We conducted structured executive interviews, mapped every decision gap, surfaced the risks that had been obscured, and built a clear set of options — each with explicit cost, timeline, and risk implications.
An executive sponsor inherited a transformation already in flight. Milestones were slipping, stakeholder alignment was weakening, and early results weren't demonstrating value. Board scrutiny was increasing.
The sponsor faced two equally bad options: keep funding something that felt fragile, or halt publicly and absorb the reputational cost. They needed a third option — and a way to get leadership to the same table.
what we found
Scope ambiguity baked in from the start
Different leaders held different definitions of success, and no one had documented why prior decisions were made.
Risk hidden behind activity reporting
Status updates counted deliverables, not outcomes — so critical risks were visible to teams but invisible to leadership.
No framework for comparing paths
Leadership kept being offered a binary choice when several intermediate options existed.
What we Did
We assessed the full program, separated the viable from the overextended, and built a restructured path forward. Leadership got an honest picture — not a sanitized status report — and a decision framework that let them act with confidence.
what happend
Leadership aligned on a phased modernization plan with clear cost, timeline, and risk
Compliance risks were identified and avoided early
Teams received stable direction for the first time
The board gained a clear, defensible decision
The Impact
From stalled to moving forward.
$20M
Program value at risk when no one could agree on whether to continue
3 Options
Surfaced and costed where leadership had only been offered a binary choice
1 Decision
Defensible, documented, and backed by the board — ending months of internal debate