All Posts

When you step out of managing multi-million-dollar technology portfolios and into building a brick-and-mortar business, people love to assume you’ve jumped into a completely different operational universe. In reality, whether you’re directing a $40M enterprise transformation or prepping a commercial space for the grand opening of a BODYBAR Pilates studio, the core challenge is identical: You are facing an endless list of "Priority #1" tasks every single day, with finite time,

When leading major initiatives, it is easy to get trapped in a false choice: Strict Compliance vs. Strategic Innovation. In heavily regulated environments—whether navigating state social services, healthcare, or franchise models—rules arrive with rigid deadlines and high stakes. Under that pressure, leadership teams often push long-term strategy, customer experience, and team capacity to the back burner, turning execution into a defensive exercise in box-checking. Treating

A perfectly detailed project plan is a comforting sight. Hundreds of tasks cleanly flagged, timelines mapped, and resource allocations locked into place. It creates an undeniable illusion of control. It is also one of the easiest places for an initiative to fail. A project plan is a tool for tracking activity. Strategy is a framework for driving an outcome. Confusing the two is the primary reason high-budget initiatives end up delivering every single task on time while fa

I’ve spent much of my career working inside established organizations—from PayPal and Boston Mutual to large, complex initiatives within the State of Nebraska. Those experiences taught me a lot about leadership, strategy, governance, delivery, and navigating complexity. But entrepreneurship has taught me something different about execution. When you own the business, strategy and execution stop being separate conversations. There isn’t a strategic plan happening somewhere o

One of the easiest mistakes in delivery leadership is walking into an organization, seeing an inefficient process, and immediately deciding how to fix it. Add a framework. Change the meetings. Restructure the backlog. Introduce new governance. Implement another tool. Sometimes those things are necessary. But one of the most important lessons I learned during my time at Boston Mutual Life Insurance Company was this: You have to understand the business before you can effective

It could be a multimillion-dollar technology initiative for the State of Nebraska. Or it could be opening a BODYBAR Pilates studio in our community. On paper, those two things couldn't look much more different. One involves large technology teams, complex systems, government requirements, multiple stakeholders, vendors, and initiatives that can span months or years. The other involves construction timelines, hiring, instructor training, technology, marketing, vendors, presale

Over the course of my career, I’ve worked in environments that, on the surface, don’t have much in common. Insurance. Consulting. State government IT. And now, boutique fitness as a BODYBAR franchisee. The products are different. The customers are different. The terminology is definitely different. But the more environments I work in, the more convinced I become of something: Strategic delivery leadership isn’t really industry-specific. It’s outcome-specific. The fundamentals

When organizations talk about improving delivery, the conversation usually turns to process. We need better planning. Clearer requirements. Stronger governance. More accountability. Better tools. More frequent status updates. All of those things can help. But one of the biggest accelerators of delivery rarely appears on a project plan: Trust. Trust may sound like a leadership or culture topic rather than a delivery strategy. In reality, trust has a very practical impact on

One of the most valuable lessons I learned while leading enterprise portfolio management wasn't about project delivery. It was about perspective. Every business leader I worked with knew exactly what their top priorities were. Ask the head of Operations, Technology, Customer Experience, or Finance for their top three initiatives, and you'd get a confident answer every time. The problem wasn't that priorities were unclear. The problem was that no one could see how they all fi

I think we've all been part of a project where everyone was incredibly busy. Calendars were packed. Meetings were happening all day. Status reports were green. Everyone seemed to be working hard. But if someone had asked, "What actually moved forward this week?" the room probably would have gotten pretty quiet. I've learned over the years that activity and progress are not the same thing. And as leaders, it's easy to mistake one for the other. Busy Doesn't Always Mean Bett

Early in one of my engagements, I sat through what looked like a productive status meeting. Every project manager gave an update. Milestones were being met. Risks were documented. The dashboard was mostly green. If you only looked at the report, you'd think everything was on track. But something felt off. As people spoke, I noticed little pauses. Certain leaders became noticeably quieter when one particular initiative was discussed. A few comments hinted at concerns, but

I've sat in meetings where every leader around the table agreed. "We should absolutely do that." "That makes perfect sense." "I support it." Then everyone left. Three weeks later... nothing had changed. No decisions had been documented. No owners had been assigned. No priorities had shifted. No work had started. On paper, there was alignment. In reality, there was only agreement. Those aren't the same thing. One Project Changed How I Think About Leadership Several years ag

In complex organizations, leaders are often expected to have answers. They are expected to set direction, make decisions, solve problems, and keep important work moving. And there are certainly moments when clear answers are exactly what a team needs. But some of the most effective leaders I have worked with are not defined by how quickly they provide answers. They are defined by the quality of the questions they ask. The right question can uncover a risk that has not yet ma

Governance has a branding problem. In many organizations, the word immediately brings to mind approval gates, extra meetings, lengthy status reports, and leaders asking teams to explain why something is late. It can feel like a layer of control added after the work has already started. And when governance is designed that way, it often creates exactly what people fear: slower decisions, frustrated teams, and more effort spent managing the process than moving the work forward.

A green status can be reassuring. It tells leaders that work is moving, milestones are being met, and there are no major concerns requiring immediate attention. In a busy organization managing dozens of initiatives, green is often exactly what everyone wants to see. But in strategic delivery, green can also be the most dangerous status on the page. Not because teams are intentionally hiding information. Most project teams are working hard, trying to solve problems, and report

I have a confession: I'm relatively new to volleyball. I didn't grow up playing the sport. I don't coach. I'm not the one drawing up lineups, teaching techniques, or running practices. My husband handles that side of things. As we've worked together to build Nebraska Power Volleyball Club, I've spent hours in gyms, practices, clinics, and tournaments. While I'm not coaching athletes, I've had a front-row seat to watch coaches build teams. And what I've discovered is that man

Organizations often ask what separates high-performing teams from everyone else. The answer is rarely a new methodology, tool, or framework. After working with organizations ranging from state government agencies to insurance companies and technology teams, I've found that the highest-performing organizations consistently do three things differently. And none of them have anything to do with whether they're Agile, Waterfall, or Hybrid. 1. They Prioritize Ruthlessly Most organ

One of the most common governance mistakes I see is expecting steering committees to operate at the same level of detail as the project team. They shouldn't. In fact, if a steering committee is spending its time discussing individual requirements, task assignments, defect counts, or detailed project activities, something has already gone wrong. Steering committees exist because leaders have responsibilities that are different from those of the delivery team. The project team

Listening is a leadership skill. Not because it makes people feel heard. Because it helps leaders understand what's actually happening. Over the years, I've been brought into organizations to help address missed commitments, delivery challenges, competing priorities, and frustrated stakeholders. On the surface, the problem often looks obvious. The project is behind. The backlog is growing. The governance process isn't working. But I've learned that the first problem presented

A few years ago, I was asked to help a team that was drowning in work. The symptoms were obvious. Too many requests. Too many competing priorities. A backlog that seemed to grow faster than the team could complete work. Everyone believed the problem was capacity and the wrong templates or processes. The conversation quickly turned to adding resources, increasing budgets, and finding ways to work faster. But before discussing solutions, we stepped back and started asking ques