field note .01
where the answers are hiding
19th August 2026
Many years ago, I was asked by a client in the energy sector to help with an operational process critical to their production.
The impact for them was significant: revenue delayed, profit affected and everyday operations disrupted. In the most extreme cases, the process was never completed at all — despite millions having already been invested.
On paper, this process at its latter stages should have taken around four weeks to complete.
In reality, six months was considered a good outcome - at the end of a process that could be upwards of five years in the making.
It would have been easy to assume we understood the problem. After all, the symptoms were obvious. Why waste time navel-gazing? Just fix it. The end of this process is not working.
Or was it ? We got underway with unpicking the process, asking some very simple questions.
Why does this process exist?
Where does it start?
Who owns it from beginning to end?
And what does ‘complete’ actually mean?
The answers revealed something uncomfortable.
The process hadn't been neglected. Quite the opposite.
It had been improved. Repeatedly.
Over time, changes intended to make things better had accumulated. Other changes were happening elsewhere in the organisation. Ownership had shifted. The original purpose had become less clear. The ability to execute consistently had been compromised.
Unwinding years of well-intentioned improvement uncovered a sleeping monster.
Complex. Disjointed. Unclear at best; confusing at worst.
And costing the organisation millions every year.
alignment had broken down
field note .01
where the answers are hiding
19th August 2026
Many years ago, I was asked by a client in the energy sector to help with an operational process critical to their production.
The impact for them was significant: revenue delayed, profit affected and everyday operations disrupted. In the most extreme cases, the process was never completed at all — despite millions having already been invested.
On paper, this process at its latter stages should have taken around four weeks to complete.
In reality, six months was considered a good outcome - at the end of a process that could be upwards of five years in the making.
It would have been easy to assume we understood the problem. After all, the symptoms were obvious. Why waste time navel-gazing? Just fix it. The end of this process is not working.
Or was it ? We got underway with unpicking the process, asking some very simple questions.
Why does this process exist?
Where does it start?
Who owns it from beginning to end?
And what does ‘complete’ actually mean?
The answers revealed something uncomfortable.
The process hadn't been neglected. Quite the opposite.
It had been improved. Repeatedly.
Over time, changes intended to make things better had accumulated. Other changes were happening elsewhere in the organisation. Ownership had shifted. The original purpose had become less clear. The ability to execute consistently had been compromised.
Unwinding years of well-intentioned improvement uncovered a sleeping monster.
Complex. Disjointed. Unclear at best; confusing at worst.
And costing the organisation millions every year.
alignment had broken down
the plot twist? the organisation already knew.
It couldn't be seen in a report, a dashboard or an executive meeting.
It lay in daily operations.
The signals were there long before the commercial impact became impossible to ignore.
Here's the thing that fascinates me.
People knew the workarounds.
They knew which parts took too long.
They knew where ownership became fuzzy.
They knew which delays had somehow become ‘normal’.
What if we paid more attention to it?
Operations are a window into the soul of the organisation.
And sometimes, the answer is sitting right there long before anyone needs to reach for an expensive investment, or another disruptive transformation programme.
The trick is knowing where and how to look.
Understand what matters.
Understand what has changed.
Understand what is getting in the way.
And, perhaps most importantly,
listening to what the organisation is already telling us.
Because the answers aren't always somewhere over the horizon.
sometimes they're hiding in plain sight.
the plot twist? the organisation already knew.
It couldn't be seen in a report, a dashboard or an executive meeting.
It lay in daily operations.
The signals were there long before the commercial impact became impossible to ignore.
Here's the thing that fascinates me.
People knew the workarounds.
They knew which parts took too long.
They knew where ownership became fuzzy.
They knew which delays had somehow become ‘normal’.
What if we paid more attention to it?
Operations are a window into the soul of the organisation.
And sometimes, the answer is sitting right there long before anyone needs to reach for an expensive investment, or another disruptive transformation programme.
The trick is knowing where and how to look.
Understand what matters.
Understand what has changed.
Understand what is getting in the way.
And, perhaps most importantly,
listening to what the organisation is already telling us.
Because the answers aren't always somewhere over the horizon.
sometimes they're hiding in plain sight.
© 2026 Orchestrate.
All rights reserved
Growth Architecture™
and the Five Conditions
for Growth are
proprietary methodologies of
Orchestrate.
growth. conducted
© 2026 Orchestrate.
All rights reserved
Growth Architecture™
and the Five Conditions
for Growth are
proprietary methodologies of
Orchestrate.
growth. conducted
© 2026 Orchestrate. All rights reserved
Growth Architecture™ and the Five Conditions for Growth are
proprietary methodologies of Orchestrate.
growth. conducted
© 2026 Orchestrate.
All rights reserved
Growth Architecture™
and the Five Conditions
for Growth are
proprietary methodologies of
Orchestrate.