Written by: David Carneal – Digital Efficiency Consulting Group
Read Time: 9 min
A leadership wake-up call: the fastest way to protect next year’s launch is a small, targeted cleanup this year.
Big plans don’t fail. Friction wins.
Every January, companies gather around the ceremonial PowerPoint and announce big plans with big confidence.
“Q3 will be our best quarter.”
“This initiative will change the landscape.”
Then reality walks in, kicks the doorstop out, and reminds everyone that priorities shift, fires pop up, and the plan gets “revisited” until it quietly becomes a historical document.
Here’s the part leaders don’t love hearing but usually need to: most plans don’t die because the strategy was wrong. They die because the day-to-day work system is full of tiny, unglamorous speed bumps that turn momentum into molasses.
The good news is also the annoying news: you don’t need a massive transformation to fix this. You need a small, targeted cleanup that removes friction where it actually lives.
The wake-up: you can’t launch cleanly on top of process clutter
If 2027 is your “launch year,” then 2026 has to must be your “make-the-launch-possible” year.
That doesn’t mean a reorg.
It doesn’t mean ripping out systems.
It doesn’t mean signing up for a multi-year “digital transformation” that mostly transforms calendars into meeting soup.
It means cleaning up the few process breakdowns that repeatedly steal time, create rework, and erode trust. The things teams compensate for with heroics… right until the heroics stop working.
Think of it like this: your strategy is the destination. Your processes are the roads. You can have a gorgeous destination and still arrive late, cranky, and missing a bumper if the roads are full of potholes. (And yes, the potholes have recurring meetings.)
A composite story you’ve seen before (even if the logo changes)
1) The problem: strong plan, messy execution
A mid-level leadership team has a solid 2026 initiative: clear business case, clear timeline, good cross-functional support.
But within weeks, the initiative starts wobbling. Not because people don’t care. Because the work keeps bouncing:
• Ownership is “shared,” which is a polite way of saying nobody is accountable for the outcome.
• A single bottleneck team becomes the choke point, defended with “that’s how we’ve always done it.”
• Handoffs between teams look fine internally, but customers feel every seam.
• Approvals are vague, so decisions wait in inboxes like abandoned luggage.
• Rework shows up everywhere, and everyone treats it like weather: unfortunate, mysterious, inevitable.
• Meetings multiply to compensate for an unclear process, until nobody has time to do the work the meetings are about.
The initiative doesn’t explode. It just… slows. Then it gets “revisited.” Then “re-scoped.” Then it becomes a slide on a future deck titled “Lessons Learned.”
2) How it was identified: the signals were loud, just ignored overlooked or neglected
The team didn’t need a crystal ball. The signals were already on the table:
• Projects were late, but only after the same handoff. ?
• Customers complained about delays, but only after a specific approval step.
• Teams were busy, but output didn’t move.
• Everyone had a different definition of “done.”
• The same issues kept reappearing with different names.
In other words: Eeffort was highlow was low. That gap is where time leaks live.
3) What they did: a two-week cleanup sprint (not a corporate renovation)
Instead of launching another giant program, they ran a focused cleanup sprint on one launch-critical workflow.
Not ten workflows. One.
They mapped how work actually moved (not how the process diagram said it moved).
They measured wait time, rework loops, and approval delays.
They picked the top five time leaks by impact.
They assigned a single-threaded owner to each fix.
They changed the rules, documented them, and trained to the new standard.
No reorg. No new platform. No “future state” poster. Just targeted fixes where work was getting stuck.
4) Outcome: the plan stopped slipping because the work stopped bouncing
The timeline stabilized. Decisions moved faster. Teams spent fewer hours “clarifying” and more hours finishing.
Customer handoffs felt smoother. And internally, something important happened:
Trust ticked up.
Not because leaders gave a speech about trust. Because people saw that when they flagged a real problem, it got fixed.it was addressed or resolved or corrected
That’s the quiet superpower of cleanup work: it makes the next launch believable.
5) Takeaway: don’t copy/paste fixes, copy the thinking
The lesson isn’t “do exactly what they did.”
The lesson is: before you bet next year on a launch, remove the handful of friction points that will predictably sabotage it.
Most organizations already know where the pain is. They just haven’t permitted themselves given themselves permission to treat it like a leadership priority instead of a background annoyance.
The usual suspects: where time leaks hide
If you’re wondering where to start, here are the six time leak time leakage (?) categories that show up across industries, team sizes, and organizational charts. None are glamorous. All are expensive.
1) Ownership leaks
Symptoms: work ricochets between teams; decisions get “aligned” forever; accountability is distributed into invisibility.
Leader test:
• Who owns the outcome (not the task list)?
• If this goes sideways, who is the first person you call?
If the answer is “a group,” you just found a leak.
