In their quest to stay ahead of the curve, business leaders might instead be throwing their employees a curve ball.

Today’s business world prizes innovation. Companies don’t want to be left behind, and executives are fearful about missing out on the next “big thing.” This can be a healthy organizational dynamic, provided the inexorable march forward, that ethos of innovation, is executed the right way.

Unfortunately, that’s not always the case.

Instead, many people find themselves working in organizations where the quest to stay ahead of the game devolves into the dysfunctional pursuit of “shiny objects”—tools, techniques and technologies that are, at any given moment, generating buzz throughout the marketplace.

When executives’ attention is drawn to one shiny object after another, it can be jarring for employees, since it manifests itself in the form of continuously changing priorities, strategic initiatives du jour and a general sense that the company is rudderless.

This ailment constitutes something of an “Organizational Attention Deficit Disorder (OADD),” where—like with the human behavioral condition of ADD—executives struggle to prioritize activities and focus on the task at hand. They’re easily distracted and often appear to others as being chaotic and disorganized.

Examples of OADD abound in today’s enterprises: the five-year plan that fizzles out after 18 months; the transformational, multiyear IT strategy that evaporates overnight; the company mission statement that changes as frequently as the weather; organizational structures that repeatedly centralize and decentralize like a crazed accordion.

Buzzworthy management techniques are frequent triggers of OADD, as evidenced by companies that flew the Total Quality Management banner back in the 1980s, then the Reengineering banner in the 1990s, followed by the Six Sigma LEAN banner in the 2000s and then perhaps the Agile Methodologies banner in the 2010s.

Trendy technologies are also common culprits behind OADD, as executives rush to embrace digital transformation and all of its assorted accoutrements: big data, predictive analytics, the Internet of Things (IoT), cloud-based legacy system replacements, chatbots, drones, Robotic Process Automation (RPA), blockchain and AI (just to mention a few).

To be clear, OADD is not about endeavors that fail midstream and are gracefully put to rest. In those situations, there’s a conscious, deliberate, fact-based decision made to adjust course. Rather, OADD is about continuously refocusing an organization on the next big thing—launching new initiatives with great fanfare, only to have them disappear into the woodwork a short time later when something better, something shinier comes along.

OADD is not just an academically intriguing organizational dynamic; it exacts a very real cost on a business.

Morale suffers, as OADD deprives the workforce of the consistency and clarity of direction that every employee desires. Staff are left cynical and confused, just waiting to roll their eyes at the announcement of the next transformational project or initiative du jour, sowing the seeds for resistance to even the most legitimate and pressing organizational change.

Customer satisfaction suffers, as employees—exhausted by all the shifting priorities—become jaded. Their frustration inevitably seeps into their interactions with customers, and that impairs their ability to be strong ambassadors for the company’s brand.

Lastly, returns on investment suffer as the OADD-driven “start, stop, move on” dynamic leaves a trail of partially completed projects and unfinished transformations, leading to write-offs and cost inefficiencies that sap organizational value.

The challenge for business leaders is to strike the right balance between fostering consistency and focus while simultaneously pushing their organizations to be progressive and forward-thinking. Here are three ways executives can accomplish that:

• Watch for telltale signs of OADD. One of the best medicines for avoiding the OADD affliction is simply being aware of its existence and monitoring one’s own behavior accordingly. Look for indications that OADD might be taking hold in your organization, be it through an affinity for buzzwords, constant reshuffling of priorities or a chronic history of false starts. By recognizing these classic markers of OADD, executives will be in a much better position to steer themselves (and their teams) away from this undesirable behavior.

• Define your organization’s “True North.” Guard against OADD by evaluating big decisions through a more strategic lens—a “True North” that keeps the organization pointed toward a bigger, bolder, long-term aspiration. Think of this True North as the capability or competency that you want your organization to be famous for (e.g., agent-focused, low-cost leader, underwriting excellence, product innovation, customer experience). It should be a defining characteristic of the organization, something that doesn’t change from year to year. Use that True North as a filter to help uncover tactical pursuits that might be motivated more by “shiny object syndrome” than by strategic fit.

• Build a narrative around that True North. Whatever constitutes your True North, it should be repeatedly communicated to the workforce, helping to bring purpose to each individual’s role. However, merely articulating that True North isn’t sufficient. It also needs to be continually referenced by management to help provide context around tactical initiatives. Indeed, this is the key to avoiding even the appearance of OADD, because it helps employees see how the company’s shorter-term pursuits align with the bigger picture—providing an umbrella of consistency across a portfolio of changeable organizational endeavors. Instead of trying to make sense of a cacophony of seemingly unrelated initiatives, employees will see how those initiatives fit into a larger mosaic. From a practical communications standpoint, this means internally promoting an initiative like AI not as an end unto itself but as a pathway that helps orient the organization toward its True North (e.g., “We’re pursuing AI technology to advance our underwriting excellence and cement it as a sustainable source of competitive advantage”). Most every initiative the organization launches should tie back to that True North in a way that will appear logical and authentic to the workforce.

The companies that deserve the most credit are the ones that stay focused on a core set of principles, regardless of which way the prevailing market winds (and management gurus) might nudge them. These are firms, for example, that promoted the benefits of applying manufacturing discipline to service operations long before the Six Sigma buzzword ever entered the business lexicon. Or those that had robust enterprise risk management programs well before it was ever in fashion, because prudent, rigorous risk management was always central to their beliefs.

Yes, great businesses and great leaders sometimes have to chart new courses. Yes, a company’s priorities must evolve with its environment. And, yes, change is the only constant in today’s business world. But executives must be careful not to mistake normal change efforts, shifting priorities and new initiatives with the more pathological, OADD manifestations of such behavior. Whereas the former merely constitutes good, sound business practice, the latter is a recipe for employee disenchantment, operational dysfunction and financial underperformance.