Insights / Article / Corporate strategy and long-term goals
ArticleBuilding an execution office that people respect
An execution office tracks progress on strategic priorities. Done badly it becomes paperwork. Done well it is small, focused on blockers and trusted to report honestly.
Many organisations create an execution office, sometimes called a transformation office, strategy office or programme management office, to track progress on their strategic priorities. The intention is good: someone needs to see across all the initiatives, spot problems early and keep the leadership team informed.
Done badly, the office becomes paperwork. Teams spend hours each month filling in templates, updating trackers and preparing slides for review meetings that change nothing. Programme leaders come to see the office as a tax on their time, and the leadership team receives reports that are thorough, late and uniformly green.
Done well, an execution office removes obstacles. It is small, close to the leadership team and focused on the few things that are genuinely stuck. Programme leaders seek it out because it gets decisions made. The difference lies in a handful of design choices.
Keep it small
Two or three capable people with direct access to the leadership team are enough for most organisations. Large offices tend to generate work to justify their size: more templates, more meetings, more reporting layers.
The people matter more than the number. The best execution office staff combine three qualities. They understand the business well enough to judge whether a problem is serious. They are respected enough that programme leaders speak openly with them. And they are confident enough to tell senior leaders uncomfortable truths. Experienced operators seconded from the business, rather than career project administrators, often fit best.
Direct access is essential. If the office reports through two layers of management before reaching the chief executive, its warnings will be softened and delayed at each step. The head of the office should be able to raise an issue with the leadership team within days.
Signs your office is too big
It produces more than one standard report a month. Programme leaders spend more than an hour a week feeding it. Its meetings are attended by people who rarely speak. Any of these suggests the office is serving itself rather than the strategy.
Focus on blockers
The office’s main product is a short list of what is stuck and who can unstick it, not a thick status report.
Most of what programmes do each month does not need leadership attention. Work that is on track can be summarised in a line. The value of the office lies in identifying the few issues that teams cannot resolve themselves: a decision that has sat with a committee for six weeks, a dependency on another programme that is slipping, a shortage of a particular skill, a conflict between two priorities.
- Each month, ask every programme leader one question: what is blocking you that you cannot resolve yourself?
- Test each blocker: is it real, is it important, and who has the authority to resolve it?
- Bring a short list, typically no more than five items, to the leadership team with a named person and a proposed resolution for each.
- Track whether each blocker was resolved, and how quickly.
The last step is the office’s real measure of success. An office that consistently gets blockers resolved within weeks earns respect quickly. One that reports the same blockers month after month loses it.
Not every issue a programme leader raises is a blocker. Some are problems the team could solve with a little more effort; others are complaints about decisions already made. Part of the office’s job is to filter firmly but fairly, sending some issues back with advice and escalating only those that genuinely need senior authority. Programme leaders respect an office that protects the leadership team’s time as much as their own.
Report honestly
Use simple red, amber and green ratings with a sentence of explanation. Leaders trust offices that report problems early.
Ratings without explanation are easy to game. A programme that has been amber for six months tells the leadership team very little. A rating with one sentence, such as “amber: supplier delay has moved go-live by four weeks; recovery plan agreed, no impact on year-end benefit”, tells them exactly what they need to know.
Honest reporting depends on safety. If a red rating leads to a programme leader being publicly criticised, ratings will stay green until the problem can no longer be hidden. Leaders must respond to early warnings with help, not blame, and the execution office should protect programme leaders who raise problems early. Over time, a culture where red is a request for help rather than an admission of failure is the office’s most valuable contribution.
The first month we reported three programmes as red, the chief executive thanked the leaders in front of everyone. After that, we got the truth.
Head of strategy execution, retail client
Keep the rhythm light
Agree a simple monthly cycle and stick to it. Programme leaders provide a brief update, a few lines on progress, the rating with its sentence and any blockers. The office consolidates these into a single page for the leadership team. A short leadership session, thirty to sixty minutes, focuses entirely on blockers and decisions.
Avoid adding reporting requirements over time. Each new field in a template or extra section in a report costs every programme leader time, every month. Before adding anything, ask what decision it will inform. If the answer is unclear, leave it out.
A typical mid-sized business might run eight to twelve strategic programmes at once. Under this rhythm, each programme leader spends perhaps an hour a month on reporting, the office spends a few days consolidating and testing blockers, and the leadership team spends under an hour deciding. That is a modest cost for a clear view of what is stuck.
It also helps to separate the office from performance judgement. If the execution office is seen as the leadership team’s auditor, programme leaders will manage what it hears. If it is seen as a source of help that gets decisions made, they will bring problems early. Keep formal performance reviews with line managers, and let the office concentrate on progress and obstacles.
Getting started
If you are setting up an execution office, start by appointing the head of the office: a respected operator with direct access to the chief executive. Give them a mandate to focus on blockers, a team of no more than two others, and a single-page monthly report. After three months, ask programme leaders whether the office has helped them. Their answer is the best measure of whether it is working.
Source: Intelliversal analysis.
