Strategy, a post-mortem and a new cascade
Rebuilding how a company sets goals
After a year that missed its goals, I ran the retrospective with the executives that established why, then wrote the replacement. It is cross-divisional and measurable, and every unit sets its own goals under clear company ones. One quarter in, performance is ahead of the prior year.
The situation
A year ended with the company’s goals missed. That happens. What matters is whether the next year is set up differently or just more hopefully.
The post-mortem first
Before anyone wrote a new goal, I ran the retrospective with the executives to establish why the old ones were missed. Not who. Why.
The pattern will be familiar to anyone who has sat in a planning cycle. Goals that could not be measured, so they could not be missed or met. Goals owned by one division that depended on another. And a gap between the company’s goals and the work teams actually did, which each division filled with its own interpretation.
The replacement
I authored the goal architecture for FY27. Three rules:
- Measurable, or it is not a goal. Every company goal has a number and a date.
- Cross-divisional by design. Where a goal needs two divisions, both own it. No goal is allowed to depend silently on someone else.
- A cascade, not a list. Clear company goals at the top, and each unit sets its own goals underneath them, so every team can see the line from its work to the company’s.
What happened
One quarter in, performance is ahead of the prior year.
What I cannot claim, yet
One quarter is an early read, not a result. The honest test is the full year, and I would rather say that now than have someone ask.
Why it is on this site
Because product leadership is not only features. It is how a company decides what matters and how it will know. This is the most senior product work I have done, and none of it shipped to an app store.