Online Discussion

Stakeholder Alignment and Organisational Readiness: Why Agreement on the Problem Isn't Agreement on the Solution

When your key stakeholders say they agree on the problem, do they actually agree on what solving it requires — and how would you know if they didn't?

Sep 23, 2026 15:00
16:00
BST
·
Online (MS Teams)
For senior supply chain leaders only
How this meeting works
  • Practitioner-led working session
  • No pitches
  • Small-group, facilitated discussion
  • Works best when you can engage actively
  • Chatham House Rule
  • Limited places to preserve quality

Suggested Discussion Points

  • Why agreement on the problem statement so often masks disagreement on what solving it requires
  • How to map real decision authority, including where the veto sits, when the org chart doesn't reflect reality
  • How to assess change appetite versus change capacity honestly without triggering defensive responses
  • When and how to bring finance, commercial and other functions into the conversation — and what it costs to involve them too late
  • What organisational conditions tend to predict early momentum loss, and which are within the champion's control

Discussion Host(s)

To be confirmed.

Discussion Co-Host(s)

To be confirmed.

Moderator(s)

To be confirmed.

Why this session exists

The most dangerous moment in a capability investment is when a team believes it has alignment it doesn't actually have. Agreement on the problem statement frequently masks deep disagreement about scope, cost, disruption and who bears it. That misalignment tends to stay invisible until the programme is already underway — at which point it becomes expensive to surface and even more expensive to resolve.

This session examines how practitioners are approaching the alignment challenge before solutions or vendors enter the conversation: who actually owns the decision, what genuine alignment requires, and how to make an honest assessment of change appetite and capacity without triggering defensive responses.

What you'll leave with

  • A clearer test for whether your stakeholders are genuinely aligned on what solving the problem requires, not just on the problem statement
  • Peer perspective on how others have mapped real decision ownership and built the coalition they actually needed
  • Practical approaches to assessing change appetite and capacity honestly before committing to scope and pace
  • A sharper sense of whether your investment case is built on genuinely shared foundations or assumed consensus

Who this meeting is for

This meeting is designed for people working through real operational and innovation decisions, rather than those seeking presentations or general inspiration.

Who for

  • Supply chain leaders preparing to make or defend a capability investment case where internal alignment is incomplete or assumed rather than tested
  • Leaders who have experienced an investment decision stall, get redirected or underdeliver and suspect stakeholder misalignment was a factor
  • Transformation leaders who need to build a shared diagnostic foundation across functions before the investment case goes forward

Who not for

  • Teams primarily looking for technology demonstrations or vendor comparisons
  • Anyone seeking a passive, webinar-style session rather than a peer discussion

How the online session works

Each session is designed as an online equivalent of a small, in-room roundtable discussion — not a passive, webinar-style presentation.

The format adapts to the topic and the experience in the room:

  • Where participants already have strong knowledge, we typically start by inviting individuals to expand on specific points they have shared in advance. This helps surface real-world context quickly and anchors the discussion in practical experience.
  • Where the topic is less familiar or more specialised, we may begin with a short explainer to establish a shared baseline before opening up the discussion.

To support productive dialogue, we often invite a subject-matter expert to join the session. This may be someone from a vendor, consultancy, or independent background — sometimes from within the community, sometimes external.

Their role is not to pitch or present a solution. Instead, they listen carefully to the discussion and reflect back:

  • how similar challenges have been approached in comparable organisations
  • what has worked (and what hasn’t) in practice
  • concrete examples that help translate discussion into action

This balance is deliberate. Without it, sessions can drift into abstract debate or problem-sharing. With it, discussions stay grounded and participants leave with tangible ideas they can apply in their own context.

The emphasis throughout is on shared learning, practical insight, and forward progress, rather than polished presentations or predetermined answers.

What happens next

Participation is confirmed through a short, staged process designed to ensure a good fit and a productive discussion for everyone in the room.

Step 1: Register interest

You start by entering your details and answering a short set of questions about your current context and the decisions on your radar.

Step 2: We sense-check fit and composition

We may follow up to clarify a few details. This is about making sure the discussion works for everyone in the room.

Step 3: You receive a personal invitation

Once confirmed, you will receive a personal invitation with the session agenda, who else will be joining, and clear joining instructions.