Many organizations believe that employees who disengage lack motivation or discipline. However, most of the time, people disengage for less obvious reasons, such as a lack of clarity.
When people are not fully aware of what matters, why it matters, how urgent it is, or how success is defined, a gradual shift in performance begins. Teams keep working, meetings keep happening, deadlines are being met, and dashboards are being updated, but truly productive momentum is fading.
The organization, while busy on the outside, is subtly becoming misaligned beneath the surface.
This disconnect rarely happens because employees lose interest. More often, it occurs when strategy gets fuzzy, or performance systems overwhelm rather than guide. In these instances, humans intuitively start to optimize for predictability rather than for impact.
The net result is an organization that is busy but lacks momentum.
Recognizing the psychological and operational impacts of vague objectives is critical for organizations striving to link strategy with execution. When goals lack clarity, the highest-performing teams will inevitably lose focus, ownership, and engagement over the longer term.
Why Employee Engagement Fades When Goals Feel Vague
Employees are more likely to remain engaged when they have a clear understanding of the purpose and meaning that their efforts will ultimately generate. When organizational objectives feel distant, intangible, inscrutable, or disconnected from daily actions, a sense of purpose dwindles.
Most organizations have their strategy documented in broad strokes. Common strategy descriptions are “become more innovative”, “focus on the customer”, “lead the transformation”, or “drive greater growth”. While appealing at the leadership level, these aspirations provide little direct guidance for employees.
This begins to create psychological dissonance between effort and outcome.
People naturally seek validation of their efforts and will readily respond to goals that provide evidence of what they are working towards. When individuals don’t have that direct visibility and connection to business outcomes, work becomes functional rather than purposeful.
Emotional investment then begins to decline with celerity.
Employees start to emphasize the accomplishment of immediate, tactical tasks over those that lead to meaningful organizational outcomes because the former offer clearer feedback and more predictable results.
Abstract goals also create divergent interpretations across the organization. Different parts of the organization define success using their own unique frame of reference rather than by overarching organizational goals.
Fragmentation ultimately weakens alignment as it expands throughout departments and teams.
This impact is exacerbated in larger, geographically diverse, or hybrid organizations.
Engagement doesn’t come from being assigned work; it comes from a clear understanding of what it represents.
The Psychological Impact of Unclear Priorities
In addition to reducing operational efficiency, undefined priorities induce psychological stress.
When individuals face competing demands, constantly shifting expectations, or inconsistent direction, they live with perpetual uncertainty about where to direct their efforts.
Humans crave clarity and predictability. When organizational priorities are murky, employees enter a continuous evaluation cycle, questioning their own decisions and seeking clarification from managers.
Stress levels increase
Employees may grow fearful that they are focusing on the wrong tasks or failing to meet expectations.
Cognitive efficiency decreases
Employees divert their attention to several perceived urgencies instead of focusing on tasks that generate strategic value.
This inevitably drives reactive, rather than strategic, decision-making.
Organizations rarely appreciate the compounding impact that this situation has on employee performance.
Conflicts arise, priorities must be constantly re-negotiated, and employees often give up trying to anticipate future work and simply manage the current uncertainty.
Overloading the Employee’s Mind with KPIs
Performance measurement is crucial for establishing and maintaining alignment across an organization; however, organizations often undermine performance when they measure too much.
As businesses become increasingly data-driven, organizations tend to develop more sophisticated KPI-based measurement systems and dashboards. Ironically, when overused, they can cause cognitive overload.
You can only keep a couple of metrics truly in focus. The moment you start asking people to juggle fifty metrics, attention becomes diffused.
This causes three distinct problems:
1. Paralysis
People cannot decide which metrics truly matter and either spread their effort thinly across all of them or focus only on the easiest metrics to influence.
2. Reduced Strategic Focus
Instead of focusing on organizational outcomes, individuals and teams focus on individual metrics.
You end up rewarding people for managing dashboards instead of solving problems.
3. Increased Mental Fatigue
People are forced to keep switching tasks, and the cost of switching accumulates.
The result is that the measurement system itself becomes demotivating.
The most effective organizations succeed because they know that using too many metrics creates more complexity and less clarity.
How Ambiguity Produces “Safe” Instead of Effective Work
An unclear environment can often lead employees to produce “safe” work.
“Safe” work implies completing tasks in a way that minimizes individual risk or visibility.
Ambiguous organizations tend to foster environments where risk-taking is discouraged.
The organization starts to become performance-oriented toward easily defensible activities.
The culture of innovation, as a result, becomes greatly hindered.
Employees are encouraged to maintain the status quo even if it isn’t delivering true organizational value.
By reducing the psychological costs of taking action, organizations increase motivation to do meaningful work.
The Distinction Between Compliance and Commitment
Compliance: employees work to do what they are told.
Commitment: employees work to achieve desired results in ways they believe add value.
These may appear similar on the surface, but what happens underneath is fundamentally different.
