Aligning Operations With Business Goals

I’ve had to protect my team in the past, particularly when their time or focus was at risk. I’ve seen this happen at companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon, where mandates and initiatives would stack during the same timeframe. While each initiative alone might have been reasonable, together they overburdened the teams. Those compiled costs may be invisible to the folks driving the individual mandates. You may have seen teams get overwhelmed by a major release, a review cycle, and bi-annual business planning all at once. This type of time management stress is usually manageable, but there are times when teams can be stretched too thin and compromise morale and quality. When you witness this, I believe it’s crucial to step in. You will hear from your team and you need to be close enough to the issues to decide how to respond. This can be tricky for a leader: on one hand, you want to ensure your team can succeed; on the other, you’re part of the broader leadership and need to support the decisions being made. Sometimes, you have very little room to maneuver. In those cases, I find it most effective to have a private conversation with key decision-makers. Meeting behind closed doors allows you to present the reality of your team’s capacity without putting anyone on the spot. Armed with clear data or project plans, you can often negotiate more realistic timelines or priorities. Another common pressure is when stakeholders create frequent direction changes. Repeated shifts in goals or features will thrash your team and waste energy. This often reflects deeper issues with strategy, alignment, and communication. However, you may not have time for a complete overhaul of your planning processes, and you still need a way to prevent thrash. A short-term fix is to set firm near-term milestones or “freeze” dates, after which any changes must go through a formal triage process. This ensures that if changes are necessary, they follow a transparent, deliberate sequence rather than blindsiding. After the freeze, broader project changes can be considered. Ultimately, I see my responsibility as a leader as fostering an environment where my team can perform at a high level, stay motivated, and avoid burnout. Part of a leader's role is to protect their team’s capability and long-term health. There will always be sprints and times when you need to push, but you also need to consider the long view and put on the brakes when required. People who feel supported are more productive, more creative, and likely to stay engaged.

You did some planning around building a feature but didn’t include a set of key business stakeholders. Now, alarms have gone off and questions are being raised about why they weren’t included. More importantly, they are now vetoing your work. Ouch. This happens more often than you think. The way to deal with this is by being proactive and really mapping out the stakeholder tree for key features you are building. What you want to do is get alignment on the When / Who / Why for each major feature you are building. Aligning the "Who" Who are the different teams involved in this Feature? Who are the stakeholders who need to say “Yes”? Who are the stakeholders that have to be kept informed so they don’t veto your work? Aligning the "When" When do you involve stakeholders? How should you involve them? What informal channels should be used to keep stakeholders aligned? Aligning the "Why" (MOST IMPORTANT) What are their motivations? What are their goals? How can you align your strategy with what stakeholders want? There’s no shortcut to this, half of product management is stakeholder management. If you don’t put the time in to think through these questions, you will get your work vetoed.

After nearly 30 years in the customer experience space, one of the biggest lessons I’ve learned is the critical importance of partnership. You can have the most innovative CX strategy, cutting-edge technology, and even the most comprehensive data insights, but if you don’t have buy-in from the right stakeholders, and have business leaders willing to work with you, your efforts will always fall flat. Sounds obvious, but so many miss this. Managing stakeholder expectations and ensuring alignment across departments isn’t just about communication, it’s about trust and influence. Whether it’s C-suite executives, frontline employees, or even external partners, each stakeholder plays a vital role in shaping and delivering the customer experience. The best CX initiatives are those that have everyone on board, with a shared vision and a clear understanding of the impact on both the business and the customer. Being an effective partner means listening to stakeholder concerns, aligning your objectives with theirs, and continuously showing the value that customer experience brings. It’s about understanding their priorities and communicating how CX initiatives help meet those goals. When stakeholders see CX as an enabler of business outcomes rather than just a customer-focused initiative, execution becomes far more effective. The bottom line? CX success isn’t just about customers. It’s about aligning the internal team, building trust, and ensuring that everyone is invested in the same outcome. #customerexperience #stakeholdermanagement #leadership #strategy #digitaltransformation #collaboration #technology

