Most organizations struggle to make their strategy work for them, not against them. Leadership teams invest time defining clear goals, yet months later, progress feels disconnected. Teams stay busy, but outcomes don’t reflect the original intent. The issue rarely lies in the strategy itself; instead, it emerges in the space between planning and execution, where goals are expected to translate into action but often don’t.This gap forms because strategy is typically defined at the top but not effectively translated downward. As it moves across departments and teams, it loses clarity, context, precision, and urgency. What begins as a focused direction becomes fragmented efforts, with each part of the organization interpreting priorities according to its specific needs.
Why Employees Feel Disconnected from Strategy
A significant portion of employees don’t fully understand their company’s strategy or how their work contributes to it. This lack of clarity creates a ripple effect. People default to what they believe matters, which often leads to redundant efforts or misplaced priorities. Without a clear line of sight between daily tasks and long-term goals, work becomes activity-driven rather than outcome-driven.The activity becomes the outcome in and of itself.This disconnect also impacts motivation. When individuals can’t see how their contributions fit into a larger purpose, engagement drops, and whilst teams may still perform their roles as expected, without alignment, their efforts rarely compound into little more than droll progress at best.
The Cost of Misalignment in Daily Operations
Misalignment is not always obvious at first. It shows up subtly in duplicated work or conflicting priorities that beget delays caused by constant clarification and reclarification. Over time, these small inefficiencies accumulate into larger organizational challenges. Departments begin optimizing for their own success metrics, often at the expense of broader company goals.Instead of moving in one direction, the organization pulls itself apart. Meetings increase, coordination becomes more complex, and leadership spends more time realigning than advancing strategy. The result is a system where effort is high, but impact remains limited.
Understanding Cascading Goals and Why They Matter
What Cascading Goals Actually Do
Cascading goals provide a structured way to connect high-level strategy with everyday work. Rather than keeping objectives at the leadership level, they break them down into actionable goals for departments, teams, and individuals. This process ensures that strategic priorities don’t remain abstract but become part of daily execution.The purpose is not simply to distribute goals downward but to create alignment across the organization. Each level interprets and translates the strategy in a way that fits its role, while still maintaining a clear connection to the bigger picture.
How the Cascade Works in Practice
The cascading process typically follows a logical flow. Leadership defines a small set of clear, measurable strategic goals. Departments then translate these into functional objectives based on how they contribute to those goals. Teams further refine these into specific KPIs they can control, and managers connect those KPIs to individual responsibilities.When this process is done correctly, every layer of the organization understands its role in achieving the overall strategy. There is no ambiguity about priorities, and each action contributes to a shared outcome.
Why Alignment Depends on More Than Structure
While the structure of cascading is important, alignment ultimately depends on communication and transparency. Employees need to understand not just what they are doing, but why it matters. Without this context, even well-defined goals can lose their impact.Effective cascading also requires two-way communication. Teams must be able to provide feedback, highlight constraints, rearrange objectives, and adapt goals when necessary. This balance between direction and flexibility is what turns cascading from a rigid system into a practical one.
Where Cascading Breaks Down (and What Causes It)
Misaligned KPIs and Conflicting Priorities
One of the most common issues in organizations is misaligned KPIs. Teams often define success based on what they can measure easily, rather than what supports the overall strategy. This leads to situations in which different departments work toward goals that unintentionally conflict.A company might aim to improve customer experience, while individual teams focus on speed, cost reduction, or output volume. Each goal may seem valid in isolation, but without alignment, they create friction instead of progress.
Silos, Ownership Gaps, and Communication Failures
Siloed thinking emerges when departments operate without visibility into each other’s goals. This lack of coordination leads to duplicated efforts and delayed outcomes. At the same time, unclear ownership creates confusion about who is responsible for driving specific results.Communication plays a central role in both of these challenges. When strategic goals are inconsistently reinforced or not clearly explained, teams are left to interpret them on their own. This results in fragmented execution and ongoing misalignment.
