From execution systems that survive the quarter to leadership teams that execute independently.
These case studies show what changes when strategic direction becomes a working execution system: clearer priorities, stronger ownership, better cadence and leadership teams that can move the business without everything returning to the CEO.
"Mike helped us set the direction from 2022 to 2026. He was instrumental in helping the team understand what was a priority now and later. Even after the project, Mike stays in touch with the business and continues to support us. There is mutual inspiration between Mike and the team."
Rasmus HolstCEO, Zensai
Execution systems implemented across SaaS, professional services and industrial teams.
SV works with leadership teams that need to turn strategic direction into execution: clearer outcomes, stronger ownership, better decision rhythm and a system the team can continue to run.
Some cases involved OKRs as a central part of the execution architecture. Others focused on leadership alignment, innovation execution or cross-business-unit decision-making. The common pattern is the same: strategy became more visible, owned and executable.
Explore by segment:
B2B SaaS Case Studies
ZENSAI
VC-backed HR/Learning SaaS · ~300 employees
HQ: Copenhagen · Global teams across Denmark, US, Poland and Australia
When the new CEO joined, the vision was strong, but there was no system to turn strategy into predictable weekly execution.
1. No OKR rhythm or consistent execution system
No weekly visibility, no structured cadence and no clear framing of the next 90 days.
2. Execution was still too dependent on the CEO
The CEO needed the leadership team, not himself, to own execution.
3. Strong team, but not used to strategic clarity
The leadership team needed to strengthen how it worked with longer-term direction, strategic versus operational work, outcome scoring and the translation of a multi-year vision into near-term execution.
4. Silos across regions
Teams in Denmark, the US, Poland and Australia operated with different speeds, levels of maturity and ways of working.
5. Strategy not translated into execution
A strong strategy deck existed, but priorities, OKRs and ownership had not yet been cascaded into a working execution rhythm.
1. Designed the OKR rhythm from scratch
Outcome clarity, weekly scoring, quarterly resets and alignment rituals.
2. Led the implementation until the leadership team became autonomous
SV supported system design, facilitation, leadership enablement and the weekly execution cadence until ownership transferred to the leadership team.
3. Built a cascaded strategic structure
3-year outcomes → 1-year focus → 90-day OKRs → weekly execution.
4. Created a unified global leadership rhythm
A single execution cadence across Denmark, the US, Poland and Australia, reducing siloed execution and creating shared visibility.
5. Shifted execution ownership from CEO-led to team-led
The leadership team moved from alignment around the CEO to ownership of the execution system.
1. Year-3 outcomes achieved in Year-1 and Year-2
Strategic clarity and weekly execution rhythm accelerated movement significantly.
2. OKR rhythm still running 3+ years later
The system created long-term sustainability and behavioural change.
3. Priorities and OKRs cascaded across functions
Product, People, Sales, Marketing and Operations worked within the same weekly rhythm.
4. Consistent quarter-by-quarter execution
No mid-quarter drift. Better visibility on outcomes, blockers and decisions.
5. VC raise supported by execution clarity
Vision, priorities and progress were visible and aligned, strengthening the fundraising process.
Mike helped us set the direction from 2022 to 2026. He was instrumental in helping the team understand what was a priority now and later. Even after the project, Mike stays in touch with the business and continues to support us. There is mutual inspiration between Mike and the team.
Rasmus Holst | CEO at Zensai
Professional Services Case Studies
APPFICIENCY
B2B Professional Services · ERP Implementation Partner · Mid-Market
HQ: Toronto, Canada
Appficiency faced several execution issues common to fast-growing professional services organisations.
1. No unified execution system
No OKRs, no weekly visibility and no single source of truth.
2. No accountability or ownership
Leaders were busy, but lacked clarity on outcomes, priorities and responsibilities.
3. No mid-term strategic cadence
The team operated quarter-to-quarter without a structured rhythm for thinking 18 months ahead.
4. Product and Services mixed in one P&L
Both units shared priorities, slowing execution and creating internal confusion.
5. CEO carried execution alone
Without a shared execution system, teams waited for direction, creating reactivity, inconsistency and leadership fatigue.