Here’s the hidden pipeline killer most sales teams ignore. ~43% of deals aren’t lost to competitors. They weren't even lost to "no decision." They were lost to competing initiatives. While you're focused on beating your direct competitors, the real battle is for budget and attention against entirely different priorities. Your prospect has 25 projects competing for limited resources. Only 5-7 will get funded. Is yours one of them? Most sales teams are completely blind to this reality. They track competitive wins and losses but ignore the bigger threat. Here's how innovative sellers are addressing this hidden pipeline killer: 1️⃣ Map the priority landscape They ask directly: "What are the top 3-5 initiatives your team has committed to this quarter?" If your solution isn't aligned with one of these, you're already losing. 2️⃣ Identify the zero-sum game For every "yes" to your solution, something else gets a "no." The best reps ask: "What would have to come off your plate to make room for this project?" 3️⃣ Quantify the cost of inaction When initiatives compete, ROI isn't enough. You need to establish the cost of NOT implementing your solution. "What happens if this problem continues for another year?" 4️⃣ Connect to strategic priorities Tactical projects get cut first. Strategic initiatives survive. Top performers always tie their solution to the company's publicized strategic goals. 5️⃣ Prepare for budget reallocation Innovative reps build relationships with the teams who control resource allocation. "Who else is competing for the same resources? How are those decisions made?" Your competition isn't just other vendors. It's everything else your buyer could spend time and money on instead.

Bad goal setting can cripple your business (I know from firsthand experience). Here's how to set goals that propel your business forward. Step 1: Analyze last year’s performance. You can’t set the right goals without the correct information. So, take some time to gather data from the previous year to find areas of strength and weakness. Look at your: Revenue streams — what are your most profitable areas? Your biggest cost centers? Sales & marketing — can you spot trends in customer acquisition or marketing ROI? Operations — where is your business bottlenecked? Where might you be overstaffed? Employee performance — look at productivity and churn. Which direction are things going? — Step 2: Brainstorm areas for improvement. Write down all the possible things you could work on. This is a great group activity for your leadership team or even the whole company (depending on your size). The data you’ve collected in step 1 should give you some idea of opportunity areas. One tip: don’t discount an idea just because it’s hard. Often the biggest impact things are hard to do. But you should be realistic about the effort required to get something done, and its chances of success. — Step 3: Set SMART goals Specific: Define clear and precise goals. Instead of saying "increase sales," say "increase sales by 12% in the next 6 months." Measurable: Ensure each goal has quantifiable metrics. E.g. "Reduce customer acquisition costs by 15% by the end of the year." Achievable: Set realistic goals based on your resources, budget and other constraints. E.g. if you have limited cash, avoid goals that would severely impact your monthly cash flow. Relevant: Align goals with your overall business objectives. Ensure they address the key areas for improvement identified earlier. Time-bound: Set deadlines for each goal. E.g. "launch a new service by Q3." — Step 4: Develop an Action Plan For each goal, create an action plan that outlines: Steps and Milestones: Break down each goal into smaller, manageable tasks. Set milestones to track progress. Resources: Identify the resources needed (time, money, personnel) and ensure they are available. Responsibilities: Assign tasks to specific employees. Ensure everyone understands their role and what is expected of them. Timeline: Establish a timeline with deadlines for each task and milestone. Doubling down on one point there: always assign tasks to a single person. They can still bring in other people to contribute, but it’s one person’s responsibility to get it across the finish line. — Step 5: Monitor and Adjust Goals are not static. Regularly check your progress, and adjust based on new insights or changing circumstances. Schedule monthly and/or quarterly reviews to keep everything on track. Having a simple KPI tracker is a good way to keep tabs on things. Make sure you’re regularly checking in, and ask people to flag any roadblocks or necessary adjustments as soon as they identify them.

