The problem this solves
Major initiatives are approved in rooms where disagreement stays polite and unspoken. Then execution starts: the CEO expects a revenue transformation, the sales director expects a reporting tool, the CFO approved a cost line and mentally checked out, and the sponsor turns out to have enthusiasm but no calendar time. Teams sense the split within weeks and hedge accordingly. Most transformation failures trace back to this moment, long before any technology decision was made.
How we work
We interview each member of the leadership team individually, asking the same structured questions: what is this change for, what does success look like in a year, what are you personally prepared to change in your own function, and what would make you quietly withdraw support. Individual interviews matter; the answers diverge in ways group settings never reveal.
We then map the divergence: where goals genuinely conflict versus where language differs, whose support is active versus nominal, and whether the named sponsor holds the authority, time, and appetite the change actually requires.
The deliverable is an alignment map, presented candidly to the leadership team together, with the specific disagreements named and a recommendation for resolving each before execution begins. Uncomfortable for an hour, and considerably cheaper than discovering the same misalignment in month six of a stalled rollout.
Deliverables
- Structured individual interviews with each leadership team member
- Alignment map showing where goals, expectations, and success definitions diverge
- Sponsorship strength assessment covering authority, time, and commitment
- Named list of conflicts to resolve before execution starts
- Facilitated leadership readout with resolution recommendations
What buyers ask before scoping.
Why do we need this for a CRM or platform project?
Because platform projects are change projects wearing a technology costume. A CRM implementation changes how sales works daily, what management sees, and whose numbers become visible. Since 2021 we have watched technically clean implementations struggle purely because leadership wanted different things from them. This assessment costs a fraction of that discovery.
What happens if you find our leadership is not aligned?
That is the assessment working, not failing. Misalignment found before execution is a planning input; found during execution it is a crisis. The readout names the specific conflicts and recommends how to resolve each: some need a decision, some need scope changes, and occasionally the honest recommendation is to delay the initiative.
Will individual interview answers be shared with the CEO?
Findings are shared at the level of positions and conflicts, not verbatim quotes with names attached, and we say so to every interviewee upfront. Executives are candid only under those conditions, and candour is the raw material here. The readout still names the real disagreements; it just does so fairly.
Related modules
AI Organizational Readiness Assessment
AI Organizational Readiness Assessment is a diagnostic engagement that examines whether your people, skills, ...
Role, Process & Accountability Assessment
Role, Process & Accountability Assessment is a diagnostic engagement that examines whether roles, processes, ...
AI Governance & Risk Assessment
AI Governance & Risk Assessment is a diagnostic engagement that examines how your company controls AI use: ...
Sounds like your situation?
30 minutes, your calendar, no slide deck. We tell you honestly whether this module fits.
Book discovery call