the-exec-memo

I know your business better than you do.

Thu, 09 Apr 2026 18:15:44 GMT

I know your business better than you.

No, I don’t. But I do see things you probably can’t.

You already know your business

You’ve built it over years. You know what works, what’s been tried, and what isn’t worth revisiting.

That’s exactly why bringing someone in from the outside can feel unnecessary. Or worse, disruptive for the sake of it.

Because too often, that person arrives with a point to prove rather than a problem to understand.

That’s not useful.

The bit that’s harder to see

There’s something that’s difficult to get from inside your own business, no matter how experienced you are - perspective.

When you’re close to something for a long time, everything starts to make sense in its current form. Decisions build on decisions. Processes grow around people. Workarounds become part of how things are done.

None of it is wrong. But over time, it becomes harder to step back and ask if it still makes sense as a whole.

That’s usually where things begin to feel slower than they should. Not broken, just harder than they need to be.

What an outsider actually brings

From the outside, those patterns are easier to spot.

Not because the outsider is smarter, but because they’re not carrying the same history. They see the business as it is today - the way a customer might experience it, or the way it compares to others facing similar challenges.

And they can ask questions that don’t always get asked internally.

Not confrontational. Just honest.

No politics, no agenda

One of the biggest differences is this:

I’m not sitting in your organisation wondering how my opinion will land.

I’m not weighing up whether saying something will cost me a promotion, or create friction with someone I need to work with tomorrow.

I don’t carry that risk.

So I can challenge things more directly. Not to disrupt for the sake of it, but to get to the point faster.

Every business has areas that don’t get properly questioned. Not because people are avoiding them, but because over time, certain lines just don’t get crossed.

That’s normal.

But it’s also where progress can stall.

Better conversations, not bigger ideas

Most businesses don’t lack ideas.

What they often lack is the space to step back and have a proper conversation about what’s really going on.

Not another meeting that circles the same points. Not another update.

A conversation that actually gets underneath the surface, where the real reasons behind decisions - and indecision - sit.

That’s where things start to move.

So no, I don’t know your business better than you

But I can help you see it in a way that’s difficult to do from the inside.

And sometimes, that’s all that’s needed to move things forward.

Need help with a decision? Get in touch now.

Why some decisions never quite land - even in good teams

Thu, 26 Mar 2026 20:59:18 GMT

Why some decisions never quite land (even in good teams)

When everything looks right… but still doesn’t move

There’s a particular kind of frustration that builds in good teams when a decision doesn’t land properly. Not because people aren’t trying, and not because the room lacks experience. In fact, it’s usually the opposite. You’ve got capable people, different perspectives, and a genuine effort to get to the right answer.

On paper, it looks exactly like how a leadership team should operate.

And yet, the decision drifts.

It’s not rejected. It’s not obviously wrong. It just never quite becomes something the team can move forward on with confidence. You leave the meeting thinking progress has been made, but when you try to summarise what was actually decided, it’s harder than it should be. Then the same topic comes back a few days or a week later, slightly reframed, with a few new angles added, and the process starts again.

No one is being difficult. No one is blocking. But something isn’t lining up.

The slow build of frustration

Over time, that starts to wear. You begin to recognise the pattern. The sense that this might be another one that circles. It’s not always spoken out loud, but it’s there in the room. A slight hesitation. A feeling that you’ve been here before and it didn’t quite land then either.

What’s interesting is that this rarely comes down to a lack of effort or intelligence. Most of the teams I see in this position are more than capable of making the decision. The issue is quieter than that, and more structural. People are working from slightly different versions of what’s being decided.

One person is thinking about short-term delivery risk, another is focused on long-term capability. Someone else is weighing cost, or customer impact, or operational complexity. All of those perspectives are valid, and in isolation they improve the conversation. But without a shared understanding of the decision itself, they don’t quite connect.

When alignment isn’t quite alignment

So the discussion expands instead of narrowing. Each contribution adds something useful, but also pulls the centre slightly out of focus. And without anyone intending it, the team shifts from solving a decision to circling it.

If that happens once, it’s manageable. If it happens repeatedly, it starts to shape how people show up. Past decisions that never quite landed begin to accumulate. Projects that didn’t fully deliver. Calls that felt half-made.