Product Management has to be one of the most chaotic jobs in an organization. Working with stakeholders, customers, engineers, executives - days full of meetings with expectations for deep, creative work... and don't forget the strategic high-level work too. Insanity. Whenever I feel too busy, it’s usually because something is off. I slow down and re-align with what really matters…. drop everything else. As a product leader, I feel like I need to do this every 2 weeks (and realistically only get a chance to refocus like this every few months). Are we too busy doing “everything” instead of focusing on what really matters? After 500+ conversations with product leaders, I realized most felt the same way. Strategic misalignment has been one of the most surprising themes in these conversations. Most teams are busy working hard, but without clear alignment to their organization’s strategic goals. The most common challenges I hear: - About 30% of product leaders say the strategic goals they work toward are vague, high-level ideas like "drive revenue." - Another 30% admit their priorities are unclear or change so frequently that it’s impossible to keep teams aligned. "If you ask 3 execs what our goals are, you'll hear 3 different answers". Even when companies do have clear goals, by the time they cascade down to projects, the objectives look more like “Finish Project X by [date]” than “Drive 10% expansion with our enterprise customers.” I recently spoke with a CIO spending $100M per year on product development. When I asked what percentage of that spend was going towards most important business goals, he said 30%. That’s not just misalignment—it’s a massive blind spot. $70M each year going into building other stuff, instead of the goals we should be focused on. Why are we so focused on “doing more” while losing sight of what really matters? How does your team make sure projects are aligned to strategic goals?

Building a product strategy that bridges vision with reality is one of the hardest parts of leading a product team. You’re balancing immediate priorities while keeping everyone aligned with long-term goals. That’s where the 'Product Strategy Layers' framework comes in, it provides a step-by-step guide to making strategic decisions that move your product forward. Here’s how it breaks down: 1. Company Vision This is your 5-10 year north star. It’s more than just a lofty idea—it sets the direction for everything your organization does, from product investments to team priorities. If the vision isn’t clear, it’s easy for teams to lose focus and drift. 2. Strategic Intents These are your 1-3 year business challenges that push the organization closer to that vision. They focus your team on specific areas and bridge the gap between high-level goals and everyday execution, making sure efforts are aligned and deliberate. 3. Product Portfolio Strategy This layer is all about identifying the key problems you need to solve across your product lines to meet those strategic intents. It’s where you decide where to invest resources for the greatest impact and how to align multiple products around common goals. 4. Product Strategy & Initiatives Now we zoom in on individual products. At this level, you’re planning for the next 6-12 months, defining specific initiatives that drive your product forward. The goal is to make sure every action contributes directly to your product portfolio strategy. 5. Options The most granular layer. Here, you explore different solutions, run experiments, and iterate. It’s highly flexible but remains rooted in the broader strategy, allowing your team to adapt quickly without losing sight of the overall vision. Using this layered framework ensures every decision you make is connected to the BIGGER picture. The 'Product Strategy Layers' structure helps you align your team, streamline decision-making, and consistently drive toward long-term success. #productoperations #productmanagement #productstrategy #strategicplanning

User needs and business goals rarely align on their own. In my experience, it’s not that teams don’t care, it’s that each part of the system and organization has its own blind spots. • Business leaders want results • Designers want great experiences • Product teams want progress But when these efforts aren’t connected, things break down. Let’s say a stakeholder notices that a competitor’s chat app lets users send voice messages. They decide, “We need that too.” They jump straight to the business outcome, “let’s increase total user engagement”, without thinking about whether this supports a larger business goal, like improving retention among new users or boosting premium feature usage to drive upgrades. Design gets asked to mock it up. They can create a smooth experience, but they’re not sure if voice messages solve a real user need.  Product helps move the idea forward, but no one slows down to ask: Why do users need this? What change are we expecting in the product experience? How will we know if it supports a business goal? So what happens? → Team ships the voice message feature, but optimizes the interface instead of tracking what behavior it changes. → Design measures sentiment and usability, while business tracks engagement, but they never align. → The feature may look polished and even get used, but no one can say if it helped users or the business in a meaningful way. Without connecting user needs to business goals, everyone works hard… but not necessarily together. Teams need to connect the dots from user needs to product outcomes to business goals. When everyone works toward the same change, progress feels good… and the business moves forward. #productdesign #uxmetrics #productdiscovery #uxresearch