Overcomplication and Lack of Follow-Through
Another common breakdown occurs when organizations overcomplicate their cascading systems. Too many layers create confusion rather than clarity. Employees struggle to prioritize, and focus becomes diluted.Even when goals are well defined, they often fail due to a lack of follow-through. Without regular reviews, audits, updates, analyses, and adjustments, alignment weakens over time. Strategy becomes static, while the business environment continues to change.
Building Alignment Through Effective Cascading
Keeping Goals Focused and Visible
Effective cascading starts with simplicity. Organizations that limit their strategic goals to a small, focused set are more likely to maintain alignment. Clear goals make it easier for teams to understand priorities and translate them into action.Visibility is equally important. When goals are accessible through shared dashboards or centralized systems, alignment becomes part of daily work. People are more likely to stay focused when they can see how their efforts connect to broader objectives.
Creating Accountability and Continuous Alignment
Alignment is not achieved solely through goal-setting. It requires ongoing management. Regular performance reviews and feedback loops help ensure that goals remain relevant and achievable. These moments of reflection allow teams to identify misalignment early and adjust accordingly.Clear ownership also strengthens accountability. When individuals understand their responsibilities and how they contribute to team outcomes, execution becomes more consistent. Accountability shifts from being enforced to being naturally embedded in the system.
Balancing Structure with Flexibility
While cascading provides structure, it should not limit adaptability. Organizations need to remain flexible as priorities evolve. This means allowing teams to adjust goals, refine KPIs, and respond to new challenges without losing alignment with the overall strategy.The most effective systems combine structured goal-setting with continuous feedback and collaboration. This approach ensures that alignment is maintained, even as conditions change.
Final Thoughts
Organizations rarely fail because of poor strategy. More often, they fail because the strategy never fully connects to execution. Without alignment, even the best plans remain theoretical, while teams continue working without a shared direction.Cascading goals address this challenge by creating a clear link between high-level objectives and everyday actions. They provide structure, improve visibility, and help organizations move as a cohesive system rather than a collection of independent parts.When alignment is achieved, the difference is noticeable. Work becomes more focused, collaboration improves, processes interlink, and progress becomes measurable. Strategy stops being something discussed in meetings and starts becoming something that actively drives results.
In the end, cascading is not just a process. It is a way of ensuring that every effort within an organization contributes to a common purpose.
**********
How are strategic objectives defined in the government today? In this interview, Dana Alsaaid unveils the meticulous approach and initiatives that her organization employs to align strategic planning with a nation’s overarching goals and how she navigates the complexities of strategy execution in the public sector.
In your position as Director of Corporate Performance Management, how do you approach the strategic planning process to align with the goals of the Ministry of Economy and Planning? Can you discuss any initiatives or methodologies you’ve implemented to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of strategy planning within the organization?
The journey of strategic planning in the ministry mainly involves identifying strengths and potential risks—as a base for planning—along with the vision of leaders, which sets the general direction of the strategy. To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of this planning process, we believe in the importance of top management’s engagement and continuous feedback through collaborative workshops as well as leveraging available data analytics tools. We use the famous Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in preparation for proper and efficient execution.
What common issues have you noticed in strategy execution, and how should they be addressed?
Issues in strategy execution start at the beginning, which is in strategy formulation. A lack of clarity makes it difficult to implement a vision. A lack of alignment and buy-in would negatively impact any rollout of strategies. Along with those factors, limited resources in the budget or people affect how execution takes place.
Trends
In light of global economic shifts and geopolitical uncertainties, how can organizations create resilient strategies that can withstand external disruptions?
Since the world is becoming extremely dynamic, organizations should regularly conduct scenario planning exercises to identify potential disruptions and develop contingency plans. Diversified supply chains can play a pivotal role in handling those disruptions. Meanwhile, fostering a culture of agility that embraces change would lead to better adaptation.
What do you see as the most promising ways artificial intelligence (AI) can further impact corporate strategy, and what steps should companies take to remain at the forefront of AI-driven strategic advancements?