That history doesn’t stay neatly in the past; it shows up in the room. People become a little more cautious, a little less certain that this time will be different. You start to sense a quiet “let’s see how this goes” rather than a shared confidence in the outcome.

That’s the point where friction moves beyond the decision itself and into the team.

What actually changes things

What I’ve found is that the shift doesn’t come from more discussion. It comes from clarity, but not the kind that sits nicely in a slide deck. The kind that forces everyone onto the same page.

A decision that can be stated cleanly, in a way that everyone recognises. A trade-off that’s named directly, even if it’s uncomfortable. A shared understanding of what matters most in this moment, not in general.

When that’s in place, something changes quite quickly. The same people, with the same perspectives, start pulling in the same direction. The conversation tightens. The decision becomes something you can actually hold and work from, rather than something that keeps shifting shape.

Why this matters beyond the decision

And that has an effect beyond the decision itself. When a team sees a complex situation turned into a clear path forward, it rebuilds confidence. Momentum returns. The next decision feels more straightforward, not more difficult. You’re no longer carrying the weight of the last one that didn’t quite land.

Most teams don’t need more thinking or more discussion to get there. They need a clearer shape around the decision, early enough that everyone can move together.

A simple place to start

If you’re in the middle of something like this now, it’s usually worth stepping back and asking a simple question: are we actually solving the same decision? If the answer is even slightly unclear, that’s often where the friction is coming from.

And if it still feels harder to land than it should, sometimes it helps to have someone outside the situation look at it with fresh eyes. Not to add more noise, but to help bring the shape of the decision back into focus.

If this resonates

If you have a decision that feels stuck, send me a message with:

What the decision is
Who is involved
What happens if it slips another month

I will reply within 48 hours with a quick diagnosis and whether a Sprint would help. No long proposal. Just honest input.

Justin

Founder, The Exec Memo

What a decision-ready brief actually looks like (and why it makes decisions stick)

Wed, 04 Mar 2026 20:47:41 GMT

What a decision-ready brief actually looks like

(and why it makes decisions stick)

Most leadership teams do not struggle to talk about decisions.

They struggle to land them.

A decision loops when the decision is not clean, the trade-offs are not explicit, and ownership is not clear. So the team keeps “aligning” and the decision keeps slipping.

A decision-ready brief fixes that. It is not a report. It is not a deck. It is a short memo designed to make the decision easy to land and hard to unpick.

Why most decision docs fail

Most decision docs fall into one of two traps:

1. Slide spaghetti: Too many slides, too many ang les, too much “context” , and the decision disappears.

2. A manifesto: A long narrative that tries to convince everyone, but never clearly states what must be decided and by when.

A decision-ready brief does the opposite. It removes noise and forces the trade-offs into daylight.

The decision-ready brief

Here is the structure I use. It is deliberately simple.

1) The decision statement (one sentence)

Make it binary or a clear A vs B.

Example: “Do we consolidate endpoint security onto one platform by the end of Q2, or keep the current best-of-breed stack for another 12 months?”

2) The context (what is true, what changed)

Only the facts that matter. No history lesson.

What is happening now
What has changed
Why the decision exists now (the trigger)

3) The constraints (non-negotiables)

These prevent fantasy options.

Budget ceiling
Regulatory requirements
Delivery deadlines
Internal resourcing limits
Customer commitments

4) The options (real options, not strawmen)

Usually 2 to 3 options is enough.

For each option: what it is, what it requires, and what it gives you.

5) The trade-offs (this is the decision)

This is the part most teams avoid, then wonder why they cannot decide.

Spell it out clearly.

Faster risk reduction vs more platform lock-in
Maximum capability vs operational simplicity
Central control vs team autonomy
Short-term cost vs long-term flexibility

6) The risks (and who owns them)

Not vague “risks exist” language.

Risk
Likelihood (low, medium, high)
Impact (low, medium, high)
Mitigation
Owner

7) The recommendation (and why)

The recommendation is not “the best option” .

It is “the best option given the trade-offs we are choosing”.

8) The decision owners and decision date

One name. One date.

Also define who is accountable, consulted, and informed.

9) The first two weeks of execution

This is what makes the decision stick.

