Most strategies don’t fail in the boardroom. They fail somewhere between the boardroom and the people doing the work.
An executive team sets a clear direction: reduce vendor overlap, modernize a process, prepare the business for growth. The objective is sound and the intent is real. Yet months later, the work underway looks only loosely like what was decided. Nobody ignored the direction. It simply changed shape on the way down.
Where direction gets lost
Every layer of an organization interprets what it hears. A senior leader shares the objective with direct reports, who translate it into priorities for their teams. Those teams turn priorities into tasks. At each step, some context drops away, and some local concerns get added.
By the time the message reaches analysts and front-line staff, the “why” is often gone. People are working hard, but on a version of the plan that has drifted from the original intent. This is rarely a talent problem. It is a translation problem.
Signs the gap is already there
Teams can describe their tasks, but not the objective those tasks serve.
Vendor and sourcing decisions follow last year’s priorities rather than this year’s direction.
Different lines of business buy similar tools or services without knowing it.
Initiatives launch with energy, then stall once the kickoff meeting is over.
The people doing the work know what’s missing, but that information never reaches the leaders who could fix it.
Leaders hear “on track” in status updates but don’t see the results they expected.
If several of these sound familiar, the strategy may be fine. The connection between strategy and execution is what needs attention.
Closing the gap, level by level
Closing the gap starts at the top, but it can’t stop there.
First, time with the executives: understanding corporate direction, the objectives already in flight and what success actually looks like to them. Not a summary in a slide deck, but the reasoning behind it.
Next, their direct reports. The goal is to confirm the message landed as intended, with nothing lost in translation. Gaps found here are far cheaper to fix than gaps found six months into delivery.
Then the analysts and the people closest to the work. The same check happens again: do the people executing understand what is being asked, and why? Just as important, do they have what they need to deliver it? The right tools, data, access, staffing and time often matter as much as understanding the directive itself.
This is where the most important gaps tend to surface, and where they most often stay hidden. The people doing the work usually know exactly what’s missing. They may hesitate to raise it, or they may simply have no direct line to the leaders who could fix it. An independent party can give those teams a voice. What they need reaches management clearly and without risk to anyone, before it turns into a missed deadline or a stalled initiative.
Only after direction is understood at every level, and the teams carrying it out have the resources to succeed, does planning begin in earnest.
Why this matters for vendors and sourcing
Every vendor relationship and every purchase is executive direction made concrete. When sourcing decisions are made without a clear line back to that direction, they become transactional: renewing what exists, buying what was requested, negotiating price without questioning need.
When the direction is understood, sourcing becomes strategic. The question shifts from “what are we buying?” to “what does the organization need to deliver on its objectives, and who is best placed to provide it?”
Making the change last
Closing the gap once is not enough. Lasting change needs defined owners, clear milestones and results that can be measured. It also needs your teams prepared to carry the work forward on their own, so progress doesn’t depend on any single person or outside party staying involved.
The best outcome of any engagement is an organization that no longer needs help with the problem it started with.
A question worth asking
Pick an objective your leadership team set this year. Then ask someone three levels down to explain it, and why it matters. The distance between those two answers is the gap.
