Leadership alignment
Leadership misalignment confirmed across three consecutive assessment cycles
Healthcare IT · Growth stage
The challenge
The operating partner had received conflicting signals from management: the CEO was consistently presenting a coherent strategic narrative while direct reports were privately raising concerns about execution fragmentation. The board needed an objective read on whether leadership was genuinely aligned or presenting a unified front while operating in silos.
What Wexler Gray surfaced
Leadership Alignment scores declined from 61 to 54 to 47 across three consecutive quarterly cycles — a trajectory Beacon escalated as Critical after the third cycle confirmed the trend rather than reverting
Operator consensus across all three cycles identified the same fracture point: the CEO and COO held fundamentally different views on product-market priorities, which cascaded into conflicting resource allocation signals across the mid-management layer
Bearing interpretation confirmed this was not a communication problem — the strategic disagreement was substantive, with both executives privately lobbying operators for support during the assessment process itself
Outcome
The board convened a structured strategy session facilitated by the operating partner, using the Bearing interpretation as the agenda framework. The COO exited by mutual agreement within 60 days, and the CEO rebuilt the operating team around a single strategic narrative. Leadership Alignment recovered to 68 in the following cycle.
Engagement brief
Request the full engagement brief.
Available to PE operating teams and portfolio company leadership. The brief covers methodology, operator composition, and the full assessment output.