Proactive Planning Techniques

In many boardrooms, the agenda is expanding faster than the structure and resources can adapt. This week offered another reminder: U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent summoned major American bank CEOs to a meeting in Washington amid concerns over the cyber risks posed by Anthropic’s latest AI model: Claude Mythos! When risks escalate this quickly, Board overload accelerates and reduces focus on valuable growth topics. 𝗙𝗲𝘄 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗼𝗿𝗲:   • Independent director time commitment has risen from 250 to over 300 hours a year the last 5 years   • 49% of audit committees report concerns about oversight gaps in cybersecurity and AI   • 70% of directors say Board work now takes more time than before Boards do not solve overload by only working longer. They solve it by working smarter, delegating to specialized Committees and upskilling! Here are few suggestions: ✅ 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁   • Create dedicated committees with the right talent   • Move cyber, AI and digital out of crowded audit agendas   • Review committee charters annually and remove overlaps ✅ 𝗘𝗻𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻   • Shift time from backward reporting to forward-looking growth focus   • Use consent agendas for routine approvals   • Reserve time in every meeting for future risks and strategic shifts ✅ 𝗕𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗲   • Invite external experts twice a year on cybersecurity, AI and geopolitics   • Run one annual deep-dive workshop on disruption and fast-moving risks   • Use short expert briefings before major decisions (don’t assume Directors understand all Technical dimensions) ✅ 𝗨𝗽𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀   • Run a rigorous annual Board assessment   • Map Board skills against future needs and close the gaps   • Ensure Directors carry or develop the skills required for the company’s future agenda Strong Boards do not just absorb more pressure. They upskill and redesign how they work. 💡 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗶𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗹𝗼𝗮𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁? #BoardDirectors #CorporateGovernance #Leadership #Strategy #RiskManagement #AI #BoardEffectiveness

Strategic thinking isn't just for executives. (it's a skill you can learn today) Most managers wait for permission to think strategically. VPs don't. They start thinking like owners before anyone asks. 9 Strategic Thinking Frameworks: 1/ The 3-Horizon Portfolio Model → Core business: 70% of resources → Growth initiatives: 20% of resources → Future bets: 10% of resources 2/ The Second-Order Thinking Test → Ask "And then what happens?" → Map consequences 2-3 steps ahead → Consider competitor countermoves 3/ The Resource Allocation Filter → Does this move us toward our north star? → What's the opportunity cost? → Can we 10x this with same resources? 4/ The Stakeholder Influence Map → Who decides? Who influences the deciders? → What motivates each stakeholder? → Build coalition before you need it 5/ The Strategic Options Framework → Create multiple paths to same goal → Preserve optionality until data emerges → Kill weak options early, not late 6/ The Constraint-Based Planning → What's our biggest bottleneck? → What if we removed it completely? → Where will the next constraint appear? 7/ The Customer Jobs Framework → What job do customers hire us for? → Who else could do this job better? → How will this job evolve? 8/ The Risk Scenario Matrix → Best case: What could go perfectly? → Worst case: What would kill this? → Most likely: The 80% scenario 9/ The Weekly Strategic Review → What assumptions did we test? → What did we learn about customers? → How do we adjust next week? Strategic thinking isn't reserved for titles. It's reserved for people who practice it. Twice a week I send frameworks like this to 15,000+ operators in Tactical Memo. Join free: https://lnkd.in/eFNHsxmh

Some years ago, I had the privilege of coaching a senior executive at a global tech company. She was exceptional at thinking big. Not just in the abstract, but in how she shaped ambition. She drafted bold visions, reframed constraints as creative tension, and refused to let others define the limits of possibility. She didn’t just think outside the box. She questioned why the box existed in the first place. She challenged norms. She reimagined products and markets. She refused to be defined by what others thought was “realistic.” While others got lost in roadmaps, she redrew the map entirely. That ability didn’t just inspire her teams. It gave them permission to think bigger too. Too often, talented people trap themselves in the doable instead of the meaningful. But like she showed, thinking big shifts the altitude of everything: strategy, culture, even self-belief. So how do you learn to think that way? Here are five real-world strategies to stretch your mental field of vision: ➡️ Zoom out before zooming in Big thinking starts with expanding the frame before filling in the details. Run a “10x scenario” and ask: What would this look like if we had to multiply its impact tenfold? ➡️ Be slightly ahead of your time Visionaries act before the trend curve catches up. Hold regular “future signals” sessions to explore weak trends, early technologies, and ideas from the edge. ➡️ Rethink the assumptions, not just the plan Breakthroughs often come from questioning what others take for granted. Imagine your idea has failed completely, then list the reasons why. That is where hidden assumptions live. ➡️ Cross-pollinate with other fields New ideas often come from unfamiliar angles. Invite thinkers from other domains like science, design or the arts to expand your perspective. ➡️ Leave space for the unknown Big thinking needs room to breathe, explore and evolve. Keep ten percent of time or budget unallocated so you can adapt when something unexpected emerges. Now, let’s be honest: big thinking alone won’t get you there. Bold visions without operational muscle are like kites without wind. They float briefly, then fall. But that’s a story for next time… *********************** Hi, I'm Andreas. An executive coach, consultant, and sparring partner to leaders and entrepreneurs worldwide. Former senior leader at Amazon, L’Oréal, Chewy, and executive board member at Tchibo. #thinkbig #vision #inspiration #leader #leadership #avdh #strategy #ambition

