Approvals
The issue goes through several levels, but the decision still comes back to the owner or CEO.
Management system
and target architecture
Distributed authority and a shared management model
We develop a target management model and business architecture. We align authority, management cycles, metrics and the sequence of organisational and technological changes.
Discuss your needsThe growth of the company increases the number of decisions, but the authority, performance and management rhythm often remain the same.
Blurred responsibility
As a result, several functions are involved, but a single owner of the result is not fixed.
Strategy and execution gap
Goals, budgets, projects, and operational indicators live in different management cycles.
Dependence on people
Critical order of action rests on individual leaders and personal agreements.
Why this happens
As a company grows, functions, projects and rules are introduced for individual needs. Each change may be justified, while the overall management model gradually loses coherence.
Departments adopt their own rules, use different metrics and interpret decision rights differently. The loss of control appears in the connections between functions rather than within each function.
Management is forced to compensate for these gaps with meetings, renegotiations and personal involvement in operational matters.
The task of practice is Define a sustainable management logic: which decisions are made at each level, who is accountable for the result, how goals relate to processes and metrics, and which changes need to be reflected in data and systems.
Three dimensions connect strategy with execution
What should a company be able to do?
Business capabilities
Functions and competencies required to implement the strategy – regardless of the structure and set of systems in place.
Capability scope, required development level, owners and priorities.
Who makes the decisions and is responsible for the outcome?
Organisational responsibility
Allocation of functions, decision rights and accountability across management levels and departments.
Owners of results, boundaries of authority and vertical accountability.
How do you create results between units?
End-to-end processes
The sequence of actions from event to result for the customer, production or internal customer.
Workflow, participant roles, handovers, deadlines and process metrics.
Unified management system model
Strategic objectives are given to owners, processes, and measurable execution rules.
- Authority and responsibility.
- Regulations and management cycles.
- Indicators and variance control.
- Data requirements and IT architecture.
More about the model
The management model and target architecture must answer three questions together: what the company needs to be able to do, who makes decisions, and how departments work together to deliver results. Decision rights, processes, metrics, data and systems are defined around the same management decisions. Automation can therefore proceed in parallel when it follows a shared approach to accountability and data.
Strategy → Goals → Indicators → Priorities for Change
How the target management system is formed
The scope depends on the starting point. Our approach is consistent: record how management actually works, design the target model and embed it in managers’ regular work.
Document how management actually works
We look at how decisions are being made: where returns arise, what data is used, who actually affects the result and what is not formally fixed.
More about our work
Starting point
Decisions go through several layers, but the actual logic of choice, data, and participants are not anchored.
What we do
We document the decision path, participant roles, data used, escalation grounds and the actual result owner.
How to check the results
It is clear where there is a delay, a return to the top level or a break in responsibility.
Designing a target model
We define decision levels, authority, result owners, management cadence, metrics and escalation rules.
More about our work
Starting point
Authority, responsibility, and indicators are defined by function, but are not related to decision classes and outcomes.
What we do
We determine the levels of decisions, the owners of the result, the boundaries of authority, the managerial rhythm and the rules of escalation.
How to check the results
Each decision category has clear preparers, decision-makers, result owners and grounds for escalation.
Linking the model to architecture and portfolio
Determine which capabilities, processes, data, systems, and initiatives should support the new management logic.
More about our work
Starting point
Projects, systems, and initiatives develop as separate function requests and are not always linked to the target management model.
What we do
Link business capabilities, processes, data, systems, and initiatives to target decisions, metrics, and outcome owners.
How to check the results
Each initiative has a defined capability, management outcome and dependencies on data or systems.
Secure the transition
Form a change plan, leadership roles, regular control formats and criteria for verifying the results.
More about our work
Starting point
The changes are described in the project materials, but are not built into the regular work of managers.
What we do
Form a transition plan, leadership roles, management formats, control points and criteria for consolidating changes.
How to check the results
The new model is used in regular control cycles rather than being a separate design description.
Services within this practice
Project formats and results that can be used as a stand-alone project or as part of a change program.
A map of management gaps: where decisions are escalated back to senior management, where accountability is unclear, and which metrics, data and processes do not support strategy execution.
A structured description of what the company must be able to do to execute its strategy: key capabilities, owners, constraints and priority areas for development.
A decision-making model: levels of authority, participant roles, areas of accountability, management domains and grounds for escalation.
A target architecture showing which processes, data, systems, integrations and infrastructure elements must support the management model.
A sequence of changes with priorities, dependencies, initial steps, projects, architecture decisions and checkpoints.
The new model is embedded in management routines, procedures, roles, project decisions and working systems, including management, enterprise and industry-specific platforms that record accountability, status and execution controls.
Management system assessment
Repeated approvals delay execution
- Observation
- Decisions are returned to the management level after approval.
- Cause
- Authority limits and escalation conditions have not been defined.
- What to change
- Define the decision owner, authority limits and escalation workflow.
Developing a business capability map
Link priorities to budget
- Owner
- CFO
- Limitation
- Project priorities and budgets are set separately.
