Ask each person on your leadership team to write down the company's top three priorities for the next 90 days. Don't let them compare notes. Then put the lists side by side.
In most growing companies I work with, especially right after a funding round, the lists don't match. Nobody is wrong. Each leader is working hard on what makes sense from where they sit. But when sales, product and engineering each hold a different top three, the cost is hidden: slower decisions, duplicated work and a team pulling in three directions at once.
It's rarely a strategy problem. It's an alignment problem, and it's much cheaper to fix at 10 people than at 50.
How to run the test
It takes about 15 minutes, and you can do it this week.
- Ask separately. Email each member of your leadership team the same question: "What are the company's top three priorities for the next 90 days?" Ask for answers before the next leadership meeting, and ask them not to discuss it first.
- Write your own list first. Do this before you read theirs, so you don't adjust your answer.
- Put the lists in one document. Group similar items together, and keep each person's wording.
- Read it as a team. Do this in your next leadership meeting, and start with what matches, not what differs.
What the results tell you
You'll usually see one of three patterns.
The lists overlap, but the order differs. The team agrees on what matters but not on what comes first. This is the healthiest result, and the fix is usually one conversation about trade-offs. When two priorities compete for the same people or budget, which one wins?
The lists share one or two items and then diverge. This is the most common result. Everyone agrees on the headline goal, such as revenue or a product launch, then fills the remaining slots from their own function. The gaps are where work gets duplicated or dropped.
The lists barely overlap at all. This is the clearest sign that something upstream is missing. Often the plan was set once, by the founder or CEO, and never fully shared. It can also mean the plan changed and only some people heard.
Why this happens
Alignment drifts for ordinary reasons. A company raises money and the plan gets bigger. New leaders join with their own views. A founder who used to make every decision now relies on a team, but the team has never agreed on a plan together. Each person fills the gap with what they can see.
The result looks like a lack of effort or a communication problem. It's usually neither. People are working on what they believe matters.
Fixing it
The fix is simple, but not easy.
- Agree the plan in one room. The leadership team writes the top three priorities together, in one session, and each person can explain why. If someone can't defend an item, it isn't ready.
- Name one owner for each priority. Shared ownership means no ownership. If two leaders are involved, decide who is accountable.
- Say what you're not doing. A list of three only works if everyone also knows what has been set aside for now.
- Put it where people will see it. One page, reviewed at the start of each leadership meeting, is enough.
- Revisit it every quarter. The right answer changes as the company grows, and the test works as a regular check.
When it's harder than it looks
Sometimes the lists differ because of disagreement the team hasn't surfaced, such as a founder and a new executive with different views of where the company is going. In that case, a shared document won't be enough. A neutral person in the room, who can ask the awkward questions and keep the conversation on the decision, speeds things up.
I work with leadership teams to build that alignment and agree on the plan, then coach the leaders through making it stick.
If you ran the test today, would your lists match?