The Audit Committee Meeting Myth Many CAEs organise their year around audit committee dates. It feels like that is where influence is exercised. The reality is that by the time the committee sits down, much of governance has already been shaped. Management has discussed the issue internally. Draft papers may have been shared with the CEO or other senior management. Risk appetite thresholds may already have filtered what qualifies as material. The company secretary has structured the agenda and influenced information flow. In some organisations, the committee chair has spoken with management or the external auditor before the formal session, shaping expectations and emphasis before the meeting begins. What reaches the audit committee is rarely raw. It is the output of a system. Add to this the reality that the same directors may sit on the risk committee, the strategy committee or other sector-specific forums. Conversations and assumptions travel across committees, reinforcing or diluting your messages before you present your report. Audit committees do not struggle because members lack intelligence or commitment. They struggle when visibility is incomplete. I have seen committees ask sharp questions and still remain blind between meetings because the ecosystem feeding them was episodic rather than continuous. This matters for CAEs. Across many jurisdictions, expectations of internal audit are evolving. Boards are looking beyond control confirmation toward forward-looking insight and organisational resilience. Where that shift is occurring, two conditions determine whether internal audit impact is real. The first is the CAE’s own ability and inclination to think beyond compliance. The second is audit committee receptivity. Even the most capable CAE cannot flourish if the committee is structurally unprepared to receive deeper insight. Where receptivity is limited, impact is limited. I am increasingly seeing CAEs invest time not only in preparing their reports, but in strengthening how their audit committees operate. Not as an expansion of remit, but as a recognition that impact depends on receptivity. Strengthening the audit committee is therefore not an added responsibility. It is a precondition for influence in an environment where expectations are rising. If internal audit confines itself to preparing for the meeting, it operates within the event. If it examines how issues are surfaced, filtered and escalated before the meeting, it begins to strengthen governance architecture itself — and with it, the committee’s capacity to engage at the right level. That is the difference between servicing the audit committee and strengthening it. The audit committee reflects the system behind it. The CAE who understands that system operates at a different level of influence.

“Know the game. Don’t become the game.” Hypo: Opposing counsel sends hundreds of pages of their expert’s file around 10 p.m. It is the night before a 9 a.m. deposition. Clearly, they are hoping I would be unprepared. But, they did exactly what I expected. Know the game. ✅ Paper your requests for the expert’s file. ✅ Reserve the right to start late or reconvene if needed. ✅ Don’t let anyone rush you. It’s your deposition. ✅Get it on the record. Note when you received the materials, and have the expert confirm when the documents became available. ✅ Research opposing counsel. Some attorneys do this every time. ✅ Use a firm-approved secure AI to help you identify the new content and then verify with your own independent review. Don’t become the game. Play it straight. Send your expert file on time. Last-minute “gotcha” moves rarely gain anything meaningful. You’re just wasting time and money, especially if your expert is charging by the hour. And, if it’s egregious enough, you’re giving me good content for a hearing and the judge won’t be amused. How do you handle these types of games? #Litigation #ExpertDepos #Civility #NotAnAdForDietCoke #NightOwl

S𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗶𝗻 𝗔𝗴𝗶𝗹𝗲? 𝗧𝗿𝘆 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 7 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀! In Agile, everything feels important, but not everything should be prioritized equally. Without a structured approach, teams can get stuck in endless debates or focus on the wrong tasks. Here are 7 proven Agile prioritization techniques to help you decide what truly matters: 1️⃣ 𝗠𝗼𝗦𝗖𝗼𝗪 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱 A simple way to categorize tasks based on necessity: ✅ Must-Have – Critical for project success. No compromise. 🔹 Should-Have – Important but not mandatory. Can wait if needed. 🔹 Could-Have – Nice to have, but won’t impact the project much. ❌ Won’t-Have – Out of scope for now. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Quick and easy prioritization of backlog items. 2️⃣ 𝗞𝗮𝗻𝗼 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹 Classifies features based on how users perceive value: 🌟 Delighters – Unexpected features that wow users. ✅ Performance Needs – The better they are, the happier users are. 🔹 Basic Needs – Expected and essential. Missing them = unhappy users. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Understanding customer satisfaction drivers. 3️⃣ 𝗥𝗜𝗖𝗘 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 A data-driven framework that scores tasks based on four factors: 📈 Reach – How many users will this impact? 🎯 Impact – How much will it benefit them? ⚡ Confidence – How sure are we about the impact? ⏳ Effort – How much time/resources are needed? 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘂𝗹𝗮: (𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 × 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 × 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲) / 𝗘𝗳𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘁 ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Prioritizing features based on measurable impact. 4️⃣ 𝗘𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅 A productivity framework that separates tasks by urgency and importance: ✅ Urgent & Important – Do it now. 🔹 Important but Not Urgent – Plan for it. 🔥 Urgent but Not Important – Delegate it. ❌ Neither Urgent nor Important – Drop it. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Managing daily work and preventing burnout. 5️⃣ 𝗪𝗦𝗝𝗙 (𝗪𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗝𝗼𝗯 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁) A formula-based method used in SAFe Agile: (Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction) / Job Duration ⏩ A high WSJF score means the work should be done sooner rather than later. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Maximizing economic impact in scaled Agile frameworks. 6️⃣ 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘆 (𝗖𝗼𝗗) ⏳ Prioritize based on the financial impact of delaying a feature. 💸 Helps answer: “How much money are we losing every day we don’t release this?” 🔥 Particularly useful for revenue-generating or compliance-driven features. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Ensuring the highest ROI on time-sensitive projects. 💡 Which of these techniques do you use the most? Drop a comment below!

10 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗙𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 Navigating uncertainty isn’t just a challenge—it’s an opportunity for visionary leaders. By leveraging foresight-driven sensemaking, you can anticipate change more effectively, develop highly adaptive and antifragile strategies, and unlock transformative innovations in an early stage. Here are 10 essential, field-proven instruments to enhance your foresight and ability to shape a thriving future for you and your organization: 1️⃣ 𝗛𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘇𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝗰𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 – Detect early signals of emerging trends, risks, and opportunities to stay ahead of the curve. 2️⃣ 𝗧𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 – Identify ongoing trends, their drivers, and potential impacts on industries and societies. 3️⃣ 𝗖𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀-𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 – Evaluate how different trends, events, or factors influence each other over time. 4️⃣ 𝗪𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗦𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘀 & 𝗪𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 – Recognize early indicators of change (weak signals) and prepare for high-impact, unexpected events (wild cards). 5️⃣ 𝗙𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗲𝗹 – A visual brainstorming tool to map out direct and indirect consequences of a change or event. 6️⃣ 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗽𝗵𝗶 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱 – A structured forecasting technique that gathers expert consensus to enhance decision-making. 7️⃣ 𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 – Develop multiple plausible future scenarios to prepare for uncertainty and explore strategic options. 8️⃣ 𝗖𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗮𝘆𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 (𝗖𝗟𝗔) – A deep analysis framework that uncovers different layers of meaning, systemic causes, and underlying worldviews. 9️⃣ 𝗧𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗛𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘇𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗙𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 – Helps decision-makers think about present and future simultaneously by categorizing innovation and change into three time-based horizons. 🔟 𝗕𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗰𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 – Starts with a desirable future vision and works backward to identify necessary steps to achieve it. In an era of constant change and opportunity, these tools help you and your organization move beyond short-term thinking and develop long-term strategic foresight to drive imagination, innovation, and antifragility. 👉 Follow Ewa Lombard, PhD, and Sebastian Baumann for more insights on foresight, visionary leadership, and future-fit decision-making. Press 🔔 to stay updated on upcoming posts, articles, and our peer-reviewed papers on these topics. 👉 Find more info on our 2025 special 𝗙𝗨𝗧𝗨𝗥𝗘 𝗨𝗡𝗙𝗢𝗟𝗗𝗜𝗡𝗚 - exclusive visionary leadership retreats and trainings - at Gravity & Grandeur