AI is revolutionizing corporate strategy by offering a powerful tool to enhance decision-making, optimize operations, and gain a competitive edge. It can assist in ideation during the strategy planning phase and lead to significant gains in efficiency through sufficient resource allocation to meet strategic goals. Organizations would do well to establish AI strategies and invest in AI infrastructure to enable the intended strategic advancements.
Does your organization use strategic foresight to enhance future readiness? If not, please detail the organization’s approach to planning in the short, medium, and long term.
For future readiness, our organization is conducting horizon scanning to identify opportunities and risks, whether globally or locally, to share key insights as inputs when planning for possible scenarios. In Saudi Arabia, the Ministry of Economy and Planning is leading the Sustainability and UN SDGs file, a main pillar for long-term planning that benefits future generations.
Strategy and Performance Management Practices
Do you see any application of AI to facilitate strategic planning or performance measurement? Is your organization using any such tool, possibly in certain areas of the organization?
Studies have been launched in the ministry to incorporate AI in modules and monitoring systems that facilitate decision-making by providing data-driven insights that can identify hidden patterns and trends for a more comprehensive understanding of the global economic setting. Moreover, AI would be hugely utilized in predictive analytics modules to forecast required economic targets.
How are strategic objectives defined in your organization, including the research process, involved stakeholders, and other pertinent details?
The process of defining strategic objectives is crucial in strategy planning since it translates the vision and mission of the organization into its goals. It should consider both the external scanning of opportunities and threats and the internal assessment of capabilities and resources. To ensure proper definition, both senior leaders and functional managers should be involved in incorporating the strategic direction and operational understanding in the process.
How do you balance long-term planning and short-term priorities?
This is a common challenge that organizations face, and it requires balancing between setting future direction and ensuring immediate success. The key element to this relationship is prioritization based on the impact and value of the initiatives, which helps to ensure that resources are allocated to the most impactful initiatives with the most suitable value.
In your experience, what is the most important tool for managing strategy, and why? How do you communicate strategy to different stakeholders within the organization to ensure a high level of awareness of priorities for both frontline employees and management positions?
First of all, I believe that the main principle in effective strategy management is engaging stakeholders in the planning phase. This ensures that objectives are achievable and the stakeholders are engaged in the execution. BSCs have proven to be effective in managing strategies for their cohesiveness.
It is also critical to properly communicate the right message to all levels of employees. Therefore, the messages should be tailored to all the different levels of expertise and communicated through multiple channels. A main component of such communication is the ability to incorporate it into everyday work and show every employee’s contribution to the implementation of the strategy.
What approaches or methodologies have you found effective in fostering cross-functional collaboration and ensuring that all departments work cohesively towards strategic goals?
In my experience, fostering a culture of teamwork, open communication, and shared accountability with a clear definition of common goals is the key to effectively ensuring cross-functional collaboration. Once this culture is established, a regular evaluation of the effectiveness of cross-functional collaboration will guide the efforts toward the organization’s strategic goals.
What critical skills and competencies should professionals develop to excel in strategic management?
For professionals to navigate the complexities of strategy, they should fully understand their respective industry and its operations. Additionally, analytical thinking and foresight competencies are critical to driving the competitive advantage. More importantly, strategy professionals should be able to manage change and communicate effectively with stakeholders.
**********
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in Performance Magazine Issue No. 29, 2024 – Strategy Edition.
About the Practitioner:Dana Alsaaid is a strategy professional with expertise in strategy execution and key performance indicators (KPIs). She holds a Master’s Degree in Health Administration from George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. Currently, she serves as the Director of Corporate Performance Management in the Ministry of Economy and Planning of Saudi Arabia.
One of the greatest human inventions is the magnetic compass, a device that uses the magnetic fields produced by the Earth’s poles for direction. This invention made navigation around the world easier than ever and it has evolved and been integrated into more complex and advanced systems to provide more accurate navigation.
