Case Study // Strategic Operations Cross-Functional Alignment

E-Commerce
Strategic
Summit

The company wanted a 3-year e-commerce strategy. But the teams required to build it had never operated in the same reality. My work created the alignment system that allowed the roadmap to exist. I did it in less than 8 weeks.

The Evidence

Frameworks
& Artifacts

The summit produced a set of diagnostic tools and decision artifacts. Several have been generalized into reusable frameworks.

Framework
Expectations
Stress Test
A method for identifying hidden expectation gaps between organizational functions. Makes invisible dysfunction explicit and manageable.
View Framework →
Applied Example
SLA Philosophy
Stress Test
The Expectations Stress Test applied to service-level agreements across 9 organizational domains. Shows what "good service" conflicts look like in practice.
View Example →
Diagnostic Tool
Dependency
Friction Map
Maps 20 cross-functional handoff points where work breaks down. Identifies the trigger, source function, receiving function, and consequence of each failure.
View Map →
Diagnostic Tool
Pressure Points
Register
21 organizational pressure points across 6 categories (Technical, Operational, Ownership, Bandwidth, Strategic, Initiative), each flagged by severity.
View Register →
Methodology
3-Day Facilitation
Mindsets
The structural arc behind the summit: pressure test, prioritize, lock. Principles for facilitating cross-functional alignment without false consensus.
View Methodology →
The Situation

No Process Could
Survive the Complexity

The roadmap didn't exist because the coordination required to create one didn't exist. Eight functional domains... DC Operations, Supply Chain, Procurement, Finance, Marketing, Digital Experience, Platform/Product and Demand Planning... were operating independently, with no structured forum to reconcile constraints.

Each function understood a different bottleneck. Operations saw DC capacity constraints and staffing shortages. Finance had no SKU-level margin visibility and an immature pricing strategy. Marketing was working with attribution gaps and incomplete SKU data. Technology was managing Shopify limitations, integration fragility and an ERP migration with unclear scope.

These realities were all true simultaneously, but they weren't integrated into a single strategic model. Any attempt to create a roadmap would collapse into disagreements about feasibility because no one had a shared view of what was actually possible.

Critical areas had unclear ownership: inventory forecasting, SKU data integrity, pricing logic, fulfillment readiness, subdomain governance. Without ownership clarity, roadmap items couldn't be assigned. The organization was stuck in a predictable failure loop:

→ Initiative proposed
→ Ownership unclear
→ Dependency conflict
→ Decision stalls
→ Repeat

Strategic conversations were happening without constraint visibility. Without a unified constraint map, strategy defaults to optimistic assumptions. That's how unrealistic roadmaps get created... and why this one had never materialized.

Pressure Points Surfaced

What the
Diagnostic Found

Before any planning could begin, I ran a systematic diagnostic across all eight functions. The full register documented 21 pressure points across 6 categories. Here are the critical blockers:

Red
ERP System Unknown Impact
No visibility into ERP capabilities or timeline, creating planning uncertainty across the entire tech stack
Red
Inventory Management Breakdown
No systematic reordering process. Constant out-of-stock issues with direct revenue impact
Red
Communication Gaps with DC
No proactive communication about warehouse changes affecting fulfillment. Service disruption risk
Red
Resource Overextension
Key personnel handling multiple specialized roles due to understaffing. Burnout and quality risk
Red
E-Commerce Identity Crisis
Unclear positioning within the company structure, directly affecting resource allocation decisions
Caution
Cross-Functional Pricing Rules
No established margin guidelines or coordination between teams. Profitability risk
Caution
Vendor Data Access Limitations
Limited access to product data, images, and pricing before physical receipt. Time-to-market impact
The Approach

Build the Decision
System First

The answer wasn't to write a roadmap. The answer was to build the organizational mechanism that could produce one. In 7 weeks, I designed and facilitated a three-day strategic summit with a specific structural arc: surface reality before attempting to plan against it.

Day 01
Pressure
Testing
Stress-test assumptions. Expose friction. Validate real limits of capacity, ownership, and system readiness. Not solving ... agitating. Surface where things will break.
Day 02
Prioritization
& MVP
Move from surfacing pain to forcing rank. Impact vs. feasibility. Define minimum viable initiatives. Force tradeoff clarity. If we say yes to X, what gets deferred?
Day 03
Locking
Commitments
Finalize ownership. Confirm executable initiatives. Document dependency risks. Exit with real commitments and a 30-60-90 day path. Clarity over consensus.
Principle
Reality
Before Theory
Every session was framed as a pressure test, not a brainstorm. It was explicitly okay to let initiatives die if stakeholders could not defend them. Documented tension, not just consensus.
The Outcome

What the
Summit Produced

18
Stakeholders aligned
across functions
8
Functional domains
operating in shared reality
12
Initiatives with
named owners
3yr
Strategic roadmap
validated and owned
6mo
Tactical execution
plan locked
21
Pressure points
documented and triaged

I built the alignment system that made the roadmap possible. The roadmap was the output. The decision architecture was the work.

Back to The Warehouse