Horizon 1 infrastructure work before you can effectively pursue Horizon 2.

Example allocations by stage:

Pre-Series A (proving PMF):

  • Horizon 1: 75-80% (core value prop and retention)

  • Horizon 2: 15-20% (initial platform thinking)

  • Horizon 3: 5% (technology exploration)

Series A/B (establishing market position):

  • Horizon 1: 60-70% (operational excellence and expansion)

  • Horizon 2: 20-30% (adjacent markets and platform)

  • Horizon 3: 10% (strategic exploration)

Series C+ (market leadership):

  • Horizon 1: 50-60% (optimization and enterprise)

  • Horizon 2: 25-35% (new markets and ecosystem)

  • Horizon 3: 10-15% (transformational opportunities)

The critical principle: Your target allocation should be explicit, documented, and jointly owned by your CPO and CTO. It's not a suggestion—it's a strategic commitment.

Step 3: Establish Governance and Decision Rights

Strategic allocation means nothing without governance to protect it.

The operational challenge: Horizon 1 work generates constant pressure to reallocate resources. A major customer threatens to churn. A competitive deal demands a specific feature. A technical incident requires immediate attention.

Without governance frameworks, these pressures will consume your Horizon 2 and 3 capacity every single time.

Create decision frameworks for:

Promotion criteria: When does a Horizon 3 experiment graduate to Horizon 2 investment? What evidence is required? Who makes the decision?

Standard: Validated customer demand + technical feasibility + strategic alignment + resource commitment.

Sunset decisions: When do you kill initiatives that aren't delivering? How long do Horizon 3 experiments run before they need to show progress?

Standard: Quarterly reviews with explicit continuation criteria. Horizon 3 experiments that haven't generated learning in 2-3 months get killed or pivoted.

Resource reallocation: Under what circumstances can you pull resources from Horizon 2 or 3 to address Horizon 1 needs?

Standard: Only for customer-affecting incidents or strategic opportunities that would be materially accretive to business value. Requires joint CPO-CTO approval and documented payback plan.

Review cadence: How often do you reassess portfolio balance and make strategic adjustments?

Standard: Monthly portfolio reviews (tactical adjustments), quarterly strategic reviews (major rebalancing), annual planning (fundamental strategy shifts).

Step 4: Align Organization and Metrics

Different horizons require different team structures and success metrics.

The structural challenge: If you measure all teams by the same metrics (features shipped, customer adoption, revenue impact), you'll kill Horizon 2 and 3 work.

Team organization approaches:

Dedicated Horizon 1 teams: Optimize for delivery velocity, operational excellence, and customer satisfaction. Measured by feature adoption, system reliability, customer retention.

Cross-functional Horizon 2 squads: Balance customer development with capability building. Measured by market validation, technical feasibility, and strategic option creation.

Small Horizon 3 exploration teams: Emphasize learning speed over shipping speed. Measured by hypotheses tested, insights generated, and graduation readiness.

The key principle: Teams should have primary horizon ownership while maintaining awareness of portfolio objectives.

Metrics that matter by horizon:

Horizon 1:

  • Customer retention and NPS

  • Feature adoption and engagement

  • System performance and reliability

  • Time-to-market and delivery predictability

Horizon 2:

  • Market validation signals (beta participation, customer commitment)

  • Strategic capability development (platform maturity, data assets)

  • Competitive differentiation impact

  • Technical-market fit indicators

Horizon 3:

  • Hypotheses tested per month

  • Validated learnings generated

  • Strategic insights surfaced

  • Graduation readiness (market signal + technical proof)

The Four Deadliest Pitfalls (and How to Avoid Them)

Pitfall 1: Horizon 1 Gravity

The problem: Urgent customer needs and revenue pressure consistently pull resources away from Horizon 2 and 3 work. "Just this once" becomes every quarter.

The solution: Ring-fence capacity for strategic horizons. Treat Horizon 2 and 3 allocations as non-negotiable infrastructure investment, not discretionary spending. Establish executive accountability for maintaining portfolio balance.

In practice: Your CPO and CTO jointly commit to board-level reporting on portfolio allocation. Missing your Horizon 2/3 targets is a strategic failure, not an execution flexibility.

Pitfall 2: Horizon 3 Delusion

The problem: Teams label incremental Horizon 1 work as "strategic innovation" to make it sound more important or get access to Horizon 3 resources.

The solution: Define ruthlessly clear criteria. Horizon 3 should feel genuinely uncertain and exploratory. If it's a sure bet that's obviously valuable, it's probably Horizon 2.

