In the past, linear extrapolations of strategic plans offered promising guides to the future. Managers tried to categorize well-known problems into boxes with strategy labels, the top of a firm’s agenda was steering clear of potential potholes, and there was a choice between clear-cut future options. These strategies no longer work today, and just repeating what we have been done before is not a convincing recipe. The world has become different with multiple and often fuzzy options. In this article, we suggest that companies in different industries have to become more agile. Naturally, agility is not easy to implement as managers fear chaos and confusion. Thus, we introduce agility patterns with different degrees of change. For instance, high-reliability organizations, such as transportation or nuclear energy, are supposed to engage more in gradual change and stick closer to planning. However, we argue that even these companies have to become agile, albeit on a different level. In contrast, companies that exhibit lower system relevance, such as advertising or arts, may strive for agility that involves transformational elements; they can engage in experimentation and play and are more likely to accept inherent chaos in their change strategy. We use the notion of agility patterns for these different degrees of change and show how they help to mitigate the risks that come from either inertia (as a result of linear planning) or experiential chaos (as a result of full agile transformation). Depending on the industry and the degree of change, we distinguish between resilient, versatile and transformational agility patterns. We illustrate each category with examples and highlight how agility patterns can be applied to create value.