- Development area
- Uniform rules for selection and financing of initiatives.
Designing a target management model
Boundary of authority
- Change
- Goes beyond the approved budget.
- Escalation
- Project manager → CFO
- Basis
- Evaluation of the impact on the budget, timing and result.
Developing target functional and IT architecture
Execution monitoring
- Process
- Monitoring
- Data
- Shared metrics
- System
- BI platform
Developing a transformation roadmap
Assign decision owners and sources of indicators
- Checkpoint
- Model agreed
- Checkpoint
- Pilot accepted
- Checkpoint
- Handover to team
Implementing and embedding the target management model
The model is embedded in daily work
- Management
- Roles and decision rights · Procedures and cadence
- Execution
- Status and accountability · Outcome monitoring
- Working systems
- 1C:ERP · Project Platform · BI
What the management team receives
Map of management decisions
Decision categories, decision-making levels, participants, deadlines and escalation grounds.
| Role/zone | Preparation | Approval | Approval | Implementation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Board of Directors | Approval | |||
| Board | Approval | |||
| CEO | Approval | |||
| Financial block | Preparation | |||
| Strategy block | Preparation | |||
| Product block | Implementation | |||
| Operations block | Implementation | |||
| IT unit | Approval |
Allocation of decision rights and accountability
Owners of the result, boundaries of authority, areas of preparation and approval of decisions.
| Committee | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strategic committee | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Scheduled. | Not scheduled. |
| Product Committee | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. |
| Finance committee | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. | Not scheduled. |
Planning
Jan — May
Monitoring
May — Aug
Revision of objectives
Aug — Oct
Updating the portfolio
Oct — Dec
Management rhythm
Calendar of committees, cycles of planning, control, review of objectives and portfolio.
Linkage of goals, indicators and initiatives
How strategy translates into indicators, budgets, projects and responsibilities at specific levels.
| Priority | Business capabilities | Processes | Data | Systems |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High priority | Client experience | End-to-end processes | Single data warehouse | Single platform |
| Medium priority | New products | Automation | Analytics and AI | Integration |
| Low priority | Support functions | Regulations and standards | Data quality | Technical infrastructure |
Architectural priorities
What business capabilities, processes, data, and systems need to evolve first?
Transition plan
Sequence of implementation, rapid changes, dependencies and checkpoints.
What changes for managers
Results are visible in the management decision path: who makes the decision, which data informs it, when it is due and what happens when a variance occurs.
Decision levelsEach decision category has a defined level, participants, criteria for making decisions independently and grounds for escalation.
Starting point
Decision categories are not differentiated by risk level, budget or impact on results.
How to verify
Decision routes show why an issue is resolved at a particular level or escalated.
Linkage between strategy and plansGoals are linked to metrics, budgets, initiatives and accountability at specific management levels.
Starting point
Strategic objectives have not been translated into a single sequence of budgets, plans, indicators and initiatives.
How to verify
Each goal has an owner, metric, review period, associated actions and data source.
Portfolio rationaleThe portfolio is based on each initiative’s contribution to strategic goals, business capabilities and the target architecture.
Starting point
Initiatives are based within functions and are not always linked to the target management model and architecture.
How to verify
For each initiative, the target result, owner, dependencies, necessary resources and completion criteria are recorded.
Incorporation of new unitsNew units follow the established levels of authority, management cycles and reporting principles.
Starting point
New companies, sites and divisions create their own management rules, indicators and coordination routes.
How to verify
The roles of the corporate centre and the new unit, common indicators, control formats and the order of escalation are recorded.
Continuity of managementThe model records key decision rights, management cycles, metrics and the basis for decisions.
Starting point
Decision-making and critical knowledge depend on individual managers and professionals.
How to verify
Replacing a manager or changing a structure does not require restoring work order through personal arrangements.
When this practice is especially useful
Practice is necessary when the scale or structure of a business changes faster than the management model.
Growth and delegation
The company has grown faster than its management model.
- Decisions are concentrated with the owner
- New divisions create their own rules
- The number of approvals is growing faster than the volume of business
- Functional indicators cease to add up to the overall result
- manual coordination does not withstand the volume of operations
Group of companies
Legal entities and business units follow different management principles
- Decision rights of the corporate centre and group companies are not separated
- The same indicators are calculated according to different rules
- support functions are duplicated
- Decisions between companies go through informal arrangements.
- Consolidated management picture is missing
Reorganization
Organisational structure changes, but responsibilities and processes remain unclear
- functions are distributed among several departments
- Part of the work is duplicated, part has no owner
- Regulations and job descriptions do not reflect actual work
- End-to-end processes break at the boundaries of the new structure
- Managers interpret their decision rights differently
Programme of changes
Projects of digitalisation, development or reorganization are launched in parallel, but do not form a single management and architectural logic.
- Systems are selected before the management decision is clarified
- Initiatives compete for resources and owners
- Local changes create new gaps between functions.
- The result of the project is evaluated by implementation, not by change of manageability.
- Changes are not fixed in a regular management rhythm.