Strategic Alignment Across Teams

🌮 Food for thought 🧠 #PublicHealth is complex. This has already been discussed in plenty of papers. Consequently, the use of #digital tools to achieve typical Public Health Goals (aka #DigitalPublicHealth) could not be less complex. Right? Together with my colleagues Hans-Henrik Dassow, Daniel Diethei, Merle Freye, Jasmin Niess & Stefanie Do, I worked on mapping the fields related to Digital Public Health. The result is this colourful sunburst diagram ☀️ 🔎 What did we find? 🔍 1) Digital Public Health (DiPH) - as for our purpose defined as the overall field - includes the clinical & individual-centered #DigitalHealth 🎯 2) DiPH is colourful! It consists of the overarching fields: Humanities, Environmental Sciences, Social Sciences, Engineering & the Natural Sciences. These can be split into individual disciplines, which also come with their subfields (we kept the figure simple and did not portray every subdiscipline here) 🖍️ 3) Due to this, DiPH is extremely #interdisciplinary - but also the individual subdisciplines are interdisciplinary (especially in the Environmental Sciences). 💫 💥 What does this mean for public health practice?💥 1) The interdisciplinarity of DiPH-related projects should be reflected in the aim, methodology, and selection of team members 🪞 2) Multidisciplinary & interdisciplinary teams may use different language & methods --> be inclusive and communicate clearly! 💬 3) Allow for (in-)formal exchange between team members. Different approaches spark interest. Talk about this! 🥂 4) Be open towards different approaches from another field of research or practice. Your gold-standard methodology might not be the best fit for a specific aspect of the project 🤗 5) Be patient! All these different approaches combined in one project will take longer than projects from one discipline. BUT they have the power to produce more robust & holistic results 🦾 📚 Read more on our thoughts in our open-access handbook here: https://lnkd.in/eeaFS83V

Sustainability Integration Roadmap 🌎 Transforming sustainability from ambition to action requires a clear and structured roadmap. This pathway outlines six strategic steps to embed ESG and decarbonization into core business operations. The process begins by defining a strong business case. This includes identifying climate risks, setting ESG policies, developing a decarbonization strategy, and aligning with global frameworks such as CDP, TCFD, SBTi, and TNFD. Once the direction is clear, companies must establish a formal ESG framework. This involves creating baseline metrics, setting targets, deploying governance mechanisms, and implementing tools such as GHG accounting and health and safety protocols. Compliance is essential but not sufficient. Businesses must meet regulatory requirements and align disclosures with the relevant standards. Doing so builds credibility and prepares the ground for long-term transformation. Execution is the engine of progress. It requires coordinated delivery across environmental, social, and governance dimensions. Key initiatives might include emissions reductions, inclusive workforce programs, and enhanced governance practices. With execution in place, the focus shifts to value capture. ESG integration can reduce operating costs, increase access to sustainable finance, unlock carbon credits, and improve pricing and competitiveness for sustainable products and services. Transparent communication with stakeholders is vital. Sharing measurable improvements in ESG performance, ratings, and alignment with global standards builds trust and reinforces strategic alignment with investor and customer expectations. This roadmap provides a practical model for sustainable business transformation. It reflects how ESG can be integrated systematically to deliver business value, stakeholder trust, and long-term resilience. Source: EY #sustainability #sustainable #esg #business

Decisions make or break success.   But making smart, timely decisions isn’t always easy—especially when the stakes are high. Great leaders don’t rely on guesswork. They use proven frameworks to bring clarity to chaos. Here are six powerful tools to sharpen your decision-making: 1. Struggling with unclear roles?   ➟ RAPID Framework   This framework clarifies:   - Who decides?   - Who informs?   - Who delivers?  It ensures accountability at every stage. --- 2. Need structure in your process?   ➟ DACI Framework   Assign clear roles:   - Driver: Guides the process.   - Approver: Makes the call.   - Contributors: Provide key insights.   - Informed: Stay in the loop.  Everyone knows their role, reducing confusion. --- 3. Comparing options?   ➟ Decision Matrix   Score your choices based on impact and criteria.   A visual tool to cut through complexity. --- 4. Facing uncertainty?   ➟ Cynefin Framework   Understand your situation:   - Is it simple or chaotic?   - Clear or complex?  This framework points you to the right approach. --- 5. Prioritizing impact?   ➟ Pareto Principle (80/20 Rule)   Focus on the 20% of actions driving 80% of results.   Cut distractions and maximize efficiency. --- 6. Planning strategically?   ➟ SWOT Analysis   Assess your Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.   A classic tool for turning insights into action. --- Why these frameworks matter: They bring clarity to chaos, speed to action, and confidence to your decisions. Remember: Smart decisions aren’t just about speed—they’re about direction.  What’s your favorite decision-making framework? Let’s discuss in the comments. If this helped you, share it with your team.   Follow Jay Mount for more strategies on leadership and decision-making.

