What I see often is organisations mistaking activity for progress.

Diaries are full. Governance cycles are dense. Papers circulate, meetings multiply, and from the outside everything looks engaged and under control. Yet growth stalls. Not because the opportunity has gone, but because accountability has quietly thinned out.

This is rarely a capability problem. Senior teams are experienced and well-intentioned. The issue is structural and behavioural. Initiatives multiply, each sensible on its own, but responsibility blurs. Decisions are discussed, agreed, and minuted, yet ownership remains shared.

Everyone is involved. No one is fully on the hook.

This shows up most clearly in regulated environments, where escalation and consensus feel safer than decisiveness. The intent is sensible. The consequence is drift.  I have seen governance processes become so rigid they start to take priority over the purpose they’re meant to serve.   

What makes the difference is not more oversight, but clearer ownership. One accountable executive per outcome. Fewer priorities, pushed harder. Committees that oversee, and individuals who deliver.

When accountability is explicit, conversations sharpen and momentum returns.
When it isn’t, organisations stay busy and go nowhere.

This isn’t a structural redesign exercise.

It’s a leadership choice.