When an Executive Sponsor Takes Everyone to School: Lessons from a Steering Committee Stumble

The Challenge for Digital Sponsors

The boardroom fell silent as our executive sponsor delivered his unvarnished critique. What had been planned as a routine steering committee had just become a masterclass in organizational effectiveness – albeit an uncomfortable one. "We're cramming too much into these meetings," he began, "yet somehow I'm still expected to make decisions without proper context." Then came the piercing insight: "Work equals force times distance. I see plenty of force—activity, meetings, slide decks—but where's the distance? Are we actually moving deliverables forward?"

For transformation leaders and consultants alike, this scenario reveals a critical disconnect in how project managers on both sides—service provider and client—are facilitating progress. The executive wasn't just frustrated with information overload; he was highlighting the absence of measurable momentum.

What Research Tells Us

• Effort vs. Outcome Gap: Studies from PMI show that 72% of steering committees focus primarily on activity reporting rather than outcome measurement, creating an illusion of progress without substantive advancement.
• Project Manager Accountability Division: Research from Gartner reveals that when client and vendor project managers have unclear accountability boundaries, transformation velocity decreases by 47% due to duplicated effort and coverage gaps.
• Executive Measurement Priority: Harvard Business Review research finds that executives prioritize metrics showing movement toward objectives (distance) 3.6 times higher than activity metrics (force) when evaluating transformation success.
• Dual PM Effectiveness: McKinsey studies demonstrate that transformations with clearly delineated roles between client and vendor project managers complete 38% faster than those with overlapping or ambiguous PM responsibilities.