If two thirds of strategies fail, what does it really take to get them successfully executed? Is a question that I am often asked!   My answer is a question: “well, where does it break down?” Then people typically mention the following key areas : 1.      Leadership at the top is not aligned 2.      Strategy is unclear or fails to prioritize 3.      Strategy is not understood & translated to teams 4.      Lack of clear goals and accountability. Weak collaboration across teams. 5.      Results are not achieved A few years ago we embarked on a journey to address that challenge in collaboration with Monte Pedersen at the CDA Group! That gave birth to the STEP framework that helps teams and organisations understand and close the strategy-execution gap, once and for all. The principles apply to teams and organisations alike. And if adopted, have immediate impact on performance and results. Here's a brief overview of the framework: LEAD IN A COMMON DIRECTION Establish a clear and compelling purpose that aligns the team and organization. A strong sense of direction ensures that all efforts contribute to a shared mission, preventing fragmentation and misalignment. SET STRATEGIC PRIORITIES Identify and prioritise the most critical initiatives that will drive success. This step involves making tough choices, focusing on what truly matters, and ensuring resources are allocated effectively to maximize impact. DRIVE STRATEGY TRANSLATION Ensure that strategy is effectively translated into clear, actionable goals at all levels. This involves aligning teams, defining measurable objectives, and ensuring that individuals understand their role in execution. ENABLE SEAMLESS EXECUTION Foster a culture of accountability and engagement where people instinctively execute on priorities. This requires synchronized efforts, continuous progress tracking, and regular performance reviews to maintain momentum. FOCUS ON RESULTS Create a results-driven mindset by reinforcing accountability, learning, and adaptation. Recognize achievements, celebrate wins, and continuously evaluate progress to refine strategies and sustain long-term success. At the heart of these five steps, we have three core enablers to ensure a team and organisation executes effectively: ·       Principles that guide how you lead. ·       A common process as the foundation for strategy execution. ·       Mindsets shape how people show up. I’m keen to hear what you think are the critical barriers to execution? And what do you think it takes to overcome them? If you want a more detailed description of the Strategy To Execution Performance framework, mention STEP in the comments! Thanks! Jakob PS. We're actively deploying this at big and small world-class organisations. DM me if you want to discuss 1:1.

Let’s just start and see where it goes. It sounds agile. It feels lean. But for SMBs, it’s often the reason projects stall When you're working with limited time and team capacity, direction matters more than speed. That’s why I borrow a principle from Amazon’s playbook: Working backwards. At Amazon, before any team writes a line of code, they write a press release. Not for marketing. For focus It forces one hard question upfront: If this succeeds, what will the customer actually experience? Now imagine what that unlocks for your business: → No more “building for the sake of building” → Clear decisions anchored to outcomes → Alignment without 50 meetings How do we adapt it for smaller teams: ✔️We skip the fluff, no decks, no endless planning ✔️We write a simple customer story that defines success clearly ✔️We avoid corporate jargon, just real language and real outcomes ✔️We reverse-engineer from the goal to decide what’s actually needed ✔️We align fast, so small teams don’t waste time chasing the wrong thing Example:Project: Improve client handoff process →Instead of “Improve client handoff,” We write: “Clients say the new handoff is so smooth, they felt taken care of from day one. Suddenly, everyone knows what we’re aiming for. And what not to waste time on. Because when you're small, clarity isn’t a luxury. It's your strategy. 👉 Want to test this with your next project? DM me, I’ll show you how we do it 