First actions
Who does what
What gets communicated
What gets measured

A quick example of how this unlocks speed

A security leadership team I worked with had a decision stuck for weeks: consolidate tools, or keep best-of-breed.The debate was not actually about tools.

It was about this trade-off: “Are we optimising for consistent coverage and simpler operations, or maximum capability even if it increases complexity?”

Once that trade-off was written down in the brief, two things happened fast:

1. The arguments stopped repeating.

2. The decision owner could finally make the call with confidence.

That is what a good brief does. It turns noise into a clear choice.

How this fits The Exec Memo

This is the core deliverable behind both offers:

Decision Sprint

For decisions that are stuck but solvable quickly.

Short working session
Decision-ready brief produced within 48 hours
Follow-up call to land the decision and actions

Alignment Sprint

For decisions that need buy-in.

Stakeholder input gathered
Friction and incentives made explicit
Facilitated decision meeting
Commitments captured in the brief

Either way, the aim is the same: clarity, trade-offs, ownership, and a decision that sticks.

If you want the template

If you have a decision that is looping, send me :

The decision in one sentence
Who is involved
What happens if it slips another month

I will reply within 48 hours with:

The missing trade-off I suspect is driving the loop
Whether a Sprint would help
And a simple template you can use internally

Justin

Founder, The Exec Memo

The 7 signs your decision is stuck (and what to do instead)

Wed, 04 Mar 2026 20:14:29 GMT

The 7 signs your decision is stuck ( and what to do instead )

If the same decision keeps coming back to the leadership team, it is rarely a 'better meetings' problem.

It is usually decision friction. The decision is not clean enough to land, so it loops.

The good news: you can spot it early, and you can fix it without adding more meetings.

The 7 signs your decision is stuck

1) You cannot say the decision in one sentence

If the 'decision' is actually a topic, a project, or a vague outcome, it is hard to land.

Test : Can one person write the decision statement without qualifiers?

Example : 'Do we consolidate endpoint protection onto one platform by June, yes or no?'

2) The inputs are messy, contradictory, or incomplete

Teams often argue because they are using different facts, different time horizons, or different definitions.

Watch for duelling spreadsheets, unclear baselines, and debates that start with 'It depends...'

3) People are debating solutions, but avoiding the trade-off

Most stuck decisions are not stuck on options. They are stuck on an unspoken trade-off.

Common trade-offs in B2B SaaS and cybersecurity include:

speed to reduce risk vs operational simplicity
best-of-breed capability vs standardised coverage
short-term cost vs long-term control
central governance vs team autonomy

4) The stakeholder set keeps changing

If the room is different each week, the decision will keep resetting.

Signal: 'We need to bring in... ' becomes the default move.

5) Ownership is fuzzy

If nobody is clearly accountable for landing the decision, everyone participates but nobody drives.

Signal: lots of 'we should' and 'someone needs to', with no named owner and date.

6) Incentives are pulling in different directions

Security wants risk reduction. Engineering wants delivery velocity. Finance wants predictability. Sales wants flexibility.

All valid. But if nobody names the tension, it leaks out as delay.

7) Delay is being used as risk management

Sometimes 'we need more data' is code for 'I do not want to own the call' . Delay feels safer than being wrong.

Signal: the cost of waiting is never written down, so nobody feels it.

What most teams do that makes it worse

When a decision starts looping, the default reaction is to add another meeting, add more pre-reads, widen the stakeholder group, or ask for more analysis.

This increases activity, but it does not reduce friction. More discussion rarely creates clarity. It usually creates more angles to disagree.

A simple reset you can run in 30 minutes

If a decision is looping, try this before you schedule anything else:

1. Step 1: Write the decision statement

One sentence. Yes/no or option A vs option B.

2. Step 2: Name the trade-off

Finish this sentence together: 'We are choosing to optimise for xxx over xxx' .

If you cannot complete that line, you are not ready to decide yet. That is fine. It just means the work is clarifying, not debating.

3. Step 3: Lock the stakeholder set

Who needs to be in the decision, and who simply needs to be informed? Write it down.

4. Step 4: Assign an owner and a decision date

Not 'next week' - a date. Put a name next to it.