The test: Would this initiative make sense if your current business model disappeared? If no, it's not Horizon 3.

Pitfall 3: Disconnected Horizons

The problem: Horizon 2 and 3 initiatives don't leverage Horizon 1 customer relationships and market position. They become science projects disconnected from business value.

The solution: Require all strategic initiatives to articulate how they build on core advantages. The best Horizon 2 and 3 work multiplies the value of Horizon 1 rather than diversifying away from it.

Governance rule: Every Horizon 2/3 initiative must answer: "How does this make our Horizon 1 business more valuable or defensible?"

Pitfall 4: Missing the Transition

The problem: Promising Horizon 2 or 3 initiatives prove their value but die because there's no clear path to scaling them or integrating them into Horizon 1.

The solution: Establish explicit graduation criteria and resource commitments. When initiatives validate their hypotheses, commit to scaling them rather than treating them as perpetual experiments.

Best practice: Include "graduation budget" in portfolio planning—reserved capacity for scaling validated Horizon 2/3 initiatives into Horizon 1.

Real-World Case Study: Series B SaaS Transformation

Company Profile:

  • B2B SaaS platform, mid-market focus

  • $15M ARR, 80 employees

  • Strong product-market fit but increasing competitive pressure

  • Preparing for Series C fundraising

Initial State (Portfolio Audit):

  • 92% Horizon 1 (customer features and enterprise gaps)

  • 8% Horizon 2 (scattered platform initiatives)

  • 0% Horizon 3 (discussed but never funded)

Strategic Challenge:

  • Investors wanted to see defensible competitive advantages

  • Enterprise prospects demanded platform capabilities

  • New competitors launching with AI-powered features

  • Team felt stuck on feature treadmill

Implementation (6-month transformation):

Month 1-2: Audit and Strategy

  • Comprehensive portfolio audit and realization of allocation gap

  • Joint CPO-CTO strategic planning workshop

  • Board alignment on three-horizon strategy

Target Allocation:

  • 65% Horizon 1: Enterprise features, core optimization, technical debt

  • 25% Horizon 2: Platform API, vertical modules, advanced analytics

  • 10% Horizon 3: AI-powered automation, embedded product, mobile experience

Month 3-4: Organization and Governance

  • Restructured teams around horizon ownership

  • Established monthly portfolio reviews

  • Created different success metrics by horizon

  • Protected Horizon 2/3 capacity in sprint planning

Month 5-6: Execution and Validation

  • Horizon 1: Shipped key enterprise features, improved reliability

  • Horizon 2: Launched platform beta with 12 early adopters

  • Horizon 3: Validated AI automation concept with design partners

18-Month Outcome:

  • Series C raised at 3x higher valuation than initial projections

  • Investors specifically cited platform strategy and AI roadmap as differentiators

  • Customer retention improved 15% despite maintaining feature velocity

  • Platform revenue reached 12% of total ARR within a year

  • Two Horizon 3 initiatives graduated to Horizon 2 with dedicated resources

  • Team satisfaction increased - engineers valued strategic work alongside execution

The CPO-CTO Partnership: The transformation required weekly portfolio reviews, monthly board updates jointly delivered, and explicit agreement on trade-offs. When a major customer demanded a feature that would consume Horizon 2 capacity, they jointly negotiated a phased approach that protected platform development.

Key Success Factor: They treated portfolio allocation as a strategic commitment, not a planning suggestion.

Making It Stick

Three-horizon thinking isn't a one-time planning exercise—it's an operational discipline that requires consistent reinforcement.

Monthly rituals:

  • Portfolio allocation review (actual vs. target)

  • Horizon 2/3 progress updates

  • Resource reallocation requests and decisions

Quarterly disciplines:

  • Strategic portfolio assessment

  • Graduation/sunset decisions

  • Market validation reviews

  • Board communication on portfolio strategy

Annual planning:

  • Fundamental strategy refresh

  • Target allocation adjustments

  • Multi-year horizon roadmaps

In Part 4, we'll explore how to measure portfolio health, communicate strategy to stakeholders, and build the competitive advantages that compound over time.

Coming in Part 4: Measuring Portfolio Health and Strategic Success—The metrics that matter, stakeholder communication frameworks, and the long-term competitive advantages of portfolio excellence.

Ready to transform your product planning? Our Board Alignment / Investment Prep service helps leadership teams articulate three-horizon strategy to investors and establish the governance frameworks that ensure execution. We also offer Horizon Planning workshops that take you through the complete implementation process.

[Learn more about strategic planning services.]

Next
Next

The Three Horizons: Reframed for Scale-Ups