As an executive governance strategy consultant, we helped a global education provider redesign decision ownership across its international operations in a 13-week engagement — cutting executive approval time by 43% and speeding up strategic decision-making by 32%, without removing a single layer of oversight.
The Instinct Is to Remove Approvals. That's the Wrong Fix.
Over a decade, this global provider of executive education had expanded across multiple countries, launched digital learning platforms, and established partnerships with universities, corporations and government institutions. Revenue kept growing. Enrolments remained strong.
Internally, leadership had become frustrated. Routine commercial decisions required approval from several executive stakeholders. Product launches were delayed by overlapping governance structures, while regional teams often waited for central approval despite possessing the expertise to act independently. The organisation had built a governance model designed to control growth. It now needed one capable of enabling it.
It Wasn't Bureaucracy. It Was Nobody Being Certain Who Decided.
When governance slows an organisation, the instinct is often to remove approval layers or decentralise authority. Neither solves the underlying problem if accountability remains unclear. Over 13 weeks, we interviewed board members, executive leaders and regional directors while analysing governance committees, reporting structures and approval workflows.
One finding appeared repeatedly: very few decisions were delayed because leaders disagreed. Most were delayed because nobody was entirely certain who had the authority to make them. Responsibility drifted upward — executives became involved in operational decisions that should have remained within business units, while regional leadership hesitated to act without additional approval.
Redesigning Decision-Making, Not Organisational Structure
We developed a governance framework based on decision ownership rather than hierarchy — defining who was best positioned to make each category of decision according to expertise, commercial impact and organisational risk, not seniority.
- Investment approvals, product innovation, regional operations and strategic partnerships were each assigned clearly documented ownership, supported by escalation principles rather than committee review.
- Leadership meeting agendas shifted from operational approvals toward strategic priorities.
- Executives spent more time evaluating future opportunities instead of resolving routine business issues.
Our Methodology
This engagement followed our five-phase governance framework — Discovery & Decision-Flow Audit, Ownership Mapping, Governance Framework Design, Rollout & Escalation Design, and Validation & Handover — applied across international operations over 13 weeks.
Five named deliverables anchored the redesign:
- Decision-Flow Audit — tracing how decisions actually travelled through the organisation before reaching a final approval.
- Decision Ownership Matrix — who's best positioned to decide, based on expertise, commercial impact and risk rather than seniority.
- Governance Framework by Decision Category — investment, product innovation, regional operations and partnership ownership clearly documented.
- Escalation Principles Playbook — replacing unnecessary committee review with clear, predictable escalation paths.
- Executive Agenda Redesign — shifting meeting time from operational approvals toward strategic priorities.
Each deliverable fed directly into who could approve what, so every governance change traced back to a documented ownership decision rather than an assumption about who held the most senior title.
What Changed in the First 12 Months
Within months of implementation:
- Executive approval time was reduced by approximately 43% as accountability became clearer across business units.
- Regional leaders gained greater confidence in their responsibilities, reducing unnecessary escalation to central executives.
- Executive capacity increased because leadership teams no longer approved matters that fell outside their strategic role.
- Cross-functional collaboration improved as governance became transparent, predictable and consistent across international operations.
The organisation discovered that speed and accountability are not competing priorities. When governance is designed well, they reinforce one another.
Our Perspective
Strong governance does not mean more approvals.
It means better decisions made by the right people at the right time. Governance should never slow ambition. It should give ambition the confidence to move.
That gap is widespread, not unique to this organisation: McKinsey’s global survey on decision-making found that only 48% of respondents agree their organisations make decisions quickly, and just 37% say their decisions are both high quality and fast — with redefining decision rights around a handful of clear owners identified as one of the most reliable levers for closing that gap.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why didn’t removing approval layers or decentralising authority fix the slow decisions?
Both are common instincts, but neither solves the problem if accountability stays unclear. Most delayed decisions in this organisation weren’t caused by disagreement or excessive layers — they were caused by nobody being entirely certain who actually had the authority to decide, which removing a layer wouldn’t have resolved on its own.
How was decision ownership assigned without just defaulting to whoever had the most senior title?
Ownership for each decision category — investment approvals, product innovation, regional operations, strategic partnerships — was assigned according to expertise, commercial impact and organisational risk, not seniority. That meant some decisions moved to regional directors who had the operational expertise, even where a more senior executive had previously been the default approver.
Why did executive meetings become more strategic instead of more tightly controlled?
Once decision ownership was clearly documented elsewhere in the organisation, executives no longer needed to personally approve matters that fell outside their strategic role. That freed agenda time to shift from operational approvals toward evaluating future opportunities.
What was the measurable outcome of the governance redesign?
Within months: executive approval time fell by approximately 43%, and strategic decision-making accelerated by roughly 32% across international business units.
What methodology did we use to redesign governance across international operations?
We applied a five-phase governance framework — Discovery & Decision-Flow Audit, Ownership Mapping, Governance Framework Design, Rollout & Escalation Design, and Validation & Handover — built on interviews with board members, executive leaders and regional directors over 13 weeks.
Work With an Executive Governance Strategy Consultant
The organisations that move fastest are rarely those with the fewest controls. They’re the ones with the greatest clarity about who decides what.