10 questions Audit Committee must ask the Chief Internal Auditor (CIA) Effective oversight starts with asking the right questions. Here are 10 questions that separate a passive committee from a high-impact one: 1️⃣ Is our audit plan truly risk-based or just acitivity & calendar-based? What emerging, strategic, and non-financial risks are we missing? 2️⃣ Which critical risks keep you awake at nightand why? What concerns are not yet visible in dashboards? 3️⃣ Where are the weakest management controls despite “green” ratings? What looks compliant but feels fragile? 4️⃣ Are we auditing culture, conduct, and ethics or just processes? How are soft controls being tested? 5️⃣ Which audit findings repeat year after year? What does that say about accountability and tone at the top? 6️⃣ How independent is Internal Audit in practice not just on paper? Any pressure, scope limitations, or access issues? 7️⃣ Are high-risk issues closed or merely reworded and deferred? What is the real quality of remediation? 8️⃣ How effective is Internal Audit’s coordination with Risk, Compliance & External Audit? Where are overlaps, blind spots, or gaps? 9️⃣ What capabilities does Internal Audit lack today to remain future-ready? Data analytics? Cyber risk? AI? ESG? Third-party risk? 🔟 If you were on this Audit Committee, what would you challenge first? Where should the board intervene now before regulators do? Strong Audit Committees don't just review reports, they challenge assumptions, test judgement and protect organizational integrity. Which of these questions does your Audit Committee ask regularly? Repost to your network if you find value!!

In the lively debate of "Which agile method reigns supreme?" the truth is that no one is right. But clients often come to us inquiring, "What's the optimal approach for my business?" Drawing from my extensive background spanning over two decades in agile methodologies and project management, I've embarked on a journey to demystify the myriad of agile practices through a unique, albeit imperfect, classification scheme. Envisioning agile methodologies in a 2.5-dimensional framework, I've mapped them against two principal axes. The vertical (y-axis) represents the complexity of the system at hand, viewing it through the lens of subsystem interactions. Complexity scales from single teams or processes, which are relatively straightforward, to intricate networks involving multiple stakeholders and initiatives, each layer adding a degree of sophistication. On the horizontal (x-axis), we measure efficiency, defined here in the classical sense of outcome over effort. This dimension introduces us to various management strategies, from the basic cadence-bound methods, which, despite their simplicity, often result in significant downtime and necessitate frequent coordination, to the more advanced constraint-based approaches. These aim to optimize the key bottlenecks within a system, minimizing work-in-progress and lead times while maximizing output. Between these extremes lie replenishment-based methods, which improve upon cadence-bound strategies by eliminating unnecessary idle time and allowing for more flexible work allocation. Yet, there's a third aspect to consider, not fully dimensional but crucial — the nature of the work being executed. This divides into two categories: production-oriented tasks, characterized by a low touch-time to lead-time ratio, and project-oriented tasks, which have a higher ratio and numerous dependencies. This distinction is vital, especially in environments where innovation and time sensitivity are paramount. By pondering three critical questions regarding your system's complexity, your management simplicity tolerance, and the character of your work, you can navigate this framework to identify or tailor an agile methodology that aligns with your unique needs. In essence, this exploration doesn't champion one agile method over another; instead, it offers a lens through which to evaluate and select the most fitting approach for your specific circumstances. Through this matrix, the path to optimizing your project management strategy becomes clearer, encouraging a more informed and nuanced discussion on agile methodologies. What do you think - does this make sense? Wolfram

Most sprint planning meetings fail for one reason: They focus on tasks… not clarity. Here’s how high-performing Agile teams actually run Sprint Planning 👇 Agile Sprint Planning (Step-by-Step) 1. Define Sprint Goal • Product Owner explains business goal • Align on why this sprint matters 👉 Without a clear goal, sprint becomes a task list 2. Review Product Backlog • Focus on top priority items • Clarify requirements 👉 If stories are unclear, stop here and fix them 3. Capacity Planning • Check team availability • Understand realistic workload 👉 Overcommitment kills sprint success 4. Select User Stories • Pick stories based on priority + capacity 👉 Not everything important fits in one sprint 5. Break into Tasks • Divide stories into small actionable tasks 👉 Smaller tasks = better tracking + fewer surprises 6. Estimate Effort • Use story points • Align as a team 👉 Estimation is about shared understanding, not accuracy 7. Discuss Dependencies & Risks • Identify blockers early • Align on external dependencies 👉 Risks ignored in planning become issues in execution 8. Sprint Commitment • Team commits to delivery 👉 Commitment should be realistic, not optimistic 9. Sprint Starts • Development begins • Daily standups drive progress Business Analyst Role (Critical but underrated) • Clarify requirements • Bridge business and tech • Answer real-time questions • Ensure everyone has the same understanding 👉 Clarity in planning = speed in execution Golden Insight Sprint Planning is not about filling capacity. It’s about creating confidence in delivery. Business Analyst Perspective If your sprint keeps slipping… Don’t blame execution. Fix your planning. What’s the biggest challenge you face during sprint planning?