The First 90 Days Workbook

Using The First 90 Days Workbook Without Driving Yourself Insane

Most people treat the workbook as a checklist. That is exactly how it becomes useless. I found that out the hard way about three years ago when I was handed the The First 90 Days Workbook by my manager to complete before my third week on a new director-level role. I spent four days filling in every single page honestly and produced something so generic that it looked like I had never actually done any analysis at all. The core issue is that the workbook assumes a clean organizational structure. It does not account for the fact that by the time you start, half your stakeholders have changed titles or reporting lines. It is a companion resource to W. Godfrey Simpson's methodology for leadership transitions. The main framework divides the initial period into three phases: get oriented, learn and build relationships, and accelerate results. The workbook takes those phases and converts them into structured worksheets. You fill in stakeholder maps, identify early wins, draft communication plans, and set up your measurement dashboard. The format is deliberately plain. That is intentional, because the point is to get you doing the work rather than reading about the work. I still reference it when onboarding senior people at my company. The version I use is the one commonly available through major business book retailers. There is no official portal. You buy it separately from the main book. Some consultants try to sell a custom version, and I would strongly recommend against that unless your organization has a specific reason for deviating from the standard framework. The standard version works because it is boring and widely understood.

How To Actually Use It Instead Of Just Filling It In

The most common mistake is completing the workbook in chronological order from day one. Do not do that. Start with the stakeholder map only. Spend your first ten days doing nothing else. Every interaction you have in those ten days should feed back into that single worksheet. By the time you move on to the later sections, you will already know which assumptions were wrong and which people actually matter. I learned this after a project completely fell apart in my second transition. I had followed the workbook sequence rigidly. I built a detailed action plan during weeks two and three, then realized during week four that two of the three people I had identified as key allies were actually working against me on the very initiative I had prioritized. The workbook section on stakeholder credibility assessment exists for exactly this reason, but only if you complete it after you have had direct conversations with those people, not before. Here is a more specific example that most guides will not tell you about. The The First 90 Days Workbook includes a section on diagnosing organizational culture through artifacts and rituals. That section assumes you have access to internal documents and meeting calendars. In my case, during a merger acquisition, those records were locked down for compliance reasons. I could not complete that part of the worksheet as designed. The workaround was to substitute a series of informal coffee meetings with mid-level managers who had been there before the merger. Their unfiltered observations gave me a more accurate cultural read than any document would have. The workbook tells you the method. It does not tell you how to adapt when the method is blocked.

Specific Sections That Actually Matter

Not all pages in the workbook are equal. The stakeholder influence mapping is genuinely useful. The 30-60-90 day timeline template is mostly filler. The success metrics section is valuable if you populate it with data you already have, not hypotheticals. Most people write vague targets like improve team morale or increase productivity. Those are not metrics. You need baseline numbers before you even open the workbook. If you cannot write a specific number next to each goal, do not write that goal down yet. The quick wins section gets the most attention and is also the most dangerous. The workbook frames quick wins as early visible results. In practice, a quick win that alienates a powerful stakeholder group is not a win. I once had someone at another company celebrate a cost-saving initiative they completed in their first month, only to realize six weeks later that the budget cuts had forced three high-performing team members to quit. The workbook does not address this tradeoff directly. You have to add that judgment yourself.

When The Workbook Fails Completely

There are two situations where I would not recommend using this at all. The first is if you are taking over a role during an active restructuring or layoffs. The usual assumption of stability does not apply, and following the standard phase-by-phase approach can make you look tone-deaf. The second is if your organization uses a highly matrixed structure with no clear reporting authority. In that case, the stakeholder map will explode into dozens of names and you will spend more time managing the map than actually leading. In both scenarios, I would suggest skipping the workbook and instead using a simpler approach based on listening sessions and direct observation for the first sixty days. If you are in a stable environment with a clear scope, the workbook is still worth the time investment. It usually takes about six to eight hours to complete fully if you are honest about it. That is not trivial, but it is far cheaper than spending three months wandering without any structure. I would still recommend reading the main book first so you understand the reasoning behind each worksheet, rather than just completing pages mechanically. The workbook without the book is just a form. The book without the workbook is an exercise in good intentions. Together they work if you use them correctly.