5. Step 5: Write the cost of delay

One line: 'If we do not decide by X, the cost is Y. '

Y can be delivery slip, customer risk, security exposure, morale, or revenue. It just needs to be explicit.

A quick example

A security leadership team I worked with spent six weeks circling a 200k GBP decision around endpoint security and incident response coverage.

The debate kept looping on: 'Do we consolidate onto one platform, or keep best-of-breed tools?'

When we sat down properly, it took about twenty minutes to realise the real question had not been asked.The real question was: 'What matters more right now, consistent coverage and simpler operations, or maximum capability even if it adds complexity?'

Once that trade-off was on the table, the decision landed within 24 hours.

They were not stuck on the tools. They were stuck on the trade-off they had not named.

If this resonates

If you have a decision that keeps looping, send me :

what the decision is (one sentence)
who is involved
what happens if it slips another month

I will reply within 48 hours with a quick diagnosis and whether a Decision Sprint or Alignment Sprint would help.

Justin

Founder, The Exec Memo

How my career led me to The Exec Memo

Tue, 03 Mar 2026 19:47:50 GMT

An introduction:

How my career led me to The Exec Memo

I did not set out to start a consultancy. I set out to solve a problem I kept bumping into, everywhere I worked.

It would show up like this: a decision would come up in a leadership meeting, get parked, return the next week, and get debated again with slightly different people and slightly different inputs. Nobody was being difficult. Nobody was incompetent. But the decision still would not move.

And every loop had a cost.

Leadership time burned. Delivery slowed. Teams lost momentum. Revenue risk built quietly.

Customers could feel the hesitation, even if nobody said it out loud.

Over time, I realised something important:

This was not a better meetings problem. It was decision friction.

What I noticed, again and again

I started paying closer attention. Across different businesses, different teams, different situations, the stuck decisions looked different on the surface. But underneath, they shared the same mechanics:

Nobody had clearly named what actually needed deciding
The inputs were messy, contradictory, or incomplete
Stakeholders were working from different assumptions
Incentives quietly pulled people in opposite directions
Ownership was fuzzy and everyone thought someone else was driving
Risk was managed through delay, because indecision felt safer than a wrong call

A quick example

A security leadership team I worked with spent six weeks circling a £200k decision on how to handle endpoint protection and incident response. Six weeks.

The conversation kept looping on:

“Do we standardise on one platform or bolt together best-of-breed tools?”

When we finally sat down properly, it took about twenty minutes to realise the real question had not been asked.

The real question was:

“What matters more right now, reducing risk through consistent coverage and simpler operations, or maximising capability and control even if it adds complexity?”

Once that trade-off was on the table, the decision landed within 24 hours. They were not stuck on the tools. They were stuck on the trade-off they had not named.

Most teams try to solve this kind of friction by adding more discussion. More slides. More pre reads.

More meetings. More alignment.

But friction does not disappear just because you talk about it longer. It disappears when you make

the decision clean.

What I learned in the trenches

My career has sat close to the sharp edge of business. Enterprise customers. Technical complexity. High stakes.

Escalations where you cannot hide behind process. Situations where the wrong call can cost real money, real time, and real trust.

In that world, you learn quickly that clarity beats heroics.

The best outcomes rarely come from the smartest person in the room.

They come from a team that can:

Name the decision properly
Separate facts from assumptions
Surface trade offs without ego
Get the right voices in the room
Commit, then execute

That became the work I found myself naturally drawn to. Not being right. Helping teams get to the call, calmly.

Why The Exec Memo exists

The Exec Memo is my attempt to take that work and turn it into something repeatable. Som ething simple.

Here is the idea:

When a decision is stuck, you should be able to run a short, structured process that produces a decision ready brief . Not a long, dusty report. A crisp memo that makes the decision easy to land and hard to unpick.

That is what I create.

Sometimes the issue is speed. The decision is stuck and just needs structure to break free.

Sometimes the issue is buy in. The decision needs stakeholder alignment before it can move. Either way, the goal is the same: remove decision friction and get the team moving.

Why I am doing this now

This part matters to me.

