Cascades strategy from boardroom to individual contributor. Detects and fixes misalignment between company goals and team execution. Covers strategy articulation, cascade mapping, orphan goal detection, silo identification, communication gap analysis, and realignment protocols.
Installs just this skill. Get the whole plugin for auto-invocation.
⚡ How it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
Fires itselfClaude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
Slash command/strategic-alignment
👁️ Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Cascades strategy from boardroom to individual contributor. Detects and fixes misalignment between company goals and team execution. Covers strategy articulation, cascade mapping, orphan goal detection, silo identification, communication gap analysis, and realignment protocols.
📊 Stats
Stars23,056
Forks3,139
LanguagePython
LicenseMIT
📦 Ships with claude-skills
</> SKILL.md
strategic-alignment.SKILL.md
---name: "strategic-alignment"
description: "Cascades strategy from boardroom to individual contributor. Detects and fixes misalignment between company goals and team execution. Covers strategy articulation, cascade mapping, orphan goal detection, silo identification, communication gap analysis, and realignment protocols. Use when teams are pulling in different directions, OKRs don't connect, departments optimize locally at company expense, or when user mentions alignment, strategy cascade, silo, conflicting OKRs, or strategy communication."
license: MIT
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
author: Alireza Rezvani
category: c-level
domain: strategic-alignment
updated: 2026-03-05
python-tools: alignment_checker.py
frameworks: alignment-playbook
---# Strategic Alignment Engine
Strategy fails at the cascade, not the boardroom. This skill detects misalignment before it becomes dysfunction and builds systems that keep strategy connected from CEO to individual contributor.
## Keywords
strategic alignment, strategy cascade, OKR alignment, orphan OKRs, conflicting goals, silos, communication gap, department alignment, alignment checker, strategy articulation, cross-functional, goal cascade, misalignment, alignment score
## Quick Start
```bash
python scripts/alignment_checker.py # Check OKR alignment: orphans, conflicts, coverage gaps
The alignment problem: **The further a goal gets from the strategy that created it, the less likely it reflects the original intent.** This is the organizational telephone game. It happens at every stage. The question is how bad it is and how to fix it.
### Step 1: Strategy Articulation Test
Before checking cascade, check the source. Ask five people from five different teams:
**"What is the company's most important strategic priority right now?"**
**Scoring:**
- All five give the same answer: ✅ Articulation is clear
- 3–4 give similar answers: 🟡 Loose alignment — clarify and communicate
- < 3 agree: 🔴 Strategy isn't clear enough to cascade. Fix this before fixing cascade.
**Format test:** The strategy should be statable in one sentence. If leadership needs a paragraph, teams won't internalize it.
- ❌ "We focus on product-led growth while maintaining enterprise relationships and expanding our international presence and investing in platform capabilities"
- ✅ "Win the mid-market healthcare segment in DACH before Series B"
### Step 2: Cascade Mapping
Map the flow from company strategy → each level of the organization.
```
Company level: OKR-1, OKR-2, OKR-3
↓
Dept level: Sales OKRs, Eng OKRs, Product OKRs, CS OKRs
↓
Team level: Team A OKRs, Team B OKRs...
↓
Individual: Personal goals / rocks
```
**For each goal at every level, ask:**
- Which company-level goal does this support?
- If this goal is 100% achieved, how much does it move the company goal?
- Is the connection direct or theoretical?
### Step 3: Alignment Detection
Three failure patterns:
**Orphan goals:** Team or individual goals that don't connect to any company goal.
- Symptom: "We've been working on this for a quarter and nobody above us seems to care"
- Root cause: Goals set bottom-up or from last quarter's priorities without reconciling to current company OKRs
- Fix: Connect or cut. Every goal needs a parent.
**Conflicting goals:** Two teams' goals, when both succeed, create a worse outcome.
- Classic example: Sales commits to volume contracts (revenue), CS is measured on satisfaction scores. Sales closes bad-fit customers; CS scores tank.
- Fix: Cross-functional OKR review before quarter begins. Shared metrics where teams interact.
**Coverage gaps:** Company has 3 OKRs. 5 teams support OKR-1, 2 support OKR-2, 0 support OKR-3.
- Symptom: Company OKR-3 consistently misses; nobody owns it
- Fix: Explicit ownership assignment. If no team owns a company OKR, it won't happen.
See `scripts/alignment_checker.py` for automated detection against your JSON-formatted OKRs.
### Step 4: Silo Identification
Silos exist when teams optimize for local metrics at the expense of company metrics.
**Silo signals:**
- A department consistently hits their goals while the company misses
- Teams don't know what other teams are working on
- "That's not our problem" is a common phrase
- Escalations only flow up; coordination never flows sideways
- Data isn't shared between teams that depend on each other
**Silo root causes:**
1. **Incentive misalignment:** Teams rewarded for local metrics don't optimize for company metrics
2. **No shared goals:** When teams share a goal, they coordinate. When they don't, they drift.
4. **Geography or time zones:** Silos accelerate when teams don't interact organically
**Silo measurement:**
- How often do teams request something from each other vs. proceed independently?
- How much time does it take to resolve a cross-functional issue?
- Can a team member describe the current priorities of an adjacent team?
### Step 5: Communication Gap Analysis
What the CEO says ≠ what teams hear. The gap grows with company size.
**The message decay model:**
- CEO communicates strategy at all-hands → managers filter through their lens → teams receive modified version → individuals interpret further
**Gap sources:**
- **Ambiguity:** Strategy stated at too high a level ("grow the business") lets each team fill in their own interpretation
- **Frequency:** One all-hands per quarter isn't enough repetition to change behavior
- **Medium mismatch:** Long written strategy doc for teams that respond to visual communication
- **Trust deficit:** Teams don't believe the strategy is real ("we've heard this before")
**Gap detection:**
- Run the Step 1 articulation test across all levels
- Compare what leadership thinks they communicated vs. what teams say they heard
- Survey: "What changed about how you work since the last strategy update?"
### Step 6: Realignment Protocol
How to fix misalignment without calling it a "realignment" (which creates fear).
**Step 6a: Don't start with what's wrong**
Starting with "here's our misalignment" creates defensiveness. Start with "here's where we're heading and I want to make sure we're connected."
**Step 6b: Re-cascade in a workshop, not a memo**
Alignment workshops are more effective than documents. Get company-level OKR owners and department leads in a room. Map connections. Find gaps together.
**Step 6c: Fix incentives before fixing goals**
If department heads are rewarded for local metrics that conflict with company goals, no amount of goal-setting fixes the problem. The incentive structure must change first.
**Step 6d: Install a quarterly alignment check**
After fixing, prevent recurrence. See `references/alignment-playbook.md` for quarterly cadence.
---
## Alignment Score
A quick health check. Score each area 0–10:
| Area | Question | Score |
|------|----------|-------|
| Strategy clarity | Can 5 people from different teams state the strategy consistently? | /10 |
| Cascade completeness | Do all team goals connect to company goals? | /10 |
| Conflict detection | Have cross-team OKR conflicts been reviewed and resolved? | /10 |
| Coverage | Does each company OKR have explicit team ownership? | /10 |
| Communication | Do teams' behaviors reflect the strategy (not just their stated understanding)? | /10 |
