Strategic Decision Making in Project Execution

How do you decide when to double down on an initiative or when to walk away? This kind of strategic decision making is one of the top skills innovators must master. Here's how I make the decision without letting my pride take over: 1. Data-Driven Decisions 📊 I insist that every project measure what I call Pivot Indicators. These are pre-defined metrics that answer two important questions: "When will we know if it's not working?" and "How will we know?" By establishing these indicators upfront, we remove ambiguity from the evaluation process. Whether it's a certain threshold of user engagement, a predefined ROI, or customer satisfaction scores, these indicators act as the guardians of our resources, ensuring that we stay agile, respond promptly to feedback, and invest in avenues that truly resonate with our overarching goals. 2. The Passion Parameter ❤️ Numbers are vital, but they're not everything. The intangible yet palpable energy of passion is often the difference between projects that fizzle out and those that thrive. If you had to make the decision today to start this idea from scratch, would you do it? Are you still as excited about the opportunity as you were when everything kicked off? If your team exudes excitement and genuine belief in the project, this collective energy can transform challenges into opportunities. 3. Opportunity Costs and the Big Picture ⚖️ Every resource committed to one initiative means potential neglect for another. It's essential to ask: What could these resources achieve elsewhere? I actually sit down and make a list of where I would invest the resources if I had more time and effort. Then, I'm not deciding whether I failed at something or didn't, I'm just deciding between option A or B for my time and resources. Our resources—whether time, talent, or capital—are finite, and successful innovators understand that we have to continuously reassess to make sure that we don't get stuck. How do you decide whether to re-invest or walk away? #innovation #management #strategy

When strategy and execution compete for your attention, both suffer. I learned this the hard way. At first, we approached our NSF strategic plan the same way we tackled our daily execution - together, as a full team. We assumed that having more people involved would lead to a stronger outcome. Instead, it led to bottlenecks, distractions, and inefficiency. The team was stretched thin, trying to execute programs while also shaping long-term strategy. We weren’t making enough progress on either front. Our approach simply wasn’t working. That’s when Alan Rudolph helped me see the problem from a different angle. The strategic planning process itself was becoming disruptive to productivity. It needed its own dedicated team focused solely on strategy and deliverables, while everyone else kept operations moving forward. It was a defining leadership moment for me. I realized my job isn’t to somehow make everyone do everything - it’s to trust my team, point them in the right direction, and let them execute. Now, we have a dedicated team leading strategic planning and an operations team free to do what they do best, and the difference is already clear. We’re moving forward with focus, speed, and clarity that we couldn’t achieve when we were trying to keep both plates spinning. For lean organizations balancing execution and strategy, remember: Not everyone needs to be in the room for every decision. Assign the right people, trust them, and just let your operators operate.

Have you ever experienced that satisfying "I told you so" moment? The one where you could seamlessly transition into a contingency plan? Or perhaps, you felt frustrated and unheard? As project/program/portfolio managers, gaining support for organizational investments can be one of the biggest challenges we face. In such situations, I have found three key points to be invaluable: 1️⃣ Gathering Comprehensive Details: When sensing a potential firefight, I make it a priority to gather as many details as possible. This helps me understand the full scope of the situation and identify the available options. 2️⃣ Presenting Multiple Paths: Armed with a wealth of information, I bring my leadership team at least two proposed paths. Each path includes a thorough analysis of costs and predicted outcomes. By offering multiple options, I ensure that decision-makers can make an informed choice. 3️⃣ Highlighting the Risk of Inaction: To emphasize the urgency, I highlight the potential risks of inaction. I emphasize how inaction can adversely impact the project, the team, the organization, or even the client(s). This helps the decision-makers fully grasp the consequences of choosing to let things unfold without a mitigation plan. However, there is a caveat. Despite presenting a well-thought-out plan, the organization may still choose to proceed without a contingency plan due to concerns of cost overruns. In such cases, it becomes our responsibility to effectively manage around this constraint. Successfully navigating these challenges requires adaptability and strategic thinking. By proactively addressing potential risks and presenting well-reasoned alternatives, we can influence decision-making and ensure the success of our projects. #ProjectManagement #ContingencyPlanning #OrganizationalInvestments #StrategicThinking

One of the biggest mistakes I see in project execution is mistaking speed for progress. Teams rush to complete tasks, tick off checklists, and deliver quickly without pausing to ask: ❓Are we moving in the right direction? I’ve learned (the hard way) that moving fast in the wrong direction only gets you further away from your goals. Momentum without alignment is just wasted energy. Here’s what to do differently: → Prioritize clarity over urgency – A well-defined goal saves time in the long run. → Encourage your teams to pause and assess – Speed should never come at the cost of direction. → Measure success by impact, not just efficiency – Completing tasks quickly means nothing if they don’t drive real results. 📌 The reality is, sometimes slowing down is the fastest way to win. In a world that glorifies speed, intentional progress is the real power move. So, ask yourself: - Is my team prioritizing real progress, or just checking off tasks? - Is our speed aligned with strategy, or are we just moving? How do you ensure you're making meaningful progress, not just rushing forward? Share in the comments ♻️Find this helpful? Repost to help a colleague Follow 👉 Benjamina Mbah Acha for insights that help you plan, execute, and deliver projects with confidence.

Ask any experienced project manager about the most common challenges encountered on a project, and you'll hear a variety of answers: a growing backlog of RFIs, compressed schedules, coordination issues, and procurement delays. These are all real — and undeniably demanding. However, after more than two decades in the industry, I believe the most critical risk doesn’t lie in the schedule, budget, or construction documents. It’s misalignment. If you’ve been in the field long enough, you know the signs. 1. The architect’s intent isn’t translating into the build 2. MEP trades are working off different versions of the plans 3. The owner’s rep is assuming decisions were already made 4. The GC is waiting for submittals that were never requested 5. Your team is “busy” but progress is unclear No major blow-ups… just a slow drip of small issues that compound over weeks. And suddenly, you’re in recovery mode, not execution. As project managers, we’re the integrators. We’re the ones tasked with turning plans into outcomes. And that means getting every player on the same page — and keeping them there. 1. Define Success — Not Just Scope - It’s not enough to have a spec book and a set of drawings. What does the client define as a win? What are the non-negotiables? What risks can they tolerate? Align on outcomes before chasing outputs. 2. Establish Roles and Decision Paths - On vertical projects, there are dozens of players, superintendents, consultants, trade leads, inspectors, commissioning agents. Clarify who owns what. Who reviews? Who approves? Who coordinates field direction when conflicts arise? 3. Create a Communication Framework - Update meetings are not alignment tools they’re just status checks unless you structure them right. Set a rhythm that supports decision-making: a. Weekly cross-discipline coordination b. Owner/architect/contractor (OAC) updates c. Rolling look-ahead reviews with field leads d. Proactive document control 4. Normalize Realignment - On long-duration builds, the plan will shift through design changes, site conditions, permitting, or resourcing. Revisit expectations, clarify adjustments, and reassign responsibilities. This isn’t rework, it’s refinement. 5. Lead with Clarity - Projects follow the tone you set. If your communication is reactive, so is the team. If your expectations are vague, coordination becomes guesswork. Precision isn’t optional it’s your greatest tool. Misalignment doesn’t announce itself. It creeps in through assumption, distraction, and silence. And by the time it shows up in missed inspections or rework, you’re already behind. Be proactive. Be deliberate. Be the one who connects the dots across the entire build. Because at the end of the day, our job isn’t just to manage plans, it’s to create alignment between vision, execution, and delivery.