Case study · Leadership across locations
Aligning Leaders Across Locations
The intervention supported 12 department heads and 36 second-line leaders to establish a common direction, clearer decision boundaries and more consistent communication across locations.
Reference case · Illustrative figuresThe impact
Greater alignment accompanied more decisions below HOD level
These reference measures show the movement from the starting condition to the outcome the intervention was designed to strengthen.
The figures are illustrative reference values from the Impact in Action portfolio; they are not independently verified client results.
- Department heads
- 12
- Second-line leaders
- 36
- Duration
- 9–14 months
The change in numbers
Before and after.
Each indicator has its own scale and unit.
Changes are shown in plain language.
Alignment increased by 23 percentage points.
Higher is betterThe share resolved below HOD increased by 28 percentage points.
Higher is betterCommunication consistency increased by 25 percentage points.
Higher is better18 fewer avoidable escalations each month; approximately 29% lower.
Lower is betterThe figures are illustrative reference values from the Impact in Action portfolio; they are not independently verified client results.
How to read these figures
The duration range is retained as supplied. The reduction from 62 to 44 escalations per month is rounded to 29%. The portfolio does not specify the location count or substantiate its suggested wider annual business-performance claim.
The same management intent was reaching locations differently
Leadership capability was present, but the interpretation of priorities varied between locations. Direction that seemed clear to a department head could arrive differently at the second line and change again as it reached execution. Communication gaps and uncertain decision boundaries created avoidable escalations.
The response focused on the connection between leadership levels
The key issue was how priorities and decisions moved between leaders. The reference alignment indicator was 61%, communication consistency was 58%, and 43% of decisions were resolved below HOD level. Together, these measures described a gap between management intent and action.
A shared management language was established around execution issues
The design combined leadership alignment forums, business-context sessions, communication protocols and second-line capability building. Cross-location problem solving gave leaders a reason to examine the impact of decisions beyond their own unit. Sustained reviews kept attention on how the agreed direction was being applied.
- 01
Agree direction
Bring HODs and second-line leaders together around business priorities.
- 02
Clarify decisions
Establish communication protocols and boundaries for local responsibility.
- 03
Review together
Use cross-location problem solving and leadership reviews to maintain alignment.
Greater alignment accompanied more decisions below HOD level
The reference scorecard shows HOD–second-line alignment rising from 61% to 84% and decisions resolved below HOD from 43% to 71%. Communication consistency increased from 58% to 83%. These measures describe how intent travelled and how much responsibility could be carried closer to execution.