A product only scales when its strategy is tied directly to business goals. Otherwise, features become noise, and teams burn months on “nice to have” work that doesn’t move revenue, retention, or efficiency. Business alignment means: ✓ Every feature connects to metrics that matter ✓ Every design decision supports growth or cost optimization ✓ The roadmap speaks the same language as the leadership team. ⸻ Example: Healthcare Case I worked with a medical SaaS platform that had a backlog of 120+ features. Developers pushed new releases every two weeks, but churn was growing and revenue wasn’t scaling. I ran a UX–Business audit: — Mapped every feature to a business KPI — Cut 40% of backlog items that had zero business impact. — Rebuilt the roadmap so that every quarter focused on one clear business lever . Result after 3 months: ✓ Customer support tickets dropped by 22% ✓ Retention improved by 15% because patients were guided better through their journey. ✓ Leadership got visibility: for the first time, the roadmap was linked directly to revenue forecasts. ⸻ Example: Fintech Case In a fintech startup, leadership struggled to raise the next round because their pitch deck showed features, not impact. I restructured the product narrative: — Aligned UX flows with financial metrics: fewer failed transactions, faster onboarding, higher account activation. — Designed a demo around money saved and money earned, not UI screenshots. — Synced the product roadmap with the CFO’s model, so investors could see cause–effect clearly. The outcome: They closed a $7M round. Investors saw a product tied to growth levers, not just design polish. ⸻ My takeaway Business alignment is not paperwork. It’s the discipline of turning UX work into financial outcomes. When I step in, I translate design into numbers the boardroom understands — retention, efficiency, growth. That’s how design stops being a cost center and becomes a driver of business decisions. ⸻ I’ve spent over 8 years in UX and 7 years in branding, marketing, and PR. What I do is not just design — I architect clarity between product and business goals. That’s why my work stabilizes teams, speeds up decision-making, and helps products grow in markets under pressure. 

Let's be honest: extensive cross-team coordination is often a symptom of a larger problem, not an inevitable challenge that needs solving. When teams spend more time in alignment than on building, it's time to reconsider your organizational design. Conway's Law tells us that our systems inevitably mirror our communication structures. When I see teams drowning in coordination overhead, I look at these structural factors: - Team boundaries that cut across frequent workflows: If a single user journey requires six different teams to coordinate, your org structure might be optimized for technical specialization at the expense of delivery flow. - Mismatched team autonomy and system architecture: Microservices architecture with monolithic teams (or vice versa) creates natural friction points that no amount of coordination rituals can fully resolve. - Implicit dependencies that become visible too late: Teams discover they're blocking each other only during integration, indicating boundaries were drawn without understanding the full system dynamics. Rather than adding more coordination mechanisms, consider these structural approaches: - Domain-oriented teams over technology-oriented teams: Align team boundaries with business domains rather than technical layers to reduce cross-team handoffs. - Team topologies that acknowledge different types of teams: Platform teams, enabling teams, stream-aligned teams, and complicated subsystem teams each have different alignment needs. - Deliberate discovery of dependencies: Map the invisible structures in your organization before drawing team boundaries, not after. Dependencies are inevitable and systems are increasingly interconnected, so some cross-team alignment will always be necessary. When structural changes aren't immediately possible, here's what I've learned works to keep things on the right track: 1️⃣ Shared mental models matter more than shared documentation. When teams understand not just what other teams are building, but why and how it fits into the bigger picture, collaboration becomes fluid rather than forced. 2️⃣ Interface-first development creates clear contracts between systems, allowing teams to work autonomously while maintaining confidence in integration. 3️⃣ Regular alignment rituals prevent drift. Monthly tech radar sessions, quarterly architecture reviews, and cross-team demonstrations create the rhythm of alignment. 4️⃣ Technical decisions need business context. When engineers understand user and business outcomes, they make better architectural choices that transcend team boundaries. 5️⃣ Optimize for psychological safety across teams. The ability to raise concerns outside your immediate team hierarchy is what prevents organizational blind spots. The best engineering leaders recognize that excessive coordination is a tax on productivity. You can work to improve coordination, or you can work to reduce the need for coordination in the first place.