When teams and leaders fully commit—when there’s no mental “escape hatch” of half-hearted support—they unlock a different level of focus, resilience, and momentum. This doesn’t mean blind loyalty or ignoring challenges. It means choosing a direction, aligning behind it, and moving forward with conviction.

And commitment has real, tangible benefits. Research shows that when leaders and teams fully commit to a strategic direction, they gain several advantages that boost execution: greater focus, stronger team cohesion, and increased resilience in the face of challenges.

When teams commit to a strategy, even with reservations, they experience powerful effects that strengthen execution. Focus improves, collaboration deepens, and momentum builds—driving both performance and team cohesion.

Accountability is the glue that holds coordinated efforts together. 

When multiple teams and individuals are working toward a shared strategic goal, accountability is a magical force that keeps everything aligned and moving forward. Without it, even our best plans can unravel into missed deadlines, finger-pointing, and confusion about who is responsible for what. 

Accountability is often thought of as something that flows from the top down—a manager setting goals, checking progress, and ensuring results. But in reality, the most effective accountability happens between peers. When teams hold each other accountable, work moves faster, problems are solved more collaboratively, and people are more motivated to deliver.

Accountability, in this sense, isn’t about oversight—it’s about commitment. It’s what ensures that when one person completes their piece of the puzzle, the next person is ready to pick it up and keep going.

We've all heard experts say, "Get the right people in the room" when it comes to building a strategy. But what does that even mean? Vague advice like this isn’t helpful unless we dig deeper. Who are these people, why do they matter, and how do we leverage their insights effectively? Without clarity on this, we risk missing essential voices or creating a strategy that lacks focus.

So, what does it mean to get the right people in the room? Here are three key objectives:

Imagine if every decision you made could make or break your company's future. Every day, employees at all levels are bombarded with decisions that shape the organization's trajectory. Each choice, no matter how seemingly small, has a ripple effect. Are your decisions propelling your company forward, or are they holding you back?

According to McKinsey, companies make tens of thousands of decisions daily, yet only 20% of them are considered high-quality decisions. How can we ensure our decisions are among the high-quality ones? Executing a strategy involves navigating a sea of choices, big and small. Leaders can’t possibly oversee all of them. In fact, most decisions happen far from the executive suite, carried out by people on the front lines. As Matt O’Connell, CEO of Vistaly, told me, “On the ground, it’s the day-to-day, nitty-gritty stuff where you need to make quick decisions. The executives don’t care about the details—they just want the problem solved.”

Making good decisions quickly is critical, but it’s not easy. Decision-making is influenced by a number of factors—ranging from cognitive biases to stress and emotional pressures—that can cloud judgment and lead to inconsistent or rushed choices.

Imagine you and your competitors all enter a pact: share your biggest revenue streams, pool your marketing, and match payrolls dollar for dollar. Everyone sells the exact same product. You'd think your companies would perform similarly, right?

This is what the NFL tries to achieve—an even playing field, where teams share profits, keep payrolls capped, and have a level shot at success. Yet, what has actually happened? Some teams rise year after year, while others (like my beloved Cleveland Browns) consistently struggle. Why?

Is it just luck? Or are there deeper lessons here—lessons for any business trying to understand the true costs of change?

When it comes to motivating teams to execute a strategy, financial incentives like bonuses, commissions, and stock options often take center stage. While these rewards are effective, they don’t tell the full story. One of the most powerful, yet often overlooked, motivators in the workplace is social incentives. Recognition, accountability, and the need to belong frequently prove just as effective—if not more—than financial rewards in driving engagement and performance.

Monetary rewards alone rarely keep people motivated day in and day out. What truly drives many of us is a sense of purpose, recognition from our peers, and a personal connection to the work we do. Almost all of us want to feel like we’re part of something bigger and that our contributions matter. In fact, neuroscience shows that when we receive recognition, the brain’s reward centers light up in much the same way as when we receive financial compensation. This means social incentives are wired into us, deeply influencing our behavior at work.

Saying “No” is hard, especially if you’re an optimist like me. It can feel awkward, even risky. Saying “Yes,” on the other hand, feels great—it’s productive, optimistic, full of possibility. So it’s tempting to say “Yes” to everything that seems promising. But here’s the paradox: saying “Yes” to too many things often overwhelms your team, scattering their focus and preventing them from dedicating their best efforts to what truly matters.

Over the years, I’ve discovered that the most powerful tool for success isn’t saying “Yes”—it’s learning to say “No.” For leaders, this is one of the most essential skills to master if you want to maintain focus and drive meaningful results.

I’ve found a simple trick that makes it easier to say “No”

I’m ignorant. And so are you. Frankly, we’re all ignorant. It’s not an insult. It’s just an acknowledgment that none of us can be all-knowing.

I recently learned about the concept of the Iceberg of Ignorance, a term popularized by a 1989 study by Sidney Yoshida. Yoshida’s research revealed a startling disparity in awareness of problems within organizations: frontline workers were aware of 100% of the floor problems, supervisors were aware of only 74%, middle managers knew about 9%, and senior executives were aware of a mere 4% of the issues.

While this concept was initially targeted at executives, it’s a universal truth. Any small group, or even individuals, experiences this iceberg effect. The notion that senior executives are the most ignorant of the problems is striking, but let’s be honest: ignorance permeates all levels. Supervisors miss out on what frontline workers know, corporate managers don’t fully grasp the supervisors’ challenges, and even frontline workers don’t everything going in their environments.

But what can we do about it?