I think alignment is overrated.

We talk a lot about “getting aligned” in the business world.  

But when we're talking about the future, like we are with strategy, it's almost impossible for everybody to completely agree on the future at a detailed level. The future is unknown. If we're being honest with ourselves, we can't be 100% sure.

So 100% alignment is a silly goal that's just going to set us up for failure.

What we really need is commitment. We need to get past asking, "Will this work?" and get started on asking, "How are we going to make this work?"

Some of the worst strategic decisions happen in the smoothest meetings.

You’ve been in these meetings. Everyone gets along, the conversation is easy, and the discussion feels productive. The meeting ends with nods around the table and a sense of direction.

But agreement isn’t alignment.

Alignment isn’t everyone nodding in agreement. You can’t determine alignment with a yes or no question. Alignment runs too deep for that.

True alignment is when everyone making the same decision when you’re not in the room.

When alignment isn’t real, the cracks show up fast.

When Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon in 1969, it wasn’t just the result of a lofty idea shouted from the rooftops. It was the culmination of a meticulously connected network of goals that guided every team and individual.[1] NASA’s mission—“land a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth”—was audacious, but it succeeded because it cascaded into precise objectives at every level. By breaking the impossible into achievable steps, NASA turned an aspirational vision into a coordinated effort that worked.

Every organization needs goals that do the same. Effective goals take strategy out of the abstract and turn it into meaningful, actionable work. When properly aligned, goals ensure every individual knows how their contributions matter.

But too often, organizations treat goal-setting as an HR-driven exercise focused on annual performance reviews. If your goals are primarily driven by HR, your strategy is probably doomed. This isn’t a knock on HR—it’s about understanding that goal-setting must be at the core of strategic execution, not just a tool for annual evaluations.

When goals are deeply tied to strategy, they can transform execution. A quality goal-setting process may produce useful performance data, but its real purpose is to bring clarity and motivation to the strategy, making it tangible and engaging for every individual involved.

The most effective framework for achieving this connection, in my experience, is OKRs—Objectives and Key Results.