01 / Executive alignment investigation
Fix the system. Not the pilot.
FranklySpeaking investigates why capable leadership teams produce outcomes they did not intend. It ends with a finding, not a framework.
02 / The condition
Three signs the cause is structural.
Repetition
The same structural decision, taken more than twice. Reorganisations that do not hold. Where structure has been the remedy repeatedly, structure is unlikely to be the cause.
Divergence
Agreement in the room, and something else outside it. The decision is minuted as unanimous. The resourcing that follows says otherwise.
Inertia
Reports that changed little. A remedy specified before the diagnosis was finished. The organisation now holds frameworks it agrees with, and a condition it has not resolved.
An accident does not begin when something goes wrong. It begins when the system loses the ability to see itself.
Applied from ICAO Annex 13 investigation principle.
03 / The investigation
Four phases. The same four, every time.
Scene preservation
Enter without announcing what is being looked for. Board packs, exit interviews, minutes, the formal chart and the working chart. Restructuring is suspended: it alters the record.
Black box listening
Non-attribution sessions, verbatim record. Where “we decided” becomes “it was decided”, ownership has left the room and the transcript marks when.
Causal chain
A dated timeline traced four levels past the visible symptom. Active failures separated from latent conditions. A failure of this kind rests on seven to 12 factors, not one.
Defence layers
Strategy, communication, trust, accountability and escalation each scored. A single gap is survivable. The finding is the point at which they line up.
04 / The intervention
The FRANK Method®
Five stages, run with the finding already established. An investigation without an intervention is an expensive document. An intervention without an investigation is a guess.
Frame the reality
The causal chain, the layer scoring and the verbatim record presented as one shared map of fact, so the discussion afterwards has somewhere to stand.
Reflect on alignment
Stated intent set against recorded behaviour, under restorative just culture terms. The question is what the system lacked, not who is answerable.
Articulate the impact
Delay cost, rework, replacement, decision latency, penalty exposure. A finding a board can act on is a finding a board can price.
Name the adjustments
Each carries a named owner and a completion indicator a third party could verify.
Kickstart realignment
A 12-week embedding period monitored against the register. Support is withdrawn on a declared schedule.
05 / Source science
Six disciplines. None of them from management consulting.
| Discipline | Field | Contribution |
|---|---|---|
| ICAO Annex 13 | Civil aviation | Causal chain reconstruction, with blame formally excluded from the terms of reference |
| Swiss cheese model | Human factors | Mapping latent conditions across protective layers, and locating where gaps align |
| Situational awareness | Cognitive engineering | Separating what a team perceived, understood and projected |
| Restorative just culture | Safety science | Keeping information flowing once findings are on the table |
| Crew resource management | Flight deck training | Measuring authority gradient and challenge behaviour |
| FMEA | Reliability engineering | Scoring residual risk by severity, likelihood and detectability |
06 / What you receive
Four documents, and one that outlives the engagement.
Preliminary report
States whether the conditions indicate an alignment failure, what an investigation would examine and what it would cost. Where the conditions are absent, it says so.
Findings report
Numbered findings, each opening a fresh page, carrying pattern, evidence and consequence together. Sample size is carried in the sentence.
Alignment register
Every adjustment scored, owned and given a verifiable completion indicator. The instrument the board keeps.
Embedding protocol
A declared schedule for withdrawing support, with the register re-scored at each step.
Specimen · alignment register
| Ref | Adjustment | Owner | Sev | Det | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-01 | Decision rights restated for capital release above threshold | Chief financial officer | 8 | 7 | OpenMonitoring |
| A-02 | Escalation route published, with a stated time to acknowledge | Chief operating officer | 7 | 9 | Open |
| A-03 | Minute records dissent by name of function, not of person | Company secretary | 5 | 4 | Monitoring |
| A-04 | Post-incident review separated from performance review | Chief people officer | 6 | 8 | Closed |
07 / Engagements
Priced against the appointment you would otherwise make.
FranklySpeaking does not quote a day rate. A day is not the thing being bought.
Preliminary report
Ninety minutes with the executive who would sponsor the work.
Black box review
The full investigation and the intervention that closes it.
Realignment
The intervention alone, where a sound investigation exists.
Register oversight
Quarterly re-scoring reported to the board, independent of the executive it measures.
| The appointment | Annual cost | Why it cannot produce the finding |
|---|---|---|
| Chief risk officer | US$150,000–300,000 | Measures compliance against policy, rather than the distance between what leadership believes and what is operationally true |
| Transformation director | US$120,000–220,000 | Owns delivery of the strategy under examination, and reports on milestones rather than on premises |
| Head of organisational development | US$130,000–250,000 | Holds the interpersonal skill without an investigative mandate or board-grade financial framing |
| Strategy consultancy | US$300,000 upward | Examines the document and the operating model, rather than what the team believed at the moment it acted |
08 / The decision
Two outcomes are available. One of them is already running.
The condition continues
- The structural remedy is applied a third time
- Decisions are taken on an account that was edited on the way up
- Departures are read as individual, and replacements meet the same conditions
- Automation is built on the record as it stands
The condition is documented
- A dated causal chain the executive team can examine together
- Five protective layers scored, and the point where the gaps line up
- Adjustments with named owners and verifiable completion indicators
- A register the board can re-score without the investigator present
09 / The preliminary report
The preliminary report.
Ninety minutes. Structured questions rather than a presentation. It concludes with a written position on whether an investigation is warranted. Where it is not, that is what the report says.
Engagements accepted by direct approach and by referral. The work requires a sponsor with the authority to act on what the investigation finds.