Analogously, organizational strategy is the compass used by organizations to navigate the journey to their strategic objectives, long-term goals, and vision. If the strategy is not well communicated and understood by all employees, navigation toward the vision is difficult. To achieve strategic alignment, transformation, and growth, the strategy must be conceived and acknowledged by all employees. Therefore, the Strategy Management Office (SMO) should emphasize the importance of internal strategy communication and education while developing and executing the strategy to ensure overall organizational strategic alignment.
First, the success of a strategic alignment is underlain by how far employees at the departmental level—the gears and the beating heart of the organization—understand and support the strategy. According to Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton in their book “The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage,” the organization’s strategy can be visually and quantitatively explained using global strategy maps and scorecards. This can be cascaded to each unit in the organization by applying the top-down approach, ensuring strategic alignment. The benefit of this process is to give each department the opportunity to derive their own strategy maps and scorecards to develop their skills and knowledge that fit the corporate strategy.
For this process to be implemented professionally, each department should produce a “service-level agreement” that shows how their department’s strategic goals support the strategy along with measurable metrics to be checked periodically by the SMO. Employees play an important role in implementing the strategy at a personal level. This triggers the need for a well-designed communication plan that consistently provides guidance and support to ensure that the strategic goals are always remembered and acknowledged by each employee, how the organization is achieving said goals, and who needs support to do so. The SMO should provide this communication plan to each department and provide training on how to use its channels.
Second, understanding the distinction in management levels as well as how to deliver the strategy to the targeted audiences and guide them in following it ensures professional implementation of strategic alignment. As discussed in The KPI Institute’s Certified Performance Management Professional course, there are three levels of management. The highest level is Top-Level Management, which uses a strategic management style that involves adopting long-term views and ensuring that tasks are performed in such a way as to achieve strategic goals. C-suite executives such as the chief executive officer (CEO), chief financial officer (CFO), chief operating officer (COO), and chief information officer (CIO) are examples from this level who need to digest long-term goals to better deliver them to the other management levels. Hence, the SMO should support each chief officer to have a clear understanding and implementation of long-term goals.
Middle-Level Management is the next level, and it includes general, regional, and divisional managers who deliver results by planning and setting objectives for their respective divisions. SMO should facilitate training sessions in performance measurement and management for this management level in order to ensure strategic goals are well measured, managed, and aligned with the mission.
The last level of management is called Operational-Level Management, and it consists of first-line managers, department managers, and team leaders. These managers aim to develop a high-performance culture and high-performance work systems. Additionally, they manage teams and individual performance to meet organizational goals. Thus, the SMO should identify the core process that represents the organization’s strategic goal and that gives value propositions to its identity and then, work together with the operational managers to build the culture and the system of the organization based on this process.
Finally, clear corporate values enforce strategy implementation and guide employees’ behavioral aspects, priorities, and attitudes toward achieving organizational goals and aligning them with the corporate strategy. Corporate Values enforce principles that employees use to make decisions in day-to-day business activities, and they also solidify organizational culture. According to a survey carried out by employee engagement specialists Reward Gateway, employers with high Employee Net Promoter Scores (eNPS) have a workforce where over 80% of employees feel that they are recognized by their employer when they demonstrate corporate values. Therefore, a values-driven organization creates a work environment that fosters organizational strategic alignment.
To succeed at achieving strategic alignment, employees at the departmental level should understand and support the corporate strategy. Moreover, understanding how to deliver and support corporate strategy according to management levels, helps in professional strategy implementation. Finally, creating a values-driven workforce encourages employees to drive their behaviors and attitudes toward achieving organizational strategic goals.
If you are interested in reading more insightful articles about strategy and communication, click here.
***************************
This article is written by Engr. Hussien Abdullah Alkhalifah, a strategy and business planning professional who specializes in corporate performance, agile project management, business process improvement, performance management, KPI implementation, quality control, and strategic planning, among others. Connect with him on LinkedIn.
