Case Study

Designing an execution system to increase decision velocity, coherence, and leadership leverage

Engagement Focus: Office of the CEO

Sector: Philanthropy & Global Health

Context

A UK-based global philanthropic foundation operating at the intersection of science, health, and policy entered a period of intentional transition. A new CEO and leadership team were appointed to reset strategy, reduce fragmentation, and strengthen how strategic intent translated into action.

Strategy and structure were being refreshed in parallel. What became clear early was that leader-driven execution would not scale in an increasingly complex environment.

The Challenge

The organization was rich in expertise and analytical depth, but decision-making was slow and priorities were difficult to operationalize.

Department-level strategies existed, yet enterprise-level coherence was weak. Leadership forums generated rigorous discussion, but too often concluded without clear decisions, ownership, or follow-through. Execution relied heavily on individual judgment rather than shared systems.

The risk was not confusion, but drift.

  • Broad priorities that were difficult to operationalize

  • Slow, centralized decision-making

  • Leadership capacity absorbed by process rather than integration

  • Execution dependent on individual judgment rather than shared systems

Without a stronger execution model, alignment, momentum, and impact at scale were at risk.

The challenge was not a lack of capable leaders or the absence of a role.

What was missing was a strategy execution system. A way to orchestrate priorities, decisions, and accountability across the leadership team without placing the burden on the CEO alone.

An Office of the CEO had already been established and led by a Chief of Staff. The opportunity was to strengthen this function from a coordination role into an execution backbone that connected strategy to priorities, enabled faster decisions, created a repeatable leadership rhythm, and built internal execution capability.

The objective was leverage, not dependency.

The Strategic Shift

Rather than adding a role, the organization strengthened its Office of the CEO as a strategy execution system.

Governance rhythm, leadership cadence, and priority ownership were clarified to connect strategy to measurable outcomes. Decision forums were redesigned to enable faster, better-bounded decisions, while execution accountability shifted from individuals to the system.

Vivid Strategies supported the Office of the CEO through execution system design, leadership coaching, and a train-the-trainer model, building internal capability rather than dependency.

What Changed

Over multiple execution cycles, structural shifts became visible:

  • Strategic priorities became more specific, measurable, and coherent

  • Decision velocity increased without sacrificing rigor

  • Leadership meetings became decision-oriented

  • Outcome ownership became shared and explicit

  • Progress was assessed objectively rather than through individual perspectives

  • A common execution rhythm and language emerged across teams

The Office of the CEO evolved into a stable execution backbone that enabled leadership focus rather than consuming it.

Execution systems do not eliminate tension.
They surface it and make gaps visible and manageable.

That friction is not a failure of the system. It is how organizations mature.

Role and Approach

Vivid Strategies was engaged as an advisor and execution systems partner to the Chief of Staff and the Office of the CEO team.

The mandate was explicit:

  • Strengthen the strategy execution system

  • Build internal capability through a train-the-trainer model

  • Support leadership adoption without owning day-to-day operations

Vivid did not redefine the organization’s strategy, run the Office of the CEO, or act as a proxy for leadership decision-making. The work focused on system design, leadership discipline, and execution maturity.

This type of engagement is relevant for growth-stage and expert-led organizations where complexity is increasing faster than informal leadership can manage, and where strategy exists but execution depends on individual heroics.

The specifics vary, but the system logic is repeatable.