02 Method
Two instruments, one owner of the WHAT
Every value-creation plan reduces to three questions. The WHAT is yours; we never set it. Our instruments answer the other two, scored against your thesis rather than a generic model, which is what lets you tell a people problem from a system problem before you fix the wrong one.
Yours, not oursWHAT is the value hypothesis?
Where you have decided this company is going and why it will be worth more when it gets there. We never set it. Everything we measure is scored against it, which is what makes the instruments yours rather than generic.
The Executive AssessmentWHO can carry it?
Intrinsics, outcome metrics by function, and how work flows through each leader's organization, rolled into one executive quality score and tracked over time as bench density. Run pre-close on acquisitions and across the hold.
The Strategy Alignment AuditHOW is the work moving toward it?
A five-dimension pulse, a system map of the likely constraint, what drift costs monthly, and a 30/60/90 roadmap. Run at day 60 to 90 post-close and at every inflection. When WHO and HOW are both broken, the pairing sequences the fix.
The audit, two depths
Most client relationships begin with the two-week read. Some end there, on purpose.
Directional Audit
Two weeks, one to two senior vantage points, fixed fee: exact in the first call, unchanged after, and as a rule a fraction of one month of the drift it measures. The job: tell you whether alignment is your constraint at all, and whether deeper validation would change any decision you would make. Sometimes the answer is no, and the brief says so.
Comprehensive Audit
Six to ten executive interviews, perception analysis across functions, and a leadership calibration session; fixed fee, a multiple of the two-week read. The job: replace one vantage point with shared reality, and name the constraint at Strong Signal confidence. Buy this when the downstream decision is expensive: a reorg, an executive change, a reset you cannot afford to aim wrong.
Who sees the findings. An audit you commission belongs to you: the readout goes to the CEO who bought it, and nothing moves up the cap table unless you send it. Fund-commissioned work says so to every participant on day zero. Every input is invited, never collected in the dark.
What the instrument looks like: alignment pulse from a sanitized directional audit
Cross-functional coordination
6
Self-reported scores usually overstate readiness, which is why the pulse is the start of the audit and never the conclusion. Findings are labeled by confidence: Strong Signal, Emerging Pattern, Hypothesis to Validate.
A note on fees: exact in the first call, fixed once quoted. The one number in this work guaranteed not to drift. The relationships that continue do it phase by phase, each with its own stop point, one good decision at a time.
What this work will not do
- A directional audit is a directional signal, not a diagnosis, and it is labeled that way, honestly.
- It will not adjudicate who on your leadership team is right. It maps where perceptions diverge and what that divergence costs.
- When findings need broader input before you act, the brief says so explicitly.
- If the timing is wrong or the constraint is not alignment, we tell you and stop. A go/no-go you can trust is the product.
If you are the CHRO reading this
Instruments like this can look like they were built to score you. The audit is how "is it the system or the seat" gets answered with evidence, before someone else answers it by default, and the answer is the system more often than anyone upstairs assumes. CHROs are most often our champion and our partner in the repair work that follows. To make the case internally, start with Anatomy of an audit, no form, and forward it.
The instruments are half the method. Once the reading says where, the work moves into the room: offsites built around the misalignments the audit named, coaching against the assessment, development for the managers who carry strategy to teams. Diagnosis without follow-through is a report; follow-through without diagnosis is a guess. The method is both, in that order.