I am building The Exec Memo because it is the most ‘me’ work I have ever done. It sits right at the intersection of:

Pattern recognition
Calm facilitation under pressure
Turning complexity into clarity
Caring about outcomes, not theatre

And I want to do it properly. Not as a side project I squeeze into evenings and hope for the best, but as something I invest in deliberately. Because I have learned that the work you choose changes the quality of what you deliver.

Needing the work vs choosing it

Here is the honest bit.

There is a difference between doing work because you have to, and doing work because you want to. When you are taking a paycheck inside a company, you can care a lot. Most people do. But you are still constrained by internal incentives, politics, shifting priorities, and how much time you are allowed to spend on a problem.

With The Exec Memo, the incentives are clean. My whole model is based on one thing: did we land the decision and create forward movement?

That makes me better at this job, not worse. Because I am invested in the outcome, not the optics. I do not want to keep a project alive. I want to finish it. I do not want ongoing meetings. I want a clean decision and clear next steps.

That is better for me, and it is better for clients.

What this looks like in practice

The Exec Memo has two ways to work with me:

Decision Sprint

When the decision is stuck but solvable quickly. A short working session, a decision ready memo within 48 hours, then a call to lock the decision and actions.

Alignment Sprint

When the decision needs buy in. Stakeholder input, the real friction surfaced, a facilitated decision meeting, commitments captured.

The deliverable is always the same at the core: clarity, trade offs, ownership, and a decision that sticks.

Why I am sharing all this?

Because I know how expensive stuck decisions are. Not just in money. In energy. In morale. In wasted weeks where smart people are doing work about the work.

If you are a leader in a growing B2B SaaS business and you have a decision that keeps looping, I would love to hear about it . Even if we never work together, I will tell you what I see and what I would do next.

That is the whole point of building something like this. It is not just a service. It is a way of working that I think more teams deserve.

If this resonates

If you have a decision that feels stuck, send me a message with:

What the decision is
Who is involved
What happens if it slips another month

I will reply within 48 hours with a quick diagnosis and whether a Sprint would help. No long proposal. Just honest input.

Justin

Founder, The Exec Memo

the-exec-memo

I know your business better than you do.

I know your business better than you.

No, I don’t. But I do see things you probably can’t.

You already know your business

The bit that’s harder to see

What an outsider actually brings

No politics, no agenda

Better conversations, not bigger ideas

So no, I don’t know your business better than you

Why some decisions never quite land - even in good teams

Why some decisions never quite land (even in good teams)

When everything looks right… but still doesn’t move

The slow build of frustration

When alignment isn’t quite alignment

What actually changes things

Why this matters beyond the decision

A simple place to start

If this resonates

What a decision-ready brief actually looks like (and why it makes decisions stick)

What a decision-ready brief actually looks like

﻿ (and why it makes decisions stick)

Why most decision docs fail

The decision-ready brief

1) The decision statement (one sentence)

2) The context (what is true, what changed)

3) The constraints (non-negotiables)

4) The options (real options, not strawmen)

5) The trade-offs (this is the decision)

6) The risks (and who owns them)

7) The recommendation (and why)

8) The decision owners and decision date

9) The first two weeks of execution

A quick example of how this unlocks speed

How this fits The Exec Memo

Decision Sprint

Alignment Sprint

If you want the template

The 7 signs your decision is stuck (and what to do instead)

The 7 signs your decision is stuck ( and what to do instead )

The 7 signs your decision is stuck

1) You cannot say the decision in one sentence

2) The inputs are messy, contradictory, or incomplete

3) People are debating solutions, but avoiding the trade-off

4) The stakeholder set keeps changing

5) Ownership is fuzzy

6) Incentives are pulling in different directions

7) Delay is being used as risk management

What most teams do that makes it worse

1. Step 1: Write the decision statement

2. Step 2: Name the trade-off

3. Step 3: Lock the stakeholder set

4. Step 4: Assign an owner and a decision date

5. Step 5: Write the cost of delay

A quick example

If this resonates

How my career led me to The Exec Memo

An introduction:

How my career led me to The Exec Memo

What I noticed, again and again

What I learned in the trenches

Why The Exec Memo exists

Why I am doing this now

Needing the work vs choosing it

What this looks like in practice

Decision Sprint

Alignment Sprint

Why I am sharing all this?

If this resonates

(and why it makes decisions stick)