2) Bottleneck leaks
Symptoms: everything queues behind one person, one team, or one “special process” that can’t be touched.
Leader test:
• Where does work stack up the most?
• What’s the reason everyone accepts for it?
If the reason is tradition, congratulations, you’ve discovered a bottleneck with a PR team.
3) Handoff leaks
Symptoms: customers get different answers; internal teams blame each other; context disappears between steps.
Leader test:
• Where does ownership transfer?
• What information should transfer, but doesn’t?
If teams need extra meetings “just to align,” the handoff is leaking.
4) Approval leaks
Symptoms: decisions die in inboxes; “quick sign-off” takes two weeks; people route around approval because it’s too slow.
Leader test:
• What decisions require approval, and why?
• Is the approver actually adding value, or just reducing their own anxiety?
If nobody can explain the rule, approvals are running on vibes.
5) Rework leaks
Symptoms: the same deliverable gets redone; quality issues repeat; teams feel like they’re running on a treadmill.
Leader test:
• What gets redone most often?
• Is it unclear requirements, unclear standards, or a broken upstream step?
Rework is rarely a “people problem.” It’s usually a clarity problem wearing a people costume.
6) Meeting leaks
Symptoms: calendars are full, progress is not; meetings exist because the process can’t be trusted.
Leader test:
• Which meetings exist to compensate for uncertainty?
• What would have to be true for that meeting to be unnecessary?
If the meeting is a substitute for a decision rule, you’ve found free time hiding in plain sight.
The 2-week Cleanup Sprint: a starter plan that doesn’t trade launch for cleanup
This is the core idea: You’re not replacing your 2026 plan. You’re making it executable.
Here’s a simple, repeatable two-week sprint that works for a mid-level exec team without requiring a budget bonfire:
Week 1: find the top five time leaks
- Pick one launch-critical workflow.
Choose the work path that must function for 2027 to be real. - Map the real process.
Include handoffs, approvals, wait time, and rework loops. (Yes, the messy parts count.) - Identify the biggest delays and confusion points.
Use three inputs: team feedback, customer pain, and “where work sits.” - Rank the top five leaks by impact.
Not by how annoying they are. By how much they slow the launch or increase rework. But the extent of the project delays and the need for rework.
Week 2: fix, lock in, and make it stick
- Assign single-threaded owners.
One owner per fix. Not a committee. Not “shared accountability.” One name. - Implement the fix with a new rule of the road.
Examples:
• One definition of “done.”
• One approval rule with clear decision rights.
• One handoff checklist.
• One queue limit to stop work from piling up. - Simple Documentation Document it simply, train it quickly, and measure one indicator.
If the fix can’t be explained in two minutes, it’s too complex for a sprint. - Close the loop.
Two weeks later, review what improved, what didn’t, and adjust. Then repeat on the next workflow if needed.
Why this stays positive (and doesn’t become a doom scroll)
This only works if it feels doable. The energizing truth is simple: most organizations don’t need more ambition. They need more flow.
Cleanup work is optimistic by design because it’s about removing the friction that is already frustrating your people. You’re not asking teams to “try harder.” You’re making it easier for their effort to turn into results.
And this directly addresses the two big risks leaders often see:
• Launch slip: you remove predictable delays before they become “execution failure.”
• Trust erosion: people see progress and clarity, so they stop assuming initiatives are temporary weather patterns.
When leaders fix the system instead of motivating the humans harder, morale rises without a pep talk.
A quick 2026 readiness check for mid-level leaders
Before you finalize your 2026 plan, run this quick readiness scan. If you can’t answer confidently, that’s not a failure. It’s a to-do list.
• Do we have a single owner for each launch-critical outcome?
• Do we know our #1 bottleneck and why it exists?
• Are handoffs defined so customers don’t feel the seams?
• Are approvals clear, fast, and value-adding?
• Do we know what gets reworked most and what causes it?
• Are meetings supporting the process, or patching it?
If two or more answers are “sort of,” your plan might be strong, but your execution runway is short.
That’s exactly what the 2026 cleanup work is for.
Next step: revisit your 2026 plan through a readiness lens
Here’s the move: pull out your 2026 plan and ask, “What small process changes in the departments that matter most would make our 2027 launch easier, faster, and cleaner?”
Pick one or two launch-critical areas. Run a two-week cleanup sprint. Remove the top five time leaks.
Then launch from a place of clarity instead of hope.
If you want a collaborative way to kick this off, DECG can facilitate a cross-level working session (frontline through leadership) to identify the most expensive friction points, align on owners, and set the first sprint in motion.
Visit the DECG site to schedule a discovery call today.
CTA: If you want a fast, collaborative way to kick this off, DECG can facilitate a cross-level working session to identify the most expensive friction points, align owners, and launch your first two-week cleanup sprint.
Leave a Reply