Fine-tune the use casePick the one closest to you
A strategy program forteams facing
Do you keep settling arguments your leadership team should settle without you?
Usually yes. Two leaders disagree, neither will give, and the argument waits in your inbox until you pick a side. This program aligns what your leaders know, believe and do when a trade-off crosses two areas, in four one-hour team sessions.
Make it for your team
Execution readinessExample scores for a team like yours. Add your website to estimate your own. Measured once your team plays. Ready at 80.
Where it usually breaks38Today84/ 100After the 4 team sessions
Ready to executeShared knowledgeMedium riskNobody knows which rule settles a cross-team conflict
Shared convictionHigh riskLeaders believe that giving way is losing
Shared practiceHigh riskEvery disagreement goes up instead of across
4 sessions~50 min each8–12 people per teamNo facilitatorThe gap
What you'd typically hear if five of your managers answered alone.
SESSION 1 · FILL THE GAPSAnswered alone
Finish the sentence: when another leader and I disagree on something that affects us both, we…MMira…settle it between us, using what the strategy says comes first.
JJonas…each make our case to the director general and let them decide.
AAylin…leave it until the next board meeting.
TTomas…both do our own thing and see what happens.
RRosa…honestly, whoever is more stubborn wins.
What it costs you if nobody notices
Shared knowledgeNo rule, so no decisionWithout an agreed rule for what wins when two areas collide, every conflict is a fresh argument, and only the director general can end it.
Shared convictionGiving way feels like losingA leader who believes conceding to a peer is a defeat will escalate every time, and the director general becomes the referee of the company.
Shared practiceThe director general is the bottleneckEvery trade-off waits in one inbox, the decision takes weeks, and both teams have already picked a side.
The program that closes the gap
Four one-hour sessions. Every one of your leaders, the same rule for what wins, settled across the table, not up the chain.
Session
Shared knowledgeShared convictionShared practice
S1Know what winsAgrees the rules that settle a cross-team conflict: what the strategy puts first, and who decides when it is unclear.
Shared knowledge1Agree the one rule and one escalation path that settles a…2Agree the rule and the fallback owner that settle a…Shared conviction3Decide the CEO's trade off call yourselvesShared practice4Sort real cross-team conflicts into the correct response5Rehearse the exact moment a cross-team trade-off call…
DemoS2Give way without losingShows you whether leaders believe a settled trade-off beats a won one, and what makes them escalate.
Shared knowledge1Test and align on the facts of when a trade-off gets…Shared conviction2Compare your team's escalation costs with the CEO's view3Decide as the CEO would, then find out why they actually…Shared practice4Decide together whether to apply the strategy's rule5Rehearse the moment a trade-off with another leader starts…
DemoS3Settle the same conflictMakes the call on the same cross-team conflict alone, compares, and aligns on how to settle it.
Shared knowledge1Call the same cross-team conflict aloneShared conviction2Make the same cross-team trade-off call yourselvesShared practice3Compare your matches on the same cross-team conflict4Rank the steps for settling a cross-team conflict in the right order
DemoS4Have the conversationPractises the trade-off conversation with a peer: what to put on the table, what to concede, when to go up.
Shared knowledge1Learn and agree the rules for putting a trade-off on the tableShared conviction2Decide as the CEO facing a stuck cross-team trade-offShared practice3Order the steps of a trade-off conversation with a peer4Rehearse a peer trade-off conversation to agree how your team raises
DemoPlay it yourself · a short demo · one exercise from session 3 · Make the Call
Alone first. Then the team agrees on one answer.
This is a taste, not the whole session. “Settle the same conflict” runs 4 exercises with your own team, on a call or in a room. Here is one of them, on the real screens, played with four AI teammates, so you can feel how a session works.
Settle the same conflict · Make the Call00:00MJLSYouMake the same cross-team trade-off call yourselves, then compare it to the CEO'sOn screen: Reframe each of the 4 cross-team trade-off situations as the decision you would make alone
You are playing with 4 AI teammates. Every screen opens on its briefing: read it, then tap I’m ready.
Readiness intelligence · what you'll see as teams play
Know which of your leaders would settle a trade-off with a peer, and where you should step in, before the next argument lands in your inbox.
Your company › Readiness intelligence › Settling trade-offsEvery one of your leaders settles cross-team trade-offs with their peers, not through the director general
Readiness index84%Ready+46 pts25% participation + 25% progress + 50% alignment · Ready at 80
Shared knowledge48 → 88Shared conviction37 → 71Shared practice44 → 80
Participation94%11 of 12 people played at least once
Progress75%3 of 4 planned sessions completed
Alignment41% →78%37 of 48 points aligned
Failed alignment pointsWhere you should step in
Settling a cross-team conflictNot aligned in 10 of 24 playsShared knowledgeYour functional leaders · 4 people
Is giving way to a peer losing?"Not yet, we still have concerns" in 2 playsShared convictionYour longest-serving leaders · 3 people
Your leaders could play this next week. Add your website to make it yours.
- 01 · 5 minConfirm the assumptionsCheck what we inferred about you and edit any text in place. Your edits are locked.
- 02 · 1 link per teamInvite your teamAny browser, any device. No account, nothing to install.
- 03 · after each playWatch readiness fill inYou see who played, what they agreed, and where to follow up.
Used by teams at
Free until you play live · ISO 27001 · EU data
Free until you play live · ISO 27001 · EU data