The leadership challenge emerged during a strategic review assignment for a large institution. Revenue was declining, customer complaints were increasing and projects were running late. The board was becoming impatient. The CEO was under pressure to explain why performance was deteriorating despite significant investment in people, systems, and technology.
The crisis reached a turning point when a major customer threatened to terminate a long-standing relationship because service standards had collapsed across multiple touchpoints. The CEO immediately summoned the Chief Operating Officer.
The assumption was simple. Operations must have failed. A deeper review revealed something far more troubling. Operations had delivered its targets. Technology had delivered its projects. Finance had controlled costs. Human Resources had filled vacancies. Every executive could demonstrate activity within their department.
Yet the customer was leaving. Nobody owned the customer journey from beginning to end. The problem sat in the gaps between departments. Every executive was managing their function. Nobody was leading the enterprise.
That is when the real issue became clear. The organisation had a weak Executive Committee and not a strategy problem.
The situation resembled a group of builders constructing the same house without a common blueprint. The mason arrives on time. The electrician finishes his work. The plumber completes his installation. Each person performs their task well. Yet when the owner arrives, the doors cannot close, the lights do not work properly, and water is leaking through the walls because nobody coordinated the whole project.
Many boards fall into the same trap. They assume organisational failure starts with weak strategy, insufficient funding, outdated technology, or market conditions.
In practice, many failures begin inside the Executive Committee. A weak Executive Committee can quietly destroy a strong strategy. The warning signs are remarkably predictable. Meetings become reporting sessions rather than decision-making forums.
Executives defend departments instead of solving enterprise problems. Bad news travels slowly. Information becomes polished before reaching the board.
The CEO spends more time settling internal disputes than serving customers and shaping the future. Artificial intelligence appears on presentation slides but never reaches operational reality. ESG becomes another reporting obligation.
Succession discussions are postponed because they feel uncomfortable. Everyone appears busy while critical problems remain unresolved.
The truth is that organisations win because talented executives operate as one leadership team and not because they have talented executives.
High-performing boards understand this distinction. They do not ask whether Finance, Operations, Human Resources, or Technology performed well. They ask whether the Executive Committee solved the organisation’s most important challenges.
They reward collective accountability. They expose unresolved tensions early. They insist that enterprise priorities come before departmental interests.
At your next board retreat, conduct the Ownership Test. This is one of the most powerful exercises I challenge leaders to do at leadership transformation retreats.
Write the organisation’s ten most important strategic priorities on a wall. Ask each Executive Committee member to stand beside the priority they personally own and influence.
If multiple executives stand beside the same priority, accountability is blurred. If nobody stands beside a priority, leadership is absent. The discussion that follows will reveal more about Executive Committee effectiveness than twelve months of board reports.
Most organisations do not suffer from a lack of strategy. They suffer from a lack of ownership. Clarity before motion. That is where high-performing Executive Committees begin.
I remain, Mr Strategy.
Copyright Summit Consulting Ltd, 2026. All rights reserved.