Compliant employees focus on doing enough to satisfy expectations.
Committed employees proactively solve problems, collaborate effectively, and adapt more willingly to change.
The gap between compliance and commitment is fundamentally a problem of unclear purpose, low trust, and lack of meaning.
Companies driven by commitment outperform those that rely solely on compliance.
Final Thoughts
The most fundamental reason companies fail isn’t that their people don’t work hard enough; it is that the work they do does not add sufficient value because they cannot clearly see the point.
Unclear priorities, complex systems, and undefined success measures dilute people’s focus, create psychological stress, and diminish initiative.
Strategic alignment is a psychological discipline as much as a tactical or operational one.
Without clear alignment, people can put in a lot of effort without ever having a significant impact because the connection between their work and intended results is too weak.
Strategy sounds straightforward in theory: define where you want to go, how you want to get there, communicate it, and then execute.
In practice, most organizations discover that the real challenge isn’t deciding what to do, it’s who is doing it and how.
That’s where cascading and alignment become critical. When done right, they connect high-level ambition with everyday execution. When done poorly, they sow confusion and reap stalled progress.
To make this more tangible, let’s step away from theory and look at how cascading strategy and alignment could play out in practice across different industries.
These are not real case studies, but realistic scenarios that highlight both the structure and the thinking behind effective cascading.
1. Financial Services: Balancing Growth, Risk, and Compliance
In financial services, strategy is rarely about growth alone. It’s about growth within strict regulatory boundaries, where risk management and customer trust are just as important as revenue.
Imagine a financial institution sets a corporate goal:
“Increase loan portfolio value by 20% while maintaining regulatory compliance and reducing default rates.”
At first glance, this appears to be a single objective, but it has multiple layers of complexity.
A) At the departmental level, this goal begins to split into specialized priorities.
The lending department focuses on increasing loan approvals and expanding customer segments. Meanwhile, the risk team concentrates on improving credit assessment models to ensure that growth doesn’t lead to higher default rates.
B) At the team level, these objectives become measurable.
A credit risk team might introduce a KPI to reduce approval time while maintaining risk thresholds.
C) At the individual level, this translates into very specific actions.
A loan officer might be responsible for processing applications within a certain timeframe while maintaining quality checks.
Alignment here is about ensuring that growth does not compromise risk or compliance.
2. Technology: Scaling Innovation Without Losing Focus
Technology companies often operate in fast-moving environments where priorities shift quickly.
Consider a tech company with the strategic goal:
“Expand into three new international markets while improving product scalability.”
A) At the top level, this is a growth and capability objective.
Product teams might focus on localization, while engineering prioritizes scalability and infrastructure.
B) At the team level, goals become more concrete.
Engineering teams might aim to reduce system downtime while increasing capacity.
C) For individuals, this becomes part of daily execution.
A developer may optimize backend performance, while marketers experiment with localized messaging.
Cascading ensures that growth occurs without compromising system reliability.
3. Government: Aligning Policy, Public Services, and Long-Term Impact
In government, strategy is broader, more complex, and highly visible to the public.
Imagine a national government sets the strategic goal:
“Improve public healthcare access by 30% while maintaining budget discipline and service quality.”
A) At the top level, this becomes a policy-driven objective.
Health ministries focus on expanding healthcare access, while finance departments ensure responsible spending.
B) At the operational level, goals become measurable.
Hospitals may track patient wait times, while digital teams focus on increasing online health service adoption.
C) For individuals, this translates into clear responsibilities.
Healthcare administrators manage resource allocation, while policy analysts monitor outcomes and recommend improvements.
Effective cascading ensures that national priorities translate into measurable public outcomes.
Alignment ensures that speed does not compromise quality.
8. Automotive: Integrating Innovation, Cost, and Market Demand
The automotive industry is under pressure to innovate while managing costs.
Consider an automotive company with the goal:
“Launch a new electric vehicle model within 18 months while maintaining cost efficiency.”
A) R&D focuses on development, procurement manages sourcing, and marketing prepares the launch.
B) At the team level, goals become measurable.
Engineering teams track milestones, procurement focuses on cost efficiency, and marketing aligns campaigns with launch timelines.
C) For individuals, execution becomes highly defined.
Engineers test components, procurement specialists negotiate contracts, and marketers build launch strategies.
Cascading ensures innovation remains aligned with financial constraints and market expectations.
Final Thoughts
Across all these industries, the specifics change, but the underlying challenge remains the same.
Strategy only works when it is connected to execution, and that connection depends on alignment.
Cascading goals provide the structure for that alignment, ensuring that every level of the organization understands not only what needs to be done but also how it contributes to the bigger picture.
When organizations cascade effectively, they improve collaboration and turn strategy into something tangible. When they don’t, even the best plans struggle to deliver results.
Alignment is not just a supporting element of strategy — it is what determines whether strategy succeeds or fails.
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.