Dashboards aren’t cutting it anymore. They track data. But they don’t drive action. This week on the 2X eCommerce Podcast, I sat down with Matt Putra, fractional CFO and founder of Eightx - Fractional CFOs for FMCG Brands, to talk about scorecards. Why scorecards? ↳ They predict problems before they happen. ↳ They simplify accountability across teams. ↳ They drive decisions instead of just tracking data. Imagine this: Every key metric flagged as red or green. Green = all good. Red = fix this NOW. From fulfillment delays → NPS dips → rising CAC, scorecards make it simple. Matt also shared how: ↳ AI is changing eCommerce efficiency. ↳ You can get more ROI from your current team. ↳ Scaling from $5M → $100M requires better systems. 2025 is about doing more with less. And scorecards are the secret to scaling profitably. 🎙️ Listen here: https://lnkd.in/ggShMH-T Are you using scorecards yet? Drop your thoughts below!

Teaching sequential decision analytics VI – How we make decisions   Humans use complex processes for making decisions, but when we transfer this responsibility to a computer, we have to be precise. *Anything* we do on a computer can be translated to mathematical notation and equations, so we should be able to translate the process of making decisions into formal mathematical statements.   Decisions that are made over time (which covers virtually all decisions) are made with methods that can be described with almost 50 words in the English language (see graphic below) in the right context, but the most common in the research literature is “policy” which is simply stated:   Definition: A policy is a method … any method … for making a decision.   There are two broad strategies for making decisions, each of which can be divided into two classes, producing the four classes of policies:   Strategy I: The policy search classes – These are methods that are tuned to work well over time, but which do not explicitly plan into the future. These include:   1)   Policy function approximations (PFAs) – These are analytical functions (typically parametric) that map information in the state variable to a decision. Examples are order-up-to inventory policies, buy low, sell high policies, linear models, even neural networks. 2)   Cost function approximations (CFAs) – These are parameterized versions of (typically) deterministic approximations. Examples might be a simple sort (with bonuses for uncertainty) or a parameterized linear, integer or nonlinear program.   Strategy II: The lookahead classes – These make decisions now using approximations of what might happen in the future. These can be organized into two additional classes:   3)   Policies based on value function approximations (VFAs) – Here we use an approximation of the value of transitioning to a state to identify the best decision now. 4)   Direct lookahead approximations (DLAs) – These plan explicitly into the future, typically over some horizon. These come in two types: a.    Deterministic lookaheads – These use point estimates of the future, as is done by Google maps. b.    Stochastic lookaheads – The best example is decision trees.   My big claim: These four classes (including hybrids) are *universal* - they include *any* method for making decisions. This includes any method in the research literature, anything used in practice, even methods that haven’t been invented yet!  

Ever been thrilled to kick off a new coaching or facilitation project, only to have things unravel before your eyes? You’ve got the green light, your client’s excited, you’re excited... and then: 😬 Deliverables turn into moving targets. 🫨 Tasks start sneaking into the scope. 🙄 Communication becomes reactive. 🙄 And somehow, you're doing more than you signed up for. Sound familiar? These issues can lead to frustrated clients, strained relationships, and results that don’t reflect your expertise. Worse, you’re left questioning your own abilities. The root cause? Poorly initiated projects. The fix? A rock-solid kickoff meeting. Here’s how I run mine to set the stage for smooth sailing: 1️⃣ Set the agenda and introduce the team. Share the agenda in advance so everyone’s prepared. A quick intro sets a collaborative tone. 2️⃣ Review the project overview. Revisit the high-level goals and objectives. Frame it as a partnership—you’re in this together. 3️⃣ Explore hopes and fears. Ask what success looks like for the client, but also what could go wrong. Addressing fears early helps build trust. 4️⃣ Create a risk and opportunity register. Most people track risks, but don’t stop there. Highlight opportunities to amplify success—maybe another internal initiative aligns with your work. 5️⃣ Revisit the timeline. Pull the timeline from your proposal and check if it still works. Revise as needed and confirm key milestones. 6️⃣ Discuss team culture and expectations. How do you want to work together? Align on communication styles and ways of working to avoid surprises later. 7️⃣ Define next steps. End with clarity: What happens next, and who’s responsible for what? 💡 Pro tip: Send pre-work in advance, like a draft risk/opportunity register. The meeting should refine, not start from scratch. The result? ✅ Clarity ✅ Alignment ✅ stronger relationships. A well-run kickoff leads to happy clients, repeat business, and—you guessed it—referrals. Start strong, finish stronger. ~~ ✍️ What’s one thing you always include in your project kickoff? Let me know in the comments! 👇

