The Execution Integrity Self-Check

0 — Everyone understands the key priorities for the day, week and month. Execution is consistently aligned.

1 — Priorities are mostly clear, though occasional confusion appears.

2 — Teams sometimes struggle to identify what should take precedence.

3 — People frequently work on competing priorities.

4 — The organisation often feels directionless in day-to-day execution.

0 — Priorities remain stable until initiatives are completed.

1 — Occasional adjustments occur but work generally finishes.

2 — Some initiatives lose momentum when new priorities appear.

3 — New priorities frequently interrupt existing work.

4 — Work is regularly abandoned midway due to shifting priorities.

0 — Important priorities have clearly protected execution blocks in leadership diaries.

1 — Most priorities receive protected time with occasional interruptions.

2 — Important work sometimes loses time to meetings or reactive work.

3 — Leaders frequently struggle to find time to execute key priorities.

4 — Leadership calendars are dominated by reactive work and meetings.

0 — Reactive issues rarely interrupt planned execution work.

1 — Reactive tasks occasionally interrupt priority work.

2 — Reactive work sometimes delays execution of important priorities.

3 — Reactive issues frequently dominate leaders' time.

4 — Most leadership time is spent reacting rather than executing priorities.

0 — Decisions are made quickly and execution begins immediately.

1 — Occasional delays occur but decisions still move efficiently.

2 — Some decisions take longer than they should.

3 — Many decisions require multiple discussions before resolution.

4 — Decisions frequently stall and delay execution across teams.

0 — Decisions are made at the appropriate level with minimal approval layers.

1 — Some decisions require additional checks but remain efficient.

2 — Decisions often pass through several people before approval.

3 — Decisions frequently require multiple layers of approval.

4 — Decision processes are heavily layered and consistently slow execution.

0 — Delegation is clear. Owners understand expectations and outcomes.

1 — Delegation is usually clear with occasional clarification needed.

2 — Delegated work sometimes lacks clear expectations.

3 — Delegation often leads to confusion about outcomes or standards.

4 — Delegation is unclear and frequently leads to rework.

0 — Leaders rarely step back into delegated work.

1 — Leaders occasionally re-engage but ownership remains clear.

2 — Leaders sometimes step back in to resolve issues.

3 — Leaders frequently re-enter tasks after delegating them.

4 — Leaders regularly reclaim delegated work and become bottlenecks.

0 — Leaders operate calmly with stable decision quality.

1 — Pressure occasionally appears but execution remains strong.

2 — Stress sometimes affects judgement.

3 — Stress regularly disrupts execution.

4 — Leadership pressure frequently causes poor decisions or mistakes.

0 — Workflows are stable and mistakes rarely cascade.

2 — Some mistakes create additional workload cycles.

3 — Mistakes frequently create large recovery workloads.

4 — Teams regularly enter cycles of overwhelm due to cascading mistakes.

0 — Leaders consistently maintain clarity and focus.

1 — Occasional overwhelm occurs but is manageable.

2 — Leaders sometimes struggle to maintain clarity.

3 — Leaders frequently feel overwhelmed by competing demands.

4 — Leaders regularly operate in a state of overload.

0 — Leaders consistently focus on high-impact work.

1 — Leaders mostly maintain focus with occasional distractions.

2 — High-impact work is sometimes disrupted by competing demands.

3 — Leaders frequently struggle to maintain focus on important work.

4 — Leaders rarely have the clarity or time to focus on high-leverage work.