For decades, organizations have aligned their operations, strategy, and even culture around the need to meet quarterly targets. This practice is so deeply embedded in the corporate psyche that it often goes unquestioned. In my almost 25 years in business, I rarely worked for a company that was not obsessed with its quarterly thinking. And not seldom I observed that this framework is distorting priorities, and undermining the long-term health of organizations. But perhaps I have to re-think…

The Quarterly Mindset: A Flawed Premise

At its core, the quarterly reporting cycle provides a regular, structured way for companies to assess performance and share progress with their shareholders. On the surface, this sounds reasonable. Businesses, like individuals, benefit from having checkpoints and goals. However, the critical flaw lies in the arbitrary nature of these deadlines. Why should the 90-day mark become the driving force behind decision-making? More importantly, why should this artificial timeframe dictate the behavior of entire organizations?

“A fixation on short-term profits will not lead to long-term success.” — Jeff Bezos, Founder of Amazon

This hyper-focus on quarterly results can lead to significant dysfunction across multiple departments. The sales team, for instance, often bears the brunt of this pressure. As the quarter draws to a close, the push to meet targets intensifies, and salespeople are frequently incentivized—implicitly or explicitly—to close deals at any cost. This can result in aggressive discounting, pushing products at lower margins just to hit the revenue numbers for that period. While this might provide a short-term boost to the company’s bottom line, it often erodes future profitability and customer trust. Customers, aware that companies will lower prices to meet their goals, may delay purchases, knowing they can secure a better deal at the end of a quarter.

A local carpenter’s perspective

To fully appreciate the absurdity of this corporate behavior, let’s contrast it with a more grounded example—a local carpenter. Imagine a skilled carpenter who takes pride in crafting custom furniture. This individual has a reputation for delivering high-quality, hand-crafted pieces. Now, consider what might happen if this carpenter were pressured to meet quarterly deadlines similar to large corporations. Suppose an external person (e.g. a shareholder) approaches the carpenter and requests that a particular table be completed five days earlier to apply to some odd reporting deadlines and to make a specific order booking before the end of the quarter. Would it make sense for the carpenter to rush the process, sacrificing quality for the sake of an arbitrary deadline?

“The focus on quarterly earnings has done enormous damage to American business.” — Warren Buffett

The answer is, of course, no. A craftsman understands the value of time, care, and precision. A craftsman understands to put the client’s needs on top of all his actions and decisions. Rushing a project to meet an arbitrary deadline would not only compromise the quality of the work but also damage the artisan’s reputation—a far more significant asset than a few extra days of earlier order booking. And booking the order a few days earlier or later doesn’t make any difference for the carpenter.

And yet, this is precisely the mindset that has come to dominate much of our corporate world. By prioritizing short-term wins—often at the expense of long-term value—companies are effectively undermining the very foundation of sustainable success. It’s a trade-off that would make no sense to our carpenter, and yet it is accepted as the norm in much of corporate strategy.

Rethinking: How the „12 Week Year“ is changing my view

But: After reading Brian Moran’s The 12 Week Year, I begin to see that the problem is not necessarily with the timeframe itself, but with how it is used. The 12 Week Year is a productivity system designed to help individuals and teams achieve more by focusing on shorter time horizons. Rather than setting annual goals, which often feel distant and unattainable, the proposed system encourages breaking down long-term objectives into actionable 12-week periods. The key difference, however, is that this approach is not about rushing to meet arbitrary deadlines—it’s about driving focused, consistent progress toward meaningful outcomes.

In The 12 Week Year, Moran and Lennington argue that most individuals and organizations fail to achieve their goals not because they lack the ability or resources, but because they lack focus and urgency. By setting 12-week goals, people are forced to prioritize what really matters and execute with discipline. The shorter timeframe creates a natural sense of urgency without the panic that typically sets in at the end of a quarter. Moreover, the system encourages regular reflection and adjustment, ensuring that teams are constantly improving rather than merely reacting to external pressures.

Could This System Make Quarterly Targets More Effective?

So I started changing my mind and believe that the principles of The 12 Week Year could be applied to the corporate world in a way that makes quarterly goals more meaningful and less destructive! It requires a significant shift in mindset. Instead of treating the end of the quarter only as a finish line to be crossed at all costs, companies could use the 12-week framework as a proactive way to focus on continuous improvement and consistent execution.

„It’s not enough to be busy; so are the ants. The questions is: What are we busy about?“ – The 12 Week Year – Brian P. Moran, Michael Lennington

Rather than pushing sales teams to close deals at the last minute, organizations could set 12-week sales objectives that emphasize building relationships, understanding customer needs, and delivering value. This would likely result in fewer rushed deals and more sustainable, high-quality sales that benefit both the company and its clients in the long term. On top, the 12-week system, with its emphasis on regular reflection and adaptation, would enable companies to remain agile while still making consistent progress toward their long-term goals.

A Balanced Approach of „Management by Quarter“

Ultimately, the key to success in business is not about adhering rigidly to any one system, but about finding the right balance between short-term focus and long-term vision. The quarterly reporting system, as it is currently practiced in many companies, often tips too far in the direction of short-termism, leading to dysfunctional behavior and poor decision-making. However, in my opinion, by adopting some of the principles from The 12 Week Year, companies can regain control over their timeframes, using them not as arbitrary deadlines but as tools for continuous improvement and growth.