I'd like to share with you a powerful method that's been instrumental in our journey towards making more nuanced and balanced decisions. The Six Hat Solution, developed by Edward de Bono, is a powerful tool for teams and leaders. It's designed to help people explore different perspectives towards a complex situation or challenge, making our decision-making process more structured and comprehensive. 1. Emotional Viewpoint: Reflecting on our emotions offers initial insights. How does this situation make us feel? Personally, the prospect of our upcoming project invokes a mix of excitement and apprehension. Acknowledging our feelings can highlight potential concerns or areas of strong motivation. 2. Factual Analysis: Grounding our discussion in facts ensures a solid foundation. What are the undeniable truths of our current situation? With our project, the realities include our deadlines, budget constraints, and the resources at our disposal. These facts help clarify the scope of our challenge. 3. Optimistic Outlook: Focusing on the positives, we identify which aspects are most likely to succeed. In our scenario, the creativity and resilience of our team stand out as invaluable assets. This positivity is crucial for maintaining momentum. 4. Critical Perspective: Conversely, acknowledging what might not work allows us to anticipate and address potential issues. For us, the constraints of time and the untested nature of some technologies are concerns that need strategic planning. 5. Creative Exploration: By thinking creatively, we open the door to innovative solutions. Could adjusting our approach or incorporating new methodologies enhance our outcome? This phase pushes us beyond our initial assumptions. 6. Synthesised Solution: Finally, integrating all perspectives, we determine the most viable path forward. A phased project implementation, leveraging both proven and new technologies in stages, appears to be our best strategy. What complex decisions are you facing that could benefit from this multi-perspective approach? #leadership #mindset #culture #growth #success #problemsolving

Lou Gerstner walked into IBM in 1993 expecting a strategy problem. What he found was worse. Here's what leaders need to learn: Every division had a strategy. Every executive had a vision. Every team was chasing a different goal. Engineering was building for one future. Sales was selling into another. Marketing had its own roadmap entirely. At his first exec meeting, each leader presented different success metrics: Revenue. Market share. Innovation. NPS. Same company, completely different definitions of winning. Gerstner didn’t write a new strategy. He did something more powerful: He mandated one framework for priorities. Same metrics. Same language. Same scorecard. Within 6 months, misalignment became visible. Within a year, IBM started moving as one. I saw the same pattern play out in a Fortune 500 basement. The quarterly review was nearly over when the Head of Ops paused: “I need to be honest. I don’t even know what our top 3 priorities are right now.” Silence. Then heads nodded. The CMO had been focused on brand. Sales thought revenue was the priority. The CTO was deep in infrastructure rebuild. The CFO was chasing cost control. 9 executives. 27 different priorities. 3 overlaps. That’s not a team. That’s a collection of soloists. Strategy isn’t the problem. Alignment is. Everyone knows the strategy. But what are they actually optimizing for this week? I’ve seen it again and again: • Monday: “Retention is everything” • Friday: Sales signs three bad-fit clients to hit quota • Product starts chasing new features • Success never gets the memo 5 days. Alignment gone. So how do you fix it? 1. Make priorities visible weekly Every Monday: top 3 org-wide priorities, posted publicly. No guessing. No side quests. 2. Create explicit handoffs Marketing, sales, product, and success - define the exact criteria for every handoff. Spotify did this. Discovered 40% of handoffs had misaligned expectations. 3. Run weekly alignment checks One question: What are you optimizing for this week? If it doesn’t match the org’s top 3, you catch drift instantly. 4. One source of truth No more 50 dashboards. Microsoft did this with their Customer Success Score. Every division had to contribute to the same North Star. Alignment doesn’t happen by accident. It deteriorates by default. Great companies don’t assume alignment. They build it systematically. That Fortune 500 team? 6 months later, they went from 27 priorities to 3. Revenue grew 18%. Engagement jumped 43% → 71%. All because they stopped guessing. Want more research-backed frameworks like this? Join 11,000+ execs who get our newsletter every week: 👉 https://lnkd.in/en9vxeNk