One of the most important factors in running a successful business is strategy implementation, where general, strategic objectives are translated into precise activities that involve bringing ideas to fruition. Operational performance is used to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of these activities in achieving strategic goals and objectives. Meanwhile, governance provides the structure and rules needed to monitor performance and achieve objectives, which requires good planning, resource allocation, and management.
Governance mechanisms are critical to guiding, monitoring, and improving strategy planning and execution. Roles and accountabilities should be clear: the board of directors sets the company strategy, goals, and overall direction. Top management ensures the strategy is translated and cascaded to the lower managerial levels. Middle management is critical to ensure the implementation of strategic objectives.
Upon receiving clear direction from the top management, middle managers should also set clear responsibilities and metrics. Metrics should be set to monitor success impartially. Clear roles and their coordination could also be ensured by appointing a strategy/performance office responsible for overseeing the strategy process, contributing to setting strategic objectives, and coordinating performance measurement.
Organizational Hierarchy | Source: The KPI Institute – C-KPI Course
The purpose of governance is to ensure that an organization continuously fulfills its mission by coordinating its strategy with its operational goals, procedures, and standards. Procedures and processes are essential to the success of an organization, as these help ensure that resource allocation is done properly, with all stakeholders having a clear role in how the organization’s objectives are achieved. In the case of a company where multiple projects run at the same time in various areas, this is especially important. Confusion, overlap, and miscommunication may arise in these situations, therefore, clear rules, guidelines, and accountabilities should be set up.
Reliable, comprehensive financial and non-financial information is at the core of governance, as it serves decision-making. Reporting procedures are crucial to ensure the right processes are set up to disclose the necessary data to the stakeholders, with mechanisms for regular reporting to share performance data and progress updates. Performance reporting is important as it disseminates information, communicates progress, forecasts progress, and updates status to stakeholders.
Moreover, decisions are taken based on the information received, and an organized process for review and decision-making, such as regular strategic review meetings or performance review sessions could be implemented. Periodic performance reviews measured against objectives should be conducted to analyze gaps, identify areas for improvement, and initiate corrective actions.
Governance cannot be properly implemented without the adequate behaviors of people. Since emotions play a large role in shaping behavior, it becomes all the more crucial for leaders to facilitate buy-in from the organization. Leaders should provide trust, guidance, and direction, instilling the necessary behaviors that support the organization’s objectives. Communication should be clear and consistent to provide clear direction.
As resistance is natural given the fear of the unknown or the perceived negative changes, it is important to address employee concerns and provide support. Some of the potential barriers are removed when support is provided to ensure that employees understand the strategy, their roles, and how their performance contributes to strategic objectives.
In conclusion, governance is indispensable for an organization’s success and reputation. By establishing clear structures, processes, and accountability mechanisms, governance ensures that the company operates in alignment with its objectives, values, and legal obligations. It provides a framework for effective decision-making, safeguarding the interests of shareholders, employees, customers, and other stakeholders. To summarize, governance isn’t merely a corporate formality—it’s the cornerstone of organizational excellence and trust in the modern business world.
For more in-depth articles about strategy, click here.
Despite the continuous hype around data analytics and the rapid acceleration of data technologies such as machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI), most companies are lagging behind with low data capabilities and no in-house data team in place. These companies have their data either fully unleveraged or marginally analyzed by executives on the side of their jobs to produce limited reports.
In such a situation, pushing the organization up the hill of data maturity would require building a team of data-specialized personnel. Building such a team can be daunting, as every company would have different conditions and no one way can fit all cases. However, covering the following main grounds can help cut miles on the road to building a data team from the ground up.
First, nurture the environment and plant the seeds. Data teams cannot grow in a vacuum. To prepare the organization to become data-driven with a data team, enhancing the organizational data culture is a good starting point. Having employees at all levels with a data-driven mentality and an understanding of the role of data analytics can significantly prepare the room for the planned team.
Second, connect with stakeholders and recognize priority needs. Carrying out data culture programs inside the organization can open up opportunities to have meaningful discussions with stakeholders on different levels about their data needs, what they already do with data, and what they want to achieve, in addition to having better insights into the pre-existing data assets. This is a good stage to recognize the organization’s data pain points, which would then be the immediate and strategic objectives of the future data team.