1. Implemented a unified OKR execution system
A single execution framework used weekly by the CEO and leadership team to track wins, bottlenecks and measurable progress.
2. Built real accountability and ownership
Each leader owned clear OKRs, outcomes, responsibilities and weekly commitments.
3. Implemented a strategic cadence
A rhythm connecting 3-year vision, 18-month strategy, quarterly priorities and weekly execution.
4. Separated Product and Services execution systems
Each unit gained its own P&L, OKRs, leadership rhythm and priorities.
5. Shifted execution from CEO-led to team-led
Ownership moved from the CEO to the leadership team, enabling more predictable execution.
1. OKR system still running 12+ months later
A rare outcome in professional services companies and proof of real behavioural change.
2. Weekly clarity on wins and bottlenecks
The CEO and leadership team could see where progress happened, where blockers existed and what needed attention.
3. Clear accountability across the leadership team
Leaders knew exactly what they owned. The CEO no longer had to push execution alone.
4. Faster, more predictable execution
Better decisions, tighter alignment and quicker movement of strategic initiatives.
5. Two business units operating with clarity
Product and Services executed with their own strategy, OKRs, cadence and accountability.
"We finally had a system that showed us where execution was breaking — and a team that owned fixing it. The OKR rhythm was simple, but it changed everything."
John Than | CEO at Appficiency
%2010.54.30%201.webp)
Industrial & Engineering Case Studies
IMI
FTSE 250 Global Industrial Engineering Group · Multi-Business Units
IMI was exploring how to accelerate innovation across business units while collaborating effectively with fast-moving technology companies. The leadership team needed clarity on how to scale innovation without slowing it down with corporate processes.
1. No clear framework for evaluating external innovation
Leaders lacked a structured way to identify, assess and integrate emerging technologies from startups and scaleups.
2. Uncertainty on startups versus scaleups
The team needed to understand which partners were safer, faster or more suitable for corporate innovation.
3. Corporate processes slowed external collaboration
Procurement, compliance, ownership ambiguity and slow decision loops risked killing innovation with corporate gravity.
4. Leadership unprepared for entrepreneurial collaboration
Leaders needed new behaviours, communication skills and decision models to work effectively with founders and product teams.
5. No execution model to scale innovation across units
IMI needed a shared execution framework to align decision-making, ownership and execution across regions and business units, including tools like OKRs where useful.
1. Designed a clearer innovation partnership strategy
SV helped IMI understand the strategic advantages of working with scaleups over early-stage startups.
2. Built a corporate–scaleup collaboration model
A practical framework to speed up evaluation, reduce friction and maintain innovation momentum without heavy corporate processes.
3. Upgraded leadership mindset and behaviours
Leaders worked on expectation setting, communication and decision-making with entrepreneurial teams.
4. Introduced modern execution frameworks
SV exposed the leadership team to OKRs and quarterly rhythms as tools to increase speed, accountability and cross-unit alignment.
5. Strengthened leadership alignment across business units
The work created a shared language, decision model and innovation evaluation framework across the organisation.
1. Clearer innovation evaluation logic
Leaders gained a more structured way to assess external innovation opportunities and decide which partnerships deserved attention.
2. Stronger corporate–scaleup collaboration model
The organisation had a more practical way to work with fast-moving technology companies without slowing innovation through unnecessary internal friction.
3. Better leadership readiness for entrepreneurial collaboration
The leadership team became more aware of the behaviours, communication patterns and decision expectations required to work with founders and product teams.
4. Shared language across business units
Different units gained a more consistent way to discuss innovation, partnership models, execution speed and decision-making.
5. Stronger execution foundation for scaling innovation
IMI gained a clearer framework for connecting innovation opportunities to ownership, rhythm and cross-unit execution.
See the Method on Your Business
The same shift is possible when execution becomes a system the leadership team can run.
Whether the work begins with OKRs, leadership alignment, innovation execution or decision cadence, the goal is the same.
Turn strategic direction into visible ownership, stronger rhythm and measurable movement.
SV helps enterprise leadership teams implement the execution system that makes strategy sustainable beyond one leader, one quarter or one planning session.