312 days after request
Marianne returned to the sentence on slide 37.
“What are you asking them to do?”
“Put renewal under one accountable owner.”
“It already has an accountable executive.”
“Not with authority over the complete process.”
“Which authority moves?”
The list began with prioritisation, then operational policy, data and release decisions. Underwriting would retain independent judgement over certain rules. Risk would retain its challenge rights. The systems budget was more complicated: it belonged to Technology, except for the portions capitalised against the transformation programme. Customer communications reported elsewhere.
Marianne listened without helping.
“Which executive in Monday's meeting are we asking to give up each of those rights?”
Felix did not have a complete answer. The diagram showed why the change was difficult; it did not specify the transfer of rights. Nothing on it gave the people in the room a decision they could make without first renegotiating the authority by which they would make it.
The diagnosis was accurate and easy to reject.
Marianne selected the sentence and replaced it with:
Opportunities exist to clarify accountabilities and strengthen cross-functional alignment.
She read the new version aloud.
“What do you think?”
The replacement no longer explained the diagram.
“It's more constructive,” Felix said.
Marianne nodded. Felix had given the correct answer, although not to the question she had asked.
The process-owning unit moved to the appendix. In its place the team recommended a cross-functional governance model, clearer accountabilities and a regular forum connecting strategy, Product, Operations, Risk and Technology. A RACI matrix would show how the parties participated in decisions nobody owned completely.
315 days after request
On Monday, the executives accepted the revised diagnosis. Each recognised the need for better coordination among the others. The governance model was approved unanimously.
Within a week three executives were discussing where the new coordination roles should report, a fourth had requested an additional approval gate to ensure that the model remained aligned with existing governance, and the programme had scheduled three workshops to agree the RACI.
The customer still could not correct her mileage.
The change was no easier to complete. Its continued inability to happen now had a governance process.
At twenty-six, Felix called that progress. It was on the opening slide.
This is the alignment-industrial complex: the internal and external economy that forms around authority nobody designed as a system. Once the company depends on coordination to make its divisions liveable, it buys more coordination.
Alignment is not the cure for fragmented authority. It is the work generated by fragmented authority.
The engagement improved Felix's year-end rating, increased his bonus and supplied the case study used to put him on the next account.
465 days after request
Five months after the board approved the model, the insurer asked the consultancy to refresh the diagnostic because the company had changed. It had. There were now more people responsible for alignment.
The arrangement was comfortable inefficiency. Every executive could defend their account, the consultancy could improve the joins between them and the customer could continue paying for the missing mechanism.