.webp)
From OKRs that finally survive a quarter to leadership teams that execute independently
these case studies show what changes when execution becomes predictable.
"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. Mike and I have had a fantastic collaboration. Even after the project, Mike stays in touch with a lot of the business and still helps out. I think there is a mutual interest, Mike was inspired by the business and the business continues to be inspired by Mike."
Execution systems we’ve installed across SaaS, Professional Services and Industrial & Engineering teams.
B2B SaaS Case Studies
VC-backed HR/Learning SaaS · ~300 employees HQ: Copenhagen · Global teams across Denmark, US, Poland, 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 execution system
No weekly visibility, no structured cadence and no framing of the next 90 days.
2. CEO needed OKRs implemented and delegated
He wanted the leadership team — not himself — to own execution.
3. Strong team, but not used to strategic clarity
The LT lacked experience with:
- breaking down a 3-year vision
- separating strategic vs operational work
- thinking 18–36 months ahead
- weekly scoring of outcomes
4. Silos across regions
Teams in Denmark, US, Poland and Australia operated with different speeds and maturity levels.
5. Vision not translated into execution
A strong strategy deck existed, but no OKRs, no cascaded priorities and no ownership.
1. Implemented the OKR rhythm from scratch
OKR design, outcome clarity, weekly scoring, quarterly resets and alignment rituals.
2. Took full ownership of OKR implementation
We led system design, facilitation, leadership enablement and the entire weekly execution cadence until the LT became autonomous.
3. Implemented a cascaded strategic structure
3-year outcomes → 1-year focus → 90-day OKRs → weekly execution.
4. Implemented a unified global leadership rhythm
A single execution cadence across Denmark, US, Poland and Australia — eliminating silos.
5. Implemented leadership ownership
A full transition from CEO-led execution to team-led execution.
1. Achieved Year-3 outcomes in Year-1 and Year-2
Strategic clarity and weekly execution rhythm accelerated movement significantly.
2. OKR rhythm still running 3+ years later
Long-term sustainability and behavior change.
3. OKRs cascaded across all functions
Product, People, Sales, Marketing and Operations all executed within the same weekly rhythm.
4. Consistent quarter-by-quarter execution
No mid-quarter drift. Predictable outcomes every week.
5. Successful 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.
Professional Services Case Studies
B2B Professional Services · ERP Implementation Partner · Mid-Market HQ: Toronto, Canada
ppficiency faced several execution issues common to fast-growing PS organizations:
1. No unified execution system
No OKRs, no weekly visibility and no single source of truth — unusual for an ERP firm, but common in PS.
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 an execution system, teams waited for direction, creating reactivity, inconsistency and leadership fatigue.
1. Implemented a unified OKR system
A single execution framework used weekly by the CEO and LT to track wins, bottlenecks and measurable progress.
2. Implemented real accountability and ownership
Each leader owned clear OKRs, outcomes, responsibilities and weekly commitments.
No ambiguity. No waiting.
3. Implemented a strategic cadence
We established a rhythm for:
- 3-year vision
- 18-month strategy
- quarterly priorities
- weekly execution
4. Implemented separate systems for Product vs. Services
Each unit gained its own P&L, OKRs, leadership rhythm and priorities.
5. Transitioned from CEO-led execution to team-led execution
Ownership shifted from the CEO to the leadership team, enabling predictable execution.
1. OKR system still running 12+ months later
A rare outcome in PS companies — proof of real behavior change.
2. Weekly clarity on wins & bottlenecks
The CEO and LT could instantly see where progress happened, where blockers existed and what needed attention.
3. Clear accountability across the LT
Leaders knew exactly what they owned — the CEO no longer pushed 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.”
%2010.54.30%201.webp)
Industrial & Engineering Case Studies
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 vs scaleups
The team did not know 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 models to work effectively with founders and product teams.
5. No execution model to scale innovation across units
IMI needed a shared framework — including tools like OKRs — that aligned decision-making and execution across regions and business units.
1. Designed a clear innovation partnership strategy
We 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 processes.
3. Upgraded leadership mindset and behaviours
We trained leaders on expectation setting, communication and decision-making with entrepreneurial teams.
4. Introduced modern execution frameworks
We exposed the LT to OKRs and quarterly rhythms as tools to increase speed, accountability and cross-unit alignment.
5. Strengthened leadership alignment across business units
We established a shared language, decision model and innovation evaluation framework across the organisation.
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 execution systemNo weekly visibility, no structured cadence and no framing of the next 90 days.
2. CEO needed OKRs implemented and delegated
He wanted the leadership team — not himself — to own execution.
3. Strong team, but not used to strategic clarityThe LT lacked experience with:
- breaking down a 3-year vision
- separating strategic vs operational work
- thinking 18–36 months ahead
- weekly scoring of outcomes
4. Silos across regions
Teams in Denmark, US, Poland and Australia operated with different speeds and maturity levels.
5. Vision not translated into execution
A strong strategy deck existed, but no OKRs, no cascaded priorities and no ownership.
The same transformation is possible for your company
If these results mirror what you want for your leadership team, we can help you implement the system that makes it sustainable.