Third, define the initial structure of the team. According to the scale of the organization and the identified needs, data teams can have one of three main structures:
Centralized: This involves having all data roles within one team reporting to one head, chief data officer (CDO), or a similar role. All departments in the organization would request their needs from the team. This is a straightforward approach, especially for small-size companies, but can end up in a bottleneck if not scaled up continuously to meet the organization’s growing needs.
Decentralized: This requires disseminating all data roles and infusing them into departmental teams. This mainly aims to close the gap between technical analysis and business benefits as analysts in every team would be experts in their functional areas. However, the approach may lead to inconsistencies in data management and fragile data governance.
Hybrid: This consists of having governance, infrastructure, and data engineering roles within a core team, along with embedding data analysts, business analysts, and data scientists in departmental teams. The allocated personnel would report to the respective department head as well as the data team head. This approach combines the benefits of both centralized and decentralized structures and is usually applicable in large organizations as they require more headcount in their data teams.
Fourth, map the necessary tech stack and data roles. As the previous stages have uncovered the current uses and needs of data in an organization, it should be easier to start figuring out the tech tools that the team would be initially working with. Mapping the needed tech stack would be the first pillar before moving on to the hiring process. The second pillar would involve defining the roles that the team would need in its nascent stage to meet the prioritized objectives.
Several data job titles can be combined in a data team, with many of them having specializations that intersect with or bisect each other. However, there are three main role areas that should be considered for starting data teams:
Data engineering: implementing and managing data storage systems, integrating scattered datasets, and building pipelines to prepare data for analysis and reporting
Data analysis: performing final data preparation and extracting main insights to inform decision-making
Data science: building automated analysis and reporting systems, usually concerned with predictive and prescriptive machine learning models
Fifth, follow step-by-step team recruitment. Hiring new employees for the data team is one option. The other option can be upskilling existing employees with an interest in a data career and with minimum required skills. Even employees with just interest and no minimum required skills can be reskilled to fill some roles, especially within an initial data team.
The team does not need to take off with full wings. It can start small and gradually grow. Typically, data teams would start with data analysts who have extra skills in data engineering, data engineers who have experience with ad-hoc analyses and reporting, or a limited combination of both. In later stages, other titles can join onboard.
The baby-step-building approach is more convincing for stakeholders as it can be more efficient from a return-on-investment (ROI) perspective. Starting with a full-capacity team may end up being too costly for the organization, which could lead to the budding project being cut off in its prime.
Sixth, deliver ad-hoc analyses, heading towards long-term projects. In the beginning, data analytics experts at the organization would be expected to answer random requests and solve urgent data-related problems, like developing quick reports and reporting on-spot metrics. This is a good point to prove how data personnel can be of direct benefit to the organization.
However, along with delivering said ad-hoc requests, the data team should have strategic goals to enhance and develop the overall data maturity of the organization, like organizing, integrating, and automating the analytics processes and installing advanced predictive models. These long-term projects should foster the organization’s data maturity, which should result in ad-hoc requests being less frequent as all executives should be self-sufficient in using the installed automated reports and systems. In such a data-mature environment, the team would have time to advance their data products continuously, opening up new benefit opportunities.
Seventh, fortify the team’s presence. Strategic projects with shorter implementation periods and more immediate impact should be prioritized over longer ones, especially in the beginning. That would help continuously prove the benefits of the data team and the point of its foundation. Owning the products of the data team by having its name on it can help remind decision-makers of the team’s benefit. In addition, it is highly useful for the data team’s head to have access to top managerial levels to keep promoting the team’s presence and expansion.
Building a data team from scratch requires careful planning, investment, and commitment from organizational leadership. By following these guidelines and adapting them to their specific needs, organizations without prior data capabilities can establish a robust data team capable of driving innovation and offering a competitive advantage through data-driven insights.
